Boeing's New Spacecraft Gets Lost On Way To Space Station
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 дек 2019
- Boeing's Starliner has been designed and built for NASA's Commercial Crew Program, intended to provide 'taxi' services for astronauts to the International Space Station. Today was the first full flight test, launching on board an Atlas V from Cape Canaveral the initial flight was flawless. However after separation the spacecraft got confused and maneuvered incorrectly, burning through fuel needed for the rendezvous. Ultimately the spacecraft was recovered by it was no longer in the correct orbit and at this time space station docking has been ruled out.
The vehicle will be tested on orbit to make sure all the systems operated correctly before the Starliner returns and lands at White Sands on Sunday.
John Kraus's launch photos can be found here:
johnkrausphotos/s... 
Наука
![A Day To Remember: Feedback [OFFICIAL VIDEO]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/iXVnysmQ4e0/mqdefault.jpg)
Boeing has had really bad attitude problems lately
Tyler Anderson So Funny
I see what you did there .. maybe they should of tried turning off MCAS :)
You know that quote “Shoot for the moon...If you miss, you’ll land among the stars”? That’s probably how the (mostly Boeing-built) SLS’s first flight will go.
@@tma2001 You beat me to it. Wondering if it's the same crew that wrote that code...?
@Tyler Anderson That was the pun I wanted. Thanks.
"Spacecraft in bad orientation?" No. The spacecraft had a bad attitude.
Well you know what they say "your altitude depends on your attitude" I reckon?
@@RandyFelts2121 Not really. Well, somewhat.
Political correctness nowadays huh.
I mean we cant even say pluto is a planet now.
@Dat Tilson
pluto is a plant
@@alextilson9741 Way to miss the point of the comment and turn it into something political. It seems no one understands what a joke is nowadays.
"This is a testflight for docking with the space station" (fails to reach stable orbit) "Actually, this is a testflight to demonstrate emergency recovery. Everything is going according to plan." - Boing, shortly after being aquired by Kerbal Space Center.
*Acquired by McDonald
BOING!
@@johndododoe1411 *acquired by Disney
@@TheWorstBridger *acquired by NASA
Wow , Boeing is having a really bad year . That’s what happens when you let accountants design your products instead of engineers
shame that this is not the top comment
@@megunded That's because there is no truth in it.
Actually they had fired a lot of long term engineers and hired a bunch of cheaper engineers that were based on Boeing's new "diversity" hiring practice which they were advertising about with the usual SJW "woke" virtue signalling. Well that didn't go over so well and the &3& Max is the result. They're in trouble. Get woke, go broke.
SparkyMcBiff correlation does not imply causation . A brain is a brain has nothing to do with the overarching cost cutting attitude plaguing mega corporations who rather risk lives than risk their profits
@@joejoey7272 You're an idiot if you think all brains are equal, and that is what it sounds like you're saying. Forgoing competence for diversity is why they are experiencing such problems. You can deny reality all you want, doesn't change it.
love them or hate them its hard to deny SpaceX does a good job with their launch streams
And actually launching their dragons to the ISS
WAY better than Blue Origin. Rocket Lab needs improvement as well. Their PR teams should realize that it is advertising for future payloads. Hire a producer and director or just one John Insprucker.
Yeah, hard to argue with that Emmy award they won for the Demo 1 mission coverage.
Honestly, they spoil us and I love it.
@@banana_junior_9000 I think most companies are afraid what will happen if something goes wrong on a live stream.
Don't worry guys, the spacecraft is in a stable orbit!
EDIT: for those unaware, that's a joke based on the hosts just endlessly repeating "The spacecraft is in a stable orbit" for a solid 20 minutes during the broadcast while they figured out what went wrong.
is it in the "right" orbit tho?
Cenobia V. Atleast they did that. Let’s hope the landing on Sunday is successful!
"Worry"? Why woulkd anyone be "worried' about an international multi billion dollars company issues? Unless you being sarcastic?
@@UTUBESUCK666 Someone missed the edit.
Me, first time launching in KSP
Bright side:
It didn't fall back to Earth like their planes.
