The harrowing story of what flying Starliner was like when its thrusters failed

"Hey, this is a very precarious situation we're in."

See full article...

 

[FalconNine]

Good grief, they really were stranded. Shame on Boeing and well done to NASA's crewed space team.

 

[David-2]

Excellent interview and story.

Bottom line: NASA had damn good reasons to send Starliner back crewless. It wasn't them being over-protective or overruling informed opinions of engineers. I wouldn't have believed anything any Boeing engineer said about their theories or their subsequent ground testing regardless.

The reason for the long delay in the decision wasn't NASA dithering, it was them trying to figure out any way possible to make it look less terrible for Boeing. Only thing now hard to understand is why they're even giving Boeing another chance to launch that turkey in the general direction of space, much less directly for the ISS. Maybe they expected that Boeing would have thrown in the towel on their own.

 

[Ploroxide]

Thank you for subscribing!

And yes, a story like this is really only possible because I've worked long enough in the industry that the astronauts generally know me, and generally trust that I'm going to try and get a story right. I knew the questions to ask. And I think, because I had a good relationship with Wilmore, he was willing to go pretty deep and honest with the details.

I just want to acknowledge you for putting your head down and chasing the story. I think you’ve bern unfairly maligned in the front page comments of some (many) of your stories recently.

 

[makimaki]

This is one of those times when I wish I could upvote an article. Thanks for all the insight from your interview!

 

[nimelennar]

Does anyone know the details of Dragon's control system well enough to game out if something like this could happen?

"Something like" what, specifically?

Something like losing control if they lose enough thrusters on the wrong side of the vehicle? Sure, but that's true of any spacecraft. Dragon has a lot fewer thrusters than Starliner; it would probably take fewer than the five Starliner lost to cause Dragon problems, unless they were really lucky about which ones failed.

Something like thrusters failing due to overheating? They've flown 20 flights on original recipe Dragon, and at least another two dozen, crewed and uncrewed, on Dragon 2. If thrusters were going to fail like that in normal operation, they probably would have.

Instead, they did an ISS orbit reboost test that pushed the aft-facing Draco thrusters beyond their normal usage (the forward-facing ones are usually the ones firing for extended periods), and that doesn't seem to have caused any problems allowing that Dragon to return safely. So, it's probably not a serious concern, assuming SpaceX standards remain high.

 

[davels2000]

Thanks for an excellent article!

 

[Mental Gear Reduction]

News reports have claimed that NASA is dithering about whether to allow a crewed vehicle for the next test flight. If that's actually true, someone needs to be moved out of this program's management immediately.

It would be unconscionable to risk that outcome again. They came so close to killing two astronauts.

 

[dwrd]

Space remains the domain of the steely-eyed missile men (and women).

 

[mannyvelo]

After reading this, it's pretty clear that going back in Starliner was not an option at all.

I suppose NASA didn't want to talk about all this at the time because it makes their vendor look bad. But really, the decision to stay on the station was set before they docked.

I wonder if they considered doing an expanse-type jump to the station if everything failed.

 

[chanman819]

They have too much respect for the agency and the White House that appoints its leadership.

I suspect that deference is a much more accurate word than respect.

 

[Mandella]

Well, this article in itself justified my Ars subscription for this year. Excellent reporting Eric, and excellent persistence and honesty through the years to be such a trusted voice in the industry.

 

[Alhireth-Hotep]

Boeing delenda est. None of this is remotely acceptable.

 

[LtKernelPanic]

Holy hell they really were stranded there until the next crew dragon arrived. Thank you for a fantastic interview!

 

[yababom]

It is one thing to read "lost 4 thrusters out of 28".

It is something completely different to learn that they nearly lost the ability to control one degree of freedom, one roll axis or one lateral axis. Yikes.

Doesn't this essentially mean they came within 1 thruster of never leaving the Starliner?

Sure, they might have been able to make 'three lefts' instead of 'one right', but that would greatly increase the chance of other thrusters failing, and at some point they wouldn't be able to regain attitude control.

 

[Mandella]

Wasn't really a cover up. Just nobody asked hard questions and nobody at NASA was particularly interested in bringing up the sordid details. This is why we need an untrammeled press - so somebody can ask the questions that no one else would.

