Talk:Boeing Orbital Flight Test

Requested move discussion under way for SpX-DM1 and DM2
A discussion is under way at Talk:SpX-DM1 that also affects this article. Please participate in that discussion, after which this page and Boe-CFT will probably need to be renamed for consistency with whatever is decided. Rosbif73 (talk) 08:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 17 March 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) B dash (talk) 00:17, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

– While the missions may have been acronymically known as "Boe-OFT" and "Boe-CFT" internally by NASA, contemporary internal documentation now refers to Boeing by its full name without hyphens, designating the missions as "Boeing OFT" or "Orbital Flight Test", and "Boeing CFT" or "Crewed Flight Test" [1 ][2 ]. The full name of the missions would be both precise enough by Wikipedia's standards, and would be the commonly recognisable names. For the Boeing Orbital Test Flight, it is also the official name. For Boeing Crewed Test Flight, while NASA has recently opted to use "Crew" instead of "Crewed" [3 ], it seems the latter is more commonly used, with SpaceNews [4 ], Bloomberg [5 ], GeekWire [6 ], Houston Chronicle [7 ], and CNBC [8 ]. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk &middot;&#32;articles &middot;&#32;reviews) 00:35, 17 March 2019 (UTC) --Relisting.  SITH   (talk)   17:46, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Boe-OFT → Boeing Orbital Flight Test
 * Boe-CFT → Boeing Crewed Flight Test
 * Support per WP:COMMONNAME and consistency with the recently agreed SpaceX demo moves. Rosbif73 (talk) 10:37, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment SpX and OA/Northrop's cargo mission articles use different naming conventions. It seems that consistency is not mandatory for these topics. SpX CRS-xx vs Cygnus Orb/OA/NG-xx -PSR B1937+21 (talk) 12:38, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The official designation is not necessarily the right name for a wiki article, as per WP:COMMONNAME and as noted by the consensus reached in Talk:SpX-DM1. The consistency aspect entails changing the "BOE" abbreviation to "Boeing". What follows should be the name used by a majority of reliable sources; there may well be an argument to be made for adding "Starliner" to the name, for example. Rosbif73 (talk) 19:42, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm simply going to copy and paste my comments from the Crew Dragon Demo discussion; "I've taken a glance at Spaceflight Now, and they used "SpaceX CRS-16" and "NG-10" for the latest CRS flights. I can imagine that editors have opted to use "Cygnus NG-10" instead, as it would be more specific and less confusing than simply "NG-10". NASASpaceFlight.com used "Cygnus NG-10", so it doesn't violate guidelines against "obscure or made-up names." – PhilipTerryGraham (talk &middot;&#32;articles &middot;&#32;reviews) 10:01, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Maybe I didn't make it fully clear. I support this specific renaming as well as your idea on CRS missions, but reject unnecessary consistency. PSR B1937+21 (talk) 08:29, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Support, although with lowercase Boeing orbital flight test and Boeing crewed flight test, per WP:TITLEFORMAT. — JFG talk 15:14, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * But they are proper names. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk &middot;&#32;articles &middot;&#32;reviews) 17:41, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Says who? — JFG talk 17:52, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Here’s an additional citation for the official “Boeing Orbital Flight Test” and “Boeing Crew Flight Test” names; [9 ]. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk &middot;&#32;articles &middot;&#32;reviews) 18:10, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Arguably that's just standard American usage of title case. All the headings on that page are in title case, even "Safety and Innovation", and I can't see that Innovation is a proper name there! Rosbif73 (talk) 18:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * ↑ This — JFG talk 10:31, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Relisting note: the relist is to gain further consensus on the casing of the proposal per the second support !vote.   SITH   (talk)   17:46, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Despite my comment above that the citation proves nothing about casing, I do feel that capitals would be warranted here as indicative of the official mission designation. In sentence case, it looks like we're talking about a generic flight test conducted by Boeing, not a specific mission. Sentence case would only work if we add "Starliner" (or replace "Boeing" by "Starliner") so as to be WP:PRECISE. So, support for either Boeing Orbital Flight Test or Boeing Starliner orbital flight test (and ditto crewed). Rosbif73 (talk) 08:05, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Support &mdash; clearer names. --Comment by  Selfie City  ( talk about my  contributions ) 20:48, 7 April 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

3 months delay
NASA will give us a new schedule soon, but expect this flight not before August and the crewed flight not before November. reuters --mfb (talk) 06:41, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Plus NASA is buying two extra seats on Soyuz… U.S. crewed flights may well slip into 2020 (but better safe than sorry). — JFG talk 10:30, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * SpaceX DM2 is NET July 25 - it has a (preliminary) launch date! 4 months from now, while 2020 is 9 months away. With a factor 2 delay it would still launch end of 2019. --mfb (talk) 06:38, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Here's hoping! — JFG talk 15:32, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Software bug in landing procedure
Boeing had to update the software in flight, otherwise they would likely have lost the capsule when trying to land. This is a separate issue and completely absent from the article so far. News articles:


 * https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/02/starliner-faced-catastrophic-failure-before-software-bug-found/
 * https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/02/boeings-starliner-problems-may-be-worse-than-we-thought/
 * https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/07/tech/boeing-starliner-software-commercial-crew-ssn/index.html

NASA:


 * https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-boeing-to-provide-update-on-starliner-orbital-flight-test-reviews
 * https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2020/02/07/nasa-shares-initial-findings-from-boeing-starliner-orbital-flight-test-investigation/

--mfb (talk) 23:14, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Boeing OFT Redo:
As stated in the second paragraph of this Article, Boeing has decided to redo the Orbital Flight Test sometime in October or November of 2020. This will mean that this Article will have to be amended adequately to reflect this fact. Someone with sufficient information ought to do the needful. [May need to wait a few days to watch events unfold] Thanks.Abul Bakhtiar [unable to log in] 103.60.175.28 (talk) 12:14, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * We have the article Boeing Orbital Flight Test 2 - so I think mention in the lead is enough. OkayKenji (talk • contribs) 03:28, 27 June 2020 (UTC)