Boeing's Starliner set for extended stay at the ISS as engineers on Earth try to recreate thruster issues
- Reference: 1720697224
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2024/07/11/boeings_starliner/
- Source link:
During a [1]briefing on July 10, mission managers admitted that engineers had not been able to recreate the conditions that caused problems for the vehicle's Reaction Control System (RCS) thrusters during docking.
During its docking with the ISS, Starliner lost five thrusters. Four were recovered, but the cause has left engineers scratching their heads as they attempt to reproduce the problem in ground tests before signing off Starliner for a nominal return to Earth. According to NASA and Boeing, Starliner could be used in the event of an emergency, but engineers want to maximize the time available for testing before the service module, where the thrusters are housed, is discarded ahead of re-entry.
[2]
In an earlier [3]briefing with the Boeing Starliner Crew Flight Test astronauts, Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, the duo reported being more than happy about getting some bonus time onboard the ISS.
[4]
[5]
However, while praising the spacecraft's performance, Wilmore noted that the thrust degradation was detectable during the docking process. The duo also stopped short of wholeheartedly endorsing Starliner for future missions. Wilmore said: "There have been multiple issues with every spacecraft that's ever been designed."
"We did have some degradation in our thrusters ... and that's why we're staying: because we're going to test it ... we are going to get the data that we need to help inform our decisions so we make the right decisions."
[6]
As it stands, a definitive return date for the crew remains elusive. Managers said that testing on the thrusters and helium leaks, which have also caused engineers headaches, should be complete by next week, meaning a nominal undocking is potentially on the cards for the end of July.
[7]Trouble in space as Boeing's not going, and China's back from the Moon
[8]Starliner to remain docked to the ISS into July – with no new departure date
[9]NASA hits wrong button, broadcasts ISS emergency training by mistake
[10]NASA, Boeing opt to fly leaky thruster as-is for first crewed Starliner CST-100 mission
Although managers have become comfortable with going beyond the initial 45-day limit set by the lifetime of batteries onboard Starliner, describing them as healthy and showing no sign of performance anomalies, getting the spacecraft away by the end of July is important to avoid a potential conflict with a Crew Dragon handover in August.
Should Starliner's stay be extended further, then managers will likely have to move from their preferred method of crew handover, where both crews are onboard at the same time, to the indirect method first used in the Crew Dragon program when the Crew-2 astronauts were returned before the Crew-3 astronauts launched. ®
Get our [11]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.youtube.com/live/PAIZHhrGqBM?si=RrQjvuXUkC4kqWTB
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZpABpJkH@veyFgedFP@0nAAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://www.youtube.com/live/737zWM5COQ0?si=zpUCESL0ZabnZxUa
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZpABpJkH@veyFgedFP@0nAAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZpABpJkH@veyFgedFP@0nAAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZpABpJkH@veyFgedFP@0nAAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/02/kettle_iss_boeing/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/24/starliner_to_remain_docked_to/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/13/nasa_iss_emergency_broadcast/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/28/boeing_padstayer_to_become_padleaver/
[11] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: In a nutshell..
That's gotta be up.there with the like of "you're holding it wrong"
Re: In a nutshell..
It's always pilot error at the end, isn't it? :)
"Starliner could be used in the event of an emergency"
Well sure, if you know you're already screwed, might as well take the chance.
Re: "Starliner could be used in the event of an emergency"
It's more that return functionality hasn't been impacted - but we want to test the service module and that has to happen before it's discarded and burnt up.
Re: "Starliner could be used in the event of an emergency"
There are concerns that the capsule will not be able to make the return manoveurs as originally planned though return is still possible.
I would count that as impacting return functionality.
Re: "Starliner could be used in the event of an emergency"
"It's more that return functionality hasn't been impacted "
As far as we know, so far, not having tried to return yet.
"...nominal return to earth..."
If I were up there then I'd prefer something a bit more specific.
Nominal return to earth
"Nominal return to earth" doesn't mean what you think it means. In this context, "nominal" means "according to the expected flight plan". It doesn't mean "roughly" or "approximately".
"Nominal" is a _good_ thing to hear in space flight.
"It's as safe as flying commercially...in a Boeing"?
This is the third flight.
Did the thrusters misbehave on the first two? If not, what's different, apart from having people on board to notice.
Re: This is the third flight.
On the first flight, the software was fucked up and fired the thrusters to the point they were going to run out of fuel - until NASA mission control noticed and stopped it.
