Why Was Starliner's First Crewed Launch Scrubbed Again? 

Coming soon! Valve or software problem? What could go wrong? Old Space Shuttle Rockets and O rings or updated 60's capsule? At least it isn't going to blow a door and sink on land. ;-)

At 0:27 why are they trying to launch a capsule that was dug up out of the ground after being buried for over 100 years??

scrubliner

Didn't have to wait long for the next sctub. Seems their next launch attempt on June 5th has caused a day delay for SpaceX now

@@Homested_Retirement - Why would ULA in NASA Florida have any impact on SpaceX in Texas? SpaceX is still working on their tiles and is awaiting launch approval plus good weather conditions. Go STARSHIP #4!

SpaceX launched Falcon fourteen (14!) times in May alone.

I love how the NASA astroNOTS testified against SpaceX in congress. Most of them are all dead and the new generation, I'm sure are very happy flying SPACEX and NOT ULA! Let's hope Congress defunds ULA even more!

Well t Boeing is arrogant to say that, Boeing was a great company and now look at the 737 max, they cut corners.

There might be very good reasons, stuff that can happen to everyone, like forgotten some doorbolts, bought cheap lithium battery with a tendency to burn, forgot some tools, installed the engines in a bad place and messed up the software and so on.

Boeing is like half a decade behind Space X …

Hey, at least the hatch did not spontaneously blow out......

@@vegas1a The only Mercury capsule that ever got the crabs!!

You win the comment section

Good one.👍

🤣🤣👍

Ha

Funny AF.....

Waaaaaaayyyyyy too late now!! The ex-Boing CEO has taken the money and run!!!!

I mean TBF atlas was never really meant to carry crew so I'd guess they have some pretty strict crew launch policy as a result

@@KiRiTO72987 - LOL. Hard to fly when your valves stick and your Microsoft software crashes. NASA with it's 2 easily prevented Space Shuttle failures is far from a strict crew launch policy. O ring failure and ice on wing damage were both well known from earlier flights. At least SpaceX fixes things from their blow ups. Go StarShip #4.

@@HDnatureTV The first Shuttle launch was a complete success. The O-ring issue was not easily foreseen by anyone. The wing issue was foam not ice (but should have been photographed on-orbit or by spacewalk.) The Space Shuttle had 133 successful missions. Go StarShip #40!

The problem they have is they buy there valves at Home Depot.

​@@michaelbruno1666the o-ring issue was known by the knowledgeable people, but was ignored by management. There was a whole inquiry about this: look up the "Rogers Commission Report"

I would say 13th attempt is the lucky number and it is the charm.

It was a ULA issue.

But Will the Door work ?

​@@michaelthomas7898 And who owns ULA? Boeing and Lockheed Martin.

@@ruger6343 - I'd trust the proven and older Russian Soyuz before Boeing's quality control issues, software issues, and valve issues. Heck, the Space Shuttle was safer!

Praying worked well for the Space Shuttle Crews?! I rather hire better companies and get the math and rocket science right like SpaceX.

I pray that NASA can see that SpaceX has its own redundancy - multiple reusable capsules, multiple reusable boosters, multiple launch pads. Are we suddenly going to discover the Falcon 9 design doesn't work?

​@@d.jensen5153Nailed it.

I haven't watched any Starliner launch attempt with crew on board because I'm not into snuff films. I really wish Blue Origin wasn't so #$%@ing slow so we could have actual redundancy in this industry. Boeing and ULA are dinosaurs.

If the Starliner crews want to be safe they should stay out of the Starliner.

Or they forgot to light the fuse.

14 years is rushing? Dude.

@Been.Here.Since.2007 LOL Well, since you put it that way!

@@julioguardado They even promised to smoke Elon in the space race. The cherry on top.

@@Been.Here.Since.2007 For them it obviously is. Would be a travesty to put those brave souls into something that will likely kill them when it could've simply been postponed. No matter how long it takes. You can't really laugh at playing it safe when the alternative is so much worse.

@@SuperCatacata The alternative is SpaceX.

