One informed source said it was greater than a 50-50 chance that the crew would come back on Dragon. Another source said it was significantly more likely than not they would. To be clear, NASA has not made a final decision. This probably will not happen until at least next week. It is likely that Jim Free, NASA’s associate administrator, will make the call.

Asked if it was now more likely than not that Starliner’s crew would return on Dragon, NASA spokesperson Josh Finch told Ars on Thursday evening, " NASA is evaluating all options for the return of agency astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams from the International Space Station as safely as possible. No decisions have been made and the agency will continue to provide updates on its planning."

  • threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.worksM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 months ago

    A couple weeks ago, it seemed like they had tested the thruster system both on orbit and on the ground, and things were going well. Have they discovered a more serious issue?

    • clothes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I was firmly in the “nothing is actually wrong and the media coverage is silly” camp, so this report is pretty shocking.

      If there are real engineering reasons (as opposed to anxious bureaucrat ones) that Dragon needs to rescue them, this seems like one of the bigger crises in the modern era?

      Will wait for more details, but clearly I was wrong about media coverage!

      • Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Dragon needs to rescue them, this seems like one of the bigger crises in the modern era?

        Just to remind everyone, it wasn’t that long ago after NASA managers tried everything to minimize investigation findings and didn’t bother telling the crew that there was an issue:

        The astronauts also likely suffered from significant thermal trauma. Hot gas entered the disintegrating crew module, burning the crew members, whose bodies were still somewhat protected by their ACES suits. Once the crew module fell apart, the astronauts were violently exposed to windblast and a possible shock wave, which stripped their suits from their bodies. The crews’ remains were exposed to hot gas and molten metal as they fell away from the orbiter.

        After separation from the crew module, the bodies of the crew members entered an environment with almost no oxygen, very low atmospheric pressure, and both high temperatures caused by deceleration, and extremely low ambient temperatures.  Their bodies hit the ground with lethal force.

      • clothes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        I wonder how predictable the thrust reduction is. I would have thought they could account for this in software, but maybe there’s too much uncertainty. Or perhaps ground tests showed the seal can fail in dangerous ways.

        • jqubed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Why would you need to test things when you’re Boeing? You know what you’re doing!

    • Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      4 months ago

      My bet is that the capsule stayed in orbit far longer than it should, and they’ve lost pressure to leaks or they discovered something else that didn’t age well.

      • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        4 months ago

        But there were commenters here on lemmy telling anyone talking about that possibility at the time that the leaks weren’t an issue. That even if it were, it would take 14+ weeks until it even started to possibly be an issue at the leak rate. But that wasn’t even a factor because the valves were closed, so there weren’t any current leaks.

        They couldn’t possibly have been wrong could they?

        • Pennomi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          You care far too much about some random person on the internet being wrong. I see multiple comments on just this article.

          That being said, I think trusting official word from NASA is far more sensible than speculation.

          • Talaraine@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            I don’t think it’s just about random wrong internet person. Anyone saying something other than ‘it’s nothing’ was borderline ridiculed.

          • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            There is absolutely no danger related to this situation unless Boeing/NASA insist on using Starliner without being certain there won’t be more issues.

            Starliner won’t be used if they aren’t absolutely certain they can fly it back safely. And there is already a proven vehicle available to rescue the crew if necessary. This is a side effect of having multiple companies create launch vehicles post-Shuttle. If one design has an issue, there’s another available to use instead while they figure that out.