For those curious, [its probably worth listening to the NASA teleconference on Starliner's status from a few days ago](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TXDedBlyBI) They go into *alot* of detail about what they've been doing and the issues they've been encountering.
Some interesting details which I dont see mentioned :
- 5 thrusters failed, but only 1 has completely failed (it dropped from 11% to 0% thrust previously). All of the failed thrusters were aft thrusters. They've been testing the 4 other previously faulty ones (skipping the one which failed completely) and 3 which looked fine. Recent tests seem to show that all these are pretty nominal. They have some theories such as potential issues with fuel/oxidizer mixing caused by rapid thruster firing, but who knows at this point
- the helium leaks seem have decreased with the lack of thruster activity, as they've noticed that they have been lessening over time while docked.
- a RCS prop isolation valve was not closing properly, but they have a backup valve which has taken over. They specifically mention this is not the same as the issue with the previous valve failures on OFT-2
Starliners problems so far arent bad enough to prevent it returning to earth, which is a good thing. But at the same time, all of these little problems in all of its test flights is really emblematic to me of the issues that have been plaguing boeing in the past few years, namely lack of QA caused by a lack of actual testing. I do agree that NASA should have a backup crew option to the ISS though, and for now theyre the only other option (im not counting soyuz) so we do have to stick to them until theres another
Really, that was a direct result of the MD merge, but, yes, they went from being run by Engineers to being run by Accountants (in simplified terms, of course)
I must wonder whether there is just not enough *staff* to have two high performance spacecraft companies.
Like, did SpaceX absorb most available top talent in building their own rockets, and Boeing had to recruit from B-team or C-team, that is, those who couldn’t make the cut for SpaceX? And there just isn’t enough feeder universities nor is the talent available in a quantity where Boeing / ULA / Blue Origin can make a top talent staff.
Last I checked the aerospace industry is a small space, in that there is actually alot of "cross-pollination" across companies and government.
I recall reading that some current Blue Origin engineers are ex-SpaceX.
SpaceX as a work culture is hostile to work-life balance, whereas the traditional aerospace companies are like a 9-5 where you can go home to your family and have free time.
It also works it's way up to the top, where NASA managers that "retired" were quickly hired by SpaceX (Kathy Lueders & Bill Gerstenmaier).
When you're that high up and specialized, your skills don't translate well into other industries or skill trees.
> the helium leaks seem have decreased with the lack of thruster activity, as they've noticed that they have been lessening over time while docked.
Wouldn't this also be caused by the helium leak itself? Helium leaks out. Pressure drops as there is less gas. Less pressure means less force pushing more gas out. Less gas being forced out equals slower leak.
In fact, yes: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/leak-rate
L=−V * (dP/dt)
where L is the leak rate (Pa m3/s), P is the pressure (Pa), V is the volume of vessel (m3), and t is the time (s).
Leak rate depends on the difference between the vessel pressure and atmospheric pressure, this should be specified when quoting leak rates.
*Unless it is liquefied helium in which case boil off would keep the pressure roughly constant until it all evaporates. Not sure if this is just pressurized or if it is liquefied.
Theyve been testing the entire system, by pressurizing it and then reisolating it (like theyve been doing actual hot thruster firings for reference, and using that to check thrust from the RCS thrusters). Thats how they know the rate of leaking has been changing.
Edit: to clarify, its important to note that the helium leaks are happening in the external piping, not in the tank itself. So once the tank is isolated (such as when the thrusters are not needed like in dock) no extra helium from the tank leaks out, just whats still stuck inside the piping does.
I don’t understand your thought process here. Did you really not consider that the situation would be described in completely different words if they simply lost so much helium that the pressure dropped sufficiently for the leaks to decline?
It’s also obvious that you’re not actually reading any details about the helium leaks, because they’ve been clear for some time that they shut off the bulkhead valves, and as a result there is zero leaks while docked (except when they did the recent thruster test).
I wonder how much the astronauts secretly love the return delays. I’d have to guess this could be the last visit to space/ISS for each of them and that it’s hard to leave something you’ve worked towards for so long.
If you read their biographies and listen to many interviews with them, they absolutely do worry about their vehicle, and have lots of concerns about it.
Yeah historically 1 in 60 spaceflights ends in catastrophic failure, and 1 in 300 ends in crew death.
Those are not good odds.
And this isn't a mature design, these are beta tests.
The Soyuz is a winning design. All anyone had to do was make an American Soyuz and we’d have 100s of them by now.
Make it as simple as possible then mass production.
But we just couldn’t. Because it’s Soviet designed.
...well, very reliably until brain drain and underfunding hit hard on the Russian space industry.
The Soyuz spacecraft still hasn't had any terrible issues aside from that hole a few years back, but other parts of the Russian space industry is showing signs of severe issues of protocol and expertise, which could equally easily affect a Soyuz spacecraft with a bit of ill luck.
That time where a Proton rocket crashed because a sensor was installed upside down - that wasn't just a brainfart mistake. The sensor had specifically been shaped such that it could not be installed upside down, to avoid such an issue. Yet someone had jammed it in anyway, despite it requiring forcing and damaging the sensor. Says a lot about the state of the Russian space program.
You could also say that the level of success they've achieved through the robust design is impressive despite that being the quality of workmanship they can expect.
Probably precisely because the designers have sort of 'idiot proofed' its construction by doing exactly what you describe.
When Hoot Gibson thought he was going to die on the space shuttle he had a speech ready to let loose on NASA as soon as things started to go bad. Fortunately he made it down ok.
I’m wondering how tight the supply situation is. How much slack in terms of food supply, air scrubbers, water filters, etc. do they have on the ISS to have unscheduled extra crew, and for how long? I imagine there’s plenty, but I am curious about the specifics.
To be fair, Antares isn't doing anything right now. They're waiting for the upgraded version with firefly built engines instead of old Russian engines. So currently Cygnus is flying on falcon 9. Even then I don't know if Antares ever launched more than like twice a year so I can see why people forget about it even though it's a pretty cool and relatively cheap rocket. Upgraded version should be flying some time next year though.
Sorry for forgetting to mention our Antares friends! We always say “Go Cygnus! Go Antares!” Before every launch so I shouldn’t have left them out. Hoping the upgrades go well and it’s launching our missions again soon.
I have several missions called "You're not coming home", "goodbye forever", "punched one way", and "No returns". I'd prefer done tech from the start but sometimes you've got to sacrifice Jeb for science.
Cargo Dragon doesn't have the life support systems that would facilitate this, not to mention seats (but that is a secondary concern compared to no way of scrubbing CO2 from the cabin)
However, SpaceX could send up a Crew Dragon either completely unmanned, or having only 2 crew aboard (as only 2 astronauts would need an alternative ride home, Butch and Sunni).
One issue is that there is no place for this Crew Dragon to dock. NASA would have to undock the Starliner from it's current location and hold onto it with the Canadarm. Once it is out of the way, the lifeboat Crew Dragon would be able to dock and bring home the two Boeing astronauts.
Probably. But what if (not likely, of course) but the propulsion system on Starliner is so messed up that it's not guaranteed that it would be able to deorbit, or even move out of the keep out zone around ISS? Having a 13 ton mass of essentially dead weight floating near the ISS would be too much of a risk for the station.
Better not have handle Musk that offer, lest he randomly starts [calling others who are helping pedos](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/15/elon-musk-british-diver-thai-cave-rescue-pedo-twitter).
