August 3rd, 2024

Boeing's Starliner proves better at torching cash than reaching orbit

Boeing reported a $125 million loss on its Starliner spacecraft, totaling over $1 billion in losses. Delays due to technical issues may extend financial losses, with the next flight expected in August 2025.

Read original articleLink Icon
Boeing's Starliner proves better at torching cash than reaching orbit

Boeing has reported an additional $125 million loss related to its Starliner spacecraft, bringing total losses from the project to over $1 billion, with projections suggesting they could exceed $1.6 billion. The Starliner, which is currently docked at the International Space Station (ISS), is facing delays due to thruster issues and gas leaks, preventing its return to Earth within NASA's safety parameters. Boeing's financial struggles are compounded by the lengthy timeline since NASA awarded the company a contract nearly ten years ago to develop a crew transport vehicle for the ISS. Despite a successful non-crewed test flight, the Starliner has encountered multiple setbacks, including a failed initial attempt to reach the ISS. As of now, NASA and Boeing have not set a date for the spacecraft's return, with ongoing evaluations of potential options, including the possibility of using a SpaceX capsule for the return of the crew. Boeing's next Starliner flight is not anticipated until August 2025, indicating that financial losses from the project may continue for the foreseeable future.

Link Icon 15 comments
By @shrubble - 7 months
Former Boeing CEO McNerny hated the "phenomenally talented **holes" in engineering roles and sought to minimize their power or get rid of them .

Dreamliner was delayed and cost 3x the amount to develop as a result.

This may be more follow-on from engineering-hostile management.

By @iancmceachern - 7 months
I used to work for a guy who had previously worked in the Osprey Tilt Rotor plant in Philadelphia and he said it was a job factory, not a helicopter factory.
By @Tuna-Fish - 7 months
Even if it's deemed sufficiently safe, there's no way the Starliner is coming down before 6th of November.

Harris is the chair of the Space Council. Even if it's in no way her fault, two torched astronauts with her in some way attached is just too easy to write headlines about. Similarly, if they publicly decide that it's unsafe, that's declaring failure.

By @csours - 7 months
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIUrvoIdsU0 Eager Space - Good NASA, Bad NASA

> 1:17 "How can an organization that is so great at science be so terrible at creating a new launch system?"

> 2:33 "What goes on inside any organization is what I've taken to calling the game. ...

Every large organization has their own version of the game. The goal of the game is simple - it is to move up the ladder in the company to get more money more reports more power more budget more respect. The game is about career, and very much about the career for the people who matter: management and especially executive management."

> 15:20 "The game was:

Keep NASA space flight centers open,

Keep money flowing to NASA contractors,

Keep votes flowing to Congress people,

Preserve NASA management jobs"

By @jmyeet - 7 months
Boeing is (yet another) cautionary tale for what happens to a company when the finance people take over, which is essentially inevitable once a company has a "monopoly". Yes I know there's Airbus but a duopoly can be pretty functionally similar to a monopoly.

The oft-quoted Steve Jobs quote on why Xerox failed [1] is always relevant.

Starliner, SLS and Artemis both behave exactly like a jobs program gone bad. Now I'm not opposed to a jobs program per se. We could honestly use more of that. But the difference between Boeing's efforts and SpaceX's efforts is just astounding.

Starliner launches on the fully expendable Atlas V N22 rocket, which reportedly costs $164 million [2] to launch. Falcon 9 seems to cost ~$62 million per launch [3] before you even factor in reuse.

I don't know how (or even if) a company can be rescued when it gets to this stage. It becomes a rent-seeking Frankenstein of tiny warring fiefdoms. We've also seen this with Intel's complete inability to internally collaborate as mid-level VPs seemingly engage in turf wars rather than share resources and information.

EDIT: fixed typo (Xerox)

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGKsbt5wii0

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V

[3]: https://nstxl.org/reducing-the-cost-of-space-travel-with-reu...

By @greatgib - 7 months
Just imagine being one of the two test pilots that will have to go back inside this junk vehicule for business reason!
By @Dalewyn - 7 months
Whoever named the capsule Calamity was a bloody genius.
By @thecleaner - 7 months
What makes AirBus better than boeing at making aircrafts ? Boeing just seems to be going down hill. Much like their aircrafts.
By @thecleaner - 7 months
Dont put accountants in charge of engineering heavy companies.
By @gojomo - 7 months
Hey now! It got two astronauts into orbit just fine. They just haven't yet figured out how to safely bring them back.
By @thriftwy - 7 months
Looks like a good time to check out these ISS - MKAD 19th km marshrutkas' timetable.
By @ambicapter - 7 months
POSIWID
By @callamdelaney - 7 months
A very predictable outcome.
By @ldjkfkdsjnv - 7 months
These old corporations, Boeing, Intel, IBM etc. They need to have all upper management fired. Bring in 30 year olds, pay them 1M a year, and let them run these companies.