Astronauts Barry Wilmore and Sunita Williams were originally on an 8 day test flight mission, which launched on June 5, 2024. More than 2 months later, many people are now saying will turn into 8 months. Well, what caused the return to Earth to be so delayed?
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
6
-
8$\begingroup$ They aren't stranded; NASA just hasn't decided if they should use Starliner to return yet. Still. Again. By the end of August, they say. $\endgroup$– Erin AnneCommented Aug 15 at 0:56
-
$\begingroup$ @EinAnne If the question is "should" then it's already a known "no" for a while. I think the current question is a "could". The more practical solution in my mind is to award the next cargo mission to Starliner and use the new ship to carry astronauts down and the old ship to carry cargo down. $\endgroup$– user3528438Commented Aug 15 at 3:33
-
$\begingroup$ @user3528438 - From a station viewpoint if Wilmore and Williams stay onboard they need to be replacing two other Expedition 72 members (likely Wilson and Gorbunov). So there will be two empty seats on the next Dragon launch either way. Also it's unpredictable how long it would take to decide that autonomous Starliner is safe to approach ISS (a risk they have no choice but to take for the departure of the CFT capsule). And Starliner was never intended for all cargo, modifying it for anything more than strapping some bags of soft cargo like clothes into the existing space will also take time. $\endgroup$– Steve PembertonCommented Aug 15 at 5:40
-
$\begingroup$ @ErinAnne okay, fine, are delayed by a massive amount of time and still dont know how theyre getting home $\endgroup$– StarshipCommented Aug 15 at 9:21
-
1$\begingroup$ Starship - they know how they are coming home, on a Commercial Crew Program vehicle, currently planned for Starliner but possibly on a SpaceX Dragon. This particular crew is highly experienced, Wilmore has logged 268 days in space previously, Williams 395 days, nearly all of that time was on the space station. Prior to the flight they both made it clear that they understood that this is a test flight (both are former test pilots). In the press conference yesterday it was mentioned that before the flight they participated in planning for both nominal and potential off-nominal mission durations. $\endgroup$– Steve PembertonCommented Aug 15 at 13:08
|
Show 1 more comment
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
9
Ars Technica's space writers Eric Berger and Stephen Clark have done a significant amount of reporting on the Starliner mission and its delayed return. Clark's recent article NASA is about to make its most important safety decision in nearly a generation addresses where we were as of Monday, August 12, 2024, and still are on Wednesday August 14:
The question facing NASA's leadership today? Should the two astronauts return to Earth from the International Space Station in Boeing's Starliner spacecraft, with its history of thruster failures and helium leaks, or should they come home on a SpaceX Dragon capsule?
Under normal conditions, the first option is the choice everyone at NASA would like to make. It would be least disruptive to operations at the space station and would potentially maintain a clearer future for Boeing's Starliner program, which NASA would like to become operational for regular crew rotation flights to the station.
But some people at NASA aren't convinced this is the right call. Engineers still don't fully understand why five of the Starliner spacecraft's thrusters overheated and lost power as the capsule approached the space station for docking in June. Four of these five control jets are now back in action with near-normal performance, but managers would like to be sure the same thrusters—and maybe more—won't fail again as Starliner departs the station and heads for reentry.
I think that sums it up. There's tension in this decision: if Starliner is deemed unsafe (or demonstrated to be unsafe, with or without crew aboard) it's a massive blow to that program. It would be nice if we could just use the spacecraft as we'd planned to. But despite extensive testing both at White Sands Test Facility and on-orbit, people at the Program Control Board level aren't convinced it will be safe.
For better or worse, schedule pressure is becoming less of a part of the decision because the schedule impacts are already occurring and flights are being delayed. The 8-month proposal is a proposal to make the Starliner flight test astronauts part of the crew of the next mission (quote from the same article):
The scenario here would involve the Starliner astronauts staying at the space station until February, when the next SpaceX crew is slated to depart and come home. Wilmore and Williams would become fully integrated members of the station's long-term crew, taking the seats of two astronauts currently training to launch next month on SpaceX's Dragon.
-
$\begingroup$ For sure a potentially a massive blow to the program, but one thing that I haven’t heard discussed much is what happens if Starliner does successfully land autonomously, with no anomalies that might have threatened a crew had it been onboard. If that happens I suspect that much of the current public interest in the story would greatly decline. And assuming that Boeing and Aerojet Rocketdyne are able to determine root cause with enough certainty to satisfy NASA, it's conceivable that they might even be allowed to carry crew on the next flight and not require another uncrewed test flight. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15 at 3:27
-
$\begingroup$ @StevePemberton that's honestly the scenario I expect, followed by "why couldn't Boeing/Aerojet convince NASA the propulsion system was safe" and "what changes will Boeing/Aerojet make to the propulsion system to ensure it doesn't happen again AND convince NASA of that". $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15 at 3:47
-
$\begingroup$ Another not talked about repercussion that I'm sure NASA is thinking about is if Aleksandr Gorbunov gets bumped from Expedition 72, which seems almost certain if Butch and Suni remain on ISS. Not because he is Russian but because like Stephanie Wilson he is not part of the flight crew for Crew 9. I would guess that NASA managers are already discussing this possibility with their counterparts at Roscosmos. But they are also probably pondering what the Russian government's public response might be. At least Dmitry Rogozin isn't there anymore, imagine the field day he would have had with it. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15 at 6:12
-
$\begingroup$ The worst-case scenario is a fatal accident on the way back down which could've been avoided with just a couple days or weeks more testing. At this point, extra delays aren't really costing more "PR points", so from a risk management perspective, it makes sense to take all the time they need if this can mitigate a disaster. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15 at 7:24
-
2$\begingroup$ @DaveGremlin - this was discussed during yesterday’s press conference, it was pointed out that numerical risk estimates are typically done during design and preflight, it takes a lot of time and is not something they normally attempt to recalculate mid-flight. Emily Nelson, chief flight director at JSC made a comment that sure you can do on the fly calculations and they do, but that’s also an easy way to convince yourself of something that isn’t true. She said the emphasis is instead on gathering as much data as possible and also bringing in many outside experts for different viewpoints. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 15 at 17:29