Excellent questions Ellie! Can see your journalism training shining through! Often times when I listen into NASA Pressers and national media ask questions (e.g. CBS), the questions are either obtuse or silly.
I think Eric had too many excuses for Boeing and NASA. If they had crew safety in mind when building the thing none of this would be an issue so late in the process. Your questions and comments were valid in spite of his eye rolling responses. I prefer your method of investigation.
Can't help but agree with you. SpaceX had to fly a couple of cargo dragons and have them go through with no issues before their demo flight and it seems like Boeing got to skip a fully successful test flight. So Boeing got more money, more time and used it poorly and we see the results Remember Boeing got a extra 2 billion for this fiasco
I mean, it is a pain dealing with situations like this. The layman isn't going to understand the reason for all of these delays. This will be the ONLY time the have to test this capsule and its support module. The moment they leave that's it. The support module will burn up and lose all of that potential to learn what is going wrong with the thing. Granted, it doesn't look good for NASA or Boeing. I am flabbergasted that they didn't launch with software that can autonomously disembark and de-orbit. NASA needs to stop its complacency with its contractors. SLS and Starliner are boondoggles. It is also very frustrating that these sorts of programs don't have immunity from presidential terms. If we had stuck with the Bush and Clinton plans with the Orion program we would have been back on the moon in 2012.
@@jtjames79 I'd put money on the relevant software modules not being up to current spec and compatible with the rest. So they need to update them and then build a completely new version and retest it before actually uploading it. And when they've done that, they need to persuade someone to actually ride in it...
Given that Boeing and NASA, exercising oversight, knew about these thruster issues two years ago, did not know the root cause then, STILL do not know the root cause now(!), and yet pressed on with committing the lives of two astronauts to flying a faulty spacecraft demonstrates that NASA has truly fallen back into the trap that led to both the Challenger and Columbia disasters. They have yet again accepted the **normalisation of deviance** (ref Diane Vaughan) that characterised the run up to both of those disasters. How many times does NASA have to go through this cycle? Is it with every new generation of administrators and managers? Great work, Ellie, on covering this story.
I used to work for NASA as a civil servant. There is a massive chain of documentation and human involvement at every point in the process. The grapevine effect on anything stated or written is rampant. You also have empire builders making sure they have control of what is in their domain. The contractors pretty much do all the work, but the decisions are made by the civil servants who aren't necessarily the best leaders because the private sectors attracts the best with better pay. In the end, NASA is just another federal agency whole overall real purpose is to get more money in the next fiscal period.
Your right beauracracy will micro manager every aspect of the project. Also, The managers are having very little to none experience in private sector. Lots of toxicity in workplace. Everyaspect of the fed beauracracy is farmed out. Most experienced have all retired.young people with no industry experience, no experience treating people etc . They are only interested in advancing their grade.
Remember what NASA stands for: Never A Straight Answer If NASA was in a burning house they would have to have several meetings to decide what color of fire truck they wanted to come and put out the fire.
@@dhansel4835 As messed up as NASA has had hundreds of successful crewed flights and several moon landings. Boeing can't seem to keep it's planes in the air from one country to another almost 90 years after transatlantic flight was achieved.
@@paulmichaelfreedman8334 NASA had to approve it for flight. They would have known about the software status and they definitely knew about the leaks. And they still said light the candle. Of course Boeing had to convince them that everything was going to be fine, like a good salesman does when he sells you insurance you don't need. I can't imagine that all NASA engineers were convinced, but they were probably outvoted. You know how history loves to repeat itself.
Does anyone remember when we lost 2 space shuttles due to the engineers not being in agreement! Boeing has 2 options…Bring the crew back on SpaceX or don’t…The best & safest is option 1 unless they want to completely destroy their damaged image!
They should fly the CEO and and other top management someone in charge of the starliner up on a dragon let them fly the starliner back let butch and sonny take the dragon home😊
What were they thinking, what if the human interface failed when they pushed the undock button and it didn't work and they had to do it autonomously from the ground "Hey guys we got it sit tight for a month". Boeing has obviously gone from a company with a bunch of good engineers to one with a bunch of good bureaucrats.
They weren't thinking. Someone screwed up and someone else didn't catch it. This was not a decision that a sane human would have made. Sloppy. Like failing to tighten lugs on a door frame on an aircraft. 99% sure no one authorized the deletion of the autonomous return system.
Apparently it can’t disconnect and move safely away from the ISS WITHOUT THE CREW. NASA and Boeing somewhere changed the “autopilot” function. What a major “F” up.
NASA's stated reason for contracting (VERY unequally, I might add) with both SpaceX and Boeing was to have a viable alternative if one program encountered a safety or performance issue. Yet now that that very thing has happened, NASA refuses to put in place their own plan to meet the crisis? I understand that there is dissent in NASA over how to proceed - but there was dissent over launching Challenger in '86 and the dissenters were shouted down. And with Columbia in '03, many at NASA were certain that the ship may not survive reentry, and that the crew should be made aware of the dangers. Once again, they were shouted down. Any fool with eyes can clearly see that NASA's management groupthink has changed very little in the 38 years since we watched Challenger blow itself to bits.
Another great interview Ellie. Now-what a mess this Starliner is in. Another example why we need more private space industries like SpaceX. U best believe if this happened to a Dragon capsule the astronauts would be back on Earth now.
I am wishing the best rescue and return for these fantastic astronauts, and that the policy that is hindering the success of this mission be revoked, to the detriment of the priority justice of bringing these people back, and safely. 🙏❤💝❤⚖🌟💫🌹Thank you very so much dear Ellie.
If they come back on starliner I will be saying my prayers and crossing my fingers. THAT IS NOT HOW THEY SHOULD RETURN ASTRONAUTS. Shame on Boeing and NASA
Ellie. I think it is quite funny as you talk about Starliner potential safety issues. The canned video footage you show of the capsule being transported along the roadway surrounded by security vehicles demonstrates exactly why Boeing is in the situation it is in. Pay very close attention to the top right corner of the capsule and you will see a door fly off and crash to the ground. The video then cuts out. It is very quick. It appears Boeing has transferred one issue from its aircraft production to its space capsule. It certainly is not a good piece of PR if Boeing wants to install confidence in its engineering or production.
