Space Exploration

Are NASA's future missions and budget justified?

  • It's worth the time and expenditures

    Votes: 223 66.0%
  • Complete waste of money

    Votes: 41 12.1%
  • We need to explore, but not at the current cost

    Votes: 74 21.9%

  • Total voters
    338
I read an article somewhere that they were intentionally pressuring it to the max to test its limitations.

Props to the electrical engineer who worked on it. Any kind of a static discharge inside that gigantic cloud of LOX would've caused a explosion that wouldve sent the entire facility up in flames.
Judging from the results they should should know it's exact limitations now.
 
I read an article somewhere that they were intentionally pressuring it to the max to test its limitations.

Props to the electrical engineer who worked on it. Any kind of a static discharge inside that gigantic cloud of LOX would've caused a explosion that wouldve sent the entire facility up in flames.
SpaceX practice is to over test. Basically blow things up and see what happens. They've still got the test articles at Boca and Cape, plus the other one they are working on they are being hush hush about.
 
Too bad. imho. Until we no longer have to pay ransom to the Russians to get there, we shouldn't pay to keep it aloft.
We need ISS aloft. It provides much more science than we could hope for on planet. And like Matt said, CST and Dragon will be launching soon enough.
 
Hubble will be funded until it completely breaks down. It provides far too much science to abandon it.

That's good news. I'm beginning to think JWST is going to die a slow death in some warehouse before we ever have the means to launch it.
 
Not a good look for Boeing/NASA on this considering some in NASA had been pushing Starliner over Dragon for sometime.
CNBC said yesterday that BA's costs/launch were $90M. SpacEX is $55M. BA declined to comment on costs.


lol

If BA weren't propped up by the .gov they would be out of business.
 
CNBC said yesterday that BA's costs/launch were $90M. SpacEX is $55M. BA declined to comment on costs.


lol

If BA weren't propped up by the .gov they would be out of business.
The production for this was horrible considering the first SpaceX Dragon flight if I recall won an Emmy.

There was limited onboard camera's, no internal capsule cameras etc... The whole thing seemed rushed compared to SpaceX and the look and feel of the first flight of Dragon. Remember the inside camera's showing the plush doll of earth floating around. The whole feel with SpaceX was we spared no expense.
 
The ULA part of this rocket worked flawlessly (Atlas V with Centaur upper stage), however the part by Boeing (The Command Module,starliner) was what had the issue. What's funny is that the Centaur upper stage had the delta v to get Starliner onto the proper orbital inclination to rendezvous with the ISS, but Boeing wanted the Starliner part of the spacecraft to circularize into orbit.

Apparently software malfunctions and glitches are the norm at Boeing (Look at the 737 Max). Boeing needs to hire some better software engineers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol
CNBC said yesterday that BA's costs/launch were $90M. SpacEX is $55M. BA declined to comment on costs.


lol

If BA weren't propped up by the .gov they would be out of business.
The fact that SpaceX's crew dragon has been to the ISS and back multiple times without hiccup, on a budget nearly half of Boeing has to work with, makes this botched mission even more embarrassing.
 

VN Store



Back
Top