TFW you spend the R&D money on hitmen
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2024
190 points (94.4% liked)
News
23310 readers
3564 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
More like when you spend the QA money on hitmen.
When the marketing department has some extra funds, so they rescue their competitor.
I doubt they spent all that much money murking whatshisname. The R&D money goes to the parasites known as executives and shareholders
Gotta research dividends!
Edit:
Maybe Boeing made a simple mistake and invested in Relaxation & Dividends, instead of Research & Development.
load more comments
(14 replies)
But totally not stranded... -NASA, probably
No because there's always the possibility to use one of the extra Soyuz from the station.
Yes and no. One of the problems right now is each of the three capsule designs uses a different pressure suit, with different hookups, and each relies on a custom fitted seat liner to absorb some of the shock of landing / splashdown, so if you’re planning on landing on a different ship then you launched on, they need to send up a new seat liner & space suit.
This was half a problem even with the shuttle. You still needed a different spacesuit, but because it landed gently on a runway, it didn’t require custom seats.
Ah come on. Don't tell us it's the square plug into the round receptacle issue all over again (Apollo 13 style)?
Technically not stranded is still stranded when NASA won't give them permission to leave.
The industry gossip/theory going around is that there’s a software issue in Starliner that makes it incapable of autonomously returning to Earth. This is probably NASA’s way of telling Boeing to fix it to a satisfactory degree of confidence before a given deadline, or else.
Arguably that alone is enough reason to completely abandon Starliner as an option for the return trip.
It's only an issue in that the logic isn't currently turned on. The capsule can do it just fine. It just wasn't the point of this mission.
NASA update earlier today said Boeing can turn the ability on if needed. Will just need time for update and then testing to make sure it's all good to go.
It takes no fewer than 4 weeks (!!!) to “turn the logic on”. The software that is currently loaded on Starliner cannot autonomously return - they will have to reflash the entire system.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It seems like there is disagreement within NASA whether it is safe for the astronauts to return on Starliner or not.
Boeing engineers did test on the ground to try to replicate the issue that is occuring on the thrusters. They found thqt the issue isndue to a Teflon seals bulging but they don't understand precisely why is the seal buldging and when it occurs.
However they feel confident enough that the problem would not happen on the way back to earth. Some people are NASA are not as confident as they are and would like to know the precise cause of the bulging.
About the software: there is a capability in the software for the capsule to undock autonomously.
However it would means resurrecting parameters that have not been used and updated since 2022, there is some reconfiguration needed and testing to make sure it still does what is needed despite the different hardware and software change that happened since then.
It is really not looking good for Boeing right now and I don't know if the Starliner program will survive this accident.
Fuck Boeing - for real fr
Playing with the lives of people seems now to be officially their thing.
Just sit right back
And you'll hear a tale
A tale of a fateful trip,
That started from a tropic port,
Aboard this tiny ship.
The mate was a mighty sailin' lass.
The Skipper brave and sure,
Two passengers set sail that day,
For an eight day tour,
A eight day tour.
I started reading this to Fresh Prince, and I got pretty far before I realized it should be Gilligan.
We can take you to the ISS, bringing you back is... Complicated
A 3 hour tour
An 8 day mission
I get that being trapped in a tube that is essentially a tiny little bubble of habitable area in the vast, hostile, emptiness of space can already be super claustrophobia inducing and they are vetted and trained for that. But it seems once you are up there and you realize the world's leaders in space, and the people that sent you can't figure out how to get you home, that would trigger that panic in anyone. If there is an emergency you have no escape and there is no rescue coming.
If there is an emergency you have no escape and there is no rescue coming.
In the case of emergency they will jump into the Starliner and go. And they’ll probably be fine.
If Scott Manley is to be trusted (and I think he is), what’s likely happening is that the probability of failure has gotten higher than the mission parameters. Still very low, but higher than what was planned.
How much food and water do they even have?
The space station has tons of stockpile of consumables like that, and are still being regularly restocked by cargo ships (unmanned).
Can't they send one of those with a shuttle for them to fly back? Is that just prohibitively more expensive? They can be autopiloted up, right?
Pretty sure cargo dragon is just a stripped down crew dragon to make more space for cargo.
Or maybe, crew dragon is a cargo dragon fitted for passengers... Seeing as cargo dragon flew with cargo and docked to the ISS in 2012 (crew dragon was 2020).
Pretty sure crew dragon has all the auto/remote to fully launch and then dock to the ISS.
Cargo dragon is auto/remote docked. Doesn't even need canadarm. So would make sense that crew dragon is as well
You could equally fit 2 additional seats in a crew dragon, which was designed for 7 people from the beginning
Not anymore, it was designed for 7 people in 2 seat rows using propulsive landing.
During development they switched to parachute instead of propulsive landing, since parachute can be rougher they had to lean the seat more back for the astronauts to be able to handle more G's.
In this lean back position there is not enough space for a second row of seats anymore
Plenty. Cygnus capsule that docked a few days ago was a scheduled resupply too.
Aren't the stranded astronauts older? I am concerned about the long term damage to their bodies.
view more: next ›