Boeing Troubles - One of the world's largest aerospace manufacturers keeps having problems with their planes.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
It can only go to low orbit and Starliner can make it up to the ISS unless i am missing something?

But Bezos is really the only buyer. Unless a Saudi Prince decides its their time.
I don't think anyone would want it, Boeing isn't going to sell it for cheap until they have cannibalized everything useful from it
 

Attachments

  • 1000008230.png
    1000008230.png
    476.4 KB · Views: 59
It can only go to low orbit and Starliner can make it up to the ISS unless i am missing something?

But Bezos is really the only buyer. Unless a Saudi Prince decides its their time.
It's still the first one used in actual private commerce. Blue Origin's New Shepard had its first launch in 2015. The currently only partially reusable rocket used to get to the ISS had its in 2018. (Now they have a fully reusable one which was the recent news story.)

Either way though, neither Blue Origin nor SpaceX managed to strand astronauts in space in an abundance of retardation and incompetence.
 
Blue Origin had a reusable rocket in commercial use before SpaceX even had a functional prototype.

(It's the one Shatner went up on.)
Sure it can haul Shatner's fat ass to LEO, but can it put larger payloads in to higher orbit, and what is the cost/weight ratio for doing so? Throwing useful shit into orbit cheaply, reliably, and efficiently is the goal.

Which is why I say bring back Gerry Bulls SuperGun! Seriously, the Verne Gun is a sound idea to put small payloads into orbit for pennies on the dollar versus current launches. Sure Bull was a loony, but the best ideas often come from half-crazy.
 
Sure it can haul Shatner's fat ass to LEO, but can it put larger payloads in to higher orbit, and what is the cost/weight ratio for doing so? Throwing useful shit into orbit cheaply, reliably, and efficiently is the goal.
Not of that rocket. Its purpose is mostly space tourism, currently for the massively wealthy or gimmick passengers like Shatner to popularize it. They've pulled in $100 million, which is currently a fraction of development costs, but it shows there's actually a market for that kind of thing with private buyers.

So it's suited for its specific purpose even though it's not really in competition with SpaceX.
 
I think they generally want things to get up there in one piece.
Yeah, and the SuperGun can accomplish this. Or do you think its meant for manned missions? Its not. Obviously, unmanned payloads.

Not of that rocket. Its purpose is mostly space tourism, currently for the massively wealthy or gimmick passengers like Shatner to popularize it. They've pulled in $100 million, which is currently a fraction of development costs, but it shows there's actually a market for that kind of thing with private buyers.

So it's suited for its specific purpose even though it's not really in competition with SpaceX.
I know. My point was Blue Origin wasn't really in the same class as SpaceX, and that's why. I think its just some nomenclature confusion on my part. When you said "Before SpaceX" I thought you were comparing them more directly. Apple/Apple vs Apple/Orange. Sorry, my bad.
 
Last edited:
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: byuuWasTaken
I know. My point was Blue Origin wasn't really in the same class as SpaceX, and that's why. I think its just some nomenclature confusion on my part. When you said "Before SpaceX" I thought you were comparing them more directly. Apple/Apple vs Apple/Orange. Sorry, my bad.
I just meant specifically on the full reusability aspect. There were previously partly reusable rockets or ones where they basically came apart and the parts landed under parachute or something, rather than actually coming down and landing. It was a pretty unique item when it was first developed.
 
Unmanned payloads of fragile electronics and other crap that can't handle the g forces
And Gerry Bull cracked that problem. Between payload design and propellant, its not hard. You don't use regular ole gunpowder, you use specially formulated slow-burning propellant and a giant fucking barrel. Its not a sudden "Bang!" but a gradual (fast, but tolerable forces) "whoosh." The G-loads are higher but closer to traditional launches, but definitely not within manned limits. You are ignorant of the subject.

Read about it before you start talking out of your ass. Its not your grandpappy's .22 rimfire.
 
And then Mossad killed him.
Well, yeah. He was a political idiot, and he was arming Iraq. I already said that he was half crazy. But he also was a brilliant engineer. Doesn't change anything about what I said.

He'd also armed Israel. and South Africa, and a few other countries of ill repute. He made many enemies, because he had no political sense. He was a literal sperg who loved ballistics, and would work for anyone who would pay for him to do it, basically. He rationalized it as artillery paying the way for him to complete his dream, the SuperGun. And to beat NASA at their own game by putting payloads up cheaply, quickly (2 week projected cycle time to clear and clean the breach and barrel) and accessibly. He wanted launch access to be easier for developing countries. The US Government and Canada even initially showed early interest and funding, but being a classic sperg, Bull scared them off.

Saddam tried to literally build it, but for less than peaceful purposes, so they say. It was a big scandal in 1990 in Europe. Especially in the UK.
 
Now if only there were some competitors to Boeing - except Boeing either took over them or drove them out of business.
Thank Clinton for that as he told everyone in the aviation sector it is "merge or die" time during his administration. Which ended up with a whole lot of mergers, immediate and protracted deaths in Clinton's wake.
 
I had a family member with the company explain to me that they were going to cut upwards of 17,000 people without any regard for seniority. Anyone from the janitor to the top exec was eligible to be laid off. The air through mid November was anxious but it seems anyone who was let go was informed as of a few days ago.

You would figure if Boeing was going to trim the fat they would target a base with hundreds to thousand of on-site employees as opposed to a tiny depot with only a handful of individuals being the company's presence in the region, especially if the depots are one of the things actually turning a profit.
 
You would figure if Boeing was going to trim the fat they would target a base with hundreds to thousand of on-site employees as opposed to a tiny depot with only a handful of individuals being the company's presence in the region, especially if the depots are one of the things actually turning a profit.
If Boeing was making rational decisions they wouldn't be in this mess in the first place
 
Back