The Starliner capsule in space right now is called Calypso, named after the nymph who, in Homer’s Odyssey, held Odysseus on a remote island for 7 years against his will….

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Starliner_Calypso

I still don't get all the hoopla about organising a special SpaceX rescue mission, when there is a Soyuz craft docked there all the time (including now) for just these sorts of eventualities, with doubtless detailed procedures on when it might be used, and training for all the astronauts on using it.

Soyuz (spacecraft) - Wikipedia

If the two Starliner crew used it, there would be no lifeboat for the remaining crew?

Remote.
 

1967. Fire involved a pure Oxygen environment in the capsule. The Crew were incinerated.
Now, "bulging", "overheating", Hydrazine, Tetroxide, Thrusters, Combustion. Do Boeing and NASA umm....understand the nature of Oxygen and "hypergolic" ?? Ordinarily, a stupid question. Perhaps still so. "Seals", Foam "unadhering", The list is long, Johnson...

Pretty sure that's the correct answer (although I don't have personal knowledge of the mission operational rules for utilization of the "rescue" Soyuz capsule).

Another factor. Against the backdrop of (1) Russia developing and testing an nuclesr ASAT system (reportedly and as stated by State Department and White House officials and Members of Congress), (2) overall tensions in the great power competition arena, and (3) Russia's stated intention to leave the ISS program in the near-term future, opening a discussion with the Russians about utilizing the Soyuz capsule to extricate NASA and Boeing from this ..... situation, is likely not much of a viable option.

I believe it is there to serve as a the only life boat. If I am correct, using it to return the 2 astronauts would leave those left on board without any way to escape in the event of a evacuatioon.

So, one locked in place by disrepair, the other locked in Place by politics.

Fly a healthy to ISS then form. Spacewalk, simples.

Starliner not planned as a lifeboat, no one else has suits or training for it. Regardless it only has a 90 day in orbit clearance and is now over 66 days so has to return.

ISS currently has 2 more on board than planned and has to reduce total.

Plan is to launch the next Dragon with only 2 of the planned 4 crew, with 2 of the current crew extending their tour until early 2025.

The Dragon will return of the planned 4 crew rotation plus the Starliner crew. The assumption is the delay will allow two necessary requirements.

First, production of suitable Dragon suits to be sent up on the ship for their use on feature. Second the upload of a software update to the Starliner to allow an automated unmanned recovery freeing up the docking port for the Dragon.

If that happens the major decision for Boeing will be whether to constitute with the NASA contract.

Starliner would undoubtedly need a further redesign and qualification flight. With the remaining life of the ISS and available slots there would be a maximum of a further 3 manned flights available for Starliner, each costing Boeing $xxM in losses and possibility of further embarrassment.

Probability is that, if they come bck using SpaceX, either Boeing or NASA will pull out of the contract.

Suspect that's not going to be Boeing's decision to make...

There is no "lifeboat" capsule on the ISS, the 3 manned spacecraft currently docked (one 4 crew Dragon, one 3 crew Soyuz and the 2 crew Starliner) carried the current occupants up to the station and in normal circumstances would carry the same crew back either on a normal rotation or in an emergency. There are currently nine people on the ISS which as said above is more than planned for an extended time so some shuffling around and a two crew dragon Launch will be needed to get back to 7 assuming they don't use Starliner which is looking increasingly unlikely. There are also 3 cargo spacecraft currently docked. Picture below.

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....3d9d648638.png

Borrowing a Russian capsule
 

According to astronaut Tim Peake's book Limitless, the Soyuz capsule seats are purpose moulded for each occupant. The body height increase in zero gravity has to be considered too but the chances of a stranger fitting the seat are not good. Then there's the driving (well, procedures, systems knowledge, currency and tech) to contend with - big ask - also for a test pilot.