You might find this amusing (sung to the tune of the Gilligan's Island theme) Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale, A tale of a fateful trip, That started from a cape launchpad, Aboard a brand new ship. Butch was a mighty engineer, Suni brave and true. Two astronauts set sail that day For a 10-day review, a 10-day review. The launch had faced a few delays, And various problems found, But finally, the ship took off, With Butch and Suni bound, with Butch and Suni bound. The flight was smooth as it could be, Starliner's booster tossed, But soon it seems problems showed up, And the mission could be lost, the mission could be lost. The ship arrived at the ISS And it didn't take long to know, They're stranded there for much longer Than they had planned to go. The crew aboard the ISS, Gave them a place to stay, Did spacewalks to repairs and more, They bravely worked each day. So join us here each week, my friends, It'll probably be a while, For two brave souls lost in space, Here on ISS Isle.
These days, regular people are saying "If it's Boeing, I'm not going". Way too few were surprised by this. Maybe SpaceX could just send up a repair crew and get it going for them...
You also have to think about these two people who signed up for a 1-2 week trip. These people have lives. You can't just leave them stranded against their will for months upon months upon months because you had a technical failure. And you can't say that they're totally cool with it because they have absolutely no choice. They don't make the calls, they just have to get along and agree and be team players.
Appreciate your efforts and quality content you post! You are a wonderful interviewer and get to the point with your well articulated questions. Ty for the entertaining live stream yesterday it was a blast I hit that like & subscribed to your Epic Channel as it is so well done 😊 Cheers🥂 to continued success, health & happiness Ellie⚘✌💫
This summary gives us a good opportunity to reflect on the Starliner press conference after the event and understand the underlying issues in a bit more detail.
I can imagine the state of mind of the two astronauts: "We are here 'delayed' and down below beancounters and PR-men in endless meetings are deciding what to do in order not to lose face and money. We will end up having to jump down with a rocket powered parachute backpack."
My understanding (some reading between the lines): if they decide to bring it back un-manned, they have to upload an entire new guidance package. There's no word on how large a file that is but it is bound to be very large, especially by ISS data xfer speeds. And there's no word on whether or not they can upload it directly to Starliner or if they have to send it up to a computer onboard ISS and then thumb-drive it over to the vehicle. I'm sure they'd prefer to send it straight to the spacecraft, but with the ISS right there both sending and receiving all sorts of data for itself, the station also providing a physical barrier to line-of-sight communications, and the fact that they are hurdling smack-dab through the center of the ionosphere - getting good data directly to the vehicle may prove challenging - especially if they are limited on electrical power which I am guessing is also a significant constraint. So they may be forced to send the new guidance-package up to a Windows-based computer onboard and then transfer it over to the spacecraft manually which would almost certainly involve the extra step of writing a whole new program so the Windows system can actually deal with whatever protocol Boeing created to write their telemetry and guidance-commands in. Either way, it's almost certain that they are going to need to tie up a major chunk of the ISS' bandwidth for an extended period to get the new guidance-package up there. And that's after they've written it, reviewed the data for accuracy, error-checked the code, debugged anything, formatted it for upload, etc. Even once they get the new guidance-package downloaded, format-checked, and kicked over to the vehicle - they are going to have to upload it back to ground to make sure nothing got corrupted in the transfer. And, with faulty thrusters sitting in space for however long it ends up being - I don't think anyone is going to have a tremendous amount of confidence that the vehicle is going to be able to execute a precision re-entry. And, given all the unexpected technical faults already encountered, I'm confident that the acting head of the National Space Council isn't particularly inclined to authorize anything that even smells iffy until after November 5th.
Why would they need to download it all to check it? Have thru not discovered hashes or something? Also, they could just send up a USB stick or an entire system on the next resupply, Does the iss not have star link yet?
One thing to remember is that items on the spaceships that are approved by NASA are not off the shelf, cutting edge computers. They have to be shielded from increased radiation exposure and meet written standards that take time to change. It would not surprise me that there isn't enough room for both programs to be active at the same time. I don't have any direct detailed knowledge of the NASA / Boeing process, but I do have knowledge of how Navy ships utilize technology and how long it takes for Milspecs to change to roll in newly created computers, etc.
@JohnnyHughes1 I don't see how that relates to what I said. Or are you saying NASA doesn't have modular or removable storage media? Also, the power on self-test of the system should already be doing a hash/signature check of all program data. That is the standard for safety-related systems.
@@deth3021 I'm wrong all over the place. They can transfer data plenty fast apparently - that used to be an issue when it was all radio-based but nowadays apparently they are using lasers (schweet). And the USB on a resupply ship makes a ton of sense (didn't think of that one).
At 7:34 in this video, a hatch blows off the Starliner as it is transported on the orange vehicle... Hmmm this reminds me of another Boeing jet that was missing 4 bolts on its hatch.
Spacex has the capacity option of up to 7 crew members if my memory serves me correctly, Why not set it up for 6 or 7 crew members and then they would not have to downsize from 4 to 2 crew member with little delay on the rescue? Am I way off on this?
That is a good question. The issue is that while SpaceX was originally sizing Crew Dragon for up to 7, NASA told them, "Nah, no more than 4", so the questions are did SpaceX size the parachutes and life support system to only be safe with 4 - or can the parachutes handle the additional weight and the demands that two more humans put on the life support system? Only SpaceX or NASA could answer that. The additional mass *might* also make for a more "higher G force, higher heating" ballistic reentry, depending on what that does to the center of gravity of the ship. They also don't have entry space suits available that are compatible with Dragon, so those would need to be sent up - if any are available in sizes that might fit them. So, they are still looking at coming home in February 2025. Really sad for what was supposed to be an 8-to-14-day mission max.
@@External2737 well, now one of the long shot options is to have them simply lie down on some foam placed on the lower deck, no bench or seat required.
As a software engineer, the excuses being made for Boeing right now are absolutely ridiculous. Boeing plainly cut corners and deserves way more shade than they are actually getting right now. I am not an expert on space hardware, but it sounds like they egregiously cut corners on the hardware development side as well.
He said that this is hard to do, but, on the other hand, SpaceX have done it. He probably means it is too hard for Boeing. Boeing can't be angry at Aerojet for building rocket engines that Boeing should have built.