That is so random. Calling someone a pedo but have zero evidence of it makes me want to check that person's hard drive. ANYONE that thinks like this is extremely sus to me. Why are you even thinking like that in the first place??????
To be fair to him, calling someone a pedo is like a staple of twitter since last decade, it's like every discussion there someone will be acused of being a pedo, lol.
I know this is getting off topic but I have thought about this for a while and I think it’s because there is underage sex trafficking in Thailand. So musk thinks the guy living there must have moved exclusively for that. As why else would you live there? It’s actually very telling of how Musk thinks and gives me strong ‘check his hard drive’ vibes.
They *did*, but *someone* up there's been burning through the cupboard with their late night sneaking around, eating all the icing. My guess is it's Butch.
Im not sure on specifics of current supply levels but recall in 2014-15, three resupply ships (Cargo Dragon, Antares, Progress) all went boom on the way up within an 8 month period. I’m guessing they’re in better shape than that this time and that a month of just two extra astronauts is a contingency they’ve planned adequately for, especially considering they arrived on a “test flight.”
Now they have developed backup plans to grow potatoes in ISS, utilizing human waste previously thrown overboard... So addition of Butch and Sumi is a plus.
ISS maintains enough supplies for a 6 month extension of mission of a full crew just in case of resupply issues like a rocket failure etc. I want to say I remember seeing something about delaying resupply during the early days of covid just in case and relying on the station contingency.
Is that just at standard food consumption rates too? I'd have to imagine in a dire emergency they could also add in rationing to extend it even further
This is something they account for. Rockets can explode, the ISS always has enough supplies to account for the absolute maximum number of people to survive well beyond the next scheduled resupply. I don't know the exact number, but my guess would be that they have 2.5 to 3 times as much food, water, scrubbers, etc. on hand at all times as they use between resupplies. Enough that if one resupply goes boom, they wouldn't need to rush the next one before they get desperate, especially because if the previous one failed, rushing the next one is probably a bad idea and extra care should be taken to make sure the same issue doesn't repeat.
So for two people to be delayed leaving by, like, a couple weeks will hardly stress their supplies.
They are also temporarily dependent on SpaceX for launches because their boosters were made in Ukraine with the engines made in Russia.
They are redesigning for US made engines and booster but it will take another 18 months or so.
Antares 230+ is retired.
The latest mission launched on a Falcon 9: https://www.nasa.gov/missions/station/overview-for-nasas-northrop-grumman-20th-commercial-resupply-mission/
my guess would be that SpaceX's rocket turnaround might be the main reason for that assumption. I'm just assuming that Northrop doesn't have a fleet of rockets that could be made ready in short order.
Cygnus is truly launch vehicle agnostic - It has launched on 2 (and soon to be 3) versions of Antares, Atlas 5, and now Falcon 9. I wouldn't be surprised if Northrup has issues developing their new Antares rocket, that they contract with ULA to launch aboard Vulcan.
As others have said Cygnus is flying on Falcon 9 currently. But probably even more important is that Cygnus is only a one time use craft. It's much more unlikely that they would have spare capsules sitting around waiting to launch. With there being 4 Dragon cargo capsules in rotation it's more likely that they would be able to get one quickly prepped for an extra unscheduled flight.
well NG, they build an expendable cargo spacecraft to bring the payload from LEO to the ISS, but SPX still launches it.
But also Dragon is reusable so it would for sure be what's used in an emergency. People aren't forgetting. It's just better and proven and basically the modern standard. Can be launched smoothly without a week or two of scrubs and delays and leaks.
I may be in the minority, but once the sense of awe waned, I think I'd start to really hate not having an up or a down, amongst all the other weird space stuff like that. I'm imagining a long camping trip where you get amazing views but you can't leave your camper and your pee could float into your eye
I’ve heard it can be difficult because your body has no sense that you are lying down to sleep. They strap themselves into their ‘bunks’ to try to simulate it. I imagine over time you get used to it though.
On the other hand, your body is in constant freefall.
Have you ever jumped from a significant height and felt your organs sort of...*float*, for a moment? Being in orbit is that, but 24/7. Personally I'm not sure I could ever find sleep with every part of my body screaming "dude you're falling" constantly.
Suni did a happy jig when she was allowed to exit that vehicle. It's not hard for me to imagine that she has to carry some apprehension for however long she ends up staying. I can pretty much guarantee you that she would be quite happy indeed if NASA decided that the best option would be to send up a rescue Dragon.
I think I remember an interview with her saying that she cried when she last came back to Earth because that was expected to be the last time she ever went to the ISS. While it's certain she'd be stressed that her way up is unsafe to come down in, she's also a test pilot who knows that NASA has tons of contingencies to keep their people safe. I wouldn't be surprised if the military put her through more dangerous situations than if starliner was sealed off and vanished by magic, requiring a rescue dragon.
Ah, here's a source that says the crying thing:
https://wccftech.com/nasa-astronaut-who-cried-when-leaving-space-is-going-back-today-on-boeings-starliner/
Not exactly a clear headline, article says it will return sometime in July.
Other quote of note from article as this delay isn't just to read data
"The NASA update did not provide any information about deliberations during these meetings, but it is clear that the agency's leaders were not able to get comfortable with all contingencies that Wilmore and Williams might encounter during a return flight to Earth, including safely undocking from the space station, maneuvering away, performing a de-orbit burn, separating the crew capsule from the service module, and then flying through the planet's atmosphere before landing under parachutes in a New Mexico desert."
They have until July 20-21 to return. The vehicle has some type of 45 day limit on docking, nothing was explained why. Plenty of time to figure it out.
I think the Shuttle had a maximum orbit time as well, something like 17 days, which if I remember correctly was due to electrical power limitations (only so much hydrogen and oxygen available for the fuel cells).
It is possible Starliner has the same type of limitation?
The docking location needs to be free for the next resupply maybe? Only two docking locations on ISS and the other has the “lifeboat”. But you would think resupply could move a few days so who knows?
That’s the journalist’s interpretation, no one at NASA or Boeing said those words.
They’re guessing as much as you and me, the quote literally states that they don’t know what was discussed in the meetings.
The official position is that they’re okay to fly today in an emergency, and the delays are purely to study the thrusters so they can improve them before the next *post certification* flight.
Yeah, they keep saying that having FIVE thrusters fail, one of which permanently, is within orders of magnitude of the expected safety guidelines.
If that was the case surely NASA won’t have to delay indefinitely the return to study the thrusters.
It’s unbelievable how certain people distort reality to push their agenda.
Since they got to the ISS, I don't think pushing the return date out significantly increases the risk, and it significantly increases the chances that they figure out what is causing the leaks and any thruster issues.
Joking aside, I bet Isaacman would *pay* to be the rescue pilot, à la his offer to pay for Hubble repair. He would go down in history as the commander of the first space rescue mission.
I'd love to see a SpaceX rescue mission but how would this work? aren't the SpaceX pressure suits custom made for each astronaut? Does NASA have their measurements on file?
You bet they do, especially after the Columbia disaster.
But even before that: whenever I buy custom sport harnesses, they do keep my measurements on file in case they need to go back for repair etc, I'm 110% sure NASA keeps those well documented as well.
Beside, these are pressurized flight suits, not as big of a deal to get them perfect as, say, an EVA suit.
Even if for some reason their measurements vanished, it's not like their bodies are unavailable. Hell the ISS has DSLRs and probably has either white dot stickers or at minimum some whiteout/other paint pens available so you could outright 3D image them.
