ALPHA TECH
====
#alphatech is a group of channel engineers who research on technology topics, spaceship projects of Spacex, Nasa, Blue orgin's space technology, space explorations such as the Jame Web space telescope.
We will create the highest quality videos, update useful information for you.
Please contact us to answer your questions.
Пікірлер
until early 90s decision makers at Boeing used to be engineers not anymore
Smells like corruption
Not another taxpayer penny to Boeing
Nuclear based engines will only be used in space. To launch the vehicle from Earth, chemical rockets will still be used. But, if they work, it will vastly reduce the time to a planet. I also feel that Elon's Starship is trying to do too much. Just to refuel Starship in space, after launch, it would take multiple launches of other starships to refill the original starship. He needs to start think about nuclear based technology as add ons
SPINSCAM !!!
Let us wait for two weeks. Then we will hopefully know what did not work.
Trump needs to cancel the AF1 and Doomsday 747 plane replacements and just ask Lockhead to convert some C5's to a common design. The cargo planes are already Mil Spec so it will mostly be just interior design and added electronics. Some added bonus is it has a ramp to avoid stair issues for another like FDR, Ford or Biden. Also the C5's already are used to transport the cars so your motorcade planes serve as extra decoys with no added cost. Combining the two types of planes to a common design (Both currently must be command centers and share most requirements except one is a luxury diplomatic layout and the other more military office layout). The only functional loss of a common layout would be reduced luxury and press spaces.
At 5:28 I realized your episode had not addressed your click-bait. Padding your view hours this way alienates viewers and will eventually reverse your channel's progression. I know for sure I will never click on another Alpha Tech announcement knowing that you disrespect viewers.
They need to launch this as another unmanned flight. Too many patches on top of patches to be considered safe for human transport. Verify the fixes without risking the astronauts.
That would be a huge violation of Boeing company policy to put corporate profits FIRST and human safety LAST. Starliner is a fixed price contract and Boeing still has one human space mission and six ISS crew rotations to go and you can bet Boeing is going to do everything it can to minimize its costs (and financial losses) in finishing that contract. It's probably hoping that if it kills a few astronauts that NASA will just terminate the Starliner contract.
NASA should be charging for failure to deliver. Only government contractors like Boeing gets to fail to deliver then demand more money to fix their total failure to deliver. With SpaceX taking over contracts NASA should deduct the SpaceX bills for every taken over job for Boeing failures from Boeing's pay. Same for the military should do the same, we are buying back old fighters to fill gaps caused by aircraft not being delivered or unable to fly missions. Some new fighters delivered are over two thirds unable to fly missions. Need to go back to the old requirements that contractors are required to provide all replacement parts for as long as they are in government service. (With the Jeep, Ford marked his bolts when they produced them under military contract to avoid fixing those from GM or other builders) The Contract needs pulled for failure to deliver and Boeing given a choice to refund the taxpayer or finish under the original terms with further payments only on completion.
Both Starliner and SLS are/were fixed price contracts, one of the smartest things NASA ever did. $4.42 billion for Starliner. The contract covers an uncrewed and crewed flight test, six ISS crew rotation missions, and Starliner repairs and modifications. Most of these goals have yet to be accomplished. Boeing is losing huge amounts of money trying to get Starliner to work. The BEST thing about Boeing agreeing to do Starliner at fixed cost was that this legitimized NASA's competitive bid fixed price program in the first place with Congress, because SpaceX and other startups were the only other companies willing to do this, and at the time, circa 2011-2014, none had never launched humans into space. The whole fixed price program might not have been authorized had Boeing not placed a bid. Boeing was the SAFE BET at the time. Its aerospace divisions (acquired in mergers) had long been involved with NASA launches of humans into space. So, SpaceX got a $2.6 billion contract from NASA for the same initial batch of launches and human flights, and now that it's become the established and ONLY US provider of human launches to ISS, it has gotten contract extensions charging NASA $65 million per astronaut. At this point, NASA isn't spending more money on Starliner, Boeing is, and you have to wonder how long before Boeing just walks away and defaults on the contract. It would be on the hook for repayment of the balance of the unfinished parts of that contract. Which actually is not a huge amount considering that Boeing once spent over $50 billion of its profits to do stock buybacks. So, probably Boeing has figured that it doesn't need to worsen the Starliner PR disaster by giving up and walking away from the contract. I think Boeing is instead just slow walking the program, trying to minimize its expenditures and losses. And if or when the six ISS crew rotation missions ever get completed, that will be that.