"Not embarrassing!" Eric, this whole Starliner saga in beyond embarrassing. It's beyond disgusting. Is it criminal or a case of corruption? What happened to Boeing whistle blowers?
Astronauts become astronauts because they want to fly in space so I suspect Butch and Sunni are quite happy with maybe getting an almost regular ISS rotation. Swedish astronaut Christer Fuglesang was asked about it and he said he was happy for every extra day he got in space because of weather and other delays and so his message to them was "congratulations!".
I do not agree, if you plan to go home next week and someone says you have to stay in a tin can for a further six months you would not be happy. They are human beings like you and I, they have family and want to come home… but not on Starliner thank you very much.
One problem though is they only went up with one set of clothes (including underwear), as it was only meant to be a short mission. That has to be 'unfun', at the very least.
Wow... definitely quality control as can see in the picture that during transporting the capsule at the beginning, a part fall down... maybe was just a cover for transportation but is not a good pubblicity
Did anyone catch in the beginning as the clips were being played at the 2:04 mark it looks like a window popped out of Starliner as they are transporting it?
One of the comments said " put the money in Dreamchaser. Great idea, but that money is long gone. Boeing is $6.2 billion spent on a $4.6 billion contract.
Indeed. Meanwhile, SpaceX completed its six-flight CCtCap contract last year, is coming up on its ninth flight, and will have minimum of six more Crew flights by the end of the ISS programme. Boeing will be lucky to complete its six-flight CCtCap obligation by the time ISS is deorbited. My money is on them not being able to complete that obligation, and NASA obfuscating on the fact that Boeing will be in breach of contract. Unfortunately, it's too late to develop a crew-capable version of DreamChaser to replace Starliner. Sierra Nevada will have to look beyond ISS to make a crew DreamChaser a reality.
@@ryanm7263 I doubt it. It would just end starliner which is pretty much finished anyway. How many people have boeing planes killed in the last few years?
A salient point is that the space program is a “nice-to-do” but domestic air travel is more than that. I agree, this could be the death knell for Being. My uneducated guess is that Boeing might spin off the aerospace unit from the aviation unit and sell one of them off. But to whom?
So this really points out the difference between building everything in house, versus delegating everything out to subcontractors. Much harder to QA that later type product.
4:20 With my software engineer hat on, the configuration explanation is the most absurd and ultra-bureaucratic approach to software design I have ever heard. It would be insane to design the autonomous functionality in such a way that it requires you to wait for over a month to switch between autonomous and manual flying. That's stupid beyond reason because the flight configurations can be stored separately (even redundantly) and loaded either on system reboot (the "stone-age" method), or dynamically (by pressing/tapping buttons/switches). My explanation for what happened is much simpler. When they almost lost Starliner twice in the same flight, NASA gave Boeing 80+ recommendations (also called issues/bugs to fix). My guess is that Boeing decided to cut corners and remove the autonomous capability so they can cover the 80+ "recommendations" faster, because they were already quite late. They simply relied on the astronauts to do the flying, docking and undocking, and - looking at their announcements -, they actually called it manual piloting demonstration, which would make people believe it was intentional. They have the capability, of course, but it's not in Starliner's systems. They have to upload it back, but they have to complete the fixes and test it before they do. Either that, or they are indeed as incompetent as the Secret Service. This is really at that level of unbelievable.
@@kylebent2608 Another bottomless pit. A scaled up version of DC (~50 passengers) would be the ideal crew vehicle if it could replace the payload and nose section of starship. It would detach before re-entry so the crew can return like the shuttle did. the lower part of starship can still do it's belly dive.
The American taxpayer deserves a refund. Boeing needs to be banned from any further NASA contracts as they have repeatedly demonstrated that they do not have the expertise to do the job effectively and on budget.
The fact that it can’t undock autonomously and that it takes weeks of “reconfiguring” is a huge failure just on its own. That should be considered as a minimal failsafe in case the crew was incapacitated.
5:25 I would be worried to go full autonomous with the vehicle being in a potentially degraded state. The autonomous mode is probably well tested on a working vehicle. Need to validate it with various failure states that the system is in, and potential future thruster failures.
One issue I have not heard discussed is the matter of crew input. Do the two astronauts get a say in how they return? It would be totally unacceptable if the crew is not given options, especially if the spacecraft is not guaranteed to be flight worthy.
One has to keep in mind that putting additional people on a crew dragon is, as far as I know, also an untested scenario with risks associated with it. It's not like a return on crew dragon is anywhere nearly as safe as taking a flight on an airliner.
do I understand this right, due to automation software having been deleted for this crewed mission, Starliner now can't even undock without someone inside the capsule pushing the buttons?
@@stevepirie8130 if that fails, would it be possible for a crew member to don an EVA suit, board Starliner & uncouple such that a Canadarm could move it to near the ISS airlock such that the crew member could depressurize & exit that piece of junk to reenter ISS via the airlock? just trying to brainstorm what they might do. government, btw, should start looking for alternatives to Boeing in future contracts.
While nasa and Boeing deserve all the criticism they are getting, I have a question for Aerojet Rocketdyn. The second simplest rocket is the hydrazine rocket engine. We have been building these since the beginning of the Space age. So, how do you f up one of the simplest rocket engines there are?
This is a Teflon seal. Probably from the thruster to the Starliner tanks. Boeing botched the thermal model. When oxidizer vaporizes, the mass flow plummets reducing cooling. This fault is outside Aerojet's domain in my opinion. For Aerojet did not design the doghouses.
The “Is it 1 in 270 or is it closer to 1 in 100?” type of decision is a different scenario where you are deciding whether an important mission can be flown or not. In this case there is no real downside to bringing them back on Dragon as the Crew 9 mission will still take place. It’s true that Butch and Suni did not receive the same specific training as whoever the two astronauts who will be bumped did, but they are both space veterans with lots of ISS experience. So I agree with Ellie that it’s a no-brainer.
Fun fact: Altas V is retiring, so now, there aren’t any more launch vehicles for Starliner. Yep, you read that right. Eventually, Starliner will (if it isn’t cancelled) launch on Vulcan, which will probably mean yet another uncrewed flight test.
