this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
110 points (97.4% liked)

Space

8764 readers
334 users here now

Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.


Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive.
  2. No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  3. Engage in constructive discussions.
  4. Share relevant content.
  5. Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
  6. Use appropriate language and tone.
  7. Report violations.
  8. Foster a continuous learning environment.

Picture of the Day

The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula


Related Communities

πŸ”­ Science

πŸš€ Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography


Other Cool Links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] KISSmyOSFeddit@lemmy.world 53 points 5 months ago (2 children)

They said after the first leak that it wasn't an issue since they calculated that it would take 4 leaks of that size to disable the thruster system. Now they have 3.

[–] NeptuneOrbit@lemmy.world 20 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I hope we didn't assume the odds of each leak was an independent event. Same failure mode and maybe we have uncovered something systemic! Kind of scary

[–] KISSmyOSFeddit@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Since the cause of the first leak was a defective rubber seal, it would have made sense to replace all of them. I'm pretty sure they didn't use different types of seals on each thruster port. But for that, they would have had to disassemble the spacecraft and that would have taken too long for the available launch windows.

[–] Omgboom@lemmy.zip 22 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's a good thing rubber seals have never caused any problems in spaceflight

[–] Speculater@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] this_1_is_mine@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

It was a bang.

[–] ieatpwns@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

And the titanic was unsinkable

[–] ringwraithfish@startrek.website 34 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Only a matter of time for another Challenger incident to set space exploration back another 20 years.

I think most in society get that human space exploration is extremely risky, but to flirt with that risk with a known variable tipping the scales the wrong way seems like a business decision rather than an engineering one.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 15 points 5 months ago

Imagine those morons end up destroying the ISS. Boeing has really gone down the shitter. I don't even know why they launched this scrap heap in the first place. Shortcuts like this are completely unacceptable in regards to space travel.

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 22 points 5 months ago (3 children)

You gotta be fuckin kidding me. How could they launch this thing?

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 26 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Because Boeing has evidently become a β€œsafety third” sort of company over the last several decades

[–] SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Better question is, why did NASA let them

[–] icerunner_origin@startrek.website 15 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I'm sitting down, waiting for Scott Manley's analysis video to drop. I'd hope there are valid and sane reasons why they thought it should go ahead, but something like this was so obviously going to happen.

[–] IEatAsbestos@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

AFAIK helium is only used to prepare the fuel and oxidizer lines for burns and to backfill propellant tanks. Liquid propellant has to be kept extremely far below zero and if the lines aren't 1, down to apropriate temperatures and 2, clear of anything that isnt rocket fuel it can cause some serious damage so helium is a purging gas. Also as the propellant is used they have to keep the fuel tanks pressurized with helium to maintain a higher pressure upstream of the engine. You dont want an engine to burn backwards.

That being said, this mission wasnt slated to take extremely long or be particularly complex (im aware oribital mechanics are by default complex but its just a mission to and from the ISS, no midflight reconfigurations like the saturn missions).

Mission control is full of engineers who know this rocket better than anyone else ever will. If they had reason to believe a small complication isnt worth worrying about we have no choice but to believe them. There are so many systems in place for a rocket launch, there has to be some wiggle room in terms of non critical systems and issues. Its kind of a morbid fact that if we dont launch until it's 100% perfect nothing would leave florida.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I want to believe you're right, but I also assume these leaks are just what we know about and there's 100 other "minor" things that could turn this thing into a fireball. Guess we'll find out soon.

[–] IEatAsbestos@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Theres no reason to assume that. I also hate boeing with everything thats going on right now but I trust NASA to be responsible with peoples lives. Also, with this as well as the cost of this spacecraft I dont see boeing getting much more government money here. Starliner cost roughly double that of the dragon. Just not worth it.

Absolutely. I’m not surprised they pulled some mickey mouse shit and massaged the rules a bit. It’s kinda their SOP at this point.

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

Probably because they were contractually obligated. Nasa and Boeing entered into their agreement in 2019 when SpaceX was making headlines for reusable rockets and the Starship announcement. Boeing had FOMO they might miss out on government money so they made their own rockets with blackjack and hookers. Sadly, now Boeing is working hard to keep up while also trying to not kill more people with their "flying" machines.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

"Well, some of them are built so that the front doesn’t fall off at all." 🀣

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago

Narrator: "This was a lie."

[–] anubis119@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Interesting watch from a recent Smarter Every Day video on this very topic. https://youtu.be/OoJsPvmFixU?feature=shared

[–] SatouKazuma@ani.social 14 points 5 months ago

At some point, really hoping the US government just disqualifies Boeing as a potential supplier. I was ready to celebrate that Boeing finally managed to not fuck something up, but alas, my hopes were somehow too high. Good luck to the astronauts on re-entry.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Particularly embarrassing considering the incredible progress SpaceX is making, including today’s launch and successful splashdown of both starship and the booster. The entry was wild, too - one of the fins burned halfway off, but the damn thing still worked fine lol

[–] mipadaitu@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Maybe they'll put a Starliner in the cargo bay of the next Starship launch.

Lmao that would be goddamn priceless. Even if it was just an external mockup with ballast to simulate full mission mass of the capsule… Jesus, that would be an absolutely hilarious amount of shade for them to throw.

[–] Senseless@feddit.de 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

At least the front didn't fall off.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's truly out of the environment now, though.

[–] Senseless@feddit.de 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Is it in another environment?

[–] kokesh@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

Who would expect something like that...

[–] MataVatnik@lemmy.world -3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I'll leave this Screenshot of an exchange I had a few weeks ago. A couple of replies were giving a soft defense of Boeing: