Boeing Starliner OFT-2

SpaceNut · 2024-05-04 13:16:07

Starliner has been in space twice during uncrewed test flights in 2019 and 2022, What's next for Boeing Starliner after its 1st crew flight test?

Given NASA and Boeing have been working for so many years together, and NASA already certified SpaceX's Crew Dragon successfully, Stich emphasized all players are familiar with the certification process and requirements. In fact, some items have been closed off already for Starliner-1: Stich estimated that 17 Starliner-1 requirements have been addressed, even before CFT lifts off on the debut astronaut space mission.
More spacecraft upgrades are already in store for future Starliner missions. For example, Stich said, Starliner-1 will feature improved software to fly to either port of the Harmony module on the ISS for docking operations (for the moment, it is approved to dock at the forward port only.)
Starliner-2, Nappi said, will fly improved oxidizer valves to address issues uncovered on the first uncrewed Starliner mission in 2019, called Orbital Flight Test 1. A new purge system will remove unneeded moisture from the valves, and some of the connector areas have been sealed as well to reduce moisture access.
Boeing's contract with NASA requires missions through Starliner-6. The first three missions are "in the process of being built", Nappi said, while the last three missions have nearly all parts in stock. (A selection of parts are on order.) Atlas V launch vehicles are all being readied for those six flights, too.
When asked if Boeing would consider flying private missions like SpaceX does, for customers like Axiom Space and billionaire Jared Isaacman's Polaris Program, Nappi said NASA's requirements come first. Assuming Boeing meets those expectations, "I think we may start looking at some of the private astronaut missions."

Oldfart1939 · 2024-05-05 22:32:59

Starliner is "stacked" atop it's Atlas V for launch on Monday late afternoon/evening. I'm actually cheering for them to succeed and the crew members seem stoked to go!

Last edited by Oldfart1939 (2024-05-05 22:33:39)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2024-05-06 02:01:05

Mission profile

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnYy3uZA-y8

GW Johnson · 2024-05-06 08:16:42

If successful (and I do hope it is!!!), NASA will "certify" Starliner to carry astronauts to ISS. That means Boeing can start its contract to do so. NASA really did want more than just Dragon to do that job. 20-20 hindsight says it may have been an error not to fund Dreamchaser. Dreamchaser is nearing orbital flight tests despite no government funding.

GW

Oldfart1939 · 2024-05-06 20:35:14

Scrubbed for today.

GW Johnson · 2024-05-07 08:58:43

From AIAA’s “Daily Launch” –

SPACENEWS
Rocket issue scrubs launch of Starliner crewed test flight

Controllers scrubbed the first attempt to launch Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner on a crewed test flight May 6 because of a valve problem with the rocket, delaying the launch by at least four days. The launch director for the Atlas 5 rocket called for the scrub a little more than two hours before the scheduled 10:34 p.m. Eastern launch of the Crew Flight Test mission from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida.

Using the link to the SpaceNews story, it was an “oxygen relief” valve in the Centaur upper stage that was “buzzing” loudly at 40 Hertz. It could be heard by launch crew at the pad. The valve was apparently opening and closing, and if moving full travel, will have to be replaced as having used up its (fatigue?) life. If so, the vehicle will have to go back to its assembly building. That would be a week or so delay. If not, only days delay. This is a “better safe than sorry” sort of thing.

GW

Oldfart1939 · 2024-05-07 09:58:03

The Atlas V has an impeccable safety record, as does ULA doing these launches. I'm hoping they maintain their record with a crew onboard the Starliner!

GW Johnson · 2024-05-08 08:55:49

Today's "Daily Launch" had a follow-up: they are definitely replacing the valve. Launch no sooner than May 17. It has to go back to the assembly building for this. The terminology is now "oxygen pressure relief valve", which if it malfunctions closed, risks an Apollo-13-style oxygen tank explosion, in a stage that is essentially a stainless steel balloon, originally a Convair stage design from half a century ago, or more. If memory serves, the RL-10 engines were originally a Rocketdyne design, also that long ago.

At least they are doing the right things; safety out-prioritizes schedule and cost. ULA is a joint venture of Boeing and Lockheed-Martin. It would appear that the Boeing corporate mismanagement of its airplane business has not infected the Boeing component of ULA. And for that, I am glad.

GW

SpaceNut · 2024-05-10 19:16:53

Nasa contractor warns against Boeing space launch due to the ‘risk of a disaster’

ValveTech, a contractor that supplies Nasa with valve components for the Starliner aircraft, warned against the imminent launch on 17 May.
“As a valued Nasa partner and as valve experts, we strongly urge them not to attempt a second launch due to the risk of a disaster occurring on the launchpad,” ValveTech president Erin Faville said in a press release.
“According to media reports, a buzzing sound indicating the leaking valve was noticed by someone walking by the Starliner minutes before launch. This sound could indicate that the valve has passed its lifecycle,” Ms Faville wrote.
She urged Nasa to “re-double safety checks and re-examine safety protocols to make sure the Starliner is safe before something catastrophic happens to the astronauts and to the people on the ground,” Ms Faville added.

GW Johnson · 2024-05-14 14:01:16

The "buzzing" valve was an oxygen pressure relief valve that was cycling rapidly open and closed. Replacing it is why they moved the rocket back to the assembly building. That seemingly takes care of whatever Valve Tech was warning about.

The next launch attempt has been delayed a few more days to May 21, so that something leaking in a helium pressurization system for the storable thruster propellants can be fixed, too. This leak was minor enough they could fly with it, but while the thing was back to the assembly building, why not fix this too. It was some sort of leaking flange joint, as near as I can tell.

GW

Oldfart1939 · 2024-05-14 16:20:48

The most important "Take Home Lesson" is: replace questionable components and don't let a software "fix" try to handle an unsafe condition. No matter what some newbie engineer with only a couple years of experience says, there ain't no shame in doing it right when lives are involved.

SpaceNut · 2024-05-14 20:51:36

NASA announces another delay to Boeing Starliner launch

The first crewed flight for Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner will have to wait a little bit longer but is still targeting a May launch. The mission is now slated for no earlier than May 21 at 4:43 p.m, NASA revealed Tuesday.

GW Johnson · 2024-05-18 09:47:00

Latest news reports say the launch has been pushed back from May 21 to May 25. They tightened the bolts on that leaking flange joint in a helium pressurant line, but that failed to stop the leak from the flange joint. The odds favor either a bad seal in the flange joint (likely a gasket), or else a crack in the line right at the joint. Should it prove to be a crack, it could get worse in flight, presenting a danger, since this is one of the attitude thruster pods. Replacing a gasket could happen fast. Replacing a bad line will fail to meet the revised date.

This thing has been plagued for years with both bad quality control and bad design. Somehow, I am not surprised by this latest problem. If it were up to me, given that history, I would refuse to man-rate it, if I were NASA. It's been a money-loser lately for Boeing's corporate management. Getting an excuse to cancel it may actually be their plan.

GW

SpaceNut · 2024-05-20 11:08:14

Another week, another leak for Boeing's Starliner crew capsule

AA1eY9Zn.img?w=768&h=512&m=6

Seems its infected with nano biting robots....

GW Johnson · 2024-05-22 08:29:34

Today's Daily Launch (from AIAA) says the May 25th launch has been further postponed without setting a date. The helium leak persists. Boeing wants to fly with it leaking, apparently NASA does not (good for NASA!) The question now arises of how long the Starliner's "shelf life" is atop the rocket booster. They may have to take it all apart and refurbish everything, if this drags on far enough.

GW

SpaceNut · 2024-05-22 17:12:08

Boeing seems to know how to make a screen...

GW Johnson · 2024-05-23 10:16:36

From today's AIAA Daily Launch -- GW

SPACEFLIGHT NOW

NASA, Boeing and ULA announce June 1 as new target date for Starliner’s Crew Flight Test

The latest launch date was announced late Wednesday evening, following a Tuesday night notice that May 25 was off the table. Liftoff of the Atlas 5 rocket on June 1 is set for 12:25 p.m. EDT (1625 UTC). A press briefing is now set for Friday, May 24, at 11 a.m. EDT (1500 UTC) to discuss the work done and the path forward to launch. Williams and Wilmore continue to remain in quarantine in Houston, Texas, and have spent the additional weeks conducting further simulator training to prepare for the mission.

Oldfart1939 · 2024-05-26 00:35:30

This is dragging out waaaay too long for the mental health of the flight crew. This could lead to human error later in the mission. Boing should consider taking it back and getting all the repairs made before subjecting humans to a faulty set of valves!

tahanson43206 · 2024-05-26 06:20:57

For Oldfart1939 re #43

Thanks for adding the mental health of the crew as a consideration.

Elon could solve that problem by enlisting them to fly on his next flight.

On the ** other ** hand, the tax payers are providing a (what I assume) is a comfortable living for the crew, and aside from the lack of flight, I expect they are busy doing preparations for the flight-that-never-comes.

Interesting dilemma.