I guess it depends on your definition of "cover up." People were asking the hard questions, and they were being deflected. Untrammeled press doesn't do much good when the answers aren't straight and there is no way to check them.

 

[gefitz]

" Publicly, NASA and Boeing expressed confidence in Starliner's safe return with crew. But Williams and Wilmore, who had just made that harrowing ride, felt differently."

Wow I bet a book could be written about this sentence. How much push, and from where, was being resisted by Williams and Wilmore about puting their asses on the line in that broken hunk?

I bet it was relentless from the Boeing Marketing Department, and probably from the C-Suite.

 

[kevinmulhall]

Boeing has to put up or shut up.
Either they pay for one more uncrewed robot mission THAT HAS TO GO PERFECTLY or they should simply get out of the ISS contracts and eat their sunk costs.
NASA SHOULD NOT let them do a crewed test next, no matter how much it might look like they've fixed issues.

 

[bikeoid]

Thanks for getting their story, and what a story it was!

 

[dra2840]

This really calls into question why they spent so much time trying to decide if they'd come back on Starliner. It should've been clear immediately they weren't coming back on Starliner

I think it was more of a question "will we send a dragon just to bring them back, will we send the next mission two passengers short, or will we modify the dragon to fit more people for the return flight?" and possibly "If ISS has a problem before we send the rescue vehicle, is it safer to bring them back on Starliner or overbook the Dragon currently there?"


And even after they knew the answer to all these hard questions, they needed to know when to release these answers, giving them time to actually put the plans in motion and release statements that have more answers than questions.

 

[smartalco]

I'm seriously struggling with why it has taken so long for this information to be provided to the public, and why it took so long to announce the decision to not come back on Starliner. You can't possibly convince me that NASA actually considered using Starliner after that, so why the coverup?

It’s probably less cover-up, and more “you don’t announce it until absolutely every possibility has been checked”. There’s also general corporate politics of trying not to piss off Boeing immediately even if it is their fault.

 

[Ploroxide]

It's a great article, save for Eric's politics

 

[SetsChaos]

They came so close to killing two astronauts.

They came so close to killing at least two astronauts. Given the number of failed thrusters and the timing, things could have gone from bad to worse had they smashed into the ISS. While I know that approaches to the ISS are glacially slow (for good reason), I don't know if they're slow enough to prevent catastrophic damage from an out-of-control crewed spacecraft.

 

[ArsSide]

What is perversely funny is that when the initial crews were announced for both Dragon and Starliner, I'll bet the Starliner crew thought they had the less risky assignment, and the Dragon crew had the more dangerous assignment. And then Bob and Doug flew on Dragon years ago, and Starliner only flew last year, and all of Starliner's three flights (two uncrewed "test" + one crewed) have been a shitshow.

 

[mattofak]

Something that stood out to me was the inability of the capsule to thermally regulate. Butch and Suni thought it might be attributable to only having two humans in the capsule, but that doesn't quite add up to me.

According to Cornell, a resting human is generating ~75W of heat (up to 125 if heavily active.) So we're missing 150~250W of heat generation.

Supposedly the solar cells are capable of 2.9 kW peak. Not all of this will be available as Starliner needs to charge it's batteries so it can operate when there is no sunlight, but we can probably assume they're all generating at near pear efficiency since they're on the bottom surface and so presumably can be pointed optimally.

I can't find a reference for the storage capacity of the Starliner batteries (nor what the baseload is); but it surprises me that they may not have ~250Wh of extra capacity... (assuming the capsule remains in shadow for an hour every other hour.)

Am I missing something?

(I also went down a rabbit hole of trying to figure out how much heat we might be expecting Starliner to be ejecting to maintain thermal equilibrium. Assuming only the capsule (e.g. not including the service module) is kept at temperature, that it's a blackbody radiator, and assuming it's a perfect cone (10ft dia, 15ft tall) that gives us ~470 sqft. Then Stefan-Boltzmann would say the capsule would reject ~835W of heat at 50degF (10C) and ~890W of heat at 68degF (20C). Under these assumptions Starliner would only need to provide an additional 55W of heat!)

 

[noraar]

Just echoing most people's comments/opinions - this was a fantastic (and terrifying) article @EricBerger ! For Wilmore and Williams to trust you enough to go into the detail they went in to is a testament to your integrity as a journalist. Ars is the only news site I subscribe to, and this is exactly why.

