A few weeks into the Starliner test flight last year, the manager of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, Steve Stich, told reporters the agency’s plan was “to continue to return [the astronauts] on Starliner and return them home at the right time.” Mark Nappi, then Boeing’s Starliner program manager, regularly appeared to downplay the seriousness of the thruster issues during press conferences throughout Starliner’s nearly three-month mission.
“Specifically, there’s a significant difference, philosophically, between we will work toward proving the Starliner is safe for crew return, versus a philosophy of Starliner is no-go for return, and the primary path is on an alternate vehicle, such as Dragon or Soyuz, unless and until we learn how to ensure the on-orbit failures won’t recur on entry with the Starliner,” Precourt said.
Boeing is a dumpsterfire lol
10
burble @lemmy.dbzer0.com - 17hr
An absolute clown show. If these psychopaths can't understand the gravity of their actions, then they need to be making decisions while holding framed pictures of the astronauts and sitting in the rooms with their families.
5
deadbeef79000 @lemmy.nz - 12hr
I suppose it's probably because the people responsible for Challenger have all retired without passing on the lesson to the next generation.
3
burble @lemmy.dbzer0.com - 5hr
And management said those requirements and processes took too long and cost too much money
2
deadbeef79000 @lemmy.nz - 5hr
Quite. I did imply that those responsible actually learned the lesson (to pass on). I doubt that everyone learned it.
burble in spaceflight @sh.itjust.works
Safety panel says NASA should have taken Starliner incident more seriously
https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/12/safety-panel-says-nasa-should-have-taken-starliner-incident-more-seriously/Boeing is a dumpsterfire lol
An absolute clown show. If these psychopaths can't understand the gravity of their actions, then they need to be making decisions while holding framed pictures of the astronauts and sitting in the rooms with their families.
I suppose it's probably because the people responsible for Challenger have all retired without passing on the lesson to the next generation.
And management said those requirements and processes took too long and cost too much money
Quite. I did imply that those responsible actually learned the lesson (to pass on). I doubt that everyone learned it.