(th)

GW Johnson · 2024-05-26 09:47:28

I've seen some things to suggest Boeing and NASA think the leak is a bad polymer seal about the size of a nickel. I'm surprised they wasted all this time trying to prove to themselves it would not get worse, instead of just opening the joint and replacing the seal.

However, on second thought, given how cost and schedule have consistently trumped technical issue resolutions for decades at NASA and in "old space", I guess I should not be surprised.

There's either a flaw in the seal, or a scar on the sealing surface it gets compressed against, if it is the seal at all. I wonder if they even tried to rule out a crack in the line or one of the flanges?

GW

tahanson43206 · 2024-05-26 10:01:30

In all seriousness...

What is the down side to a helium leak?

The gas itself is non-toxic and not flammable, but there may be other concerns we just don't know about.

The reason I ask is based upon the risk of causing other problems while fixing this one.

Do other components have to be removed to gain access to this component?

Do all those components have seals and exacting procedures to replace them?

***
As a related item ... I saw Pete Buttigieg on ABC News this morning .... he said that Boeing is restricted against any increase in production until they prove they can produce airplanes without defects. Plus! A hot line for defect reporting has lit up! Reporting is up 500 % over normal. That might be impressive, but if the old culture blocked defect reporting, it might not be saying much.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2024-05-26 10:05:46

It's about for filling the Nasa contract to which they are getting close to breeching I am sure where they will be penalized.

GW Johnson · 2024-05-26 12:14:36

The helium is the pressurant gas that drives the storable propellants to simple pressure-fed attitude thrusters. Were it to fail completely in the one thruster pod, they could still fly on the remaining three thruster pods (located around the periphery of the service module), although control is more difficult with some unbalanced forces.

As for corporate culture at Boeing, it's been in the toilet valuing money and schedule way above safety ever since they acquired McDonnell-Douglas. Shortly after that acquisition is when the corporate management moved to Chicago to get away from being bothered by the engineers and their safety/reliability concerns in Seattle, and after that, to DC so they could lobby Congress more easily in person.

You can kind of tell about that culture, since both of the publicly-known whistleblowers died. If they find out the identities of the new whistleblowers in that new reporting system, more will die, I predict.

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2024-05-26 12:15:36)

SpaceNut · 2024-05-26 14:57:22

It might be time for NASA to bail on Boeing's Starliner there was a time when Starliner was actually a very promising option for space exploration.

Unfortunately, nearly a decade later, any hopes and dreams that might have rested on Starliner's shoulders have since started to fall away, replaced by successes from other companies - like SpaceX - and repeated failures and issues plaguing Boeing's capsule.
It's been over ten years since Boeing won its NASA contract to develop the spacecraft to carry astronauts to the International Space Station, and now that we're in the final stretch, the spacecraft has yet to fly any humans to space. Not only has the program seen repeated delays - including the most recent launch holds - but the program has also been plagued by manufacturing issues.
Things like corroded valves and even severe software errors have helped hold Starliner back while SpaceX and its Dragon spacecraft have continued to step in to fill that void. Perhaps one of the most egregious issues was the fact that Boeing discovered issues with the design of its parachute system and the fact that it had used flammable tape inside the capsule. This delayed the first crewed launch from its original 2023 launch date, and no, over a year later, we're still waiting.

GW Johnson · 2024-05-30 09:04:01

In today's news, it looks like the June 1 launch is a "go" for now. They have decided to fly with the small helium leak.

GW

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2024-05-04 13:16:07

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#27 2024-05-05 22:32:59

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#28 2024-05-06 02:01:05

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#29 2024-05-06 08:16:42

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#30 2024-05-06 20:35:14

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#31 2024-05-07 08:58:43

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#32 2024-05-07 09:58:03

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#33 2024-05-08 08:55:49

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#34 2024-05-10 19:16:53

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#35 2024-05-14 14:01:16

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#36 2024-05-14 16:20:48

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#37 2024-05-14 20:51:36

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#38 2024-05-18 09:47:00

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#39 2024-05-20 11:08:14

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#40 2024-05-22 08:29:34

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#41 2024-05-22 17:12:08

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#42 2024-05-23 10:16:36

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#43 2024-05-26 00:35:30

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#44 2024-05-26 06:20:57

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#45 2024-05-26 09:47:28

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#46 2024-05-26 10:01:30

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#47 2024-05-26 10:05:46

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#48 2024-05-26 12:14:36

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#49 2024-05-26 14:57:22

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

#50 2024-05-30 09:04:01

Re: Boeing Starliner OFT-2

Board footer