Right. Starliner with Butch and Suni. It was only
Tuesday
that they delayed it again, until this coming Tuesday, the 25th. This time
they didn't specify a date, saying only "in July."
Not long after last night's post, Ars Technica posted the headline, "NASA indefinitely delays return of Starliner to review propulsion data."
Which pretty much says it all.
The announcement followed two days of long meetings to review the readiness of the spacecraft, developed by Boeing, to fly NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams to Earth. According to sources, these meetings included high-level participation from senior leaders at the agency, including Associate Administrator Jim Free.
It seems pretty clear that the people at this meeting weren't comfortable with all the contingencies that Butch and Suni 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.
This is despite repeatedly saying Starliner is cleared to come home "in case of an emergency." Which makes me wonder what are the percentage odds of surviving they're talking about here? When they say "emergency" does that mean the ISS has been hit by a large chunk of space junk (or space rock) and is going to crash and burn? Would that mean the chances of surviving if they stay on the ISS are pretty much zero, but the chance of surviving reentry on Starliner are simply just greater than zero? Like 2%? 25%? Or do they mean the odds of the Starliner surviving aren't the 99.9 % they'd prefer (pure speculation here) but with some luck and some test pilot skills, they should be fine?
Either way, Eric Berger at Ars points out something I didn't know.
[T]his vehicle is only rated for a 45-day stay at the space station, and that clock began ticking on June 6.
Note they say "rated for" not scheduled. I count that to be July 25th.
I wonder how many people thought launching was a bad idea but we're overridden. How much of the risk was shared with the two astronauts? Is there a picture floating around of the two astronauts praying over a Starliner model?
ReplyDeleteCrew Dragon to the ready room. Crew Dragon to the ready room. Be ready to launch as soon as a Falcon can be reassigned.
ReplyDeleteNo way Boeing would survive if they killed two astronauts returning a module that never should have been launched in the first place.
"Be ready to launch as soon as a Falcon can be reassigned."
DeleteSince every booster in the fleet is re-launching every couple of months and there are enough boosters to launch every two days between both coasts. I can't see that taking longer than it takes to pick a booster and move its load of Starlink satellites to another one.
The long delay there is going to be getting NASA to ask.
Getting them to ask. Nothing like pride forced by circumstances. That clock doesn't stop as you mentioned.
DeleteI will be SpaceX has already started pre-flight checks on a Dragon and is unstacking a Starlink package. It pays to do the long lead times before the Aw Shit event requires quicker responses.
DeleteWhat would be fun is to send up a version of Starship with an accessible cargo bay so it can bring the Starliner capsule back intact for troubleshooting.
Breaking:
ReplyDeleteI've cracked the case!
https://raconteurreport.blogspot.com/2024/06/nasa-has-cunning-plan-achievement.html
It just might work!
DeleteOne thing to note is that Butch & Suni may not be current with water landing practices & protocols, WP suggests they have just done dry returns, Soyuz and Shuttle.
ReplyDeleteJust a wild hair based on nothing. Crew Dragon can handle a crew of four. There could be an assigned pilot to go get them. One of Polaris Dawn's crew that's just about ready to launch on that mission and has already flown to a water landing. Jared Isaacman or Scott Poteet - whoever flies the Dragon regularly.
DeleteI think that would be a very good idea. Regardless of their general competence as astronauts - and I am not implying they are anything but - you want someone very familiar with the CD and up to speed and practiced on various contigencies.
DeleteIs the design of the thruster system that much different than what has been used, oh say, since the Gemini program? If it works don't fix it. EdC
ReplyDeleteA question I can't answer - maybe someone else can
DeleteAnother point to remember is when the first Artemis test flight took place (November '22) they seemed to have lost the knowledge of how to work with liquid hydrogen and had all sorts of problems. SLS uses the same engines as the shuttles (most of their engines actually flew on shuttles) so in the space of a decade, the knowledge was lost. Not to mention that liquid hydrogen as a fuel also goes back to the '60s.
The right person retires or is lost and massive amounts need to be relearned all over again.
And this is where my list of questions from the other day become true.
ReplyDeleteI knew that turd wasn't going to work. I just am glad that it didn't kill anyone on the way up. It will kill on the way down.
So, yes, SpaceX to the rescue.
Now all they really need to figure out is how to handle the life support for the brief moments that the astronauts are required to keep their face shields closed during reentry and splashdown.
No need to worry about water landing training, though SpaceX can throw in some life preservers or something similar to cover an oops event.
At the time of the launch, I had an idea but kept quiet about it. I'll say it now.
ReplyDeleteStarliner will not bring the astronauts back. The delay of the return of Starliner is to calc best method to destroy Starliner while saving face for a gov contractor and gov itself.