@@gandalfgreyhame3425 Boeing is already in breach of that contract as several missions never too place and instead SpaceX did the jobs Boeing has already failed to deliver as required. Boeing should have to pay that cost just as a contractor would for abandonment of a contracted job on a home after taking the money. SpaceX is taking pay on delivery and even advancing on their own while NASA opposes each new advancement at SpaceX early. This is because the leadership at NASA are not about exploration but DEI, and money markets. The parent of Boeing is the same people that killed GE and GM and they even bragged about it. The head of Boeing himself said his goal was to turn Boeing into another hedge fund ran failure with huge profits for those who knew when to dump the stock after running up impossible debts. Glen Beck among others has been covering it. They cancelled the 747 and larger aircraft without replacement and the 737 line has QC issues that demand the return of FAA oversight on the plant floor. I think the company when it fails needs broken up and auctioned off with a limit of only US buyers and each plant to a separate owners.
@@charlesmaurer6214 I don't think you understand the terms of that fixed price contract. Firm dates for completion were not specified. NASA originally hoped to have the Commercial Crew Program ready by 2017. Even SpaceX was not able to do this, launching its first CCP mission in 2020. NASA had to contract for additional Soyuz missions to ISS as a result. So, Boeing is not in default on that contract Far more likely is that Boeing will keep plugging along, building and patching a defective spacecraft while cutting corners to minimize its financial losses, and then at some point there will be a catastrphic failure leading to the deaths of astronauts, a national outcry will ensue, and NASA will be forced to terminate the contract. That will probably allow Boeing to walk away from the contract without having to pay back any of that money. As for all your conspiracy theories about Boeing, whatever. It's not worth my while to debunk them. Boeing is just another in a long line of companies throughout human history (not just American) that so over emphasized profits over doing the things that the company did so well to make those profits that it srarted failing completely.
Might need to purge those tanks with dry air. Methane ice at subcooled O2 temp is also a problem.
Should change the name to PORKLINER..
NASA and Boeing are no longer innovative, they still use outdated ideas. They are yesterday, we need companies that think cutting edge, toward the future!
Well that was a lot of NASA and Bowing bashing. I guess it is impressive he found that quote from "Truth, Lies, and O-rings".
This is a dangerous vehicle. Do not put a crew on this
I didn't hear anything about NASA "totally giving up on Starliner" in this video, nor have I read anything anywhere else about an official cancelation of the Starliner programme?
That is the point, they are trapped.
I didn't hear anything about "giving up" ether. Just another 'click bait' thumbnail trying to start rumors. 👎
BEWARE of these youtube sites that trash Boeing. These are communist sites. There are many of them. ANYONE trashing Boeing for any reason is UN-AMERICAN!!!!! Shut up, or live under a bridge.
Move Hq back to Seattle from the DC MIC swamp. Replace all senior management who are “finance” hedge fund folks with engineers. Stop all outsourcing for major components and sw which in the past were manufactured by Boeing. They should have designed a new 737 and not tried a cheap update which resulted in the max debacle.
(*Ahahahahahahahaha....*)
It is unamerican of Boeing to waste the taxpayers' money and run the company as a scam racket. Also note China owns part of it and copied everything they designed and their copies of the Aircraft are not missing or losing parts inflight. Give it 2 years and either Boeing will fold in bankruptcy or you will have another GM style bail out. It is strange that every witness against Boeing is found dead right around trial or testimony hearing. 2 or 3 with just the current 737 issues.
