The first crewed voyage of Boeing’s Starliner was supposed to last around a week, but the high-stakes mission is still in limbo eight weeks after launch.

Their high-stakes mission was supposed to last about a week — but 56 days later, two NASA astronauts are still aboard the International Space Station, waiting as teams on the ground try to figure out how to bring them home safely in the Boeing spaceship they rode to orbit.

The beleaguered Starliner capsule has two problems: its propulsion system is leaking helium and five of its thrusters malfunctioned as it was docking with the space station. Mission managers were aware of the leaks before the vehicle lifted off but had said they were unlikely to affect the flight or the astronauts’ safety.

    • Zron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      If your flight is on a Boeing aircraft, you’re likely in the same situation as the astronauts.

      What I can’t understand about this situation, is they’ve apparently been studying the craft’s helium leaks this whole time. But, as far as I’m aware, they’ve done 1 EVA to look at the thing. How are they inspecting the physical condition of hardware(pipes, seals, welds, brazed joints) via software from the ground and the results of one EVA. I also can’t see NASA giving the green light to really strip the Starliner to the guts while it’s attached to the space station, so did the astronauts even get a chance to look closely to find these leaks. A quarter of my job is finding leaks in high pressure piping systems, and you often have to really get in there and remove all the panels to pinpoint a leak. I highly doubt nasa has allowed the crew to rip apart a space capsule the same way I would rip apart a rooftop unit.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        4 months ago

        What I can’t understand about this situation, is they’ve apparently been studying the craft’s helium leaks this whole time. But, as far as I’m aware, they’ve done 1 EVA to look at the thing. How are they inspecting the physical condition of hardware(pipes, seals, welds, brazed joints) via software from the ground and the results of one EVA.

        The thing that takes the most time isn’t looking at the thing, it’s doing the engineering to figure out WTF you’re going to do about it afterward.

      • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        How are they inspecting the physical condition of hardware(pipes, seals, welds, brazed joints) via software from the ground and the results of one EVA.

        Well, there are a whole lot of sensors and monitors on all of the hardware in that capsule, and all that data gets collected. So they can tell a lot about what’s going on with the capsule even remotely. But it’s still a lot of data to dig through and analyze.

        And then once you identify the problem it’s like… “well the temperature on component X went way past its lower limit and one section of the fuel line went way over pressure and this third sensor isn’t responding at all”, so… now you know some things, but that might not immediately tell you what exactly happened, or why it happened. And then once you figure out why it all happened, there’s trying to figure out how to prevent it reliably without introducing new problems.

        And I think you’re right that it is actually pretty hard for the engineers to do all that without physically being there. I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of the slowdown is due to needing to replicate the problem in simulations or physical mockups down on earth.

      • ptfrd
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        as far as I’m aware, they’ve done 1 EVA to look at the thing

        Don’t think so.

        They do have access to camera imagery, but as you say, most problems like this probably need much more intrusive investigation.

    • darvocet@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      4 months ago

      Based on my knowledge gained by watching multiple space station related movies there are several emergency escape capsules up there, so they aren’t technically stranded until those don’t work also.

      • MagicShel@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        There is also at least one astronaut up there who smuggled a pack of chewing gum that can be used to plug the leaks once all other options are exhausted, but he hasn’t told anyone because he’ll get in trouble.

          • Scubus
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            4 months ago

            “The spaceship is at nearly 100 atmospheres of pressure!”

            “Well how many atmospheres is it rated for?”

            “Well, it’s a spaceship, so typically between zero and one”

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

        Having also watched some classic sci-fi movies, I hope no one installed the ChatGPT module in the ISS computer system.

      • Frozengyro@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        *Just sit right back and you’ll hear a tale,

        A tale of a space-bound flight,

        That started from the launch pad,

        And soared into the night.

        The crew was a brave expedition,

        Their mission to the ISS,

        They docked at the space station,

        For a stay they hoped would be a success.

        But then a mishap came their way,

        The systems went awry,

        And now they’re stuck in orbit,

        With no way to say goodbye.

        So this is the crew of the ISS,

        Stranded in the sky,

        With floating and fixing their new routine,

        They’ll adapt and try to get by.

