Sure sounds like an argument in favor of using the new boosters on a Starlink launch, and using flight-proven hardware for customer launches, eh? Then it'd be Starlink launches being delayed while the bugs are being figured out and fixed while the other stuff gets their launch dates on schedule. Flight proven hardware - it's gonna be the new thing in transport to orbit any year now!
Granted! . It's a real shame that Boeing has made itself the butt of jokes like these. I've never worked there or been an investor, but from what I've read, it was a seriously good engineering company. -was- That being said a flight unproven 737 Max sounds even worse to me.
Kathy Lueders comments on what is happening with the Mertlin engine anomalies which is forcing delays of Crew 1 and GPS III:
Crew 1 update: https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-spacex-invite-media-to-crew-1-mission-update-target-new-launch-date
Most of the astronauts for SpaceX Crew 3 mission has been announced. NASA, ESA Choose Astronauts for SpaceX Crew-3 Mission to Space Station
And during that time, SpaceX will have reused a Crew Dragon and a Falcon 9 booster on crewed missions. (And will have flown three such missions: DM-2, Crew-1 and Crew-2.)
SpaceX's Crew-3 already preparing for the next mission. Can't help but wonder about the status of those Boeing Starliner crews. I don't believe individual astronauts have much control over commercial crew assignments. Chris Ferguson has already left Boeing. Stuck on a Boeing I suppose it's sadly possible to age out before flying. Sunita Williams comes to mind.
This reminds me of this now mind-bending picture: https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/8kif3i/astronaut_sunita_williams_wearing_the_spacex_suit/
Crew 4 details: https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-assigns-astronauts-to-agency-s-spacex-crew-4-mission-to-space-station
And on the Boeing front: https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-invites-media-to-prelaunch-launch-activities-for-boeing-s-orbital-flight-test-2
That isn't how I read this: That sounds more like the "ground support equipment", isn't that the equipment in the ground control station?, was configured wrong and sent commands that caused a power surge. So really a software problem? (or human data entry problem?)
I have no idea whose interpretation is correct. I guess either works. I just assumed the wrong kind of power was fed in via umbilical cords ("Wait was that dial to set to 200V DC or 50V???"). Or they could have done what I did during a recent power outage and connected a generator to an isolated breaker panel, but didn't connect the neutral line, meaning 240V appliances were fine, but 120V ones had rather interesting power surges resulting in blown capacitors on their control boards. Nah, they couldn't have been that dumb!