Do you think NASA’s investment in the Starliner will pay off or is this a lost cause? Let us know below!

The problem is simply that companies like Boeing, Lockheed, etc are so invested in politics that they own all of the oversight and know that they will always have a seat at the table whenever a bid comes up and will never be blocked from consideration for failing to deliver. Over budget and behind schedule is standard operating procedure and the people who could put a stop to it won't because they'll get primaried in their next election if they do.

In the true spirit of government programs, the Starliner (specifically designed to work with the ISS) will be ready to use 4 months before the ISS is decommissioned. Then the replacement space station will be designed to work with the Starliner. However, the new space station will be ready 5 months before the Starliner is decommissioned. Rinse and repeat.

The best thing Starliner has done for the US, is to reaffirm that bloated old legacy corps are slow, costly, and lacking innovation. Boeing received almost double the funding as SpaceX, around $5 billion, had decades of experience building spacecraft, and yet nearly 10 years later, they've still not launched a single astronaut. We do need multiple launch systems for flexibility and assured access to space, but damn if SpaceX doesn't fly circles around absolutely everyone else in aerospace.

I remember reading a while back that a McDonnel Douglas engineer said after the merger, that the company was now run by accountants with spreadsheets instead of engineers. He said F' this and retired.

When you consider that the whole contract is just for the “command module” and the whole “get it into space” rocket part is ULA’s rocket and that’s all sorted, it’s a really poor effort on Boeing’s part. Meantime SpaceX designed a rocket and command module, and space suits etc. AND are in the middle of sorting the next level of spacecraft now. Good job NASA. You made such a good decision going for Boeing. 🤦‍♂️

Over 50 years ago we lost 3 astronauts to a fire in the Apollo capsule, but Boeing didn't think to check the flammability of the wiring in Starliner capsule??? This is either total incompetence or an absolute clown show.

Always been a fan of the Dream Chaser. It's amazing what companies can do if they don't have the bloat and corruption of a Boeing.

I grew up with NASA and the Space Program, and constantly admired Boeing, IBM, and the others. Just cannot believe that Boeing can no longer walk and chew gum at the same time. I sincerely wish them success because they've always delivered. But now this, and billions of of our dollars.........

LOL, New Glen? Ha ha. That's funny I expect we will be using a Star Trek like transporter before new Glen gets off the ground.

Boeing was a trusted engineering driven company, now it is a bank with an Aerospace branch, bean counters rulr and this explains the 737 MAX, the capsule etc

It truly is sad to see Boeing struggling the way they do with everything they build. The days of Apollo have long gone and so are they brilliant people that worked for them. Computers are great but if you don't have the right people , smart people , it isn't going to work any longer. All glitz and glamor but no show.

You forgot the part where on orbit they found an error that would have caused the destruction of the ship, when it collided with it's trunk.

isent it interesting that all the big aerospace companies have been racked with problems and bloated price tags its almost like they have been the only game in town so long they have forgotten what it like to have competition

Yikes, inflammable wiring is scary. I am old enough to remember Apollo 1.

I worked on the shuttle program. During its time, it was initially designed operated by Rockwell international. I also worked at Boeing, Rockwell was the better company for aerospace

Sierra Space has an *unmanned* Dream Chaser ready to fly. I am quite certain that, had they received the COTS contract instead of Boeing, they would have been flying crew to the ISS for quite some time now. It will be years, if ever, before they develop a manned version of Dream Chaser, although that is certainly high on their priority list. Boeing was supposed to provide Starliner as their contribution to the Orbital Reef space station, but my impression is they want to fly their six missions and get out of the space flight business all together.

Rest in peace first manned crew of Starliner, Boing does it again !

9:00 I'm sure you didn't mean for it, but the way you said that about Falcon 9's blowing up made it seem like they were accidental, and more common than in reality. They expended one (1) Falcon 9 for the inflight abort test, which exploded due to aerodynamics when the front of the rocket flew away. It was intentional, and only happened once for this program.