WOOOO.... Pointing out Boeings constant failures is Un-American and Communist????.....Hey The whole Democrat Party and ALL the RINO's are Un-American and Communist, But Telling the Truth about something is the opposite of communisium.
I'm pretty sure you would not ride that rocket GoDodgers1.
Waiting to hear, "Artemis".
Over priced, under engineered with Bureaucratic bloat (with political overtones). Some how ULA is still slugging on. Question; will ULA be willing to take on Starliner in the future?
During washing laundry at laundry mart didn't go right for nasa except the tax payer dollars is gone again ! Back to school this time bring no bleach this excuse is good as any in recent decades in the past. Just saying it as sad as it gets.
So says mumbling Joe.
@@GoDodgers1 @gododgers1 and mumbling Joe waiting at laundering mart.
100 percent correct. Boeing makes only invoices now. Watching their launch videos was telling. Notice the cut price environment for work. It’s a tell.
Bored of Boeing
The delay of Starliner is as long as the time between Kennedy's moon speech and Armstrong walking on the moon,
you're really funny
@@alphatech4966 7 year delay. JFK Speech: September 1962. Armstrong and Aldrin set foot on the moon: July 1969. Not quite 7 years. And our Vanguard rockets were routinely blowing up on the ground at the time Kennedy made his speech. With 1960s technology they reached the moon in under 7 years. And now they can't even make JUST THE CAPSULE? Disgusting.
Stupid robot voice
Why do you think like that?
@@alphatech4966 Because you are Chinese?
@@alphatech4966 that is what it is
Boeing Boeing Gone 🤣🤣🤣
SpaceX took advantage of all the extra NASA attention! 😂
This is very embarrassing for nasa, all nasa does is waste taxpayers money 💰 just anything Nelson finds interesting.
We had a great program until LM & Boink forced control then put all their competition out of business. MD, NA was far far better, to the moon and back multiple times. Now blame it on a company they forced out of the scene 20+ years ago. Don't forget They both state that they are in firm control of everything. Douglas not allowed into the commercial end of boeing. Boink makes changes spontaneously on the space designs. With the exception of 3 LM & Boink have cost us the lives of quite a few astronauts.
NASA, you have spent enough money on it. NASA is making poor decisions on their business, and this is the wrong decision to continue spending money on a dead horse.
Scheduled for a 1 June launch.
That’s right!
Nah We were said same a humongous amount of times Why this would be the one?
NASA is trapped between Congress and an inept bunggling Boeing et al. NASA can not do shit and has to wait and wait and wait. In the meantime, SpaceX gets on with doing more and more and more. Which at the end of the day, should mean that Boeing & Co will get less and less of future NASA contracts as NASA reduces its risks and delays and indeed removes politics from mission delivery.
I totally agree 👍
I'd laugh if SpaceX gets to the moon first. Bye Bye SLS.
They will get there first.
You said it, pride. And vision, Boeing has neither. Combine that with a total lack of accountability for its leadership over these delays and overruns. 👍👍
Thank you for your comment!
Does NASA have to go thru FAA approval every launch they do ? Or is it because SpaceX is closer to population?
I think you got it mixed up with spacex. They are massively underperforming on the mission to the moon
Do u work for a MIC company or a congressional aid or upset about twitters commitment to free speech
They can't even build airplanes right anymore.
Why do I feel like I'm listening to Casey Kasem getting rocket nerdy?
oh really?
Boeing is not an aerospace company. They are just a giant equity fund.
Good video. What Ai voice do you use? If you dont mind me asking
What do you mean my voice is a problem?