        They’ll orbit 'round the Earth each day,

        In their floating, cosmic home,

        With teamwork and resilience,

        They’ll make it through alone.*

        PS, I didn’t write this.

    • huquad@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      No no no, they chose to be on the deserted island. Definitely not stranded

    • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      stranded technically comes from the germanic word, strand, which means beach. They’re nowhere close to sand!

  • MagicShel@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    4 months ago

    Mission managers were aware of the leaks before the vehicle lifted off but had said they were unlikely to affect the flight or the astronauts’ safety.

    So managers made that decision? Not engineers? Rocket scientists?

    So they are all jockeying over who is going to fall on their sword when this ship blows up on reentry. We’re going to hear later about an engineer who tried to put a stop to it but was overruled because there was only a 30% chance of everything going to hell. It’s the Challenger all over again in slow motion.

    Just scuttle the ship and send a rescue mission. And fire whoever they are throwing under the bus, since that’s the only closure we’re likely to get.

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

          As an aside, turning on split vote count display on Lemmy really shows how petty some people can be.

          Who in their right mind decided that this comment was worth a downvote?

          • MagicShel@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            I have a very small very petty fan club. Fortunately, I don’t care other than I laugh that I’m living in their head rent free.

    • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 months ago

      Mission Manager is a technical role, not a managerial position. They might also be people managers, but the role is about managing the mission. And even if they are also people managers, they had to be engineers or scientists first to start working at NASA.

      And I think they can’t simply scuttle the ship. I read they need humans in the ship to get it to properly disconnect from the station.

      • AnIndefiniteArticle
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        they had to be engineers or scientists first to start working at NASA

        NASA actually employs a very large number of people who are neither scientists nor engineers. Going to space requires a very diverse workforce.

        Also, it’s not “Mission Manager”, it’s “Mission Operations Manager”.

        You’re right that someone doesn’t end up as the MOM of a mission without experience in the technical roles that they are managing.

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

          NASA actually employs a very large number of people who are neither scientists nor engineers. Going to space requires a very diverse workforce.

          Thanks for stating the obvious. I pretty clearly meant working at NASA in a technical role where one could move up to managing engineers/scientists. You don’t move from Human Resources or Legal or Janitor or Machinist or Admin Assistant or Graphic Designer or whatever to Mission Ops Manager or to a role people managing engineers/scientists (this COULD happen but would be incredibly rare).

          As far as correcting me on Mission Operations Manager, I have no clue what their title is. I was only responding to the actual article saying “Mission managers were aware of the leaks.”

    • Zipitydew
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 months ago

      The leaks were examined and found to benon-critical. They were even controllable. No helium has leaked since docking with ISS and there is plenty to get home.

      The problem has been the crew capsule and the space propulsion module are 2 different pieces. The capsule comes home. The propulsion module gets ditched in space. NASA and Boeing have been taking their time to review the propulsion module (leaks and all) while docked at ISS because they can’t bring it home.

      Nothing much has changed from all that. NASA is in control of the mission. It’s all proceeding at their pace. I wouldn’t trust any spin Boeing makes. But watching the NASA mission reports shows there isn’t much reason for concern.

      • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        The fact that NASA has been considering the option to use the Dragon capsule to bring them back shows that there is some concerns.

        • Zipitydew
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          That’s overblown per the latest NASA update a couple hours ago.

          While waiting on engine test results part of the mission team has been brainstorming all kinds of new return contingency ideas that were never an option in the past. The SpaceX idea is one of 4 or 5 mentioned. It’s just the one the media ran with.

          The main announcement today though was that all thrusters passed 3 hot fire simulations of a return mission. And that Starliner is likely fine to come home. The issues during approach seem to be understood and worked out.

          • MagicShel@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            Glad to be wrong about all that. Being an astronaut was my biggest dream 40 years ago. But we can’t all be astronauts, so I had to settle for my second dream - shitposting on the internet.

            In all seriousness, it’s important work for the future of humanity. I don’t want someone to fuck it up for profit or because it’s not their ass on the line. I’m glad those fears are unfounded here.

