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.