9 ms·
Boeing's starliner docks at ISS after five thrusters unexpectedly shut off
- vlovich123 2y ago> Starliner’s docking has not gone smoothly, the spacecraft developed trouble with its reaction control system thrusters
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- notfried 2y agoWill these leak and thrusters issues affect the return trip?
- bell-cot 2y agoAbsolutely. Even if zero additional problems crop up while they are at the ISS, the Controllers will need to have fall-back-back-back-and-further-back plans on tap, in case of yet more failures in the Service Modules' propulsion systems.
- cbsks 2y agoNot surprisingly, they already have these backup plans. The potential for RCS jet failure was known ahead of time and was determined to not be a flight safety concern. There’s a bunch of info about it here: https://spaceflightnow.com/2024/05/24/nasa-says-boeings-starliner-crew-capsule-can-safely-fly-as-is-with-propulsion-system-helium-leak/ https://spaceflightnow.com/2024/05/24/nasa-says-boeings-star...
- LegitShady 2y agoIt sounds like they only recovered 4/5 thrusters.
- rootusrootus 2y agoSounds like they worked through it, so docking was successful. I imagine that much like SpaceX in a similar situation, there are lessons learned that will be applied to the next iteration.
- colechristensen 2y agoGenerally you actually want 0 "lessons learned" in human spaceflight. Test flights especially and unmanned missions have a much higher tolerance for error. A bunch of thrusters failing with people on board could have been catastrophic and is well into the territory of "enormous problems which never should have happened". The astronauts may have to be "rescued" with a different capsule returning the departing astronauts to earth.
- justinclift 2y agoIt'll be super ironic if they have to come back via SpaceX capsule. :)
- rootusrootus 2y agoI agree, zero would be ideal. Maybe I'm just too accustomed to the iteration we see all the time when SpaceX equipment fails. This is arguably more a traditional space program and less of a 'go fast and break things' process. IIRC, SpaceX also had some sort of glitch when docking with the station, on a crewed mission. Related to the thrusters, too, if memory serves.
- colechristensen 2y agoFound this https://www.space.com/spacex-dragon-international-space-station-glitch https://www.space.com/spacex-dragon-international-space-stat... Which was a problem, but it was a backup in case of a leak that broke, it had 0 effect and it was a cargo mission not a people mission. Starliner's failure today did have a significant mission effect and had people. SpaceX had a bunch of rocket landing failures on real missions, but that didn't matter because landing was a bonus, basically nobody had done that before and everything was just fine if a rocket blew up trying to land. SpaceX has also done a bunch of test launches with new vehicles, this also doesn't matter if they fail, they're specifically launched to find failures instead of expending tons of engineering effort which is more expensive than blowing up test rockets. Those things are quite separate from "there's people on board and several thrusters broke requiring unexpected manual pilot intervention", this was not expecting or allowing for failure by design but a serious anomaly that has to be researched how the problems weren't caught in human certification.
- downrightmike 2y agoWhat a joke: An accurate and all encompassing critique of the vehicle and the company who made it.
- dang 2y ago"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- rootusrootus 2y agoHas SpaceX had any thruster problems when docking with the space station?
- willy_k 2y agoThey had an issue with a leaky valve, in a backup system, on a cargo mission. https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/08/valves-are-a-regular-concern-at-spacex-just-like-every-other-space-company/2/ https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/08/valves-are-a-regular-c...
- gpm 2y agoCrew Dragon C204 docked with the ISS and returned without problem without people. It was suppose to do so again with people, but instead it blew itself to smithereens on the ground due to a thruster problem. Which is to say "not exactly (at least that I remember), but problems in a similar vein on hardware that did similar things".
- perihelions 2y agoI'm not certain I counted right, but I believe it was eight failed thrusters in its first uncrewed test in 2020, and later four failed thrusters in the second one, in 2022. (Combining the failure count of the larger orbital maneuvering thrusters with that of the smaller reaction-control systems). - "The NASA source said eight or more thrusters on the service module failed at one point and that one thruster never fired at all." https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/01/nasa-and-boeing-are-closely-looking-at-starliners-thruster-performance/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/01/nasa-and-boeing-are-... - " Two of the 20 main thrusters on the spacecraft's service module, used for orbital maneuvering, failed shortly after Starliner separated from its Atlas V rocket. They were not recovered during the flight. Two smaller reaction control system thrusters also failed during the approach to the space station, but they were recovered." https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/05/nasas-verdict-on-starliner-a-great-vehicle-for-crew-transportation/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/05/nasas-verdict-on-sta...