Just wait a few days buddy
it wont! cuz, it will burn up in the upper atmosphere 😑
@@manjus9219 No, they're planning to land it someplace, can't remember the name. It's going to happen later today, should be covered on NASA's YT channel
@@limiv5272 white sands rocket range. Source: this video
@@suspicioustumbleweed4760 Yes that's the name, thanks
This mission went perfectly,
For SpaceX
Indeed
For half the price.
@@willywgb 1/5
Boeing should have purchased this years edition of the UBD Street Directory. It’s shows the location of the ISS with Crew Dragon parked on the driveway! You remember street directories, kinda like GPS without the batteries or CTRL ALT DEL
Saiz 1/3rd
Nice MiB2 reference. It's a shame about the failure, Boeing having repeated trouble with guidance and automation in entirely different sections of the company can't be a good sign.
Well they started outsourcing their code to India at $8 an hour. After killing a few hundred airline passengers, a few astronauts is just a rounding error.
@@trumpocalypsenow4654 pilot error* that crap would've never happened with better trained pilots like we have in U.S.
@@MichaelD-fn5lv "Better" training as in *any* training and documentation of the MCAS features?
@@charlesboyer61 to my knowledge the MCAS feature was not disabled in both situations and the pilots failed to perform their primary duties- which is to FLY THE PLANE! if they would've disabled the MCAS feature, and in the second crash not renabled MCAS after recovering, these pointless crashes would've been avoided. Boeing doesn't want to come out with that statement because it would be insensitive to the families of the victims.
@@cosmonautbilly9570either way, apples to oranges sir. I don't think that reflects a fundamental issue of Boeing- space is hard... unbelievably hard. If the rocket exploded on the pad we might then have cause for concern. In this case though, I think we're good to call this one to the difficulties of space travel.
Remember those t-shirts and hats saying “If it's not Boeing, I'm not going”...? That phrase could use some update.
if it is Boeing aint nobody going
There was a joke about what is the most common question asked in the cockpit of an Airbus. Answer: "What's it doing now?" We can now apply that joke to Boeing.
If it’s not burning it’s not Boeing.
If it is going into production use too early, it must be Boeing
Just black out the first 'not'.
The anti stall system must have just kept pushing the nose up with the thrusters
sounds like Boeing employed the MCAS from their 737's there...
Meanwhile 21trillon is still missing from the Pentagon!(Donald Rummsfield)911. NASA is good at exploring the space between your ears!
It’s hilarious how people who have no idea what they are talking about try to crack jokes.
JediOfTheRepublic because those are the best kind of jokes.
Hahahaha! Good one!
No problem, it's Boeing, just throw another billion dollars at them, they'll get it sorted...eventually.
Maybe
*quietly pockets money*
And if not ... looking in the direction of a group of faceless US Senators & Military types).. well THATS OK TOO.... Ummm YES Thats ok too!
Boeing? Isn't that this company who built these crash-liner passanger planes and killed hundreds of people?
Why on earth are they still at large? Do you have no police in the former colonies? And isn't that your famous Space-Force's task to sort it out?
What are your Forces doing?
Are they watching porn, like on 9-11 and Pearl Harbor?
@@magapickle01 Boeing only operates still because the US does not want to remove their only homegrown civilian aircraft manufacturer left and official orbital rocket manufacturer.
In the civilian department they are outshined by airbus since Airbus became a thing, with airplanes that basically fly themselves (and having watched the A380 pull turns like it was a plane a quarter the size reinforces this). And in orbit Boeing is outhsined by their newcomer SpaceX, which clearly achieved way more than them with less money while showcasing more innovative designs more suited for the tasks at hand.
But again, this is known and planned for: just look at the F-35 project. They added way too many independent constructors, the aircraft overall lacks and actually effective role in today's engagements and they decided to design 3 variants while only the B variant (the original one that actually brings something new to the table) was needed initially. The role just being to inflate the cost for the sake of job creation, lobbies and higher ups getting money. If not then the gov would have given their space money to homegrown spaceX, and their aircraft money to vastly more efficient foreign companies
4:50 Watched it live this morning with my son. We was like wtf is the animation of the spacecraft burning its correcting engines. We figured it was an animation loop. Nope. She be screwed eh.
That's cool that you watch that stuff with your kid 👍
So it's MechJEB was broken.
Sounds like they were using the 737 max's software. See what you get for letting Boing do their own quality assessments.