To the theme of Gilligan's Island; Sit right there and I'll tell a tail, A Tale of a crazy flight, that started right at the Cape, aboard this leaky ship. Suni was the pilot with crazy hair all curled, and Butch was the captain of the pair, soon in a perilous plight. On that day the astronauts launched into space, on a one week tour, a one week tour. The helium started several leaks, the tiny ship was crap. If not for the courage of the fearless crew the tiny ship wouldn't launch, but now it's launched it's stuck in space, now it can't come home, now they're stuck right there, on Starliner Isle.
I’m dumbfounded that there are only two docking ports on the US side of the ISS? It’s not exactly a good time to ask Roscosmos for permission to use one of their open ports (if they are even compatible). Some of the concept-only modules we’ve seen being developed, will have multiple docking ports they would add. It just seems like one dumb thing after another.
I'm less surprised that those two are stuck and more surprised that NASA allowed people to ride in a craft whose builder is being questioned about safety and quality checks and poor builds. Especially as they have had time and again failed to achieve a flawless trial.
Ellie, I guess the hypothetical question that has to be asked of NASA and SpaceX is why Barry and Sunni can't come back on Dragon 8? The Dragon was designed to accommodate seven astronauts if I remember correctly. There may be more to this than just adding chairs which in concept could be flown up on Dragon 9, I realize Dragon 8 may not have the life support connections, yet it should be possible. We have been working on space rescue since Apollo Soyuz. Dragon 9 should be able to take the standard crew, with room for additional astronauts on return. There would be some cargo impact but should be manageable. Returning experiments can be risked on Starliner. The other question to be asked would be is the latency of updating software on Starliner a legacy of the communication mode to the station and limited data rates and ground stations. We know that Polaris Dawn is going to test Starlink laser communications, and thus need to know if this capability needs to be added to the station possibly by incorporating it into future Dragon systems. It would be interesting to get SpaceX / Starlinks take on doing this. these could make good questions. Let's be honest you could see SpaceX taking the challenge to rapidly incorporate this capability into Dragon or even put an on station (if they can do a spacewalk in the current situation with suits). I suspect integration on Dragon would be the simplest from both a physical integration and political inter agency challenge. NASA isn't agile.
This is the place to get the most up to date "Stuck-Liner" news and info ... Ellie in Space 🚀 ROCKS !
Stuck-Linger....
Leakliner
Doomliner
Stuckliner
ROCKS: Boeing wants to leave no stone unturned here.
Did anyone notice the door blowing out of the capsule being transported at 2.02?
Yes, I was wondering what that part was that blew off the capsule!
Ah well you know boeing and doors, they are still working on the concept.
It was only a protective window cover for transport, not a door.
@@rjswasI think someone didn't use enough duct tape. 😅
@@rjswas just like a door plug you might say?
NASA has a history of putting pride before astronaut safety and many have sadly died.
NASA or Boeing?
Challenger. Columbia
@@satweavers1 BOTH!
Defund and dismantle NASA
@satweavers1 both are scandalous
Door transport cover fell off of it while it was being transported along the road. two minutes two seconds into the video 🤦🏻♂️ inspires confidence
The NASA investigation into that are still ongoing.
Not a hatch or window, just a protective transport cover.
@@rjswas if they cant be bothered to attach protective transport cover correctly, should they be trusted with peoples lives?
@@rjswasRicky you weren’t the one responsible for securing that cover were you?🤨
@@Mark-hr9dy Yep, i threw it from Australia, I'm a bloody good shot mate 😂
Excellent questions Ellie! Can see your journalism training shining through! Often times when I listen into NASA Pressers and national media ask questions (e.g. CBS), the questions are either obtuse or silly.
I could only imagine the anxiety of traveling back on a dodgy ship. Bad enough driving with a slow puncture or a low fuel light.
Wow, this update came pretty quick after the live stream.
I'm crazy and can edit fast AF from working in news :P LOL
This is clearly something that distinguishes you. Keep it up
I think Eric had too many excuses for Boeing and NASA. If they had crew safety in mind when building the thing none of this would be an issue so late in the process.
Your questions and comments were valid in spite of his eye rolling responses. I prefer your method of investigation.
It's not a software problem, we just have to change some text files, and that takes a month. 🤡🌎
Can't help but agree with you. SpaceX had to fly a couple of cargo dragons and have them go through with no issues before their demo flight and it seems like Boeing got to skip a fully successful test flight. So Boeing got more money, more time and used it poorly and we see the results Remember Boeing got a extra 2 billion for this fiasco
I mean, it is a pain dealing with situations like this.
The layman isn't going to understand the reason for all of these delays.
This will be the ONLY time the have to test this capsule and its support module. The moment they leave that's it. The support module will burn up and lose all of that potential to learn what is going wrong with the thing. Granted, it doesn't look good for NASA or Boeing.
I am flabbergasted that they didn't launch with software that can autonomously disembark and de-orbit. NASA needs to stop its complacency with its contractors. SLS and Starliner are boondoggles. It is also very frustrating that these sorts of programs don't have immunity from presidential terms. If we had stuck with the Bush and Clinton plans with the Orion program we would have been back on the moon in 2012.
@@jtjames79 I'd put money on the relevant software modules not being up to current spec and compatible with the rest. So they need to update them and then build a completely new version and retest it before actually uploading it.
And when they've done that, they need to persuade someone to actually ride in it...
@@jonathanj8303 That's not what they said. What they said was stupid.
They get no points.
Given that Boeing and NASA, exercising oversight, knew about these thruster issues two years ago, did not know the root cause then, STILL do not know the root cause now(!), and yet pressed on with committing the lives of two astronauts to flying a faulty spacecraft demonstrates that NASA has truly fallen back into the trap that led to both the Challenger and Columbia disasters. They have yet again accepted the **normalisation of deviance** (ref Diane Vaughan) that characterised the run up to both of those disasters. How many times does NASA have to go through this cycle? Is it with every new generation of administrators and managers?
Great work, Ellie, on covering this story.
An outstanding comment thank you so much.
Well stated.
I used to work for NASA as a civil servant. There is a massive chain of documentation and human involvement at every point in the process. The grapevine effect on anything stated or written is rampant. You also have empire builders making sure they have control of what is in their domain. The contractors pretty much do all the work, but the decisions are made by the civil servants who aren't necessarily the best leaders because the private sectors attracts the best with better pay. In the end, NASA is just another federal agency whole overall real purpose is to get more money in the next fiscal period.