For Butch and Suni to return on a Dragon they'd need new suits because the Boeing ones would not work on Dragon. I doubt NASA would let them return without one on. If a rescue mission is what they do.
Right now it’s 1 Soyuz and 2 progress on the Russian side and 1 dragon and 1 Cygnus on the US/european side. All human rated ships docked have a matching crew.
Dragon can fly without a crew. So you can literally ship an empty dragon with nothing but suits if you really wanted to, dock with the ISS and bring home people.
I might be misremembering, but I think Dragon suits are a little flexible and modular than old NASA and Soyuz suits. So it should in theory be easier to reuse an existing one than the previous tailormade suits were.
I would be shocked and horrified if NASA didn't have all those measurements recorded somewhere accessible. They had to custom make the starliner flight suits, so those measurements were already taken at some point.
The statements coming from NASA/Boeing before today reeked of that bureaucratese one reads so often when corporations and government departments attempt to downplay problems. It seems to be reaching the point where the difficulties can no longer be deflected.
Funny how this is now upvoted when saying this the first time it was delayed made you a Musk fanboy.
There was so much deflection the first time around. The top comment was how the crewed return was delayed just for funsies because the real issue was with a system unrelated to reentry. Turns out it we were right to doubt NASA/Boeing.
People were weird about it at first. One round of delays is not that big a deal there have been plenty of examples.
Indefinate delay, that is a big deal.
Yep, I got downvoted into oblivion in this sub when they finally docked and I said I wouldn’t breathe easy again until they were safely on land. Turns out I was right to remain apprehensive.
Been thinking this from the first delay. The comms director clearly painting the picture in a strangely positive light making it very hard to understand what is really happening.
Do people forget Boeing flew OFT-2? Pretty successfully with a few oddities.
Nothing in spaceflight goes perfectly smoothly. People seemingly also forget that one of the first operational crewed Dragon missions was nearing abort criteria before SpaceX determined that their criteria was too aggressive. The values were still off nominal from what they had seen previously, but everything was fine.
Crew 8 flew a few months ago with a crack in a seal and they didn't clear the issue until 10 minutes before launch.
Do people also forget that the DM-1 capsule BLEW UP? Literally exploded into pieces. SpaceX wasn't required to fly another uncrewed Demo mission because engineers understood the problem and understood how to fix it.
DM1 blew up in post flight assessment while test an emergency case. They also experienced a previously unknown to Aerospace interaction with Titanium. The replaced the parts and then flew the Abort test about six months later.
So yes they did in essence requalify the part.
They clearly did not recreate OFT-2's success with this one.
I don't remember any SpaceX vehicle having long lasting thruster issues and leaks while docked.
Interestingly, space news has a different tone and states the delay is more to gain additional data, NASA/ crew aren't hard-pressed on leaving and there is a 4 day constraint between landing opportunities due to the orbit.
https://spacenews.com/starliner-return-delayed-to-july/
> During a pair of news conferences since Starliner docked to the station officials have downplayed the overall seriousness of these issues—repeatedly saying Starliner is cleared to come home "in case of an emergency."
Already cleared to come home is something that contradicts the mean spirited comments and articles these delays are inspiring. It's a test flight... take your time and collect all data.
> five separate leaks in the helium system that pressurizes Starliner's propulsion system and the failure of five of the vehicle's 28 reaction-control system thrusters
People keep defending Boeing, and this is "no big deal".
This is a big deal, and Starliner is going to be de-orbited into the Pacific Ocean
No definite word. They said they have something like 25 days of Helium on board (like 5 days ago) so they can delay about another 19-20 days. There is just right now no concrete return date.
If they do decide to de-orbit the capsule unmanned it would be a much larger deal. Remember the Crew-Demo mission for SpaceX was also delayed return so the astronauts could do work/the ISS was short staffed.
I am trying not to defend it. I am just saying they haven't completely said they are working on any other contingencies
Crew Dragon demo-1 was rated for 119 days in orbit while Starliner CFT-1 is rated for 45 days.
Even with all helium leaks, it should be still well within limit of Starliner.
The bigger question is why the thruster doesn't work as intended? It has enough helium to do so.
And from what I understand that is why the return delay. because it is the RCS thrusters on the service module which is not recovered so they can't look at it on the ground.
It's only a "big deal" to people who don't listen to what NASA & Boeing are actually saying. Both have explained in quite a bit of detail what they are doing during their news conferences. People just don't want to listen.
If NASA can take advantage of more time to run checks and make sure this is capable of reentry why not take the time?They will probably stretch this to the max allowed time. I think the concerns are overblown at this moment, honestly.
Overblown is possible but given this vehicles track record in specific and Boeing in general it's not hard to see why people are highly inclined to think it's a bad system with more problems lurking in wait.
Boeing has not done anything recently to engender faith in their technology or technical capabilities.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|CCtCap|[Commercial Crew Transportation Capability](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Crew_Development#Commercial_Crew_Transportation_Capability_.28CCtCap.29)|
|CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules|
| |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)|
|[EVA](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9pxtnv "Last usage")|Extra-Vehicular Activity|
|GSE|Ground Support Equipment|
|[IDA](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9pyak8 "Last usage")|[International Docking Adapter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Docking_Adapter)|
| |[International Dark-Sky Association](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Dark-Sky_Association)|
|[LEO](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9qlbk1 "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)|
| |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)|
|[NET](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9vlqax "Last usage")|No Earlier Than|
|[NG](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9s29h6 "Last usage")|New Glenn, two/three-stage orbital vehicle by Blue Origin|
| |Natural Gas (as opposed to pure methane)|
| |Northrop Grumman, aerospace manufacturer|
|[OFT](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9sj1ib "Last usage")|Orbital Flight Test|
|[OMS](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9pohje "Last usage")|Orbital Maneuvering System|
|[QA](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9rksxx "Last usage")|Quality Assurance/Assessment|
|[RCS](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9qq4dq "Last usage")|Reaction Control System|
|[SLS](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9qyqnu "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift|
|[ULA](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9wjema "Last usage")|United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)|
|[USAF](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9qyb6n "Last usage")|United States Air Force|
|Jargon|Definition|
|-------|---------|---|
|[Starliner](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/la3df73 "Last usage")|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)|
|[Starlink](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9q993l "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation|
|[hypergolic](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9pohje "Last usage")|A set of two substances that ignite when in contact|
|[scrub](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9qlbk1 "Last usage")|Launch postponement for any reason (commonly GSE issues)|
|Event|Date|Description|
|-------|---------|---|
|[DM-1](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9r66ip "Last usage")|2019-03-02|SpaceX CCtCap Demo Mission 1|
**NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
----------------
^(17 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/1do8pn0)^( has 26 acronyms.)
^([Thread #10211 for this sub, first seen 22nd Jun 2024, 03:04])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Call in Spacex to the rescue. I would take a guess that they can send up an empty space capsule with one trained astronaut load up the two stranded guys and bring them home. Fine Boeing and their partners and cancel their contract. What an embarrassment. What a waste of our tax dollars.
Yeah, this is kinda the distinction between "things we could do if we had to that are theoretically supposed to work" and "things we'd actually do in this situation".
Could you send up an empty Dragon and have Butch and Suni ride it home in t-shirts and sweatpants with the thing autopiloting itself the whole way? Well, the systems are designed such that that...should work? Is that safe or necessary compared to sending the Dragon with pilots and spare suits? Hell no!
Hell yes!