No, it was a problem with their kerbal alarm clock.
When you want to make an airplane in kerbal space program but reaction wheels keep doing their job
Nah, it was kOS, and they had the Kerboscript for the mission coded by some guy in India for $8 an hour like the 737Max.
They mounted it sideways (well the clock was sideways)
*Phone rings* "This is Elon"
Boeing: "Hi, we have a question"
Elon: "What question?"
Boeing: "Why does Capsule go brrr too late?"
@@Juno101 Because Capsule's nervous system did not detect the intense coldness of space until way later. Maybe that nervous system was deformed in a way that it can't respond initially.
ZacharyS41 They should have used HAL
@@unclezeds They were too focused on 747 porn to think about that.
Mikey Mmmmmm !! Check out that undercarriage! [insert wolf whistle here]
Scott Manley wearing a Robe while explaining rocket science...
Absolute GOLD 😂
Oh thats bad
Not really a real bad thing is that the only part working flawless was the RD 180 motors which are unfortaly for US pride made in bad, bad, bad Russia
But it comes with a free yogurt!
Yarp Yarp
Oh that’s a good video
more proof the earth is flat!
''Oh Hi Mark''
"Starliner's trajectory is carefully mapped to put it on a precise path to catch up to the International Space Station about 24 hours after launch." Whoops, never mind.
pauldzim 24 hours after launch, or in simple terms, fakery and bullshit.
@@lebobo1986 space is fake bro.. blah blah blah get outta here with that tinfoil and go give Owen your hard earned money
Oh no
One thing hard about the fast rendezvous is it's less forgiving probably should have went with a slow approach like Spacex and Orbital did.
“I much congratulates the Boeing on his Great Success!” - Borat
127 likes and not a single reply...
@@planetastic8522 That is very sad
YOU RUINED IT.
YOU SON OF A-
@@planetastic8522 :3
Bruh at this point we may see Falcon Heavy carrying Orion to moon
if orion ever exists
hmm
I'd take Dragon for that trip too. Squeezing into a smaller capsule beats dying, imo.
@@matt309 Orion actually does exist-it first flew almost 15 years ago!
SMH, they probably forgot to convert between Metric and Imperial time
They didn't forget. They did convert. That was the problem. LOL
The difference between imperial and metric time is currently 13 days and some seconds.
Or maybe a DST issue.
Swedish Mouse Hafia?
Probably forgot about daylight savings time
And now Boeing will ask for additional funding to fix the issue
The contract said It was fixed price. But so did SLS
Typical government project. The worse the performance the more funding it gets.
ding. hit the nail on the head.
@@ramabg2 They recently asked for another 200 million and got it. Rumors are they threatened to pull out of commercial crew but that's not confirmed.
That's another way to have government subsidies for commercial aircrafts
SpaceX's system looks so much simpler to this one and the booster comes back !
We didn't complete the mission, but we learned from our failure.
-Every engineer ever
@John Smith what's a ionized worker
@@matt309 The first astronaut who rides this thing
This launch just made me really appreciate how advanced SpaceX has got with its launch coverage, having a presenter explain things at every stage of the way, cameras galore, a mission clock that’s visible at all times as well as maneuver timestamps. Yes it’s just PR, but it makes for a way better viewing.
Loving the dressing gown. Very Arthur Dent.
Shit you beat me to it LOL
Did he have a towel?
Dent Arthur Dent. Oh never mind!
@@AndrewBlucher Actually it's Dentarthurdent.
Pre towel Dent.
Seems like a rough year for Boeing.
okrajoe yup so much so it’s an overreaction at this point
They bring it on themselves, they are not what they used to be.
They'll survive. I'm sure our tax dollars are subsidizing them one way or another.
@John Smith I wouldn't want to make lite of that. But was it negligence? Aircraft are amazing machines but they're complex and made by man. We all know there are risks. Now if the company knew or hid something than that's obviously a problem.
@@ratpatrolrenegade1413 Their quality of work has gotten worse over the years. Rushed production to beat the competition and turning a blind eye to manufacturing quality.
So wait, they don't recover their boosters? Man that's sooooo last century...
Elon: *joins chat*
i ruined your 69 likes
Well the Centaur has been flying for 50 years
Not even Parachute... -__-
bro, they could barely recover the capsule😂
Maybe Boeing should rename it, Starliner Max...