And the answer to the Senate which hates bad comments about their big donors, whether Boeing, ULA (et al) kill people or not.
Boeing hasn't exactly shown the supposed superiority of private industry of late.
Your right beauracracy will micro manager every aspect of the project. Also, The managers are having very little to none experience in private sector. Lots of toxicity in workplace. Everyaspect of the fed beauracracy is farmed out. Most experienced have all retired.young people with no industry experience, no experience treating people etc . They are only interested in advancing their grade.
Remember what NASA stands for:
Never
A
Straight
Answer
If NASA was in a burning house they would have to have several meetings to decide what color of fire truck they wanted to come and put out the fire.
@@dhansel4835 As messed up as NASA has had hundreds of successful crewed flights and several moon landings.
Boeing can't seem to keep it's planes in the air from one country to another almost 90 years after transatlantic flight was achieved.
NASA cut some serious corners here and it's really biting them where it hurts.
Not NASA, Boeing did.
@@paulmichaelfreedman8334 NASA had to approve it for flight. They would have known about the software status and they definitely knew about the leaks. And they still said light the candle.
Of course Boeing had to convince them that everything was going to be fine, like a good salesman does when he sells you insurance you don't need. I can't imagine that all NASA engineers were convinced, but they were probably outvoted. You know how history loves to repeat itself.
Idiot comment !! They gave Boeing 4.5Bn , and Space X 2.4 Bn
Can not say THANKS enough for this kind of in depth reporting!
Does anyone remember when we lost 2 space shuttles due to the engineers not being in agreement! Boeing has 2 options…Bring the crew back on SpaceX or don’t…The best & safest is option 1 unless they want to completely destroy their damaged image!
The engineers were in agreement, just management was not in agreement with the engineers. That's how it went, TWICE.
Boeing has no options, its all on NASA right now.
@steve9604 You hit the nail on the head 🎯
@@paulmichaelfreedman8334 Exactly! Bean counters and PR people have no business in flight safety decisions
They should fly the CEO and and other top management someone in charge of the starliner up on a dragon let them fly the starliner back let butch and sonny take the dragon home😊
What were they thinking, what if the human interface failed when they pushed the undock button and it didn't work and they had to do it autonomously from the ground "Hey guys we got it sit tight for a month". Boeing has obviously gone from a company with a bunch of good engineers to one with a bunch of good bureaucrats.
What if the crew was disabled for some reason?
Even the space shuttle had autonomous return on command.
Autonomous operation should be the default, and manual is the fallback.
They weren't thinking. Someone screwed up and someone else didn't catch it. This was not a decision that a sane human would have made. Sloppy. Like failing to tighten lugs on a door frame on an aircraft.
99% sure no one authorized the deletion of the autonomous return system.
Just disconnect it and let it burn up on reentry. Make Boeing give a full refund.
Wait NASA paid for this? 😂
Apparently it can’t disconnect and move safely away from the ISS WITHOUT THE CREW. NASA and Boeing somewhere changed the “autopilot” function. What a major “F” up.
@@bobbastian7605 bill?
The thrusters ain’t working right. Disconnecting it now may send it to a collision orbit with the ISS…so much fun!
@@mchii6633 Unfortunately it no longer has the autopilot software so it has to be crewed. What a major F up.
NASA's stated reason for contracting (VERY unequally, I might add) with both SpaceX and Boeing was to have a viable alternative if one program encountered a safety or performance issue. Yet now that that very thing has happened, NASA refuses to put in place their own plan to meet the crisis? I understand that there is dissent in NASA over how to proceed - but there was dissent over launching Challenger in '86 and the dissenters were shouted down. And with Columbia in '03, many at NASA were certain that the ship may not survive reentry, and that the crew should be made aware of the dangers. Once again, they were shouted down. Any fool with eyes can clearly see that NASA's management groupthink has changed very little in the 38 years since we watched Challenger blow itself to bits.
A brilliant comment
The term “A Three Hour Tour” comes to mind. With Boeing playing the role of Gilligan”
A "3-hour tour" has turned into being shipwrecked on a desert isle.
Another great interview Ellie. Now-what a mess this Starliner is in. Another example why we need more private space industries like SpaceX. U best believe if this happened to a Dragon capsule the astronauts would be back on Earth now.
I am wishing the best rescue and return for these fantastic astronauts, and that the policy that is hindering the success of this mission be revoked, to the detriment of the priority justice of bringing these people back, and safely. 🙏❤💝❤⚖🌟💫🌹Thank you very so much dear Ellie.
Great idea...cargo missions
Why wasn’t all this Starliner testing done to switch from manual to automated operations BEFORE launching the vehicle?
This could be a new TV show will call it debacle in space :)
If they come back on starliner I will be saying my prayers and crossing my fingers. THAT IS NOT HOW THEY SHOULD RETURN ASTRONAUTS. Shame on Boeing and NASA
The control room was full of people crossing their fingers every time a shuttle launched
Ellie. I think it is quite funny as you talk about Starliner potential safety issues. The canned video footage you show of the capsule being transported along the roadway surrounded by security vehicles demonstrates exactly why Boeing is in the situation it is in. Pay very close attention to the top right corner of the capsule and you will see a door fly off and crash to the ground. The video then cuts out. It is very quick. It appears Boeing has transferred one issue from its aircraft production to its space capsule.
It certainly is not a good piece of PR if Boeing wants to install confidence in its engineering or production.
The window cover blowing of the Stuckliner though
You might find this amusing (sung to the tune of the Gilligan's Island theme)
Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale,
A tale of a fateful trip,
That started from a cape launchpad,
Aboard a brand new ship.
Butch was a mighty engineer,
Suni brave and true.
Two astronauts set sail that day
For a 10-day review, a 10-day review.
The launch had faced a few delays,
And various problems found,
But finally, the ship took off,
With Butch and Suni bound, with Butch and Suni bound.
The flight was smooth as it could be,
Starliner's booster tossed,
But soon it seems problems showed up,
And the mission could be lost, the mission could be lost.
The ship arrived at the ISS
And it didn't take long to know,
They're stranded there for much longer
Than they had planned to go.
The crew aboard the ISS,
Gave them a place to stay,
Did spacewalks to repairs and more,
They bravely worked each day.
