Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Boeing is doing a worse job with SLS than it is with Starliner!! The latest from NASA OIG! [17:18]
YouTube ^ | August 10, 2024 | The Angry Astronaut

Posted on 09/07/2024 7:56:40 AM PDT by SunkenCiv

If you think Boeing's doing a lousy job with Starliner, just wait until you hear the latest about SLS!
Boeing is doing a worse job with SLS than it is with Starliner!!
The latest from NASA OIG!
| 17:18
The Angry Astronaut | 145K subscribers | 37,566 views | August 10, 2024
Boeing is doing a worse job with SLS than it is with Starliner!! The latest from NASA OIG! | 17:18 | The Angry Astronaut | 145K subscribers | 37,566 views | August 10, 2024

(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...


TOPICS: Astronomy; Science
KEYWORDS: angryastronaut; artemis; astronomy; boeing; nasa; orion; science; sls; spacex; starliner; theangryastronaut
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-44 next last
To: SunkenCiv

Time.


21 posted on 09/07/2024 8:57:57 AM PDT by Sequoyah101 (More important than why there was nobody protecting the AGR roof, how did Crooks know that?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101
Why not just give us a few lines of summary? That is what summaries are for.

It's conditioning. For most of FR's existence, if an OP didn't put up the whole body of an article, Humblegunner would start a war.

22 posted on 09/07/2024 9:00:56 AM PDT by Brass Lamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101

Transcript

0:00 · Why not
0:03 · just give
0:06 · us a few
0:10 · lines of
0:13 · summary?
0:15 · That is
0:18 · what summaries
0:20 · are for.


23 posted on 09/07/2024 9:22:56 AM PDT by Jeff Chandler (THE ISSUE IS NEVER THE ISSUE. THE REVOLUTION IS THE ISSUE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101

This is what happens when you have no domestic competition. Boeing is like the late 70s and all of the 80s Detroit automobiles. They didn’t make better automobiles until Japan started outselling them.


24 posted on 09/07/2024 9:38:27 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants ("Gays for Gaza is like Chickens for KFC"- B. Netanyahu )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

I asked you first. I answered your question, why not answer mine?


25 posted on 09/07/2024 9:54:22 AM PDT by Sequoyah101 (More important than why there was nobody protecting the AGR roof, how did Crooks know that?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


26 posted on 09/07/2024 9:57:17 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (The Demagogic Party is a collection of violent, rival street gangs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: norcal joe

You’re only second worst reply of the year, loser.


27 posted on 09/07/2024 9:59:03 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (The Demagogic Party is a collection of violent, rival street gangs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Jeeves
And Boeing is doing worse still with the 777X - ceding virtually the entire large commercial aircraft space to Airbus because airlines can’t afford to wait any longer.

Boeing needs a competitor. SpaceX should build planes. Maybe under a new division called PlaneX.

28 posted on 09/07/2024 9:59:56 AM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Ezekiel

You made me look it up. :-)

WikiPedia gives Jason’s “Affiliation” as “The Argonauts”.

I thought that was pretty funny, too.


29 posted on 09/07/2024 10:11:09 AM PDT by Empire_of_Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101; norcal joe; SunkenCiv
What’s a matter with you guys? Sunken posts a lot of interesting stuff, much of it that can’t easily be summarized. If you don’t have the inclination to read the article, just read the comments (in which much of the information in the article is brought out in the course of the discussion), or skip it altogether.

You just come across as lazy or hungover when you jump on posters like this.

30 posted on 09/07/2024 10:26:30 AM PDT by power2 (JMJ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

Thanks, I get multiple advertisements from youtube now so don’t bother with it.


31 posted on 09/07/2024 10:29:07 AM PDT by jdt1138 (Where ever you go, there you are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: power2
Far far from either. Most people like this would never make it in corpocracy where an executive summary may be the only attention you get from anyone.

Some people just want to know what time it is before they are told how the watch was built.

32 posted on 09/07/2024 10:46:43 AM PDT by Sequoyah101 (More important than why there was nobody protecting the AGR roof, how did Crooks know that?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: power2

Thanks power2!


33 posted on 09/07/2024 10:49:28 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Putin should skip ahead to where he kills himself in the bunker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

SunkenCiv, you’re an FR SuperStar and I appreciate you!

Thank you for your time and effort spent posting some of the most interesting stuff on FreeRepublic!

:-)


34 posted on 09/07/2024 10:56:33 AM PDT by pax_et_bonum (“Killer rabbit jokes have a long tradition in medieval literature.“ - Dr. James Wade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

Some background for those who have not followed this topic.

Why the SLS?

If you deem going back to the moon as unimportant, waste of money etc. Then, if that sentiment were to prevail, the Moon would belong to the Chinese.

If you are fine with that outcome, then you will be fine with living in a country whose currency is worthless as BRICS currency, the Yuan, would superseded the dollar.