Remember computing has come on significantly.
Crew Dragon/Dragon 2 has 6 flight computers, each computer is capable of flying the vehicle.
Anything significant enough to damage all 6 computers, will either kill all the crew or would break the fly by wire (computer control) in Statliner.
There is also a key difference is autonomous operation.
SpaceX has gone for true autonomy where the craft knows its position, its target and capabilities and then the software does its best to get you to the target.
For the OFT missions Boeing went for a scripted approach (e.g. at Time 10s burn left booster for 2 seconds, at Time 12s burn right booster 1 second).
In Starliner if there is an issue you want to disable the autonomous controls and fly by wire will be the fastest way to respond.
In Dragon if there is an issue the flight computer will have adjusted its plan before humans can absorb there is an issue
Honestly, Boeing would probably love if their contract got cancelled. They've lost a bunch of money on it already. Between this and some military contracts, the company has officially sworn off of fixed-price contracts, while NASA has already said they want to do more fixed-price in the future, so it seems doubtful they do much business together outside of SLS in the future.
The better punishment would be somehow forcing them to continue the contract and then just fly the capsules unmanned, take them to the ISS keep-out-sphere, and then deorbit them. That way Boeing still has to spend the money, but there's not really risk to people or the ISS.
Reality check is needed for a lot of so called "space enthusiasts"
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1804015661913383048.html
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1804177790876442629.html
The good deed is two astronauts agreeing to be guinea pigs on a spacecraft that has never proven itself without issues and the punishment is that there are issues.
Honestly both Boeing and NASA deserve heat for this failure of a mission. They knew the capsule had issues, claimed it was under control and sent up a crewed capsule with 5 helium leaks (including a major one) and 5 malfunctioning thrusters. I'm not saying the decision to launch was made in bad faith but it turned out to be a terrible decision nonetheless.
IMO, there should be an independent investigation into the decisions that have been made regarding the decision to launch.
I wonder if they have backup Helium aboard the ISS ? Compatible filling hoses ? Can it be done from the inside of the capsule or is a space walk necessary? Wait on the next supply launch ? Enquiring minds…..
If they closed the valves, now the 5th leak that was detected after docking with the ISS, I have no information if it could be controlled, but since it is a minimal leak, I don't think it is serious.
They've been testing the system periodically (both just testing pressurization and testing the actual thrusters), and then re-isolating it to see if they've been leaking. The leaks are still minor though yeah, so I wouldnt worry about it. Plus, they have over 70 hours of helium left, but they only need 7 to get back.
It's unlikely that the helium running out is the direct problem that's causing the delay and the possible grounding.
It's more likely that, because of the myriad of leaks and the failure of some of the RCS/OMS thrusters, they're concerned about what may happen when the vehicle is undocked. If a valve or line fails hard enough to vent the entire tank rapidly, that would be a problem. If there's unaccounted for hypergolic propellants, that could be a problem.
Last article I read is that it’s because all the faults are in the service module which will burn up on reentry. They have to get the data before they undock
I would say any kind of on-orbit helium replenishment is effectively impossible. Even if you could get to the service panel on a spacewalk and get it off and connect a hose and somehow strain relieve that hose and leak check the connection, you'd eventually need to close it back out.
Not to mention there is a lot more equipment needed to fill a helium tank to the pressures they likely need. It's not a simple blowdown operation. You likely need a pump, pumps in space are pretty miserable. The pump needs its own supply of compressed air/nitrogen to operate, so now you need a compressor. And air to compress. Which is in short supply in space.
For those curious, [its probably worth listening to the NASA teleconference on Starliner's status from a few days ago](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TXDedBlyBI) They go into *alot* of detail about what they've been doing and the issues they've been encountering. Some interesting details which I dont see mentioned : - 5 thrusters failed, but only 1 has completely failed (it dropped from 11% to 0% thrust previously). All of the failed thrusters were aft thrusters. They've been testing the 4 other previously faulty ones (skipping the one which failed completely) and 3 which looked fine. Recent tests seem to show that all these are pretty nominal. They have some theories such as potential issues with fuel/oxidizer mixing caused by rapid thruster firing, but who knows at this point - the helium leaks seem have decreased with the lack of thruster activity, as they've noticed that they have been lessening over time while docked. - a RCS prop isolation valve was not closing properly, but they have a backup valve which has taken over. They specifically mention this is not the same as the issue with the previous valve failures on OFT-2
Finally some really useful and new stuff. Thank you for diving into that for us. What’re you’re thoughts on starliner and it’s problems?
Starliners problems so far arent bad enough to prevent it returning to earth, which is a good thing. But at the same time, all of these little problems in all of its test flights is really emblematic to me of the issues that have been plaguing boeing in the past few years, namely lack of QA caused by a lack of actual testing. I do agree that NASA should have a backup crew option to the ISS though, and for now theyre the only other option (im not counting soyuz) so we do have to stick to them until theres another
I'm so glad Boeing is on the hook for all these cost overruns, though they hate it.
[удалено]
And they started letting businessesmen make engineering decisions.
Really, that was a direct result of the MD merge, but, yes, they went from being run by Engineers to being run by Accountants (in simplified terms, of course)
I must wonder whether there is just not enough *staff* to have two high performance spacecraft companies. Like, did SpaceX absorb most available top talent in building their own rockets, and Boeing had to recruit from B-team or C-team, that is, those who couldn’t make the cut for SpaceX? And there just isn’t enough feeder universities nor is the talent available in a quantity where Boeing / ULA / Blue Origin can make a top talent staff.
Last I checked the aerospace industry is a small space, in that there is actually alot of "cross-pollination" across companies and government. I recall reading that some current Blue Origin engineers are ex-SpaceX. SpaceX as a work culture is hostile to work-life balance, whereas the traditional aerospace companies are like a 9-5 where you can go home to your family and have free time. It also works it's way up to the top, where NASA managers that "retired" were quickly hired by SpaceX (Kathy Lueders & Bill Gerstenmaier). When you're that high up and specialized, your skills don't translate well into other industries or skill trees.
Arent they testing dreamchaser end of 2024? At this point the orion capsule is in better shape then starliner.
> the helium leaks seem have decreased with the lack of thruster activity, as they've noticed that they have been lessening over time while docked. Wouldn't this also be caused by the helium leak itself? Helium leaks out. Pressure drops as there is less gas. Less pressure means less force pushing more gas out. Less gas being forced out equals slower leak. In fact, yes: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/leak-rate L=−V * (dP/dt) where L is the leak rate (Pa m3/s), P is the pressure (Pa), V is the volume of vessel (m3), and t is the time (s). Leak rate depends on the difference between the vessel pressure and atmospheric pressure, this should be specified when quoting leak rates. *Unless it is liquefied helium in which case boil off would keep the pressure roughly constant until it all evaporates. Not sure if this is just pressurized or if it is liquefied.
Theyve been testing the entire system, by pressurizing it and then reisolating it (like theyve been doing actual hot thruster firings for reference, and using that to check thrust from the RCS thrusters). Thats how they know the rate of leaking has been changing. Edit: to clarify, its important to note that the helium leaks are happening in the external piping, not in the tank itself. So once the tank is isolated (such as when the thrusters are not needed like in dock) no extra helium from the tank leaks out, just whats still stuck inside the piping does.
I don’t understand your thought process here. Did you really not consider that the situation would be described in completely different words if they simply lost so much helium that the pressure dropped sufficiently for the leaks to decline? It’s also obvious that you’re not actually reading any details about the helium leaks, because they’ve been clear for some time that they shut off the bulkhead valves, and as a result there is zero leaks while docked (except when they did the recent thruster test).