So join us here each week, my friends,
It'll probably be a while,
For two brave souls lost in space,
Here on ISS Isle.
Omg do I have permission to sing this?!
I’d love to share
Please email me your permission
Eliana.sheriff@gmail.com
Oh this is great!
@@ellieinspace indeed you do! Email sent.
Nicely done, the words fit with the melody...!
Good one !!!!!
These days, regular people are saying "If it's Boeing, I'm not going". Way too few were surprised by this.
Maybe SpaceX could just send up a repair crew and get it going for them...
Well done Ellie. Your journalistic talents come through very well.
Proper journalism is great to watch and unfortunately a dying career in the mainstream media.
10:22 I bet the dogs got a stern talking to during that cut
You also have to think about these two people who signed up for a 1-2 week trip. These people have lives. You can't just leave them stranded against their will for months upon months upon months because you had a technical failure. And you can't say that they're totally cool with it because they have absolutely no choice. They don't make the calls, they just have to get along and agree and be team players.
This mission will now have lifetime effects on their health and bodies.
Appreciate your efforts and quality content you post! You are a wonderful interviewer and get to the point with your well articulated questions. Ty for the entertaining live stream yesterday it was a blast I hit that like & subscribed to your Epic Channel as it is so well done 😊 Cheers🥂 to continued success, health & happiness Ellie⚘✌💫
As a side note. Ellie's makeup was great.
Thank you! No fake lashes today!
@@ellieinspace With those eyes, you don't need any!
Also, as a side note, Ellie's feelings are completely transparent in her facial expressions. Maybe, avoid high stakes poker games...
I'd like her to swing the medusa look on her flight to ISS
That's just incredible that a hatch falls off while it's barely moving down a roadway. That's at two minutes into your video.
This summary gives us a good opportunity to reflect on the Starliner press conference after the event and understand the underlying issues in a bit more detail.
I can imagine the state of mind of the two astronauts:
"We are here 'delayed' and down below beancounters and PR-men in endless meetings are deciding what to do in order not to lose face and money.
We will end up having to jump down with a rocket powered parachute backpack."
Newton: "What goes up must come down"
BOEING: "Wanna bet?"
Butch and Sunni are basically stuck on Gillian’s island! They were on a three hour tour and it will stretch into almost a year!
Call in Roscosmos!!!! That'll humiliate Boeing..... Good grief 😕..... Good show Ellie 👍
My understanding (some reading between the lines): if they decide to bring it back un-manned, they have to upload an entire new guidance package. There's no word on how large a file that is but it is bound to be very large, especially by ISS data xfer speeds. And there's no word on whether or not they can upload it directly to Starliner or if they have to send it up to a computer onboard ISS and then thumb-drive it over to the vehicle. I'm sure they'd prefer to send it straight to the spacecraft, but with the ISS right there both sending and receiving all sorts of data for itself, the station also providing a physical barrier to line-of-sight communications, and the fact that they are hurdling smack-dab through the center of the ionosphere - getting good data directly to the vehicle may prove challenging - especially if they are limited on electrical power which I am guessing is also a significant constraint. So they may be forced to send the new guidance-package up to a Windows-based computer onboard and then transfer it over to the spacecraft manually which would almost certainly involve the extra step of writing a whole new program so the Windows system can actually deal with whatever protocol Boeing created to write their telemetry and guidance-commands in. Either way, it's almost certain that they are going to need to tie up a major chunk of the ISS' bandwidth for an extended period to get the new guidance-package up there. And that's after they've written it, reviewed the data for accuracy, error-checked the code, debugged anything, formatted it for upload, etc. Even once they get the new guidance-package downloaded, format-checked, and kicked over to the vehicle - they are going to have to upload it back to ground to make sure nothing got corrupted in the transfer. And, with faulty thrusters sitting in space for however long it ends up being - I don't think anyone is going to have a tremendous amount of confidence that the vehicle is going to be able to execute a precision re-entry. And, given all the unexpected technical faults already encountered, I'm confident that the acting head of the National Space Council isn't particularly inclined to authorize anything that even smells iffy until after November 5th.
Why would they need to download it all to check it? Have thru not discovered hashes or something?
Also, they could just send up a USB stick or an entire system on the next resupply,
Does the iss not have star link yet?
One thing to remember is that items on the spaceships that are approved by NASA are not off the shelf, cutting edge computers. They have to be shielded from increased radiation exposure and meet written standards that take time to change. It would not surprise me that there isn't enough room for both programs to be active at the same time.
I don't have any direct detailed knowledge of the NASA / Boeing process, but I do have knowledge of how Navy ships utilize technology and how long it takes for Milspecs to change to roll in newly created computers, etc.
@JohnnyHughes1 I don't see how that relates to what I said.
Or are you saying NASA doesn't have modular or removable storage media?
Also, the power on self-test of the system should already be doing a hash/signature check of all program data.
That is the standard for safety-related systems.
@@deth3021 I'm wrong all over the place. They can transfer data plenty fast apparently - that used to be an issue when it was all radio-based but nowadays apparently they are using lasers (schweet). And the USB on a resupply ship makes a ton of sense (didn't think of that one).
They don't have Starlink services on ISS? ;-)
Great reporting Ellie, I'm getting better information from you than NASA or other YouPoo channels 👍😆
Awesome! Thank you! Seriously!?
At 7:34 in this video, a hatch blows off the Starliner as it is transported on the orange vehicle... Hmmm this reminds me of another Boeing jet that was missing 4 bolts on its hatch.
Spaghetti code. Exactly what you want on orbit 👍
Spacex has the capacity option of up to 7 crew members if my memory serves me correctly, Why not set it up for 6 or 7 crew members and then they would not have to downsize from 4 to 2 crew member with little delay on the rescue? Am I way off on this?
It's not just the dragon's capacity, it's the ISS capacity that's the biggest problem. Space and resources are limited up there.
That is a good question. The issue is that while SpaceX was originally sizing Crew Dragon for up to 7, NASA told them, "Nah, no more than 4", so the questions are did SpaceX size the parachutes and life support system to only be safe with 4 - or can the parachutes handle the additional weight and the demands that two more humans put on the life support system? Only SpaceX or NASA could answer that. The additional mass *might* also make for a more "higher G force, higher heating" ballistic reentry, depending on what that does to the center of gravity of the ship. They also don't have entry space suits available that are compatible with Dragon, so those would need to be sent up - if any are available in sizes that might fit them. So, they are still looking at coming home in February 2025. Really sad for what was supposed to be an 8-to-14-day mission max.