Ouch!
😁That's funny, right there! 🤣🤣🤣 LMAO
Or ask Airbus for help with software....
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
It even stalled in the space without gravity lol
Looks like Boeing and NASA finally ran out of WW2 German technicians
Better than what your country has.
Good thing too. They also built the armed nuke the military accidentally dropped on South Carolina.
Lololol
They work for Bezos and Elon.
That was the main reason why USA could not go back to moon. Those Germans techinician does thing with lack of proper documentation. Look on F1 engine.
Boeing just announced that the new name for the Starliner is going to be 'MAX-11'.
With the chances of crashing into the International Space Station and causing everyone on board to die to be 110 percent! The current CEO does not care if he is destroying Boeing from within.
@@tidepoolclipper8657 maybe it is time for Boeing as a company to split and fracture into manageable pieces.
@@tidepoolclipper8657 i guess thats why he resigned today.
@@tidepoolclipper8657 no it will nosedive into the ground
watch spacex do the same mission for 10 cents on the dollar
Hi I’m from future
@@FlorenceSlugcat Yello , im from the future.
@@Rutherford_Sam hello future I'm from the future
@@shawno8253 hello future from the future I'm from the future of future
@@fumesolo6709 hello future from the future from the future, I’m from the future of the future of the future, and this future will look better in the future
I just hope SpaceX can carry the whole astronaut load for America (if Crew Dragon passes its last test). We only have a couple more Soyuz seats reserved. Starliner's going to be set back months by this.
How about Orion?
@@grossersalat578 Orion's being built by Lockheed Martin, so yeah we'll probably have it too (SLS is being built by multiple contractors under NASA's supervision).
No it isn't lol. It's a software glitch, unlike what happened with Dragon when it...you know...literally exploded.
@@spinor That's been fixed now. The new test was flawless. The in-flight test is all that remains.
@@thunderbird1921 do you believe it's been fixed? 🤣
Believer...
You may also believe Obama 🤣
Ok. Number one rule of space travel: Remember where we parked.
Rule number two: bring a towel.
@@LoanwordEggcorn Don't panic!
Best comment ever...
"And because it sets itself on fire whenever it launches" 😂 well said
At least it didn't lawn dart and kill a bunch of people.
"Lawn dart"
😂 i love that!
All thanks to a searchlight that my friend made
*do a proton
A non reusable rocket seems so yesterday.
I know, it didn't do its boost back burn. :) It just quit up there and was done. Another brand new booster into the sea after its A-grade initial flight test...what a waste. And with Vulcan, only the engines will be saved, right?
This may be off topic, but what if you are a dolphin swimming along pleasantly in the ocean, minding your own business and you hear this rippling sound. It grows louder and louder. Then suddenly you're hit by 50,000lbs of falling stage one rocket. I mean, I'm pretty sure there is still life in the oceans. Do we even know what happens on a splashdown?
Go away fan boy
Non reusable spacecraft seem like so 1970s lol just be excited that we are on the verge of having two human rated American space capsules and save the mob mentality for politics and sports.
They messed up the staging - just revert to launch.
Nonononono, they should revert to assembly so they don't forget to change it again when they crash into the ISS and have to revert to launch.
i love how much the simple animation of the space craft in the control looks like really old ksp
The title of this video is why CEO Muilenburg lost his job today.
Nah, Muilenburg got fired because of the 737 Max scandal. The failure of the ISS interception was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Apparently, he allowed a whole bunch of incompetents to be hired. I'm wondering whether he went a little too far in the direction of Affirmative Action.
@@Jenab7 oh, now that would be some spicy info I'd like to know about ;)
Whilst watching it I played KSP and got less problems than the Boeing launch.
Alex Landherr Well yeah no shit
All the KSP players should start a space company together, it can't be that hard. Just install real solar system and when in doubt add more boosters right?
@@Shontaku Kerbal Space Program (game)
Do you mean to tell me that launching a spaceship in a video game is *easier* than in real life?
@@13n1304 Boosters are not the salvage but struts are!
It's going to be grounded for a year due to a fault with the MCAS system.
Grounded like a naughty teenager. No thrusting action or shooting loads for a year.
Or not, after all it seems that the problem was caused but the TDRS network, not the actual spacecraft.
@@conall9415 it was caused by Christmas coming up and engineers spending alot this year on the holidays. So to stay outta debt they know the best thing to do would be make more work. It's only our money they are playing with and failing at. I say let Space X handle space. NASA is good at training astronauts. Keep training, space X can keep launching and building.
ouch! that was a good one!
@@waterlife.1905 I don't think you understand how NASA and other government agencies work. They contract private companies to create products for them to use. In the case of NASA, they contract companies to build rockets and spacecraft. Every rocket and spacecraft NASA has used has been built by a company or many companies. NASA is the one who organizes these companies and sets contracts in order to achieve a goal, like restoring crewed launch capabilities or landing on the Moon or creating a huge space station (In the case of the ISS NASA was also the main organizer.) Also a huge part of this is setting competition for contracts, because different companies can do different jobs better than others, so no, SpaceX will not be the only one the launch spacecraft, because while they can do some things great, other things they're not so good at, which is where other companies come in.
Beat boxing with an X-Wing model for the intro, PRICELESS!
I know it's late, but : Boeing has decided to install a Timex watch for time keeping on the Starliner. Everyone knows that a Timex watch "takes a lickin and keeps on tickin."
No good if it's set wrong by hours from the start.
Killing the Hugh Heffner look
It looks like the old glitch the ksp had with the overactive SAS. With attitude thrusters firing everywhere. It's just missing a floppy rocket underneath it.
Ever present glitch. I had the same thought, looks like ksp when rcs is on.
The SpaceX one was automated and didn't have this failure :)
Let's not pretend SpaceX hasn't had catastrophies
@@weebgrinder the boosters not landing? Sure rockets have exploded but i don’t understand
They were using English time instead of Metric time.
*Visible confusion* What do you mean Metric and English time and stuff?
Nautical hours instead of regular imperial ones.
@@piranha031091 If you believe that "rocket scientists" forget to convert something from one unit to another... then you're a moron.
You joke, but if the French had gotten their way back when they were pushing metric on everything, we WOULD be using "metric" (decimal) time, with 10-hour days, 100 minute hours, and 100 second minutes.
@@basedbear1605 it has happened in the past.
We used to talk about "Legacy car makers" and how they only start realizing that they gotta change something or they become useless... Now it seems we've got "legacy spacecraft makers" as well.
To be fair RKK "Energiya" and Khrunichev are also those "legacy spacecraft makers". If Russia doesn't stop fucking around they'll meet the same fate as Boeing. :(
It just shows that you cannot sit back and lose your drive now a days. Aways someone out there gunning to get into a leading position. Since the Apollo missions, NASA and their buddies have not had any drive and no Target or goal to achieve. Now we have private identities who have really surprised the old camp with what they can do and the desire they have to get there. Time will tell if the old camp can survive with out their governmental bureaucracy buddies spotting them some coin.
@@NoCharName They will indeed. They are, in fact, even more bureaucratic than any company in the US. And the person at the helm of Roskosmos now has nothing to do with space, he is a typical russian cleptocratic official who said out loud on multiple occasions that "Elon Musk has nothing to do with rockets and talks about things he has no idea about". Russia will soon lose the manned space program just because all the money spent on it gets pocketed. We are just on our way of becoming a 3rd world country... With nuclear weapons. Savages with nuclear weapons...
@@vovacat1797 I think this is the tendency of all entities that enjoy an extended period of success. Whether private companies or government/quasi-governmental industries. After being the best in field for a while, they begin to "rest on their laurels", and eventually the hierarchy becomes clogged with people that had no hand in the original success and only know how to hold meetings and lubricate politicians.
@@NoCharName Already the only thing keeping Russia in space is their monopoly on crew access to the ISS. Both Crew Dragon and Starliner are gonna be more competitive, apart from sending Russian astronauts to the ISS and maybe tossing up a few government satellites there will be nothing for them to do now.
On the uncrewed launch market, ESA is already feeling the pressure SpaceX gives them, they basically have a grip over the entire commercial launch market at this point, and in the Starship era there will be absolutely nothing to compete with it. The only reason to not launch with SpaceX will be a lack of willingness to share satellite details with SpaceX, and by extension, the US government. Russia stands no chance here.
Sounds like they dident check their staging.
...and they can't revert to launch...
Sounds like a bunch of bs to hide whats really going on...
That's what they get for playing no-revert, no-quicksave career
We've all been there...
I feel so sorry for all the people who worked so hard for this Project. I Hope that they won't lose their motivation
Boeing, could take a page out of Space X...Embrace the launch even if it fails. Show video throughout!
Robb Patterson They can’t show the whole thing or everyone would know its fake!
Mysterious Cindy yikes
One time use boosters, outsourced engines, expensive to launch, welcome to the 1960s Boeing.
So another Boeing software problem; I’m seeing a pattern here.
boeing used to be located in seattle, but now the company is chopped up into pieces that don't communicate very well. quality was extremely good when the unions still had some power, now it's run by investors and bean counters.
furthermore all the problems are coming out of their Washington sites.
But yeah Boeing computer systems are rather, problematic.
Hopefully the unlucky astronauts who get to fly it will be well rehearsed in shutting off Boeing’s crappy autopilot
@@jkcransx lol like 'Airplane II: The Sequel' ROK
@Puppy power you call bull that new software can contain a bug? Interesting position to hold.
Almost seems a stretch to call it a spacecraft.
Dragoon: *Laughs in getting 30 minutes early to the bonus objective*
Glad you said your name, thought I had subscribed to the ghost of Hugh Hefner for a second.
Someone forgot to go into the computer settings page and turn on the, “set time automatically” function. Oops!
I love how Boeing, a giant of the aerospace industry since the beginning, basically got shown up by spacex, the same spacex that has only been around for like 18 years.
"This is Maxwell Smart in Mission Control. Missed it by that much. Sorry about that, Chief."
Ah Mr Manley, I've been expecting you...
He's manly!
Task failed successfully?
Welcome to Engineering 101. First lesson; how to cover your mistakes.
System BD Also Public Relations 101 nowadays.
@@SystemBD Indeed, I learned it from the Indian space program...
In engineering, you try to plan for the "What ifs". Looks like someone got this "What if" correctly and the capsule is still intact. So, yes, it did fail successfully. Hopefully, they can recover it and figure out what went wrong.
no wonder I am an unsuccessful Engineering Student. I thought the first lessons was to break what you just made (you know to test it out and find the tolerances).
awesome intro.
jokes aside the boeing team is making spacex look like gods
Great comprehensive report. Thanks for keeping it understandable
It's better that it happens now than later. Boeing is going through a dark phase were the MBAs took charge of the company hence why all of its programs are so fucked up. Now it's time to let the engineers get back to do their stuff.
It's a scam
I think the engineers have much higher chance to do a good job in any modern company like SpaceX, Blue Origin, Rocket Lab or make their own startup.
They've gotten 75 billion dollars plus of taxpayer money. I think they can afford quality control.
What stuff ripping off NASA??
No. Boeing is gonna keep fucking up, getting money, fucking up untill they put some people inside it and they all die.
I love how Scott pronounces capsule as capshool
First thing I thought of was Morons From Outer Space.
Army Guy: “PODULE! PODULE!”
French Scientist: “Ahhh, perdu!” (Produces lighter)
@@Activated_Complex
"I agree that we could launch a pod."
"A pot?"
"A pod."
"A capsule."
It really bugs me
Maybe they outsourced the code to India for nine dollars an hour, like the Max.
It's insane how boeing does not have a in house programing team.
Didn't they also fire a bunch of old engineers and hire a bunch of 'diversity' hires?
@@MrJustinUSCM Thats SOP....standard operating procedure for just about every tech company now
@@MrJustinUSCM lol
I'm guessing it was the "flux capacitor"
no no it's obviously a problem in the dilithium crystal matrix in the impulse engine input manifold
Check the fuse
So... double the cost of Spacex... failure to complete mission parameters... Nasa: we meant to do that
NASA: Let's put people in it!
Beyond ALL belief. Boeing isn't having a good year, and it looks as if it really doesn't deserve one. Does Boeing really deserve to receive premium pay vis-a-vis SpaceX for the splendor of their expertise?