NASA’s SLS is a single shot direct to the moon, whereas SpaceX’s path will be multi-rocket.

Starship, version 3 as it is envisioned, will take about 15 trips each way via refueling stops. SpaceX will have to launch 30 refueling ships, and each stop will take time, and everything must go according to plan. If not, the whole thing collapses, until another refueling ship can be launched and reach the stricken ship.

Why if Starship is bigger and more powerful than SLS does it need to refuel? Because weight.

SLS is a a lightweight carbon composite; Starship is stainless steel. Stainless steel is not light. Weight and mass are the determining factors in rocketry. The more a rocket weighs, the more fuel it takes to get to a given place; the more the rocket masses, the more fuel it takes. In this case, mass is not the problem, but weight is.

Because of political factors (Musk hate, rival jealousy, environmentalists), the Starship is far behind schedule. SLS will only be launched, if everything is perfect. Starship is different, using the ‘test to failure model’. The SLS method takes longer and costs far more money. The Starship is quicker & with its reusable booster is far cheaper, but is prone to spectacular failures.

In this case, going back to the moon, using NASA’s plan, requires both the SLS and the Starship to be perfected. The initial date has been set back several times - and right now its is looking like the Chinese will get there before the USA or be right behind.


35 posted on 09/07/2024 10:59:55 AM PDT by PIF (They came for me and mine ... now its your turn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

Space Launch System [SLS]

NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) is a super heavy-lift rocket that provides the foundation for human exploration beyond Earth orbit. With its unprecedented capabilities, SLS is the only rocket that can send NASA’s Orion spacecraft, four astronauts, and large cargo directly to the Moon on a single mission.

https://www.nasa.gov/reference/space-launch-system/


36 posted on 09/07/2024 11:13:46 AM PDT by deks (Deo duce, ferro comitante · God for guide, sword for companion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: norcal joe

The Space Launch System (SLS) is an American super heavy-lift expendable launch vehicle used by NASA.As the primary launch vehicle of the Artemis Moon landing program,


37 posted on 09/07/2024 11:39:50 AM PDT by olezip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Empire_of_Liberty

In case this got missed in the search — there really is a star theme:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argo_Navis


38 posted on 09/07/2024 12:05:23 PM PDT by Ezekiel (🆘️ "Come fly with US". 🔴 Ingenuity -- because the Son of David begins with MARS ♂️, aka every man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: deks

In my best independence day voice...”That’s not entirely accurate”

Starship is also a 200+ tonne expendable capable rocket. They want it to be reusable so they use stainless steel and heat shields. Being how cheap Raptor 2 and then Raptor 3 is and will be they could throw away superheavy boosters and a stripped down one way starship really just 6 raptors + tanks and fairing no need to bring heat shields or wings. Remember ONE RS25 engine costs $100+ million each per the NASA contract. Raptor 2s are under a million each and they are making more than one per day now. For those prices you could just throw away 33+6 for less than the cost of a single RS25 engine.

When that’s the case you don’t have to fly back the superheavy so you can use every bit of fuel in it much like disposable Falcon 9 vs boost back Falcon 9 that increases your payload by 30-40%. Also then not having to have heat shields, wings or all the hydraulics for those means more payload mass to orbital delta V . In short 200-225 tonnes is the estimate based on full up wet weight. With that kind of throw weight into low earth orbit which is double SLS btw you can add a large hydrogen based third stage and go directly to the moon with 60+ tonnes TLI, even using a single Raptor 2 in a 100 tonne third stage puts 50+ tonnes on a TLI trajectory delta V to TLI is less than delta V to a trans Mars injection by about 1,000 meters per second.

Here someone did the math on a 150 tonne to low earth orbit Starship that’s the reusable payload target, with expendable add 75 to 100 tonnes to that you run out of volume well before you run out of mass. For the cost of some tanks and one additional Raptor you don’t have to refuel anything you have 100+ tonnes of fuel and a world class engine on top of it. You can throw crazy payloads to Jupiter,Saturn or out of the solar system too. Think Europa landers, Titan flyers, Mars landers with one shot sample return missions. When you can throw 50+ tonnes out of earth’s gravity well and into solarcentric orbit the whole solar system is then open to you. Starship even expendable versions fundamentally changes human’s presence in space. SLS doesn’t do that and at half a billion dollars or more per launch it never will.

https://www.reddit.com/r/space2030/comments/19038iz/thoughts_on_a_reusable_otv_for_starship/#lightbox


39 posted on 09/07/2024 2:17:26 PM PDT by GenXPolymath
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
"Touchdown! Uncrewed Boeing Starliner lands safely in New Mexico..."

You Tube - 11 minutes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdDiHLeGjBU

40 posted on 09/07/2024 2:26:26 PM PDT by zeestephen (Trump "Lost" By 43,000 Votes - Spread Across Three States - GA, WI, AZ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-44 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson