the argument is valid but somehow the article appeared today, I'm almost certain this is a plant but either Boeing, or NASA< possibly both together, just like how they have been attempting to PR their way out of their mess/continue to fund Starliner.
I'm willing to bet my house on:
-
SpaceX will bring back the astronaut
-
Starliner will continue to be funded, maybe with extra money from congress.
there is a reason these kinds of articles show up right after some conference call from NASA and right before the moment they have to make a call
Why Having a Plan B Is a Win for Human Spaceflight
byu/Ok-Stomach- inspace
7 Comments
Two 99% reliable systems can be combined to get you close to 99.9% or 99.99% reliability. Which is the sort of reliability you need to open up space to the general public.
Theoretically. Obviously, in real life, things are a ton messier. But, aside from the competitive angle, there’s a real safety win that you could go for with two reasonably reliable systems complementing each other.
Idk seems to me just a more knowledgeable journalist writing a more balanced and informed article to counter some of the more clickbaity stuff out there. Loren Grush isn’t exactly a hack.
The commercial crew idea is great but it does fall apart a little if there is only one company willing and able to participate. NASA gives up some control and ownership to give the companies more room to innovate and find new customers for the things they need to design and build. But in exchange, NASA is supposed to get more than one provider so they have a fallback if one doesn’t work out, whether for technical or commercial reasons.
If it’s just SpaceX then NASA is basically just riding SpaceX’s roadmap from here on out.
NASA is basically required to have 2 providers so yeah Boeing need to sort their stuff out
I agree that NASA wants/needs a backup/2nd option, but if Boeing can’t get the crew back down safely, one of the first times ever in spaceflight of a spacecraft being abandoned like that, I’m not sure NASA could justify putting any more money into Starliner, and I’m also not sure Boeing’s reputation would survive.
If the crew does return on Starliner, then sure, NASA will have some very strong words for Boeing but Starliner will probably remain a thing. But if they have to abandon, I think NASA would rather chance it and give the contract to Sierra Nevada’s Dreamchaser instead.
I’m 100% certain that most politicians don’t like relying on SpaceX for anything and would much rather a company that pays them for favors to be the top dog in private space exploration.
NASA’s hands are tied in regard to using SpaceX as much as they do since its the only company capable right now, but they don’t want to be so reliant on them and I bet if Boeing and SpaceX’ roles were reversed NASA would never consider SpaceX for anything.
All speculation.
I heard someone suggest NASA could pay Boeing for an uncrewed cargo mission to help facilitate further testing before crewed missions and of course ameliorate the money pit this has become for Boeing. There is always the chance Boeing will decide it has lost too much money and end the program. This would make a lot of people happy but not NASA I imagine. The main problem with this idea is that there aren’t any spare Atlas Vs for this extra “test” flight. Amazon would need to be convinced to give up one of the Kuiper Atlas Vs.
When one can essentially launch at will, another archaic one isn’t really needed.