I think Starliner will get 1 flight… to collect the final crew of the ISS before it’s decommissioned 🤣

Boeing Starliner: 1.507 billion USD for 390 cubic feet of total volume. It is the most expensive tiny B&B on the planet which still hasn't proven that it is up to code. An even better riot of fun is to look at Boeing's other military programs which have huge cost overruns and design/acceptance issues. The McDonnell Douglas utterly failed profits first philosophy is now so deeply entrenched in Boeing that it will never be eradicated from this company. The Starliner is the new McDonnell Douglas DC-10, aka the flying coffin as the DC-10 came to be known by the flying public.

I am not an engineer, but it would seem that Boeing with all their defense contracts was more interested in saving money and padding their profits than getting into the space race. Musk on the other hand is more interested in success than profits, at least in the early stages. He has risked bankruptcy more than once and came out a billionaire.

Boeing should have to do 2 more uncrewed missions before manned

At the rate at which the market value of SpaceX is growing it will in a couple of years overtake both Boeing and Airbus. Once its quite modest development cost of about $5B is paid off, Starship will become a "license to print money". None of the other existing or planned launch vehicles can deliver 10 tonnes to LEO for less than the current cost of Falcon 9, about $30M, never mind less than the designed launch cost of Starship, less than $5M! Oh, and while delivering that 10 tonnes to LEO Starship can for no additional cost deliver another 140 tonnes! Starship can deliver 10 tonnes to the MOON for less than any other existing or proposed launcher can deliver 10 tonnes to LEO. There is also a hypothetical possibility that Starship could deliver 150 tonnes to any spot on Earth in under an hour for less than the cost of using a 747 or even the Antonov An-225 Mriya, both of which would require 12 hours for delivery! It could certainly deliver over 100 passengers on a sub-orbital flight to a greater altitude than either BO's New Shepard or Virgin Galactic can deliver 7 passengers. Boeing has already been paid for six flights to the ISS and NASA will probably oblige them by not paying for any additional Crew Dragon flights beyond current contracts in order to exploit those FREE missions. Those 6 missions will still cost Boeing at least $1.5 billion in payments to ULA for delivery to LEO. Why should NASA continue to subsidize Boeing beyond that when each additional flight by Shitliner beyond those 6 would cost them $50M more than SpaceX charges for the same service. There is far more value to NASA subsidizing the Sierra Dreamchaser which can move cargo more efficiently. Also SpaceX does not need any more missions to the ISS because it already has a lock on cargo and personnel transport to the commercial Axiom space station which will replace ISS. What good are Boeing's crew transport contracts or NGs Cygnus cargo contracts to the ISS when there is no ISS in 7 years? Further note that the only reason the ISS is in its inefficient 51.6° inclination orbit was to permit the use of Soyuz and Progress spacecraft to supply it. The Chinese Tiangong space station is at only 41.47°. The ideal inclination for US stations is the latitude of Cape Canaveral 28.5°! With any western replacement space station SpaceX will be able to deliver 100 tonnes of cargo or a dozen astronauts and 80 tonnes of cargo for less than any other proposed launcher. And since all western replacement space stations are to be privately operated, European, Canadian, and American politicians will not be able to demand that their "friends" get contracts.

NASA's Space Shuttle was launched 135 times, 133 successfully. The first shuttle mission in the ISS program was launched on 4 Dec1998 (STS-95). That was the 93rd shuttle launch. Most of the 37 shuttle flights after STS-95 went to the ISS and, obviously, none of the first 92 shuttle flights went to that space station.

What went wrong with Boeing?...to dang big...a mountain of management above the actual worker. Same issue it's always been.

This video was much more interesting and informative than expected. Nice job. I love your videos!

If it's Boeing, you ain't going!

Thank God for Space X !

Great updates! Well done!

Nice job. Very informative. keep it up.