It would prove too delicious if Space X returns the astronauts. That must be avoided. To that end, FAA will lend a hand in causing delay of Space X. Look for new criteria in approval for future flights.
The more convenient course is another country provides rescue mission.
"The more convenient course is another country provides rescue mission."
ReplyDeleteInteresting but (AFAIK) only Russian Soyuz capsules have docked regularly. That doesn't seem likely with the bigger geopolitical talk going on. I don't know if any other country could put a launch together in less than a year.
"It would prove too delicious if Space X returns the astronauts. That must be avoided. To that end, FAA will lend a hand in causing delay of Space X. Look for new criteria in approval for future flights."
Again, interesting. I don't know of any delays the FAA has dropped at the KSC, where Crew Dragons launch from. It's Boca Chica, Texas where they've been a pain. I don't know how they could do that. SpaceX launches from Pad 39A, and their pace there is pretty much the definition of "routine." What could the FAA throw at them?
In delaying now until July, Boeing is essentially admitting that there is some problem or problems of SERIOUS concern. Are there other problems we have not head about? What if it is decided that the capsule can't return to earth safely? The risk to Boeing is huge - if they scrap the capsule alone, the company might survive. If they lose two astronauts, Boeing will cease to exist.
ReplyDeleteAt this point, I am positive that SpaceX is being consulted on a crewed mission to the ISS.
This looking more and more like a mash-up of "Marooned", and "Capricorn 1"....
ReplyDeletehttps://thesilicongraybeard.blogspot.com/2024/06/starliner-is-getting-unnerving.html?showComment=1718835193203#c4165936623908794074
DeleteFalse flag to cover for possibly pedo joe
ReplyDeletePolitically, are there any downsides to NASA people blaming Boeing and refusing to allow the astronauts to come back in Starliner "due to an abundance of caution"? Bureaucrats love to say "no" so why the reticence now?
ReplyDeleteI wonder if they have a guage on the helium, to know how much remains.
I can't explain the politics, except to note NASA gets funded by congress and you can bet Boeing donates heavily to congress critters that support them. There was a handful of congress saying NASA shouldn't do fixed cost contracts and really needed to stay with cost-plus. More money to skim off and pass around to them that way.
DeleteWhile I don't think there's a physical gauge, they've been giving estimates about the number of minutes worth of thruster control they have versus how many they need. Maybe the total pressure or a measure of the thrust the thrusters produce or something like that.
This is an American govt endeavor, saying "follow the money" is not an out of place remark.
DeleteCountdown to "controlled release into the Indian Ocean" . . . .
ReplyDeleteI have my doubts as to whether NASA or Boeing will ask SpaceX for a rescue of the Starliner crew. Boeing, because doing so would be an admission of failure that would send their stock into the penny stock class(if my recent injury hadn't drawn down my available funds I'd be shorting their stock). I suspect that Boeing will be getting out of the space business after the Starliner comes crashing down in downtown Atlanta.
ReplyDeleteAs to NASA, there is the continuing "war" between the manned spaceflight community and the robotic cabal that wants to end all manned spaceflight; NASA funded in particular, more generally humans in space until True Communism has been achieved(ie., never).
ReplyDeleteStarliner doing a one point landing at 18,000 mph landing in downtown Atlanta would be a fantasy come true for many of the robotics types. It will probably result in ending NASA's manned programs, and with any luck they could persuade Congress to shut down SpaceX and the other commercial space companies.
Whether the robos could get Uncle Sam to spend 1 trillion dollars on their fantasy projects remains to be seen. Neither Trump nor Biden have any interest in space, and Congress only regards NASA as a sinecure for retired senators and jobs for as many districts/states as possible.
In conclusion, I don't think there will be a rescue attempt made; Boeing would probably ask Musk to pay for it, if at all. Much of NASA would cheer at the idea of Starliner crashing, and funding for the manned programs redirected.
I hope that I'm wrong on this prediction...but I'm extremely cynical.
I might be wrong on this;
Nota bene that NASA didn't specify July of what year.
ReplyDeleteJust saying.
In a way this is the scenario that the two separate designs from two different companies was created to address: a flaw is found in one design, the other steps up and takes its place.
ReplyDeleteNo one expected it *this* soon.
But in two years is ciuld be a main bus B undervoltage from a bad tank on the entire Dragon fleet & Boeing's capsule saves the day.
On further reflection, and after consulting with my three cats, who are each smarter than the project engineer on my last contract, I think that what is going to happen here is as follows:
ReplyDeleteStarliner will be relocated and tethered to another part of the ISS. The two crew will remain on the station until the next supply run/crew swap, when they are brought home safely. After that Starliner will be quietly de-orbited, and Boeing will get a renewed contract, say for 10 billion or so that they can use to please the stockholders. If Starliner disintegrates somewhere over the Indian ocean, so much the better.