It looks like they need the extra money, to be honest
Yeah. I'm sure if they could get it done with less NASA would be all for that. But NASA decided back at the start that to hedge their bets they wanted two redundant systems. I don't blame them for that, SpaceX was definitely more unproven at the time.
Now though... this is getting silly.
The 737 Max of spacecraft
I know RIGHT ? What was that about ? They received like twice the funding ?
@Prowler Cam Yea, quite easy to spend someone else's money. Eaaa Man O Man I simply have little faith in NASA any more.
Remember when Boeing launched an ad saying "we are diversity at Boeing"
(Not meritocracy)
There you have it.
Uh interesting, wait who made the 737 max again
Rocket science/company are not allowed to hire people who don’t have a green card in the USA
That has to be embarrassing for Boeing. Its another project gone off the rails(at least partially) in addition to the 737 Max fiasco. It makes one wonder what kind of people are hired there. No doubt many competent and highly skilled types so how did they manage to overlook the system clock not being the right one?
There are also issues with the 777 I believe.
What happened, is that they decided short term profits are better for those at the top than quality and long term returns.
down with Boeing executives and uncaring bureaucrats who want to make the next buck but don't give a rats ass about passenger safety. Good omen for space X that starliner took a dump cuz I really wanted payback for 346 who died for nothing.
@Mark Grudt Actually the new 777X has serious issues, potentially another 737MAX disaster. He's not starting rumors.
In 1997, Boeing bought McDonnel Douglas, which was failing due to poor management. Somehow, the managers and accountants running McDonnel Douglas all got jobs running Boeing, and immediately got to maximizing short term profits at the expense of good engineering.
This led to the joke, "McDonnel Douglas bought Boeing with Boeing's money."
Another flawless product from boeing, this time at taxpayers expense
Actually, since Boeing has a fixed price contract with NASA, any redos are on Boeing to pay for.
RockinRobbins13 So they are hurting themselves. Not great, but it is better
flawless part were the RD 180 motors which are unfortaly for US pride made in bad, bad, bad Russia
@@altergreenhorn And the Centaur stage worked well as well. It was Starliner itself that had the software error resulting in overuse of propellant. This is easy to model in KSP using MechJeb. NASA is already making nicey-nice pronouncements about overlooking this and letting Boeing run the next mission with astronauts aboard anyway. It's a repeat of filling the air with cryogenic fuel fumes surrounding the landed capsule and then proclaiming the launch abort test a success. Good thing they have SpaceX as a backup for 2/3 the price.
@Thomas Lucas I don't know what word do you live in, but in this mission only boeing made mistakes. All other parts of the mission are alredy done and executed flawlessly.
Unimpressive that Boeing would choose to keep the audience in the dark. SpaceX isn't perfect, but certainly more open in sharing live video with the world.
SpaceX won a fucking Emmy for their DM-1 coverage! If you don't know how to put up a decent livestream, just call the SpaceX's regists!
Holy crap. They did... I never would have expected that. "Outstanding Interactive Program - 2019"
how 'bout that first falcon heavy mission where they cut the center core off and never said that it dived into the ocean? People had no idea what happened for hours. They are better now though, maybe elon told them to not do that.
SpaceX is the exception, not the rule
Well , Elon Musk is quite the showman.
2:07 looks like someone was playing ksp on the left of the big screen lol
ikr!
The Astronauts on the Space station have affectionately renamed the "Star Liner" to "The👽 Grinch", since it stole their Christmas presents! 🎅
Ayyy Scott, right on time.
Boeing should not have installed MCAS on the Starliner!
lol. nice one
Boeing: Beam me up, Scotty! Scotty! Where are you?!
Scotty on space station: The question is, where are you?
Gracias por su canal y Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo!!!
Thank you for your great channel!!!
And Happy Christmas and happy new year!!!
Yes, the coverage was terrible!,,
ULA coverage of its launches is far, far worse than SpaceX. I don't bother to "tune-in" to ULA launches because of this.
Hopefully the landing coverage will be better... The shots of the people watching screens we couldn't see didn't show too many women - maybe 1/20? Sad...
Dan Daly I am confused by whatever point your trying to make. I counted a minimum of 5 women in the shot of the room, and probably more but too blurry to see all the people in the back. If you’re trying to virtue signal and say they don’t have enough women on employ, then A: if you have some proof that they hire disproportionately on purpose, show proof lol, and B: they should hire the most qualified people for the job regardless of gender/age/race ect.. so go somewhere else with your insinuations, because I’m here for the science, like most people.