- amelius 2y agoHurray for the software that managed to work even with the failed thrusters.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- jauntywundrkind 2y agoAn astronaut took over manual control after automatic docking system started popping failures.
- amelius 2y agoIn reality a Python programmer at the mission control center modified the scripts and told the astronaut what buttons to press.
- verzali 2y agoSounds like they think it's actually a software problem rather than a hardware fault.
- Aaargh20318 2y agoI wonder how this affects the certification.
- throwup238 2y agoI bet the actuaries responsible for the astronauts’ life insurance just bumped the premiums up a few tiers.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- borbulon 2y agoI think given Boeing’s focus on profit over quality and safety lately, this really shouldn’t come as a surprise.
- impulser_ 2y agoThey should be focused on profit, because they haven't made a profit in almost 5 years now and Boeing is a very important company to the US. If Boeing ends up going bankrupt, the US government will 100% have to bail it out.
- blackhaj7 2y ago> As a result, NASA astronaut Butch Wilmore had to assume manual control of the crew capsule for a while before it went back into its autonomous mode Is there a video of this? Bet it was nail biting. Kudos they pulled it off given all that went wrong.
- jakderrida 2y agoYou know you can always rely on a guy named "Butch Wilmore" to take control when shit hits the fan.
- HighlandSpring 2y agoButch "Space Cowboy" Wilmore
- wmf 2y agoHe trained for hundreds of hours to fly the capsule manually and the docking process is excruciatingly slow so it's probably not that stressful. Even when everything is working they let the astronauts have a little manual control as a treat.
- UberFly 2y agoI don't know. I pictured it like the landing scene from airplane and I'm sticking with it.
- jdsalaro 2y ago> He trained for hundreds of hours to fly the capsule manually and the docking process is excruciatingly slow _COME ON TARS!_
- bacheaul 2y agoYou can try it yourself here -> https://iss-sim.spacex.com/ https://iss-sim.spacex.com/ Protips: Watch your instruments and take it super slow!
- 2y ago
- JumpCrisscross 2y agoThese are the same thrusters that are on Orion [1][2]. (They were delivered to Boeing 6 years ago.) [1] https://www.spacefoundation.org/2018/03/15/aerojet-rocketdyne-ships-starliner-re-entry-thrusters/ https://www.spacefoundation.org/2018/03/15/aerojet-rocketdyn... [2] https://www.compositesworld.com/news/aerojet-rocketdyne-to-provide-propulsion-for-orion-spacecraft-fleet-#:~:text=Reaction%20Control,assemblies.%20At https://www.compositesworld.com/news/aerojet-rocketdyne-to-p...
- hehdhdjehehegwv 2y ago“If it’s Boeing I ain’t going”
- replyifuagree 2y agoCame here to post this!
- dark-star 2y agoHard to believe that NASA sent people to the moon 60 years ago, when they can't even get basic reaction thrusters working after over 10 years of developing and building the Starliner...
- JshWright 2y agoNASA is just the customer. Starliner is built by Boeing.
- failuser 2y agoBoeing used to mean quality. Now it means cutting corners for the sake of stock price and dividends.
- userbinator 2y ago...and the other trendy word that starts with a D.
- saltymug76 2y agoCome on, say it for everyone.
- salawat 2y agoDeaths (of passengers)? Disassembly following premeditated lithobraking induced by lackluster system architecture? Dead whistleblowers?
- saltymug76 2y agoFigured he was going to say 'diversity' as if that has something to do with any of boeings issues, but your D words are on the nose!
- justapassenger 2y agoYou should read more about failures than happened during Apollo program. Apollo 1, Apollo 13 being most famous, but even during Apollo 11 multiple things failed.
- replyifuagree 2y agoMcDonnell Douglas knows they can continue to drain Boeing of money because the US govt will step in to bail Boeing out when things go really bad. Reminds me of the cynical calculus around power companies here in California.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> the US govt will step in to bail Boeing out when things go really bad Even an optimistic bail-out scenario involves the stock being wiped clean. (For example, what we did with the automakers.) Given the bipartisan frustration with Boeing, I'd fully expect calls for clawbacks that make failure personally painful for Boeing's leadership.
- replyifuagree 2y agoOh there will be political theatre on par with the WWF, no doubt. For those people it falls under the heading "Nice work if you can get it."
- SirMaster 2y ago"It's not possible". "No, it's necessary".