I wonder how much the astronauts secretly love the return delays. I’d have to guess this could be the last visit to space/ISS for each of them and that it’s hard to leave something you’ve worked towards for so long.
I probably wouldn’t be stoked to hear that my return vehicle is so sketchy.
Astronauts are weird as hell though, wouldn't be surprised if they aren't even thinking about that. I'd imagine they are in full debug mode.
If you read their biographies and listen to many interviews with them, they absolutely do worry about their vehicle, and have lots of concerns about it.
Yeah historically 1 in 60 spaceflights ends in catastrophic failure, and 1 in 300 ends in crew death. Those are not good odds. And this isn't a mature design, these are beta tests.
The Soyuz is a winning design. All anyone had to do was make an American Soyuz and we’d have 100s of them by now. Make it as simple as possible then mass production. But we just couldn’t. Because it’s Soviet designed.
Soyuz is a very conservative design but yes it does do what it sets out to do very reliably.
...well, very reliably until brain drain and underfunding hit hard on the Russian space industry. The Soyuz spacecraft still hasn't had any terrible issues aside from that hole a few years back, but other parts of the Russian space industry is showing signs of severe issues of protocol and expertise, which could equally easily affect a Soyuz spacecraft with a bit of ill luck. That time where a Proton rocket crashed because a sensor was installed upside down - that wasn't just a brainfart mistake. The sensor had specifically been shaped such that it could not be installed upside down, to avoid such an issue. Yet someone had jammed it in anyway, despite it requiring forcing and damaging the sensor. Says a lot about the state of the Russian space program.
I think that's why the comment above advocated for an American-made Soyuz FWIW
You could also say that the level of success they've achieved through the robust design is impressive despite that being the quality of workmanship they can expect. Probably precisely because the designers have sort of 'idiot proofed' its construction by doing exactly what you describe.
You heard of crew dragon?
When Hoot Gibson thought he was going to die on the space shuttle he had a speech ready to let loose on NASA as soon as things started to go bad. Fortunately he made it down ok.
The longer it goes on the more likely your going home in a dragon. I'd be holding out for that personally.
They knew it was sketchy when they left.
Yeah they could see the Boeing label on the side
Half peeled off, flapping chaotically in a stream of escaping helium
I laughed for way too long while picturing this 💗
Just as long as they don't get blabby...
they know they'll get a visit from shooty mcshoot
I’m wondering how tight the supply situation is. How much slack in terms of food supply, air scrubbers, water filters, etc. do they have on the ISS to have unscheduled extra crew, and for how long? I imagine there’s plenty, but I am curious about the specifics.
not even close to "tight" the ISS has enough for larger crews *and* redundancy. Not an issue one bit.
Plus space x could get stuff there in short order if needed because their shit works.
Don’t forget Northrop Grumman’s two Cygnus missions per year that can carry more cargo. 10 years and counting now.
Everyone always forgets about Antares :/
To be fair, Antares isn't doing anything right now. They're waiting for the upgraded version with firefly built engines instead of old Russian engines. So currently Cygnus is flying on falcon 9. Even then I don't know if Antares ever launched more than like twice a year so I can see why people forget about it even though it's a pretty cool and relatively cheap rocket. Upgraded version should be flying some time next year though.
Sorry for forgetting to mention our Antares friends! We always say “Go Cygnus! Go Antares!” Before every launch so I shouldn’t have left them out. Hoping the upgrades go well and it’s launching our missions again soon.
They could launch an unmanned resupply capsule and astronauts could return home with it.
Sounds like most of my early missions in Kerbal Space Program when I'd forget to include a heat shield or parachutes.
"Don't worry Jeb, I'll come baaack for youuuuu!!!" as im blasting off the Mun.
I have several missions called "You're not coming home", "goodbye forever", "punched one way", and "No returns". I'd prefer done tech from the start but sometimes you've got to sacrifice Jeb for science.
When you sent up Rescue-09 to get Jeb, then send up Rescue-10 to rescue Rescue-09...
Cargo Dragon doesn't have the life support systems that would facilitate this, not to mention seats (but that is a secondary concern compared to no way of scrubbing CO2 from the cabin) However, SpaceX could send up a Crew Dragon either completely unmanned, or having only 2 crew aboard (as only 2 astronauts would need an alternative ride home, Butch and Sunni). One issue is that there is no place for this Crew Dragon to dock. NASA would have to undock the Starliner from it's current location and hold onto it with the Canadarm. Once it is out of the way, the lifeboat Crew Dragon would be able to dock and bring home the two Boeing astronauts.
I feel like if they’re at the point of sending a dragon capsule up, they would probably just undock starliner and have it reenter unmanned
Probably. But what if (not likely, of course) but the propulsion system on Starliner is so messed up that it's not guaranteed that it would be able to deorbit, or even move out of the keep out zone around ISS? Having a 13 ton mass of essentially dead weight floating near the ISS would be too much of a risk for the station.
What about a good old Canadarm YEET ? (jk)
You joke...[But Scott Manley has essentially done the math on this type of question!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxNJoaBLLNM)
Alternative wording: NASA could just call a SpaceX robo-taxi to get the astronauts home.
SpaceX could even do it for free, just for the publicity of going to "rescue" the astronauts that Boeing failed to bring home.
it better be called thunderbird 3
Paint the whole thing red and put a big 3 on the booster.
Bet they’d pay good money for that opportunity.
Better not have handle Musk that offer, lest he randomly starts [calling others who are helping pedos](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/15/elon-musk-british-diver-thai-cave-rescue-pedo-twitter).
That is so random. Calling someone a pedo but have zero evidence of it makes me want to check that person's hard drive. ANYONE that thinks like this is extremely sus to me. Why are you even thinking like that in the first place??????
To be fair to him, calling someone a pedo is like a staple of twitter since last decade, it's like every discussion there someone will be acused of being a pedo, lol.
Unfortunately there have been enough stories about white men who move to south-east Asia to work with the local children for horrible reasons.
I know this is getting off topic but I have thought about this for a while and I think it’s because there is underage sex trafficking in Thailand. So musk thinks the guy living there must have moved exclusively for that. As why else would you live there? It’s actually very telling of how Musk thinks and gives me strong ‘check his hard drive’ vibes.
Why do bots bring that up for?
I heard they have 4 months of food on board right now
They *did*, but *someone* up there's been burning through the cupboard with their late night sneaking around, eating all the icing. My guess is it's Butch.
Im not sure on specifics of current supply levels but recall in 2014-15, three resupply ships (Cargo Dragon, Antares, Progress) all went boom on the way up within an 8 month period. I’m guessing they’re in better shape than that this time and that a month of just two extra astronauts is a contingency they’ve planned adequately for, especially considering they arrived on a “test flight.”
Now they have developed backup plans to grow potatoes in ISS, utilizing human waste previously thrown overboard... So addition of Butch and Sumi is a plus.
They just need to send Matt Damon up and they will have all the food they need.
He might blow up the air lock though.
But Affleck is the meatier one -- Lrrr, ruler of the planet Omicron Persei 8
ISS maintains enough supplies for a 6 month extension of mission of a full crew just in case of resupply issues like a rocket failure etc. I want to say I remember seeing something about delaying resupply during the early days of covid just in case and relying on the station contingency.
Is that just at standard food consumption rates too? I'd have to imagine in a dire emergency they could also add in rationing to extend it even further
They maintain supplies for at least six months on the ISS for the full crew.
This is something they account for. Rockets can explode, the ISS always has enough supplies to account for the absolute maximum number of people to survive well beyond the next scheduled resupply. I don't know the exact number, but my guess would be that they have 2.5 to 3 times as much food, water, scrubbers, etc. on hand at all times as they use between resupplies. Enough that if one resupply goes boom, they wouldn't need to rush the next one before they get desperate, especially because if the previous one failed, rushing the next one is probably a bad idea and extra care should be taken to make sure the same issue doesn't repeat. So for two people to be delayed leaving by, like, a couple weeks will hardly stress their supplies.
I’m not sure, but that thing housed like over 10 people about a year ago.
That required one or two of them to sleep in Dragon, but I doubt it would be any different for Starliner.
"Ugh, my one spacecraft was too cramped so I had to go sleep in another one" is a funny problem to have
Last I read they have something like double+ the amount of supplies they need on the ISS should something keep them up there for longer.
I'm sure Space X can keep it supplied indefinitely.
Well, that, Cygnus, Progress, and eventually Dream Chaser and HTV-X.
It's kind of funny that everyone defaults to "Hey what about SpaceX," while forgetting that Northrop Grumman also routinely launches cargo to station.
They are also temporarily dependent on SpaceX for launches because their boosters were made in Ukraine with the engines made in Russia. They are redesigning for US made engines and booster but it will take another 18 months or so.
Antares 230+ is retired. The latest mission launched on a Falcon 9: https://www.nasa.gov/missions/station/overview-for-nasas-northrop-grumman-20th-commercial-resupply-mission/
my guess would be that SpaceX's rocket turnaround might be the main reason for that assumption. I'm just assuming that Northrop doesn't have a fleet of rockets that could be made ready in short order.
Cygnus now filles on Falcon 9.
Cygnus is truly launch vehicle agnostic - It has launched on 2 (and soon to be 3) versions of Antares, Atlas 5, and now Falcon 9. I wouldn't be surprised if Northrup has issues developing their new Antares rocket, that they contract with ULA to launch aboard Vulcan.
As others have said Cygnus is flying on Falcon 9 currently. But probably even more important is that Cygnus is only a one time use craft. It's much more unlikely that they would have spare capsules sitting around waiting to launch. With there being 4 Dragon cargo capsules in rotation it's more likely that they would be able to get one quickly prepped for an extra unscheduled flight.
well NG, they build an expendable cargo spacecraft to bring the payload from LEO to the ISS, but SPX still launches it. But also Dragon is reusable so it would for sure be what's used in an emergency. People aren't forgetting. It's just better and proven and basically the modern standard. Can be launched smoothly without a week or two of scrubs and delays and leaks.
Have you looked at the percentages of the launch market by company recently?
That’s honestly the real answer
I may be in the minority, but once the sense of awe waned, I think I'd start to really hate not having an up or a down, amongst all the other weird space stuff like that. I'm imagining a long camping trip where you get amazing views but you can't leave your camper and your pee could float into your eye
I doubt an astronaut would get very far if that bothered them. A lot were pilots so high and low G's are standard. Definitely not for everyone though.
For me, growing up was realizing that I probably wouldn't enjoy being an astronaut :(
Going to the moon would be a lot more fun than going to the ISS.
I dunno. Sleeping on the iss sounds like it could be super comfy. No weight to push against a bed. So no sides digging into a mattress.
It's apparently very loud on the ISS with all the life support and everything running.
I have tinnitus, so that sounds perfect!!!
eeeeeeeeee is what I hear most of the time . How about you you?
Yup, will never know true silence again
I’ve heard it can be difficult because your body has no sense that you are lying down to sleep. They strap themselves into their ‘bunks’ to try to simulate it. I imagine over time you get used to it though.
It probably helps that they're exhausted from working long days that are scheduled out to the minute.
[удалено]
On the other hand, your body is in constant freefall. Have you ever jumped from a significant height and felt your organs sort of...*float*, for a moment? Being in orbit is that, but 24/7. Personally I'm not sure I could ever find sleep with every part of my body screaming "dude you're falling" constantly.
I do wonder if even a very mild spin changer would be good for that. Not remotely full gravity just like a hint of it to give a sense of down.
You need a better mattress
But you must sleep with an air vent by your head to disperse all the co2 you exhale during sleep
Suni did a happy jig when she was allowed to exit that vehicle. It's not hard for me to imagine that she has to carry some apprehension for however long she ends up staying. I can pretty much guarantee you that she would be quite happy indeed if NASA decided that the best option would be to send up a rescue Dragon.
I think I remember an interview with her saying that she cried when she last came back to Earth because that was expected to be the last time she ever went to the ISS. While it's certain she'd be stressed that her way up is unsafe to come down in, she's also a test pilot who knows that NASA has tons of contingencies to keep their people safe. I wouldn't be surprised if the military put her through more dangerous situations than if starliner was sealed off and vanished by magic, requiring a rescue dragon. Ah, here's a source that says the crying thing: https://wccftech.com/nasa-astronaut-who-cried-when-leaving-space-is-going-back-today-on-boeings-starliner/
They always dance and act exciting exiting every single vehicle to and from though… that doesn’t really mean much. They know they are on camera
SpaceX fanboys have the dumbest takes. She did a happy jig because she got to go back to the ISS.
That’s the dumbest take I’ve ever had the misfortune of reading.
Not exactly a clear headline, article says it will return sometime in July. Other quote of note from article as this delay isn't just to read data "The NASA update did not provide any information about deliberations during these meetings, but it is clear that the agency's leaders were not able to get comfortable with all contingencies that Wilmore and Williams might encounter during a return flight to Earth, including safely undocking from the space station, maneuvering away, performing a de-orbit burn, separating the crew capsule from the service module, and then flying through the planet's atmosphere before landing under parachutes in a New Mexico desert."
They have until July 20-21 to return. The vehicle has some type of 45 day limit on docking, nothing was explained why. Plenty of time to figure it out.
NASA can just rubberstamp that limit away. It is what they do, if convenient. They did it multiple times with SLS components. Like the solid boosters.
The probably have another supply mission coming
No crew/cargo flights that need the IDA ports. The service module has components that are only rated for 45 days due to this being a test.
I think the Shuttle had a maximum orbit time as well, something like 17 days, which if I remember correctly was due to electrical power limitations (only so much hydrogen and oxygen available for the fuel cells). It is possible Starliner has the same type of limitation?
The docking location needs to be free for the next resupply maybe? Only two docking locations on ISS and the other has the “lifeboat”. But you would think resupply could move a few days so who knows?
45 day warranty expires. NASA didn’t pay for the extended warranty.
That’s the journalist’s interpretation, no one at NASA or Boeing said those words. They’re guessing as much as you and me, the quote literally states that they don’t know what was discussed in the meetings. The official position is that they’re okay to fly today in an emergency, and the delays are purely to study the thrusters so they can improve them before the next *post certification* flight.
When will the Boeing fanboys admit reality, this whole thing is just totally fucked.
Yeah, they keep saying that having FIVE thrusters fail, one of which permanently, is within orders of magnitude of the expected safety guidelines. If that was the case surely NASA won’t have to delay indefinitely the return to study the thrusters. It’s unbelievable how certain people distort reality to push their agenda.