The problem with Sierra Space is that they don't have a launch platform. They plan to use ULA, but tgat depends on ULA getting the engunes from Blue Origin, which seems to be an ongoing problem. Falcon9 could launch it, but it would need a new design of payload fairing, which SpaceX is reluctant to spend time and money to build. Still, I wouldnt bet against SpaceX eventually being the launch provider.

and the problems go on I’ll believe it when I see it thanks for the updates David 🚀❤️👌🇬🇧👍😊

Love your videos, I think I’ve watched 85% of them 😊

How can Blue Origin be considered "in the running" when that company has yet to launch anything past the Kármán line?

Boeing shouldn't get any more money and be forced to finish it with their own money or be fined $4.2billion

Has a flight crew member ever refused to to fly on a vehicle and what would happen if they refused to fly on boeing's capsule ?

9:02 - this was done on purpose. It was a test of the in flight abort system which will case instability in the first stage when this happened due to it still seeing a lot of aerodynamics drag being that it wasn’t in space for this planned in flight abort. Rather the timing was likely the worst case time to have the abort to occur to test out the system in the most difficult point in the launch.

SpaceX must have discovered the "secret sauce" in their architecture that Boeing has yet to discover. Endless fixes and upgrades to a flawed design may lead nowhere unfortunately. They never talk about the number of engineers who have to work with forced overtime on projects like this. After so long, there's the inevitable burn out of personnel and people start looking for another employer in order to save their physical and mental health.

Interesting. Thanks. Good comments.

Hey Astronaut… you wanted a free trip on Starliner? Hey… hey… where are you going?

Great content, thanks very much for producing it, but why the purposeless flashy graphics?

I love space stuff

The Falcon 9 didn't explode by an accident, it was intentionally destroyed during an in flight abort test!

Given the entire ULA company is up for grabs at around 5 billion$, this POS is inexcusable. Why couldn’t simplify the Orion for LEO/ISS is beyond understanding.

NASA is still building 1980's space "capsules". SpaceX is building space ships!

Flammable wiring covers? Am I the only one who immediately thought of Apollo 1?

What is the perforated black ring for? It runs all the way around the service module.

😂 Hilarious start to your monologue.

When lives are on the line being cautious is probably the right call. Boeing is big enough they can afford it. Likely they will fulfil their missions and recoup some of that cost. Owning those patents alone probably make it all worth it. Not to mention the human capital they have probably built up over this project.

Thanks!

Aren’t they canceling the project since it is costing too much with zero results… And the starliner windows blew off the craft when it was being transported on the highway

the whole point of this is healthy competition, rather than a monopoly.

~ 6:00 - Sunny Williams looks pretty skeptical here... I would, too.

If I was scheduled to fly on StarLiner I’d be pulling out !!

Anyone know if SpaceX has continued to pursue dry landing site landings for Dragon 1/2?

Did the window fall off when being moved in Florida a year ago or so.

Nasa always has the best cartoons... ; )

none of the boeing ship's parts are even re-usable.

I'm sorry you guys. It's been a horrible week. Wish I guys did your part and much as I contribute behind t scenes

Nice intro!

Compared to Orion, it is well within old space development timelines.

Did you mention that the ULA SLS booster is not reusable and very expensive each shot?

Time for heads to roll.

How much did the execs git

Will they be using it in conjunction with any of the Artemis program?

very cool

4:42 it's an sfs iss 🤣🤣

Realy I like this video so so much

I work for space x! Go space x ! Next stop mars!

The way this was presented it seems that Blue Origin will fly sooner than Starliner.

That brings to mind the development of the 787, when alarming reports from engineers were systematically ignored. Perhaps the underlying problems in Boeing's corporate culture hadn't been resolved?

Is it dome worthy? or is it just another pool sub?

Boeing suffers from over management and lack of communications which is a common issue amongst very large companies. They are also run by the good old boy system which means they want to keep doing things the old fashion way, which also contributes to the issue.

Fixed price contracts, fined on late delivery. The concept of the cheapest bidder, leads to unrealistic start prices. the system must be adjusted to the most reliable bidder

There are two ways of doing these things. The SpaceX way, and the wrong way.

Boeing needs to give the money back and close up shop!

What is 4.2 "Billon" anyway? Is that more than a Zillon?

