[londons_explore]

It sounds like the entire issue was caused by a design issue with a thruster which had never been used in space before.

Surely one can switch out the thruster for a redesigned one, or even a totally different type of thruster if the team has lost confidence in the design, and be flying again in months?

[verzali]

It's never that simple, especially when it comes to human spaceflight and NASA procedures. Switching out the thrusters will mean months of safety reviews, tests, updated procedures and flight rules, and endless other paperwork to make sure neither the crew nor the space station are put in any risk.

Not that all that necessarily works - Starliner had already been through all that and the really wild stuff to me is how much NASA was willing to waive their rules about safety around the ISS in order to let Starliner dock.

[throwanem]

NASA always does this in manned spaceflight: about once every two decades or one human generation, like clockwork since the 60s, they get "go fever" and people die in ways they promised the public people wouldn't.

The last one was in 2003, so I suppose those two astronauts in that Starliner must've had their guardian angels working triple shifts and overtime that day.

[ChocolateGod]

> safety reviews, tests, updated procedures and flight rules, and endless other paperwork to make sure neither the crew nor the space station are put in any risk.

And no one involved in these tasks has any reason to do it quickly or on time.

[throwanem]

There are seventeen names so far of people who died because it was more important to NASA management to get things done on time than to get things done right.

How many more names do we need to add to that list, before the psychotic mania for paperclips-uber-alles efficiency has been satisfied? And for that matter, I'm sure somewhere there's a headstone carved "Robert Strange McNamara," but have we checked what's in the casket under it? Or that there's a casket there at all? Did anyone see a body?