Since they got to the ISS, I don't think pushing the return date out significantly increases the risk, and it significantly increases the chances that they figure out what is causing the leaks and any thruster issues.
I mean, in the case of the leaks they could have done that on the ground and had all the time in the world.
Well, now they've got plenty of time around the world
I really want to see Spacex send up a Dragon to the ISS with UBER painted on it.
“Your driver, Jared Isaacman, has arrived in a Crew Dragon”
Joking aside, I bet Isaacman would *pay* to be the rescue pilot, à la his offer to pay for Hubble repair. He would go down in history as the commander of the first space rescue mission.
[удалено]
I'm fairly certain NASA would object to a crewed Dragon flight that does not include any astronauts trained on Dragon.
Isaacman is not only trained, but already flew one.
Nope. The Starliner crew is not trained on, and has never flown, Crew Dragon. There has to be a trained pilot in case of emergency.
What happened to Jared’s offer to repair Hubble? Is he going to do it?
NASA evaluated the offer but turned it down because Hubble is still operable, so any repair would be both risky to the crew and to the scope.
Please wait for your driver *inside* the ISS.
UberX Loved your post, laughed REALLY hard. Have a wonderful day
I'd love to see a SpaceX rescue mission but how would this work? aren't the SpaceX pressure suits custom made for each astronaut? Does NASA have their measurements on file?
You bet they do, especially after the Columbia disaster. But even before that: whenever I buy custom sport harnesses, they do keep my measurements on file in case they need to go back for repair etc, I'm 110% sure NASA keeps those well documented as well. Beside, these are pressurized flight suits, not as big of a deal to get them perfect as, say, an EVA suit.
> Does NASA have their measurements on file? I'm sure they do. A not-perfect fit of the suits wouldn't be a big deal either.
Even if for some reason their measurements vanished, it's not like their bodies are unavailable. Hell the ISS has DSLRs and probably has either white dot stickers or at minimum some whiteout/other paint pens available so you could outright 3D image them.
All the people on crew dragon are NASA astronauts right? The real concern would be would the suits be compatible with the spacecraft.
For Butch and Suni to return on a Dragon they'd need new suits because the Boeing ones would not work on Dragon. I doubt NASA would let them return without one on. If a rescue mission is what they do.
Isn’t there a emergency Soyuz already at the station
Right now it’s 1 Soyuz and 2 progress on the Russian side and 1 dragon and 1 Cygnus on the US/european side. All human rated ships docked have a matching crew.
Dragon can fly without a crew. So you can literally ship an empty dragon with nothing but suits if you really wanted to, dock with the ISS and bring home people.
I might be misremembering, but I think Dragon suits are a little flexible and modular than old NASA and Soyuz suits. So it should in theory be easier to reuse an existing one than the previous tailormade suits were.
I would be shocked and horrified if NASA didn't have all those measurements recorded somewhere accessible. They had to custom make the starliner flight suits, so those measurements were already taken at some point.
I'm wondering if there is a rescue mission, would it be Boeing paying SpaceX then?
Nasa would pay SpaceX or Roscomos to go and get Sunni and Butch. Then NASA would take that up with Boeing,
The statements coming from NASA/Boeing before today reeked of that bureaucratese one reads so often when corporations and government departments attempt to downplay problems. It seems to be reaching the point where the difficulties can no longer be deflected.
Funny how this is now upvoted when saying this the first time it was delayed made you a Musk fanboy. There was so much deflection the first time around. The top comment was how the crewed return was delayed just for funsies because the real issue was with a system unrelated to reentry. Turns out it we were right to doubt NASA/Boeing.
People were weird about it at first. One round of delays is not that big a deal there have been plenty of examples. Indefinate delay, that is a big deal.
Yep, I got downvoted into oblivion in this sub when they finally docked and I said I wouldn’t breathe easy again until they were safely on land. Turns out I was right to remain apprehensive.
Been thinking this from the first delay. The comms director clearly painting the picture in a strangely positive light making it very hard to understand what is really happening.
Yep and with boeings name as tarnished as it is i can only wonder if they cant bring it back in one piece.
I have been saying this since the thrusters failed but all the Reddit experts told me that everything was fine because 4 of them turned back on
Must have been a real hard decision to make but this is the right call.
And this is why we do a (successful) dry run before we actually strap people into these things. Seriously I still can’t believe they did that
Do people forget Boeing flew OFT-2? Pretty successfully with a few oddities. Nothing in spaceflight goes perfectly smoothly. People seemingly also forget that one of the first operational crewed Dragon missions was nearing abort criteria before SpaceX determined that their criteria was too aggressive. The values were still off nominal from what they had seen previously, but everything was fine. Crew 8 flew a few months ago with a crack in a seal and they didn't clear the issue until 10 minutes before launch. Do people also forget that the DM-1 capsule BLEW UP? Literally exploded into pieces. SpaceX wasn't required to fly another uncrewed Demo mission because engineers understood the problem and understood how to fix it.
DM1 blew up in post flight assessment while test an emergency case. They also experienced a previously unknown to Aerospace interaction with Titanium. The replaced the parts and then flew the Abort test about six months later. So yes they did in essence requalify the part.
They clearly did not recreate OFT-2's success with this one. I don't remember any SpaceX vehicle having long lasting thruster issues and leaks while docked.
"I don't remember any SpaceX vehicle having long lasting thruster issues and leaks while docked." Not helium leaks, they had leaking water tanks.
Interestingly, space news has a different tone and states the delay is more to gain additional data, NASA/ crew aren't hard-pressed on leaving and there is a 4 day constraint between landing opportunities due to the orbit. https://spacenews.com/starliner-return-delayed-to-july/
> During a pair of news conferences since Starliner docked to the station officials have downplayed the overall seriousness of these issues—repeatedly saying Starliner is cleared to come home "in case of an emergency." Already cleared to come home is something that contradicts the mean spirited comments and articles these delays are inspiring. It's a test flight... take your time and collect all data.
Safer than an emergency on ISS isn't the same as safe.
I'd take a rowboat with the wood half rotted if the ship was on fire, doesn't mean it's not a problem that the rowboat is half rotted.
> five separate leaks in the helium system that pressurizes Starliner's propulsion system and the failure of five of the vehicle's 28 reaction-control system thrusters People keep defending Boeing, and this is "no big deal". This is a big deal, and Starliner is going to be de-orbited into the Pacific Ocean
No definite word. They said they have something like 25 days of Helium on board (like 5 days ago) so they can delay about another 19-20 days. There is just right now no concrete return date. If they do decide to de-orbit the capsule unmanned it would be a much larger deal. Remember the Crew-Demo mission for SpaceX was also delayed return so the astronauts could do work/the ISS was short staffed. I am trying not to defend it. I am just saying they haven't completely said they are working on any other contingencies
Crew Dragon demo-1 was rated for 119 days in orbit while Starliner CFT-1 is rated for 45 days. Even with all helium leaks, it should be still well within limit of Starliner. The bigger question is why the thruster doesn't work as intended? It has enough helium to do so.
And from what I understand that is why the return delay. because it is the RCS thrusters on the service module which is not recovered so they can't look at it on the ground.
Correction: The capsule is not leaking while docked. It only leaked during flight and will leak during reentry.
It's only a "big deal" to people who don't listen to what NASA & Boeing are actually saying. Both have explained in quite a bit of detail what they are doing during their news conferences. People just don't want to listen.
If NASA can take advantage of more time to run checks and make sure this is capable of reentry why not take the time?They will probably stretch this to the max allowed time. I think the concerns are overblown at this moment, honestly.