My hope is that the Dream Chaser is going to give more competition to the SpaceX’s Dragons as SpaceX has ever wished. Sierra Space’s vision for the space flights is just much better than any Dragon can ever be. But the biggest of my hopes is to see the Tenacity on the top of Falcon Heavy. A perfect solution but so improbable, such a pity! The other issue is Boeing’s Star liner. A naive try to implement the 70ties project to the 21st century. Just a shade for the burned money.

Pork barrel has always been a " nice little earner" for pigs snouts in the trough. Time to audit it all!

Boeing should contract SpaceX to design and build Starliner, that's the only way it will ever work.

Another consistent aspect, in line with the internal requirements laid out in the Boeing program has been the ability to perform routine rendezvous with inter orbital objects in space in a broader technical capacity, requiring no pilot to be present. Which, in real terms, is something of a quantum leap in capsule mechanics design.

I put less stock in new Glenn than starliner, and I don’t put much in starliner. At least Boeing has hardware and it has flown. Dragon and Dream Chaser will be the rides of the future, along with Orion.

I am confused. You indicated that in early in 2020 NASA identified 80 issues which needed to be corrected for Starliner to proceed. Why wasn’t the parachute attachment and flammable tape issues identified back then? Also the pad abort launch was deemed a success with only two of the three parachutes fully deployed. You indicated that that was the minimum acceptable requirement. I assume that the same yoke parachute attachment was used. Why was it deemed unsafe later on? Also I assume the same problematic tape was used for the successful docking launch. Why was this not identified years earlier? Sounds to me like NASA shares some of the blame in this fiasco.

1:20 international space station was first launched in 1981 not 1998

Stop. Starliner is all Boeing, not NASA.

It sounds to me like Boeing has some serious quality control issues. Not only as shown in this video with the Starliner's numerous delays due to things they ought to have made sure worked, but also with several of their key commercial products, like the 737MAX as mentioned here... and let's not forget the Boeing 787 Dreamliner; Q/C issues due to unskilled staff assembling them, faults with their batteries, structural concerns, etc... As well, the whole thing mentioned in this video about the wiring that became flammable in a high-oxygen environment, you Boeing would think of that, as that caused the loss of Apollo 1 back in the 1960's, which led to North American Aviation and Rockwell taking a step back and re-thinking their Apollo capsules. Interestingly, North American Aviation and Rockwell both became part of Boeing!

No way I’d be on that first Starliner flight. I’d probably require 3-5 safe flights before thinking about it.

They should have developed the HL-20.

Commercial Crew was not a "space race" of any kind. NASA learned, at least, that having 1 vehicle to fly crew would be bad if it was grounded (see STS-107). Commercial Crew spacecraft are partners; NASA wanted redundancy, not superiority. Each ship can also technically fly on its counterpart launch vehicle. All other points about Boeing's ineptitude, lack of verification and integration testing are accurate.

Should of developed the X30 spaceplane back in the early 90's then there would of been a replacement craft by the time the space shuttle retired.

Some projects should be done by governments, not for profits corporation. Their main thing is profit first. Elon musk is passionate about space exploration so he pushes his company forward.

4.2 Billion ! I hope Nasa got a receipt.

Sierra Space announced Dream Chaser Tenacity ready for launch 3 days ago. Why does Boeing even have employees any longer?

0:51 As much as I dislike the Space Shuttle, I will acknowledge that it is quite iconic.

What happened to Orion ????

@8;30 I thought the Jan 1967 Apollo 1 fire taught engineers about flammable materials on/in space craft. I guess not. Imagine one of the young engineers at home watching a UKposts documentary on the Apollo 1 disaster, and thinks "shit I wonder if the stuff in/on the capsule is fireproof" Another year delay, call Biden to open another barrel of money, this may take a while

When you take the cost of the SLS, all the "savings" are totally out the window.

Hmm, do you suppose that Boeing reassigned all of their 737Max Programmers to their Starliner project?

Boeing should have to return the money and give all the space assets to spaceX