Boeing's Starliner Now Has 5 Leaks While Parked Outside the ISS

74 points by scblzn 1 year ago | 53 comments
  • leoh 1 year ago
    We really still sure this whole decompression sickness thing was just a “simulation”?

    https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/nasa-accidentally-b...

    • everforward 1 year ago
      I don't think a "leak" would cause decompression sickness. Decompression sickness is caused by bubbles forming when pressure decreases too quickly for the body to expel now-excess nitrogen. A slow, gradual decrease would provide plenty of time to expel excess nitrogen.

      A leak in a pressure vessel is basically how deep saturation divers re-acclimate to standard pressure, and they're making a much, much larger change in pressure (maximum of 14.5 psi delta on the ISS, ~429.06 for a saturation diver at 1000 ft). It's really a delta P of 10 psi though, since the American space suits are 4.5 psi. There's not really much point in talking about decompression sickness without a space suit; they'd die of lack of O2 or exposure even without DCS.

      Current recommendations for space walks are a 4 hour denitrogenation period breathing 100% oxygen, and that's pretty cautious. That's based on the denitrogenation rate of the slowest tissues; it could likely be done significantly faster without presenting dramatically increased risks of DCS, and especially so if you only need to avoid type 2 DCS where the bubbles present a risk of dying.

      • ethbr1 1 year ago
        Also, this is helium from the propulsion system.

        >> Helium is used in the spacecraft’s thruster systems to allow the thrusters to fire without being combustible or toxic.

        I'm assuming it's used to backfill tanks as they're emptied?

        • CableNinja 1 year ago
          Theres 2 use cases:

          1) To keep the fuel/oxidizer pressurized and liquid (by pressure) as the tanks content empties.

          2) for RCS thrust, as a cold gas thruster.

      • hehdhdjehehegwv 1 year ago
        I read that article earlier, but it didn’t mention Boeing so I wasn’t questioning it.

        But where Boeing goes, bad things follow.

      • OutOfHere 1 year ago
        What would one expect from a company that indirectly allegedly has its own employee murdered for speaking up in favor of basic safety. If they don't care about their own employees, and they don't care about hundreds of passengers, they sure as hell don't care about a few astronauts.
        • WheatMillington 1 year ago
          That's a big old "citation needed". As far as I'm aware that's a crackpot conspiracy theory - just because some fringe lunatic alleges something is enough to honestly decribe that something as "alleged".
          • OutOfHere 1 year ago
            It is not a fringe theory. It is quite mainstream. Boeing is ostensibly "protected from above" due to their military and space contracts, but as we're seeing with Starliner, such contracts are proving to be a liability.
            • tim333 1 year ago
              It seems unlikely though. He was found in the hotel car park in a locked car with the keyfob in his pocket, a suicide note and a gun he was shot in the head with. He also had a history of mental illness. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13431401/boeing-whi...
              • 1 year ago
                • et-al 1 year ago
                  I love a good conspiracy theory, but you need to link to some articles about the video cameras.
                  • WhackyIdeas 1 year ago
                    As I only just recently found out about Boeing’s involvement in making missiles which Israel uses in Gaza, it would unfortunately not surprise me if these particular conspiracy hypothesis are more than just hypothesis.

                    At least for Boeing, they’ll be benefiting from the fear other potential whistleblowers may have.

                    But it’s also possible that Boeing don’t know about the deaths because someone else has done it for them. But that’s when we start going down the rabbit hole of suspects from Mossad to the CIA!

                    Regardless, the big question is: Would they have the stomach to do it if they they could get away with it?

                    …to ME, that has a very easy answer.

                    Edit: Why the downvotes? Not rational enough? Or too rational?

                  • HeatrayEnjoyer 1 year ago
                    Coincidences happen, but it sure is a mighty convenient one in this case.
                  • southernplaces7 1 year ago
                    After getting to know sequential incidents like the Marconi murders of the 1980's, which even today are often dismissed as being anything more than coincidence despite a lot of very weird details, I wouldn't entirely dismiss at least the possibility of Boeing being involved in his death.

                    Large companies are in certain ways like governments, by which different parts of them can be doing entirely different, even divergent things that aren't quite congruent with the benefit of the wider whole. In other words, often one hand doesn't know what the other is doing, even if the activity is batshit crazy and a bad idea, and this is sometimes by design.