Even if they decide to bring the Starliner crew back with a Dragon they will have a short time period ( few hours/days ) where there is no possibility to evacuate all ISS Crew in case of an emergency. The Starliner has to undock before the arrival of the Dragon ( Crew 9 ) to free the docking port. Or is it possible for Dragon to dock at one of the ports blocked right now by the various cargo capsules, which then have to be undocked first?

skadi

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/0...-a-generation/

NASA is about to make its most important safety decision in nearly a generation

[QUOTE=ORAC;11715759]https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/0...-a-generation/


Amid the talk of putting lives at risk etc., I imagine that the affected astronauts might well have a word to say on their own behalf...

You mean like in "The Right Stuff": "We are the best and most well trainined astronauts and test pilots in the world and even our little children can fly this thing home with one hand only and blindfolded and with 3 of 24 thrusters operational..."
It is not the 1960ies any more. After the two Space Shuttle accidents, both with ample pre-warning, no official can grant permission for that return mission unless there is a 99,9% chance of success. Especially when there is a safe alternative.

No I meant nothing of the kind - rather that they may well refuse to fly the heap back. There's as little justification for get-home-itis as there is lower down

They could man one of the others, Soyuz or Dragon, undock and move that away from ISS, then allow the other Dragon to dock... etc etc.
Messy but doable.

More bad news, reported in Ars Technica.

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/0...ulsion-issues/

At the beginning of space flight in USA the purported philosophy was Zero Errors.
As anybody knows who has anything to do with aero-space operations, that is another expression for luck and hope.
Redundancy is hard to plan for on a new untried project but a vehicle for repeat operations has to be designed that way. At least there should be no doubts or “mel” items before dispatch. As we see, maintenance while in space is at best in its infancy.

Good point well made.....

The vehicle was designed for the wrong duty cycle resulting in an incorrect thermal analysis.

It’s fairly unprecedented to have such a critical component on a crewed flight vehicle, that has completely incorrect analysis, resulting in significant thermal design violations.

​​​​​​​The temperature bounds for these seals is very known. What is unknown is how much those bounds can be violated further, if at all, on a vehicle in orbit where their current state and degradation can’t be inspected, with significant temperature violations prior in the mission, while still guaranteeing sufficient performance/reliability to carry crew.

Am I right in thinking that this suggests that it would be safe for the Starliner to attempt an unmanned return, with any problems likely to occur well away from the Space Station.

Probably.
Problem being that it can't do an unmanned undock apparently....

My understanding is that it can, or could (it has done before), but the software to do that was dumped for the version on there now, that allows manned operation. The issue is now doing a software changeover.

... and it was apparently dumped immediately after the unmanned launch, so now requires updating for consistency with updates to other code since then. Probably not involving a lot of code updates, but needing but some pretty heavy testing. Luckily there are several months before SpaceX arrives.

Weeks, not month!
Crew9 arrival is planned for September

skadi

Single point of failure?
 

You mean, yet another single point of failure, with no redundancy?

Or, putting it another way, yet again designed down to a budget.

Not that NASA doesn't have form on such, either. John Glenn, when asked what it felt like sat ready to be shot up on the pioneer Mercury mission 60 years ago, famously said "It's thinking you're sat on top of 2 million components, all bought from the bottom bidder".

By who?

Boeing and SpaceX were both awarded contracts to provide ferry flights to the ISS at the same time. Boeing got $4.2B, SpaceX got just $2.6B.

SpaceX has now flown 13 successful manned flights to the ISS. This was the first Boeing manned flight to actually reach the station.

And Boeing have already filled accounts reporting a loss on the program so far of an additional $1.6B.

With further redesigns and test flights, at Boeing expense, certain to be required and with only a few remaining unallocated resupply flights to the ISS before it is retired (assisted by another dedicated SpaceX mission), it will also probably be the last Starliner flight.

I remember reading at the time that this was mandated by US federal law -- as part of a general attempt at reducing the corrupt distribution of government money in return for backhanders.