If I remember correctly they had problems with the fuel valves on the second mission. They got damp, and corroded. Nobody expects it to be humid on the pad in Florida right? They launched anyway but I don't think the mission was without its problems.
We're told that 5 of the 8 thrusters failed at some point, but that it was a software issue. Which was rectified. However the astronauts in this article said that they had degraded performance during docking, that they could feel. Which suggests that it wasn't fully fixed. Thrusters that might stop, and require a system reboot to get started again is one thing. Bad - but relatively predictable, maybe even relatively safe. Thrusters that fail due to software and then come back with reduced performance are even less safe and predictable.
I'm a bit suspicious. They have to say it's ready for an emergency return. Because the only alternative to that would be to send a crew Dragon up to rescue them (or at least be on standby as a lifeboat). Unless there's spare seats in the one that's already up there? It's obviously safer to leave them up there and learn more about the problem than to return to Earth immediately. There's a Dragon supply capsule going up in August, so presumably they could bung in flightsuits for them - if the Boeing ones aren't compatible?
Are Boeing going to have to do another test flight repeat - at their own expense?
Re: This is the third flight.
> Are Boeing going to have to do another test flight repeat - at their own expense
And could they find anyone willing to fly in it?
Re: This is the third flight.
NASA might just insist on a couple of C-suite beancounters to get the point across concerning the prospects of keeping their contract?
I think it's a squeaky bum cheek issue
When even astronauts are saying "if it's Boeing I'm not going", the writing's on the wall.
"managers have become comfortable with going beyond the initial 45-day limit"
Maybe managers should have been selected at random for the initial crew. Better yet, Boeing directors.
Dear god almighty ... is there anything Boeing can build safely !!!
The Boeing 'It's not going' liner can only manage 1 half of the journey, then the rest is a flip of a coin !!!
I am waiting for SpaceX to come to the rescue ... Thunderbirds style !!!
Cue music and action ...
:)
Re: Dear god almighty ... is there anything Boeing can build safely !!!
Boeing have an army of skilled cost plus accountants and first rate lobbyists. Just yesterday they got congress to include [1]NASA research for SLS in the next draft SLS funding law. Congress want to know:
*) What would it take to increase SLS's launch rate to twice a year from the current half a launch per year. ($X billion per year extra funding in a cost plus contract.)
*) When would that capability be ready? (When voters start to complain it is years behind schedule.)
*) Who would buy the extra SLS launches? (Only those required to do so by law.)
*) What would be the cost and schedule savings from reduced transit times to deep space? (Swamped by at least $1B cost to stop SLS's strong torsional vibrations destroying the payload.)
*) What it would take to get commercial customers to launch with SLS? (A law mandating SLS use, $2B subsidy per launch and some actual SLS rockets not required for Artemis.)
Congress awards SLS more funding than NASA asks for. Boeing's lobbyists are that good.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/07/congress-apparently-feels-a-need-for-reaffirmation-of-sls-rocket/
Re: Dear god almighty ... is there anything Boeing can build safely !!!
The problems here are in the Service Module, which was built by L3 Harris. Still Boeings responsibility, as they chose the contractor, but technically, Boeing didn't build the problem module.
IT Crowd Solution
"Have you tried turning it off and back on again?"
Re: IT Crowd Solution
"Have you tried turning it off and back on again?"
Don't be silly! Of course they have!
The current question is how big a hammer, and how hard to hit it.
Re: IT Crowd Solution
It's not how hard you hit it, it is where you hit it that matters,
Re: IT Crowd Solution
"Have you tried turning it off and back on again?"
The thrusters were doing that all by themselves, and indeed that's the crux of the problem...
The cheap option
> getting the spacecraft away by the end of July is important
Or Boing could follow the example of budget airlines and just cancel the return flight. Leave the astronauts to make their own way home.
Re: The cheap option
Yeah, I mean how hard can it be? If they jump out of the ISS, eventually they will fall to Earth.
Time to give up
I'd get SpaceX or Roscosmos to bring the crew back and send the Starliner back unmanned. If it breaks, it breaks.
Its already proven to be worthless. It doesn't offer anything novel, the only new thing that was said about it per the press release was that "it wasn't Russian". Its already cost a fortune, twice what was given to SpaceX for the same job, and Boeing hasn't really delivered. Continuing to develop it is a waste of resources, resources which would probably be better deployed in fixing the problems in their aircraft business.
In a nutshell..
The pilot flew it wrong. :-)