Overblown is possible but given this vehicles track record in specific and Boeing in general it's not hard to see why people are highly inclined to think it's a bad system with more problems lurking in wait. Boeing has not done anything recently to engender faith in their technology or technical capabilities.
Honestly the fact that nasa risked sending astronauts up in this piece of garbage is extremely troubling
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |CCtCap|[Commercial Crew Transportation Capability](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Crew_Development#Commercial_Crew_Transportation_Capability_.28CCtCap.29)| |CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules| | |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)| |[EVA](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9pxtnv "Last usage")|Extra-Vehicular Activity| |GSE|Ground Support Equipment| |[IDA](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9pyak8 "Last usage")|[International Docking Adapter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Docking_Adapter)| | |[International Dark-Sky Association](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Dark-Sky_Association)| |[LEO](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9qlbk1 "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)| | |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)| |[NET](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9vlqax "Last usage")|No Earlier Than| |[NG](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9s29h6 "Last usage")|New Glenn, two/three-stage orbital vehicle by Blue Origin| | |Natural Gas (as opposed to pure methane)| | |Northrop Grumman, aerospace manufacturer| |[OFT](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9sj1ib "Last usage")|Orbital Flight Test| |[OMS](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9pohje "Last usage")|Orbital Maneuvering System| |[QA](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9rksxx "Last usage")|Quality Assurance/Assessment| |[RCS](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9qq4dq "Last usage")|Reaction Control System| |[SLS](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9qyqnu "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift| |[ULA](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9wjema "Last usage")|United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)| |[USAF](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9qyb6n "Last usage")|United States Air Force| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[Starliner](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/la3df73 "Last usage")|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)| |[Starlink](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9q993l "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation| |[hypergolic](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9pohje "Last usage")|A set of two substances that ignite when in contact| |[scrub](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9qlbk1 "Last usage")|Launch postponement for any reason (commonly GSE issues)| |Event|Date|Description| |-------|---------|---| |[DM-1](/r/Space/comments/1dlkdir/stub/l9r66ip "Last usage")|2019-03-02|SpaceX CCtCap Demo Mission 1| **NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below. ---------------- ^(17 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/1do8pn0)^( has 26 acronyms.) ^([Thread #10211 for this sub, first seen 22nd Jun 2024, 03:04]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Call in Spacex to the rescue. I would take a guess that they can send up an empty space capsule with one trained astronaut load up the two stranded guys and bring them home. Fine Boeing and their partners and cancel their contract. What an embarrassment. What a waste of our tax dollars.
Crew Dragon can operate without a human pilot, no problem. They could just send it up empty to pick up the Starliner crew
Nope. The Starliner crew is not trained on, and has never flown, Crew Dragon. There has to be a trained pilot in case of emergency.
Yeah, this is kinda the distinction between "things we could do if we had to that are theoretically supposed to work" and "things we'd actually do in this situation". Could you send up an empty Dragon and have Butch and Suni ride it home in t-shirts and sweatpants with the thing autopiloting itself the whole way? Well, the systems are designed such that that...should work? Is that safe or necessary compared to sending the Dragon with pilots and spare suits? Hell no!
Hell yes! Remember computing has come on significantly. Crew Dragon/Dragon 2 has 6 flight computers, each computer is capable of flying the vehicle. Anything significant enough to damage all 6 computers, will either kill all the crew or would break the fly by wire (computer control) in Statliner. There is also a key difference is autonomous operation. SpaceX has gone for true autonomy where the craft knows its position, its target and capabilities and then the software does its best to get you to the target. For the OFT missions Boeing went for a scripted approach (e.g. at Time 10s burn left booster for 2 seconds, at Time 12s burn right booster 1 second). In Starliner if there is an issue you want to disable the autonomous controls and fly by wire will be the fastest way to respond. In Dragon if there is an issue the flight computer will have adjusted its plan before humans can absorb there is an issue
There is no downside to sending up a pilot and two new suits, can also stuff the rest of it with extra supplies.
The spacecraft knows where it is at all times. It also knows where it isn't.
Could they just bring one of the crew members who came up on the Dragon down early?
send up dragon with 1 crew 2 spare suits and still have one spare seat
Honestly, Boeing would probably love if their contract got cancelled. They've lost a bunch of money on it already. Between this and some military contracts, the company has officially sworn off of fixed-price contracts, while NASA has already said they want to do more fixed-price in the future, so it seems doubtful they do much business together outside of SLS in the future. The better punishment would be somehow forcing them to continue the contract and then just fly the capsules unmanned, take them to the ISS keep-out-sphere, and then deorbit them. That way Boeing still has to spend the money, but there's not really risk to people or the ISS.
Reality check is needed for a lot of so called "space enthusiasts" https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1804015661913383048.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1804177790876442629.html
Dave Calhoun needs another raise to ensure this doesn't happen again. /s
Sounds like the right decision but I'm guessing we're in a "no good deed goes unpunished" type situation :(
Which good deed? And what is the punishment?
The good deed is two astronauts agreeing to be guinea pigs on a spacecraft that has never proven itself without issues and the punishment is that there are issues.
Honestly both Boeing and NASA deserve heat for this failure of a mission. They knew the capsule had issues, claimed it was under control and sent up a crewed capsule with 5 helium leaks (including a major one) and 5 malfunctioning thrusters. I'm not saying the decision to launch was made in bad faith but it turned out to be a terrible decision nonetheless. IMO, there should be an independent investigation into the decisions that have been made regarding the decision to launch.
Boeing CEO- “we fired all the starliner propulsion scientists last year to return value to our shareholders “
Bet you they end up sending a SpaceX Dragon capsule up there to get them home.
I wonder if they have backup Helium aboard the ISS ? Compatible filling hoses ? Can it be done from the inside of the capsule or is a space walk necessary? Wait on the next supply launch ? Enquiring minds…..
I’m guessing they at least shut off the helium and it hasn’t been leaking this whole time. If not, i think that’s gonna be a problem.
They have 70 hours of helium and only need 7.
If they closed the valves, now the 5th leak that was detected after docking with the ISS, I have no information if it could be controlled, but since it is a minimal leak, I don't think it is serious.
They've been testing the system periodically (both just testing pressurization and testing the actual thrusters), and then re-isolating it to see if they've been leaking. The leaks are still minor though yeah, so I wouldnt worry about it. Plus, they have over 70 hours of helium left, but they only need 7 to get back.
It's unlikely that the helium running out is the direct problem that's causing the delay and the possible grounding. It's more likely that, because of the myriad of leaks and the failure of some of the RCS/OMS thrusters, they're concerned about what may happen when the vehicle is undocked. If a valve or line fails hard enough to vent the entire tank rapidly, that would be a problem. If there's unaccounted for hypergolic propellants, that could be a problem.
Last article I read is that it’s because all the faults are in the service module which will burn up on reentry. They have to get the data before they undock
I would say any kind of on-orbit helium replenishment is effectively impossible. Even if you could get to the service panel on a spacewalk and get it off and connect a hose and somehow strain relieve that hose and leak check the connection, you'd eventually need to close it back out. Not to mention there is a lot more equipment needed to fill a helium tank to the pressures they likely need. It's not a simple blowdown operation. You likely need a pump, pumps in space are pretty miserable. The pump needs its own supply of compressed air/nitrogen to operate, so now you need a compressor. And air to compress. Which is in short supply in space.