Has the 2nd bench been certified? A serious question.
You do not select how many seats, but which benches to install.
@@External2737 well, now one of the long shot options is to have them simply lie down on some foam placed on the lower deck, no bench or seat required.
The issue with the software is the fact they removed said software.......
As a software engineer, the excuses being made for Boeing right now are absolutely ridiculous. Boeing plainly cut corners and deserves way more shade than they are actually getting right now. I am not an expert on space hardware, but it sounds like they egregiously cut corners on the hardware development side as well.
In this age of technology for Starliner not to have a "Manual/Auto" mode always installed is bonkers.
He said that this is hard to do, but, on the other hand, SpaceX have done it. He probably means it is too hard for Boeing.
Boeing can't be angry at Aerojet for building rocket engines that Boeing should have built.
"Not embarrassing!" Eric, this whole Starliner saga in beyond embarrassing. It's beyond disgusting. Is it criminal or a case of corruption? What happened to Boeing whistle blowers?
Astronauts become astronauts because they want to fly in space so I suspect Butch and Sunni are quite happy with maybe getting an almost regular ISS rotation. Swedish astronaut Christer Fuglesang was asked about it and he said he was happy for every extra day he got in space because of weather and other delays and so his message to them was "congratulations!".
I do not agree, if you plan to go home next week and someone says you have to stay in a tin can for a further six months you would not be happy. They are human beings like you and I, they have family and want to come home… but not on Starliner thank you very much.
One problem though is they only went up with one set of clothes (including underwear), as it was only meant to be a short mission. That has to be 'unfun', at the very least.
Wow... definitely quality control as can see in the picture that during transporting the capsule at the beginning, a part fall down... maybe was just a cover for transportation but is not a good pubblicity
Did anybody else see something blow off the starliner on that video
Just a protective transport cover for the window.
They can't even put a protective window on correctly.!! That's a little troubling.
@@rjswasjust a shill trying to save boeings image
@@abowden5079 Why would i save their image lol, it doesn't gain me anything.
Why not add two more seats to the SpaceX Dragon? It was made for that right?
ISS capacity and limited resources up there.
Did anyone catch in the beginning as the clips were being played at the 2:04 mark it looks like a window popped out of Starliner as they are transporting it?
One of the comments said " put the money in Dreamchaser. Great idea, but that money is long gone. Boeing is $6.2 billion spent on a $4.6 billion contract.
Indeed. Meanwhile, SpaceX completed its six-flight CCtCap contract last year, is coming up on its ninth flight, and will have minimum of six more Crew flights by the end of the ISS programme. Boeing will be lucky to complete its six-flight CCtCap obligation by the time ISS is deorbited. My money is on them not being able to complete that obligation, and NASA obfuscating on the fact that Boeing will be in breach of contract.
Unfortunately, it's too late to develop a crew-capable version of DreamChaser to replace Starliner. Sierra Nevada will have to look beyond ISS to make a crew DreamChaser a reality.
People are not the number one priority for boeing. Money is.
It's safe to say that losing two astronauts on a Starliner would be pretty bad for their bottom line, and probably the end of Boeing altogether.
@@ryanm7263 I doubt it. It would just end starliner which is pretty much finished anyway. How many people have boeing planes killed in the last few years?
@@JWyatt91 Losing astronauts has a much larger impact from a PR perspective, as it's a historic event.
A salient point is that the space program is a “nice-to-do” but domestic air travel is more than that. I agree, this could be the death knell for Being. My uneducated guess is that Boeing might spin off the aerospace unit from the aviation unit and sell one of them off. But to whom?
Gilligan's Island !!! It was predicted from 1960's TV show!
So this really points out the difference between building everything in house, versus delegating everything out to subcontractors. Much harder to QA that later type product.
No..."STRANDED" is the appropriate term for the situation that has been ongoing and appears to continue to be ongoing for some time.
4:20 With my software engineer hat on, the configuration explanation is the most absurd and ultra-bureaucratic approach to software design I have ever heard. It would be insane to design the autonomous functionality in such a way that it requires you to wait for over a month to switch between autonomous and manual flying. That's stupid beyond reason because the flight configurations can be stored separately (even redundantly) and loaded either on system reboot (the "stone-age" method), or dynamically (by pressing/tapping buttons/switches).
My explanation for what happened is much simpler. When they almost lost Starliner twice in the same flight, NASA gave Boeing 80+ recommendations (also called issues/bugs to fix). My guess is that Boeing decided to cut corners and remove the autonomous capability so they can cover the 80+ "recommendations" faster, because they were already quite late. They simply relied on the astronauts to do the flying, docking and undocking, and - looking at their announcements -, they actually called it manual piloting demonstration, which would make people believe it was intentional.
They have the capability, of course, but it's not in Starliner's systems. They have to upload it back, but they have to complete the fixes and test it before they do. Either that, or they are indeed as incompetent as the Secret Service. This is really at that level of unbelievable.
Wow what a great interview. It is so refreshing to hear someone like Eric who is so well informed and certain of their facts.
Anyone else catch the portal cover being punched out at 2:03?
Dream Chaser should replace Starliner, period!
The Dream Chaser manned version isn't quite ready yet.
@@kylebent2608 Yup. Really looking forward to their cargo mission, such a cool vehicle with different uses.
@@kylebent2608 Another bottomless pit. A scaled up version of DC (~50 passengers) would be the ideal crew vehicle if it could replace the payload and nose section of starship. It would detach before re-entry so the crew can return like the shuttle did. the lower part of starship can still do it's belly dive.
The American taxpayer deserves a refund. Boeing needs to be banned from any further NASA contracts as they have repeatedly demonstrated that they do not have the expertise to do the job effectively and on budget.
The fact that it can’t undock autonomously and that it takes weeks of “reconfiguring” is a huge failure just on its own. That should be considered as a minimal failsafe in case the crew was incapacitated.
5:25 I would be worried to go full autonomous with the vehicle being in a potentially degraded state. The autonomous mode is probably well tested on a working vehicle. Need to validate it with various failure states that the system is in, and potential future thruster failures.