Useless Lazy Asses

Better comment 😅

Useless Launch Attempt

Useless Launch Alliance

Please don't forget, if it's Boeing it ain''t going factor too.

...or going either.

That's because they were hand tight.

Boeing’s new motto: “When one window closes, another door opens”!

Now that is funny!

DEI people maybe?

Spot on

They only hire from within and cronyism. Every generation of employees gets weaker as no one hires anyone smarter than themselves.

And all the years of experience Boeing has, and just look at what SpaceX has done, I think Boeing probably has too many financial pen pushers now instead of engineers.

They have it off for eveky video. It’s not about Starliner

Given some of the stupid comments I've seen lately from the social media "experts", I don't blame them!

The crew are very brave

@@kimpeater1 or expendable. Maybe they heard they were whistle-blowers

Don't you love how Boeing stole the BLACK JUMP SUITS from SpaceX with blue NASA hats (doesn't match) to help the Astronauts in?

@@kimpeater1 - I loved their press conference saying how much they trust Boeing? LOL. And how they helped overcoming the hundreds of problems and flaws.

...hopefully it opens outward.

I think the plan is for someone to get in it...that's not happening either.

I would for $. Big money.

Probably the environmentally friendly computer, which doesn't draw as much power from the wall, so takes a little longer.

The common shit like every Microsoft OS user sadly knows..... please do not shutdown, still clompleting an update.. bla bla bla

New O rings! But oops the ice and the wing problem not addressed until later - though NASA new about it and ignored it.

If you work for NASA then you didn't...the rest of us moved on.

It's not about pressure to launch. What's with you idiots??? It's about competently completing the task assigned.

Obviously they did from the Challenger because they didn't launch like Challenger did when under pressure to do so.

This comment makes no sense. If anything they may be overly cautious. If the bean counters were in charge they would not want to be wasting money on scrubs. I am sure the engineers one concern is the crews safety. At least we hope so.

NASA made a very wise decision in granting two contracts for a crewed capsule. They got one amazing vehicle which made the entire program worthwhile. But also this.

Those guys are crazy for taking that job

I heard they asked homeless guys and found three of the 284,977 in California willing to do it.

Best comment yet. I worked for boeing for 32 years. They went downhill when mickey D bought them.

You're a poet and didn't even know it!

Yeah I have the same heeby jeebies about this - the fact that they think they can just launch with the helium leak and it won’t exacerbate in space is concerning to me.

NASA - Never A Straight Answer

NASA - no taxpayer dollar left unwasted

You mean the resting in place date.

And don't grade students because someone might fail and get butt hurt

Would you go up in it if made by BOEING =NO DAM WAY

@@jimmunro4649 - If it's Boeing, I'm not going! SPACEX all the way!

Boing, boing, splat.....

Boeing and Douglas was killed by the managers from McDonnell

The downfall of Engineering excellence

Right, a wet dress rehearsal (WDR)

@@metriczeppelin You don't need astronaut to sit on the dang rocket for a wet dress

@@ameunier41 I never said you did. I replied to @monk's post above mine that his "training exercise" is called a "WDR." Jump on him if you choose, not me, mate.

absatively

They have.

or hire the Russians again - LOL! They would be better than ULA any day with older tech that works!

​@@TheEvilmooseofdoom yea, but unsuccessfully every time

@@jakajakosthe second one worked

Good question. There's a definite number of A5 launches, since the РД-180 engines aren't being imported any more. As it is, ULA can name their price and the only competitor, SpaceX can charge the same and take whatever profits their reusability allows. It would take more competition to lower the price but it's not clear that anyone else can get into the market, since both SpaceX and ULA have had the benefit of previous govt programs. Maybe something could happen to make the demand increase so much that they lower prices to increase volume. Blue Origin is also gonna want to make a few engines for themselves while they build up their fleet.

