The first astronaut mission of Boeing's Starliner capsule has been extended again.
Starliner will remain docked with the International Space Station (ISS) until at least July 2, roughly a week later than the previously stated target date of June 26. The extra time will allow Boeing and NASA more time to assess several issues that have arisen with the vehicle.
"We are taking our time and following our standard mission management team process," Steve Stich, manager of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, said in an update on Friday evening (June 21).
"We are letting the data drive our decision making relative to managing the small helium system leaks and thruster performance we observed during rendezvous and docking," he added.
Starliner's current mission, known as Crew Flight Test (CFT), sent NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams to the ISS. CFT launched on June 5 and arrived at the orbiting lab a day later.
But, as Stich noted, that arrival was not perfectly smooth. During its chasedown of the ISS, Starliner experienced problems with five of its 28 reaction control system (RCS) thrusters. Four of them were eventually brought back online.
In addition, CFT team members have noticed five small helium leaks in Starliner's propulsion system. One was spotted before launch but not deemed a serious issue; four cropped up after the capsule deployed from its rocket, a United Launch Alliance Atlas V.
Breaking space news direct to your inbox
Sign up to our newsletter for the latest updates on rocket launches, skywatching events and more!
Starliner was initially scheduled to spend about a week at the ISS on this shakeout cruise. But on June 9, NASA and Boeing announced that its departure had been pushed back to no earlier than June 18, to accommodate a planned June 13 NASA spacewalk at the ISS and to allow more time for Starliner checkouts.
Then, on Tuesday (June 18), the planned departure date shifted again, to June 26. The reasoning was similar: The extra time would allow a more detailed assessment of the helium leaks and RCS thruster issues. And there was still a spacewalk to accommodate; the planned June 13 excursion was moved to June 24, after one of the designated spacewalkers experienced discomfort with his suit.
NASA plans to conduct another spacewalk on July 2 and also wants that activity to be done before Starliner comes home, agency officials said in Friday's update.
RELATED STORIES:
— Boeing's Starliner rolled off launch pad to replace 'buzzing' rocket valve (photo)
— Meet the crew launching on Boeing's 1st Starliner astronaut flight
—Boeing's Starliner spacecraft will not fly private missions yet, officials say
The repeated CFT extensions are not cause for alarm, Stich said, stressing that NASA still has confidence in Starliner.
"Starliner is performing well in orbit while docked to the space station," Stich said. "We are strategically using the extra time to clear a path for some critical station activities while completing readiness for Butch and Suni's return on Starliner and gaining valuable insight into the system upgrades we will want to make for post-certification missions."
Certification involves clearing Starliner to fly six-month astronaut missions to the ISS for NASA. SpaceX already conducts those flights with its Crew Dragon capsule; Elon Musk's company is in the middle of its eighth contracted long-duration crewed mission.
"The crew is not pressed for time to leave the station since there are plenty of supplies in orbit, and the station's schedule is relatively open through mid-August," NASA officials said in Friday's update.
Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.
Mike Wall
Senior Space Writer
Michael Wall is a Senior Space Writer withSpace.comand joined the team in 2010.He primarily covers exoplanets, spaceflight and military space, but has been known to dabble in the space art beat.His book about the search for alien life, "Out There," was published on Nov. 13, 2018. Before becoming a science writer, Michael worked as a herpetologist and wildlife biologist. He has a Ph.D. in evolutionary biology from the University of Sydney, Australia, a bachelor's degree from the University of Arizona, and a graduate certificate in science writing from the University of California, Santa Cruz. To find out what his latest project is, you can follow Michael on Twitter.
More about spaceflight
Latest
4 CommentsComment from the forums
fj.torres Those things are heavily automated and Crew Dragon can be configured for up to 7 so adding two more seats to the cargo of the next launch is easy.
Send Starliner down empty to see how it behaves and bring the two astronauts down on the Dragon up there.
Too many things are popping up; Boeing is done for. Admit it and move on to Sierra Nevada.Reply
Bob Braan The real reason for the delays is NASA and Boeing are likely having problems convincing the astronauts to get back into this POS for the risky ride home.
They're no dummies. Test dummies.
NASA and Boeing knew about a leak and they launched anyway.
It wasn't considered serious.
Starliner has sprung 4 more leaks, so far, the thrusters are unreliable and there is an O2 valve issue.
“We thought we had fixed that problem,” Stich said, adding, “I think we’re missing something fundamental that’s going on inside the thruster.”
That statement must make the astronauts feel all warm and fuzzy.
NASA knew about O ring partial burn throughs before the shuttle Challenger disaster.
It wasn't considered serious.
And they launched anyway.
NASA also know about foam falling off and hitting the wing before the Columbia disaster.
It wasn't considered serious.
And they launched anyway.
Both NASA and Boeing have demonstrated safety is not the top priority.
No wonder the original commander bailed on Starliner after training for years.
Bailed for "personal reasons" like he preferred not to take the risk.Reply
Unclear Engineer Bob Braan said:
The real reason for the delays is NASA and Boeing are having problems convincing the astronauts to get back into this POS for the risky ride home.I don't think you should post an absolute statement like that unless you have direct information that it is true. Posting even reasonable speculation as fact is not proper.
I do agree that it appears that NASA is not publicly admitting to a level of concern that seems more appropriate than their public statements indicate.
And, as I posted here in other threads, I think they have reached the point where they should decide to bring Starliner back autonomously, and bring the astronauts back on a Dragon capsule sent up for that purpose.
But, that would cost them the "crew certification" that both NASA and Boeing are trying to achieve for Starliner, even if they don't really believe that the capsule is safe enough for crew without further diagnosis and fixes.
But, I think that is appropriate, at this point in the development process, Starliner just does not seem to be in condition to warrant crew certification, as indicated by the problems already demonstrated in the first part of this flight.
I hope that both NASA and Boeing are seriously considering how badly a fatality or even an obvious near miss would damage their reputations and possibly even threaten their future existence. This could be NASA's "third strike" on making fatally bad calls in crewed space flights.
Reply
fj.torres Unclear Engineer said:
I do agree that it appears that NASA is not publicly admitting to a level of concern that seems more appropriate than their public statements indicate.fj.torres said:
Those things are heavily automated and Crew Dragon can be configured for up to 7 so adding two more seats to the cargo of the next launch is easy.
Send Starliner down empty to see how it behaves and bring the two astronauts down on the Dragon up there.
Too many things are popping up; Boeing is done for. Admit it and move on to Sierra Nevada.A further point to consider, CBS just reported that all the problems are all in the service module so while the capsule itself might be safe to land, the thruster issues in the service module might not send it on the proper reentry.
That is seriously concerning: minor changes in the reentry path would be deadly.
I'm not sure protecting Boeing's reputation is worth the risk given that alternatives are available. The capsule is supposed to be refurbishable but the service module is expendable which might explain the lower quality (cheaper?) workmanship.
Reply