@alphatech4966 no issue with voice didn't mean to insult. Just asking what AI software you using thanks
Sector 28: ARTEMIS programs; (not yet finish);👍🦊❤ ("Platinum Golden Silver Surfer Song: CODE: " Super CODE: " Ultimate CODE: " Code name: " Whereas ::::: ; ;;;;::: stated hereunder of; (Contents): ARTEMIS programs; 1.) 2.) 3.) Whereas ::::: ; ;;;;::: stated hereunder of; (Contents): ARTEMIS programs; 1.) 2.) 3.) Whereas ::::: ; ;;;;::: stated hereunder of; (Contents): ARTEMIS programs; 1.) 2.) 3.) Whereas in The 10 COMMANDMENTS, Commandment no. 1; (UFGSIRR) Universal Federal Government System Implementing Rules and Regulations Code of 2017 as adopt and absorb thee, Sectors 1-28, Art. 1, Sec. 1, (FA) Federal Act no. 1, Art. 1, Sec. 1, (RYA) RoyaltY Act no. 1, Art. 1, Sec. 1, (RA) Republic Act no. 1, Art. 1, Sec. 1, BOURDEIRR no. 00001, Art. 1, Sec. 1; Unlimited BUDGET all approved; effective immediately;👍🦊❤
Clickbait title...
Back when I watched those two walk out to the Starliner I said to myself because of a bad feeling I was having is it really ready to go up or are we going to waste 2 more of our brave people. JUNK IT.
afraid for the trip
Boeing is a finance company, no longer aerospace design company imo.
NASA needs to scrap any projects associated with Boeing, what they have is a Starliner MAX here.... Sad!
1-800-GOT-JUNK
🤣🤣
Elon,ce uspeti u svemu.Odlicno napreduje.👍✔🚀💯ja verujem u njegove planove,za buducnost.
Where’s your video with the title “game over for starship”??? THEIR RAPTOR ENGINE EXPLODED LAST WEEK! I will patiently wait for this video….
Yeah! Watch that video tomorrow
Endless churn,ckickbait
Atleast SpaceX tests EVERY engine, and they make a lot. Boeing only has ONE Starliner and they still cannot get that right.
Out of how many? Maybe they pushed it until it exploded! They've done it before. Not a big deal.
Thrust force... :). It's Tons of force. Thrust is not a unit.
My father song
Maybe if Starship ejects few more parts, it will have enough fuel to rich orbital speed this time. Let's hope.
🙏🏻
It's hilarious hearing about SpaceX having "fixed" the "issue(s)" that resulted in "rapid unplanned disassembly" of its "spacecraft" during the last and "previous" Starship/Super Heavy "flight" by...doing something different during "preparation" for the NEXT "flight" without any "testing" of the "solution" whatsoever ALL WHIĹE PRETENDING ITS A SPACE "PROGRAM" GOING ACCORDING TO A SPECIFIC "PLAN" AND PROCEEDING "ON SCHEDULE" AS "FLIGHT 2" FOLLOWED "FLIGHT 1" AND PRECEDED "FLIGHT 3" IN A "SERIES" OF "FLIGHTS" WHICH ARE YET TO PROCEED "ACCORDING TO PLAN" IF THE "PLAN" IS A "FLIGHT" WHICH DOES NOT END WITH ANY "ISSUE(S)" THAT REQUIRE "FIXING" BEFORE THE NEXT "FLIGHT" OF YET ANOTHER "PROOF OF CONCEPT" SPACECRAFT "PROTOTYPE" THAT MUST NOT ONLY "FIX" PREVIOUS "ISSUES" IN PRACTICE AS WELL AS IN PROPAGANDA BUT REACH "STAGES" OF "SPACEFLIGHT" NO STARSHIP/SUPER HEAVY "FLIGHT" IN "HISTORY" HAS YET "ACHIEVED" MUCH LESS "SURVIVED".
"Non-nominal re-entry"? Do you know what "nominal" means? Obviously not. Re-entry is not "data".
Thank for your reminder I will note this