@@dandaly7305 and 19 out of 20 people who watch these videos are men
The little x-wing model intro is still my favorite and always puts a smile on my face and makes me chuckle.
spacex: "move out of the way boeing i got this"
Any test flight that goes up and down just fine is a pretty good success.
Depends on what you count as a success. Had it been an actual mission it would have been a failure and at 90 mill a seat.
Honestly reading that description my reaction is oh god and also that's pretty hilarious. How the new space company got it done flawlessly on its first test flight while the entrenched old space company mostly did it correctly but still messed up and done goofed, making the supposed "rookie" look better.
And SpaceX were awarded less money to do it all aswell.
SpaceX is by no means a rookie here. They've been flying Dragons for 9 years straight.
Flawlessly on its first test flight, now that might be true for the dragon, but what about all the falcons that wiped out, the water tower that’s struggling, and the one that destroyed the launchpad?
@@seabiscuits landing the falcon is not a main objective of any mission of SpaceX. Regardless if it lands or not, SpaceX at least manages to actually get dragon reliably injected into the correct orbit.
It wasn't flawless at all (I've heard things about excessive degassing and I think something else on that level, plus the parachute winding up on top of the capsule at recovery wasn't ideal), but at least they showed they could get where they were trying to go! And Starliner hasn't even attempted docking.
So, everything worked great, except for all the new stuff?
Lev Andropov....
New stuff, old stuff, ALL MADE IN TAIWAN!!! Pass hammer please...hammer fix everything.
Everything worked great except the apparent first gen Patriot missile clock...
Scott. You rock! Thanks for explaining.
Ehud, Tucson AZ USA SOL-3
Nice update scott.. also thanks for all your twitter updates during the anomalies.. 👍
Ty scott for this video 🤙
"It sets itself on fire whenever it launches." Ha!
This must've been similar to how it felt during the early Mercury / Gemini programs almost 62 years ago. Trying to figure out how to get a manned capsule into orbit and all. Maybe we should ditch the fancy computers and re-install the abacus.
Boeing fails because they're still trying to be proprietary.
Just install linux in there, it will work 100% :)
@@paulmichaelfreedman8334 It's amazing how people will make up any excuse to believe a lie.
It needed a man onboard. Armstrong would have overridden the computer and saved it.
@@basedbear1605 And what do you believe is a lie?
It may be an issue with the OMCAS “orbital manoeuvring characteristics augmentation system” installed secretly to handle like space x capsules .
Lmao, you dont need that, you just need mums iPad to control it like a SpaceX capsule
Boeing is really on a winning streak lately LOL!
It tends to happen when you've become sloppy, lazy, careless etc etc etc
When you let the bean counters tell the engineers how to do their job this is the result, and this is what I also understand reading comments from past and present Boeing engineers writing about the 737max problems.
@FantomOmega even worse crashes in to weston super mare
They have the overhead of political factors to deal with. I never imagined private companies would prove the most effective model for innovation in spaceflight but they have. We are truly fortunate to find ourselves on a version of Earth with Elon. He is an anomaly
Yeah, should have implemented MCAS, a true and tested method of doing nothing ;)
5:41 It has a bucket handle??
In case they need a giant kerbal to carry it home yeah sure
Water landings you want to be tilted, land landing needs to be flat so the chutes have a bucket handle.
Its a door knocker i think ;-)
This... is a bucket!
That's a shopping basket handle.
When Boeing is measured with different standards than SpaceX... Corrupt dinosaurs.
Really well done video!
Control engineering and reality is always a complicated combination
Delta 4: I am going to launch myself into space!
Everyone: Yay!
Delta 4: By lighting myself on FIRE!
Everyone:Wha- Nononononono...
Scott, you said the Delta 4 makes onlookers a little worried when they see the rocket lighting itself on fire. I suspect it makes the ground crew around the launch pad a little more than a little worried when they see that.
I don't think the ground crew is there when the engines are about to fire...
Micro machines x-wing! Best way intro ever!
Man, I've done this in KSP so many times. You've got the controls in docking mode!