Decision regarding use of Starliner as manned return vehicle to be revealed by NASA in 48 hours. (Saturday, 24 August, 2024.)

- Ed

NASA/Boeing has decided to abort a crewed Starliner return! Butch and Suni will return on Crew Dragon 9 in February. NASA seems to be damning Boeing with faint praise during this Flight Test Status News Conference, though Administrator Bill Nelson stated that there is a 100% chance that Starliner will fly again. Elon Musk and SpaceX seem to be the heroes of the day.

- Ed

They're coming back with Crew9 - Starliner coming home Solo....

Another flight review next week to OK the automated undock and re-entry process.

Not sure if that’s before or after they update the software/firmware. Expected undock date currently 6th Sept.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nasa-bo...nauts-update/#

…..“The hard-luck Starliner now will be commanded to undock from the space station's forward port as early as Sept. 6 to carry out an unpiloted re-entry and touchdown at White Sands, New Mexico, bringing the long-awaited test flight to a disappointing conclusion, the latest in a series of major setbacks for Boeing.

With the Starliner's departure, only the four-seat Crew 8 capsule, which arrived at the lab last March, will be available to serve as a lifeboat if an emergency forces its four-member crew, along with Wilmore and Williams, to evacuate before the Crew 9 ferry ship arrives.

While the odds of an evacuation are remote, SpaceX will work with NASA and the station crew to rig makeshift seats in the Crew 8 Dragon before the Starliner's undocking to accommodate Wilmore and Williams in an emergency.

Once the Crew 9 capsule docks, the four outgoing Crew 8 fliers, wrapping up their own six-month expedition, will reconfigure their ship for a normal undocking and return to Earth around Oct 1st as planned.”……

Not to whip up political conspiracy theories or anything, but in addition to the obvious consequences for NASA, it would be unhelpful to the chairperson of the National Space Council to have any sort of safety issue overtly manifest itself with the return of Starliner. Boeing's going to take another (deserved) one for the team.

Of course, Boeing could have done proper engineering and end-to-end testing and likely avoided all of this mess.

One also wonders if Boeing's "two week" process of reconfiguring flight software for automated re-entry might spawn more embarrassing problems.

I support the decision to let it return without the crew. Those leaks were too serious. Let's hope it returns in one piece and can be properly examined.

Less,

The components of interest are jettisoned and burn up on reentry.

Well, just a moment. The VP's role w.r.t. the National Space Council has been nothing more than reading agenda notes and scripts of blandishments and platitudes during the few meetings that have taken place. She has not initiated policymaking and does not have any significant experience with, or knowledge of, space policy matters at, really, any level, let alone the level of the White House.

Certainly a disaster with Starliner .... and thank goodness NASA has made the right call here ..... would be nearly certain to cause the docile press establishment to consider tossing more insistent questions at the VP, based on the superficial relevance of her chairing the Council. But the Council has had no role in this decision-making (or if it has, it has been kept very far off-camera and out of sight).

Yes political factors breed cynicism (this SLF/attorney included). But the NASA Administrator, despite having been a Senator (or maybe because of it) has been a straight-shooter throughout his tenure and in this difficult situation, imo. If returning two NASA Astronauts on the Boeing spacecraft had turned out to be the right call, nothing about the VP or her nomination or campaign would have mattered.

You underestimate the capability of oppo, which would be all over this if anything went wrong, translating "association" into "management responsibility." This has already been in the press, with no particular traction.

But anyway, we should be all good now, regardless. Even if Starliner is unable to upgrade its software, or unable to undock, or goes haywire and becomes orbiting junk, or burns up on reentry, that's just another bad day for Boeing, not NASA.

If the American public in general, and the electorate in particular, are so vapid and clueless as would be necessary to fall for the level of oppo claims that you describe, there is no hope.

Honestly Suni and Butch on-orbit deserve better discourse, even if only on some backwater irrelevant inter-zone of the internet, as we have here.