NASA has labelled the botched 2024 Starliner mission, which left two astronauts stranded in space for months, a “Type A” mishap, on par with fatal shuttle disasters of the past, in a newly published report.
The category is the space agency’s most severe, reserved for incidents causing more than $2m (£1.49 m) in damage, the loss of a vehicle or its control, or deaths.
On Thursday, Nasa’s new boss, Jared Isaacman, blasted Boeing, which built Starliner, and the space agency for poor decision-making and leadership that led to the failed mission.
All valid points, and yes SpaceX is a demonstration of how privatization can be more innovative. The challenge is that the counterpoint of Boeing culture change causing things like the Starliner is about as valid when regulatory capture happens.
I’m not saying nationalizing companies would help, but a government with good oversight (which is more and more of a question under Trump) could also help.
We’ll its not “regulatory capture” because we’re not talking about regulatory agencies, but you’re right if you’re talking corporate capture.
I know its going to sound counter-intuitive, but Starliner was actually necessary to break corporate capture.
The entrenched interests in Aerospace as well as Congress had almost no desire to change. Aerospace loved their “cost plus” infinite money printing machines paid for by government dollars. Contractors had zero concern for cost overruns/ballooning costs. Congress got to land Aerospace jobs in their districts. NASA got working but VERY EXPENSIVE space vehicles every 10-20 years. Fat cats on all sides were very very happy with this arrangement.
A very small set of politicians concerned about costs (and likely some campaign contributions) along with NASA wanted much cheaper vehicles then they were getting at that time. So they got a proposal to have private companies bid for fixed price contracts for space cargo flights. “UPS for space shipments” essentially. It worked. Law passed It was cheap. It was reliable.
So then with the success of private cargo, questions were raise why we were spending orders of magnitude more on human flights to the International Space Station? There was much clutching of pearls about these new hotshot private space companies and if they could handle human spaceflight. Somehow Boeing, the trusted legacy maker of the Space Shuttle and Apollo, was convinced to bid on human private spaceflight. There was now a company Congress would be confident would deliver a working solution, and they still got to tell their districts they were bringing
porkjobs. Those other untrustworthy “newspace” companies could fail, and Boeing would still deliver human spaceflight as they had for decades.We know now how wrong that was, but without that as a possible future, no human private spaceflight would have happened. If it had just been newspace companies like SpaceX and Sierra Space, Congress never would have passed the legislation to allow Commercial Crew to happen.
So you can see that Starliner needed to exist to break the corporate capture. That had to existed for use to break the corporate capture model that plagued human spaceflight.
I don’t have much faith in that idea. Look at what NASA was before private spaceflight. I love them for other reasons, but look at what ESA (European Space Agency) is today. Safran is a company that is the Boeing to ESA with all the same problems of Boeing for NASA.