    • Acidbath@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I think or hope that these managers were engineers in the past but at the same time wont be surprised if they are not. I mean like, isn’t it a thing in the aerospace or any engineering industry to promote engineers up until they become managers and such? It does feel like Challenger 2.0 :( hope they return safely.

      • becausechemistry@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 months ago

        Technical people that move into management usually (but not always) suffer from something I’ve started calling management brain rot. They’re exposed to the spreadsheet warriors and their corporate jargon, and it doesn’t take long for the good ones to give up and the bad ones to thrive in a, let’s call it, “low-information environment.”

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

          The first-time I was promoted to management, I had no idea what I was doing. Managing people is a totally different skill set to the highly technical positions I had before. So I decided to look into management courses etc. to try to figure it out. I convinced my company to pay for a few graduate level courses.

          After a very short time in these courses, it became abundantly clear nobody else had a clue either. They had ideas and "case studies’ but no actual proof of anything. It was all a bunch of bullshit fads to make money.

          Over the decades I have come to understand why a good manager is such a unicorn. A good manager has to care about both the people and the business equally. It’s a razor thin balancing act. I have met exactly one person who fits this model.

          • MagicShel@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            You have to care about the people, to foster a culture of caring about the work. Caring, motivated people are the backbone of a business - they aren’t easily replaceable resources that you just hire off the street as needed.

        • Num10ck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          suddenly the carrots and the sticks are strictly tied to Key Performance Indicators, which are ultimately short-term financial with inflation. whats best or safest or ecological or wise or in the long term best interests of the workers or the customers doesn’t come into the math. try to refute this and you are quickly replaced.

          • 5oap10116@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            4 months ago

            Any time I hear anything about KPIs I immediately turn my brain off not because I don’t understand it, but because I maliciously don’t give a fuck.

            • MagicShel@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              I’ve been out of work for 4 months and tbh, getting desperate. But I saw a job posting that talked about KPIs and didn’t even apply. Homelessness would be less shitty than dealing with that (I say having never been homeless and probably not going to be).

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

        This is the Mission Manager, not “manager.” The person who is the Mission Manager can be but isn’t necessarily also a people manager.

    • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      4 months ago

      Bruh, if your ass went to Jamaica (or other scenic location) and your return flight got delated indefinately, you wouldn’t be a fan

      • ashok36@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        If my job paid for me to go to Jamaica and had to keep paying me the entire time I was stuck there, that would soften the annoyance quite a lot.

        • Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          We almost got stuck at a five star hotel on a work trip in Mexico at the start of Covid. Instead we got a private plane back due to panic setting in. Was pissed.

      • toast@retrolemmy.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah. I was in Hawaii when 9/11 happened, and of course all flights at the time were canceled for days. It wasn’t a bad place to be stuck for a little while, but even that short of a delay in returning did cause a few issues.

  • SeaJ@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    4 months ago

    I do love that Boeing is like “we have no idea what the fuck went wrong. Here’s the data cause we give up.” Boeing sure is turning de a new leaf and putting safety first. /s

    • Zipitydew
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      4 months ago

      tl;dl

      Starliner thrusters all passed 3 hot fire simulations of a return mission. Probably fine to fly home.

      Ground testing was able to match what happened to the thrusters on approach. NASA now more confident the theory around fuel flow restrictions was correct.

      Catch is they’ll never know for sure because the thrusters in space can’t be taken apart to examine. And they won’t make it back to Earth because they’re on a portion that detaches before re-entry.

      The rumors around using Dragon for a return mission are true. But in that NASA has had time to think up multiple scenarios that weren’t ever possible prior for return missions. There are now around 4-5 options thought up. NASA might go on to test some of those ideas out.

      ISS has so many ships docked, with more planned, that a decision on Starliner is happening soon. Regardless of if people are aboard, it needs to leave ISS by September if I was following along correctly.

  • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 months ago

    They’ve probably finished all the scientific tests they had to do, and played as much Hearts as they can stand.

    How will that weightless man and woman get busy and stay diverted?

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    If they actually send up a SpaceX capsule to pick them up, they should not fly empty. They should take the managers responsible for this project up, and let them return in the Boeing capsule.