Thanks! I miss the days when NASA was more transparent with updates.
"There is resistance to using words like 'stuck' or 'stranded.' " How about 'marooned'?
One issue I have not heard discussed is the matter of crew input. Do the two astronauts get a say in how they return? It would be totally unacceptable if the crew is not given options, especially if the spacecraft is not guaranteed to be flight worthy.
Send crew dragon and bring them home.
One has to keep in mind that putting additional people on a crew dragon is, as far as I know, also an untested scenario with risks associated with it. It's not like a return on crew dragon is anywhere nearly as safe as taking a flight on an airliner.
Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale,
A tale of a fateful trip
That started from this tropic port
Aboard this tiny ship.
Good work, Elle!
Was that a window that fell off the Starliner casle at the 2:05 point in this video?
Great interview!
NASA + Boeing = A heaping helping of word salad, with a side of B.S.
Boeing Standard?
do I understand this right, due to automation software having been deleted for this crewed mission, Starliner now can't even undock without someone inside the capsule pushing the buttons?
Unless they upload the programme which is what they're looking into how to
@@stevepirie8130 if that fails, would it be possible for a crew member to don an EVA suit, board Starliner & uncouple such that a Canadarm could move it to near the ISS airlock such that the crew member could depressurize & exit that piece of junk to reenter ISS via the airlock? just trying to brainstorm what they might do.
government, btw, should start looking for alternatives to Boeing in future contracts.
I have a good word. They are 'SCREWED'
While nasa and Boeing deserve all the criticism they are getting, I have a question for Aerojet Rocketdyn. The second simplest rocket is the hydrazine rocket engine. We have been building these since the beginning of the Space age. So, how do you f up one of the simplest rocket engines there are?
This is a Teflon seal. Probably from the thruster to the Starliner tanks. Boeing botched the thermal model. When oxidizer vaporizes, the mass flow plummets reducing cooling.
This fault is outside Aerojet's domain in my opinion. For Aerojet did not design the doghouses.
7:35 Starliner loosing the protective hatch 🤣
The “Is it 1 in 270 or is it closer to 1 in 100?” type of decision is a different scenario where you are deciding whether an important mission can be flown or not. In this case there is no real downside to bringing them back on Dragon as the Crew 9 mission will still take place. It’s true that Butch and Suni did not receive the same specific training as whoever the two astronauts who will be bumped did, but they are both space veterans with lots of ISS experience. So I agree with Ellie that it’s a no-brainer.
Did anyone else notice in the clip of them transporting the Starliner capsule on the road that a piece fell off it? Lol
Fun fact: Altas V is retiring, so now, there aren’t any more launch vehicles for Starliner. Yep, you read that right. Eventually, Starliner will (if it isn’t cancelled) launch on Vulcan, which will probably mean yet another uncrewed flight test.
Combine with plan a or b, or backup from original part
Did I just watch a door fall off without even a tire kick?
To the theme of Gilligan's Island;
Sit right there and I'll tell a tail, A Tale of a crazy flight, that started right at the Cape, aboard this leaky ship. Suni was the pilot with crazy hair all curled, and Butch was the captain of the pair, soon in a perilous plight. On that day the astronauts launched into space, on a one week tour, a one week tour. The helium started several leaks, the tiny ship was crap. If not for the courage of the fearless crew the tiny ship wouldn't launch, but now it's launched it's stuck in space, now it can't come home, now they're stuck right there, on Starliner Isle.
"Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale
a tale of a fateful trip,
that started from this tropic port,
aboard this tiny ship..."
Here's your problem 2:02. Starliner is missing a door.
Thanks, Ellie!
What is that door flying off the capsule at about 2 minutes in!!!???
window cover used during transport. an omen perhaps?
NASA's strategy is sort of working. Having 2 different vehicles as back up to each other. The trouble is that Boeing still has not done their part.
is it even possible to detach starliner from the space station safely?
at 2:00 part falls off starliner?
Conhecimento e vida nos liberta
às vezes
They are stranded. They can't come home currently because starliner is blocking the docking port
I’m dumbfounded that there are only two docking ports on the US side of the ISS? It’s not exactly a good time to ask Roscosmos for permission to use one of their open ports (if they are even compatible). Some of the concept-only modules we’ve seen being developed, will have multiple docking ports they would add. It just seems like one dumb thing after another.
I'm less surprised that those two are stuck and more surprised that NASA allowed people to ride in a craft whose builder is being questioned about safety and quality checks and poor builds. Especially as they have had time and again failed to achieve a flawless trial.
Ellie, I guess the hypothetical question that has to be asked of NASA and SpaceX is why Barry and Sunni can't come back on Dragon 8? The Dragon was designed to accommodate seven astronauts if I remember correctly. There may be more to this than just adding chairs which in concept could be flown up on Dragon 9, I realize Dragon 8 may not have the life support connections, yet it should be possible. We have been working on space rescue since Apollo Soyuz. Dragon 9 should be able to take the standard crew, with room for additional astronauts on return. There would be some cargo impact but should be manageable. Returning experiments can be risked on Starliner.
The other question to be asked would be is the latency of updating software on Starliner a legacy of the communication mode to the station and limited data rates and ground stations. We know that Polaris Dawn is going to test Starlink laser communications, and thus need to know if this capability needs to be added to the station possibly by incorporating it into future Dragon systems. It would be interesting to get SpaceX / Starlinks take on doing this. these could make good questions.
Let's be honest you could see SpaceX taking the challenge to rapidly incorporate this capability into Dragon or even put an on station (if they can do a spacewalk in the current situation with suits). I suspect integration on Dragon would be the simplest from both a physical integration and political inter agency challenge. NASA isn't agile.
Thanks for getting Mr.Berger again. Great update. I still think they come home on starliner but damn.
Its amazing how afraid nasa is of boeing.
money money money $$$$$$$$
This is brings back memories of Apollo 1. And the space shuttle Challenger disaster. Normalized deviance was the ultimate cause for both disasters.
2:15 Did a piece of Starliner fall off during transport?
window cover used during transport. it's Boeing you know.
2:02 Did something fall off of Starliner while they were transporting it? 😂
window cover used for transport only. Ellie chooses video clips with meticulous care. 🙂