"Untenable," great word. The answer is never! It's not their dime, it's ours, the American tax paying citizens of this already overtaxed country. Cheers

ULA has a much better track record than SpaceX over the long haul. As for rocket engines it's probably better to let the engine builders make the engines, especially when you have a mix of rockets that you launch. BTW, The Delta V does not use BE engines.Their main engines are Rocketdyne. So BE engines have nothing to do with this vehicle. It's the newer Vulcan that uses BE engines, ULA has a phenomenal success rate and actually makes profit as a publicly traded company. Arguably that's better than a private company that relies on very deep pockets to run the operation. The owner of that company likes to throw around amazing numbers but in reality they aren't actually profitable and has many billions invested that may well take decades to achieve a payback on the investment. A lot of ULA's business is for government projects, so profits are somewhat restricted. Being publicly traded they can't just pull numbers out of places where the sun doesn't shine! They have to report accurate numbers according to SEC financial rules. That other company likes to take made up numbers for current "operating cost", of particular segments, but that leaves out all the investment costs, infra structure cost and even employment cost and R&D. Single use rockets is the norm amongst all the competitors except one, so ULA with its many launch capabilities is likely to have more business than they can keep up with. ULA is indeed taking a "smart reusability" approach. Make sure you have a system that can reliably deliver what is supposed to and then look at ways to lower costs. That other guy has a long list of failed companies that didn't deliver real ROI. Just look at his biggest publicly traded company that went for years without making money and is now facing potential collapse within 2 ir 3 years. And he's being investigated by the SEC for a number of improper practices.

I don‘t really understand what Blue Origin has to do with any of this. They didn‘t build the rocket or the engines, this is Starliner ontop of Atlas. Blue Origin builds the engines for Vulcan and is working on New Glenn.

LOL with BO making the rockets, and ULA ... I'd say they could maybe launch on every 4 or 5 years. If you rely on Boeing for any part of it, you could probably just preemptively scrub all of them.

I heard they will use what remains of the program on pots and pans.

@@ASDasdSDsadASD-nc7lf Those poor kitchens 🥺

They only way that thing is seeing space is towed by a Starship.

No one even covers them anymore unless it is unusual.

@@genebohannon8820 ngl they pretty much did it to themselves when they switched the streams to X

It already has

Hopefully it is made out of $100 bills, at least you will still have your retirement money in 30 years.

At 0:27 Why are they trying to launch a capsule that was dug up out of the ground after being buried for over 100 years?

I couldn't agree more. What an embarrassment to the industry this Junkliner is.

​@@ASDasdSDsadASD-nc7lf?????? You're making absolutely no sense. Buried for 100 years?

NOT SPACEX much anymore! Maybe weather! Go Starship #4 next week!

Maybe that’s it 👍

negatory

I'd fly to Russia instead for a ride.

@@HDnatureTV lol 😂

OMG! That's a GOOD one!

I found a positive comment in this mucking comment section. *YES!*

There's a neat answer to that, it's the thrusters on the service module they've had several problems with. 🎉

Escape System - SpaceX.

It's already certified for crewed flight that's why there was a crew onboard. It just hasn't gotten up there yet. Starliner wasn't the problem, it was the ULA rocket. Pay attention.

Dream chaser is coming close to a launch A crewed dream chaser is close behind If that works it will be far more useful than Starliner.

@@RossM3838 Still going up on a ULA rocket so probably not.

@@RossM3838 I crewed Dream chaser is not close behind. The current one and the next one being built are cargo only. They would need to get a third one built that would be manned. We are several years away from seeing that.

@@bluesteel8376 space planes need a lot of work for sure. Is it my imagination or does that plane look just like creightons ship in the shows”Farscape”? A crewed version is in the works but it’s a few years off for sure. In Boeing terms a few years means very quickly.

They do have some experience with this sort of stuff.

@@TheEvilmooseofdoom - dead astronauts?

They set the bar so low they feel like they're winning 😂

@@-MeatsOfEvil- DEI - just lowers the bar - no degrees or math needed!

Lizzo weights more though but she also can't get off the ground.

Eventually to become eternity.

They aren’t?

Boeing announced that the astronauts have gone to SpaceX and they are launching the whistleblowers instead. Hope nothing happens!

Don't insult Temu.

Don’t swipe away! Temu has StarLiners at 50% off!