 

[George Moromisato]

I'm another grateful reader who pretty much only subscribes to Ars for the space coverage.

If you can afford to subscribe, please do. The only way to fight the enshittification of media is to support the people who do good work.

 

[Demosthenes642]

This really calls into question why they spent so much time trying to decide if they'd come back on Starliner. It should've been clear immediately they weren't coming back on Starliner

I get where you're coming from but it's not as if there was urgency on making that decision outside of arranging for how they could leave in an emergency. The astronauts were in safely space and had plenty of supplies and there wasn't any necessity for them to leave the ISS soon. NASA had plenty of time to see if they could figure it out and once they had all the information they needed they could make a decision. Making a snap call wouldn't have bought anyone anything.

Gotta say, great story and the level of detail really speaks to the gravity of the situation. It's always amazing the work rate of the astronauts when they're flying and how dedicated they are to training so when things go wrong they have the best chance of still accomplishing the mission or in some cases getting out alive. Space is hard and they work that much harder because of it.

 

[yababom]

Starliner was designed to fly four people to the International Space Station for six-month stays in orbit. But for this initial test flight, there were just two people, which meant less body heat. Wilmore estimated that it was about 50° Fahrenheit in the cabin.

Is this really saying that Starliner was designed to depend on >2 warm bodies to keep the spacecraft habitable? This seems like something I would have expected on Apollo or Soyuz, but it shouldn't be acceptable in the latest model transport from the US space industry. Does Dragon have any similar issues?

This seems unnecessarily spartan from a safety aspect, as it clearly made things difficult physically and mentally for astronauts that already have plenty to worry about.

Edit: Ninja-ed by @mattofak

 

[JohnDeL]

This article should be national news. Two astronauts come about as close as you can to dying in orbit? The only closer call that had a happy ending that I can think of is Apollo 13. (And I'd love to see this done as a movie/miniseries!)

Unfortunately, there is so much else happening right now that this won't get the level of exposure it deserves.

I am grateful that we finally know what happened and why the decision was made to switch to an alternate vessel for the return flight. And, reading between the lines, it is clear that the astronauts were not "stranded in orbit" by Biden; if there is any blame to be assigned here, it goes directly to Boeing.

 

[bthylafh]

What actually makes you a "steely-eyed missile man" isn't bravery, mojo, having XY chromosomes or white skin, it's to

SCE to AUX.

 

[FreeRangeOrganicSoyLatteCappuccino]

They came so close to killing at least two astronauts. Given the number of failed thrusters and the timing, things could have gone from bad to worse had they smashed into the ISS. While I know that approaches to the ISS are glacially slow (for good reason), I don't know if they're slow enough to prevent catastrophic damage from an out-of-control crewed spacecraft.

Does make you wonder how many problems happen on other launches, including for SpaceX, that we just never hear about.

 

[wesleyd]

Wondeful story. Much more dramatic and nerve-wracking than initially we knew.

 

[alisonken1]

No, Boeing executives and engineers should go.

FTFY

I'm pretty sure the engineers do their best and get overridden on the results.

 

[Richard Weiss]

Great read and excellent reportage. Thank you, Eric!

 

[Uzial]

Great Article, thanks for sharing the insight and your relationship building. Frightening for the Astronauts and their families and the ground crew as well, the folk on the space station at some point aft docking realized that a projectile called Boeing Starliner potentially out of control was headed at them as well and they kept their composure. Aerospace and Defense company leadership has to get back to the old school mentality that the mission is first. margins are second.

 

[EllPeaTea]

Top notch reporting from Eric. And also one of the scariest things I’ve read in a while.

 

[SomewhereAroundBarstow]

lucky, but this kind of story make people question the eight decades old moon landing plot line more...

Watching a live broadcast of Apollo 11's crew walking on the moon is one of my very earliest memories. I was three. I'll be 59 soon.

Your demonstrated competency in math is the kind of thing that makes me question the quality of any analysis behind your statement.

 

[adamsrobw]

There were sooooo many Boeing apologists when this was happening, gas-lighting everyone about how there was nothing to see and that everything was being blown out of proportion.