                    • cqqxo4zV46cp 1 year ago
                      Didn’t you hear? Since Hacker News hates Boeing now, all reasoning goes out the window as long as it’s in service of looking smart by dog-piling on the company that the other totally smart HN users also hate.
                      • OutOfHere 1 year ago
                        Think about it this way. If you mentally torture an employee for 30+ years, and lead them to suicide, how are you not culpable?
                  • gnabgib 1 year ago
                    Discussion [0] (37 points, yesterday, 48 comments)

                    [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40662803

                    • thot_experiment 1 year ago
                      If it's a Boeing I'm not going.
                      • shiroiushi 1 year ago
                        I don't mind flying on a well-tested 777 (i.e. one that's been in service for years). It's a great design from before Boeing really went down the shitter, and is probably the backbone of most carrier's long-haul intercontinental fleets today.

                        But there's no way I'd fly as an astronaut on Starliner. I have very little confidence it won't have a catastrophic failure, considering how Boeing's been doing things lately.

                      • OutOfHere 1 year ago
                        https://www.amiflyingonaboeing.com/ (but remember that planes can sometimes change)
                        • cqqxo4zV46cp 1 year ago
                          A statement as completely absurd as it always was.
                          • WhackyIdeas 1 year ago
                            If it’s Boeing, I’m boating!
                          • gwill 1 year ago
                            are these actually scary leaks? in the article they say they'd be fine even if the leak were 100x the size.
                            • MR4D 1 year ago
                              In a sense, yes. The leaks shouldn’t be there, which means the craft is out of spec. Being out of spec in one area makes you consider how good/thorough the design and testing was. The next step is to consider what else isn’t working or might break sooner than anticipated. And that is not a pleasant thought.
                              • czl 1 year ago
                                You purchased an airplane. How would you feel when on the solo flight home you begin to hear odd sounds "under the hood"? The plane may still be flying ok but might you wonder for how much longer? It is not the noise that's the problem but rather what that noise predicts.
                                • Waterluvian 1 year ago
                                  Yeah this is one of those times my lizard brain wants to say, “that’s terrifying” but my not-as-lizard brain says, “you don’t have a frame of reference. What’s normal?”
                                • ramesh31 1 year ago
                                  With the officially stated reason from Boeing being "It would be quite involved" to fix before launch: https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/05/nasa-and-boeing-are-ge...

                                  It would almost be comical at this point if this company weren't directly responsible for human lives.

                                  • seydor 1 year ago
                                    this is crazy. so many screws are loose in boeing
                                    • Havoc 1 year ago
                                      That’s terrifying
                                      • nomel 1 year ago
                                        No it's not.

                                        > While Starliner is docked, all the manifolds are closed per normal mission operations preventing helium loss from the tanks,

                                        > “We can handle this particular leak if that leak rate were to grow even up to 100 times,”

                                        • fransje26 1 year ago
                                          If your propulsion system is developing leaks as you go, and, for good measure, you are also loosing thrusters in critical flight phases, than yes, this is terrifying.

                                          What you have is a known failing system, with a very high probability of additional failure as soon as it is repressurised and it enters its next stress cycle. Which is normally when these things like to fail.

                                          • nomel 1 year ago
                                            > What you have is a known failing system

                                            Absolutely not. Engineering in the real world doesn't work like this. You don't design for perfection. You have intentionally defined specs set to what can be intentionally accommodated in your design.

                                            In this case you literally have is a system operating at 1% of the value that can be accommodated. That is not a problem. Something undesirable happening does not necessarily mean the system is failing, or that it's even a practical problem.

                                          • protocolture 1 year ago
                                            Its terrifying that the build quality is so poor due to the issues we have seen.

                                            The helium leak is obviously acceptable, but this thing is meant to return humans to the surface, can we trust that it wont have issues in other areas?

                                            • nomel 1 year ago
                                              > can we trust that it wont have issues in other areas

                                              We can trust it's not perfect. For this problem, operating at 1/100 the failure point probably shouldn't stir too many emotions. There's very little in your daily life operating at those types of margins, except maybe the ground you walk on.

                                        • Simulacra 1 year ago
                                          Now with 5 leaks, at what point does it make sense to jettison the Starliner and get something else on the pad, something more reliable. Like SpaceX?
                                          • verticalscaler 1 year ago
                                            Starliner wasn't selected based on merit in the first place so only after people will die will it become impossible to pretend otherwise. What incentive do the current decision makers have to own up to their mistake? They'll double down first, watch.

                                            Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown.

                                          • doublerabbit 1 year ago
                                            I wonder if there is an Enterprise equivalent for UFOs hire.

                                            Towing fees back to Roswell I could imagine would be pricey.