posted 09-13-2024 06:54 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by issman1:
All concerned had "go fever" and paid the price.

---

posted 09-20-2024 06:41 PM               

The company said Theodore "Ted" Colbert III was removed immediately as president and CEO of Boeing Defense, Space & Security and replaced temporarily by the division's chief operating officer, Steve Parker. A search is underway for a permanent replacement.

Colbert spent 15 years at Boeing, serving as chief information officer and leading its global-services business before running the defense unit.

Kelly Ortberg, who took over as Boeing CEO last month, said in a memo announcing Colbert's departure, "At this critical juncture, our priority is to restore the trust of our customers and meet the high standards they expect of us to enable their critical missions around the world. Working together we can and will improve our performance and ensure we deliver on our commitments."

posted 04-01-2025 03:08 PM               

Essentially, Wilmore could fully control Starliner any longer. But simply abandoning the docking attempt was not a palatable solution. Just as the thrusters were needed to control the vehicle during the docking process, they were also necessary to position Starliner for its deorbit burn and reentry to Earth's atmosphere. So Wilmore had to contemplate whether it was riskier to approach the space station or try to fly back to Earth. Williams was worrying about the same thing.

Williams: "There was a lot of unsaid communication, like, 'Hey, this is a very precarious situation we're in.' I think both of us overwhelmingly felt like it would be really nice to dock to that space station that's right in front of us. We knew that they [Mission Control] were working really hard to be able to keep communication with us, and then be able to send commands. We were both thinking, what if we lose communication with the ground? So NORDO Con Ops (this means flying a vehicle without a radio), and we didn't talk about it too much, but we already had synced in our mind that we should go to the space station. This is our place that we need to probably go to, to have a conversation because we don't know exactly what is happening, why the thrusters are falling off, and what the solution would be."

Wilmore: "I don't know that we can come back to Earth at that point. I don't know if we can. And matter of fact, I'm thinking we probably can't. So there we are, loss of 6DOF control, four aft thrusters down, and I'm visualizing orbital mechanics. The space station is nose down. So we're not exactly level with the station, but below it. If you're below the station, you're moving faster. That's orbital mechanics. It's going to make you move away from the station. So I'm doing all of this in my mind. I don't know what control I have. What if I lose another thruster? What if we lose comm? What am I going to do?"

posted 04-02-2025 12:34 PM               

I went back and listened to the CFT post docking NASA media call. I was curious to see how it lined up with the latest info, nearly a year later.

I expected to do a big thread noting the changes but to my surprise (and relief) I have to say it holds up well. In fact it was like I was reading the Berger article again it matched so well.

Now the tone is obviously pretty optimistic but I don't think they should've been super alarmist in a briefing directly after docking.

They don't mention the loss of control for 6DOF, but they do list out all the thrusters that failed in detail and I guess if any of us had taken the time we would've been able to tell.

Knowing what we know now though I actually do read more concern/relief into their statements than I did when I watched this live.

As of now I don't know if I have the motivation to do the full homework and rewatch all of the Starliner media calls from June to September of last year. But I am relieved to say that the first one I consider accurate, which I actually did not expect.

Obviously they could have been more stern or critical. But that is kind of out of character for them, as they haven't really taken that stance with any program/contractor. And this was so early in the storyline they really didn't have much info, and despite the troubles were also happy at that point Starliner brought crew to the station. They've probably never had one as bad as Starliner so it is new territory.

I've always found NASA human spaceflight engineers, like those on the Starliner media calls, to be fairly straightforward and honest. I don't believe I have ever been straight up lied to by a NASA program official. I feel I can generally trust what they say, which is healthy.

posted 04-04-2025 09:20 PM               

Further, there is a crew member on every expedition who is appointed USOS lead, whose job it is to brief the ISS commander on what is happening. So whoever that was, was keeping Kononenko informed.

posted 12-25-2025 10:33 AM               

"The ASAP finding is the lack of a declared in-flight mishap or high visibility close call contributed to an extensive, excessive … period of time where risk ownership and the decision-making authority were unclear," Precourt said.

NASA procedural requirements stipulate that the agency should declare a mishap in the event of an injury, destruction of property, or mission failure. A high visibility close call is an incident senior NASA leaders "judge to possess a high degree of programmatic impact or public, media, or political interest, including, but are not limited to, mishaps and close calls that impact flight hardware, flight software, or completion of critical mission milestones."

posted 02-19-2026 11:39 AM               

During a news conference today (Feb. 19) at 2 p.m. EST NASA will discuss the findings of investigations into the crewed test flight of Boeing's Starliner.

posted 02-19-2026 01:23 PM               

NASA Releases Report on Starliner Crewed Flight Test Investigation

At a news conference on Thursday (Feb. 19), NASA released a report of findings from the Program Investigation Team examining the Boeing CST-100 Starliner Crewed Flight Test as part of the agency's Commercial Crew Program.

"The Boeing Starliner spacecraft has faced challenges throughout its uncrewed and most recent crewed missions. While Boeing built Starliner, NASA accepted it and launched two astronauts to space. The technical difficulties encountered during docking with the International Space Station were very apparent," said NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman.

"To undertake missions that change the world, we must be transparent about both our successes and our shortcomings. We have to own our mistakes and ensure they never happen again. Beyond technical issues, it is clear that NASA permitted overarching programmatic objectives of having two providers capable of transporting astronauts to-and-from orbit, influence engineering and operational decisions, especially during and immediately after the mission. We are correcting those mistakes. Today, we are formally declaring a Type A mishap and ensuring leadership accountability so situations like this never reoccur. We look forward to working with Boeing as both organizations implement corrective actions and return Starliner to flight only when ready."

Starliner launched June 5, 2024, on its first crewed test flight to the International Space Station. Originally planned as an eight-to-14-day mission, the flight was extended to 93 days after propulsion system anomalies were identified while the spacecraft was in orbit. After reviewing flight data and conducting ground test at White Sands Test Facility, NASA decided to return the spacecraft without NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams. Starliner returned from the space station in September 2024, landing at White Sands Space Harbor in New Mexico. Wilmore and Williams later returned safely to Earth aboard the agency's SpaceX's Crew-9 mission in March 2025.

In February 2025, NASA chartered an independent Program Investigation Team to investigate the technical, organizational, and cultural contributors to the test flight issues.

This report was completed in November 2025. NASA and Boeing have been working together since Starliner returned 18 months ago to identify and address the challenges encountered during the mission, and the technical root cause work continues.

Investigators identified an interplay of combined hardware failures, qualification gaps, leadership missteps, and cultural breakdowns that created risk conditions inconsistent with NASA's human spaceflight safety standards. NASA will accept this as the final report.

As a result, NASA is taking corrective actions to address the findings of the report, in an effort to ensure the lessons learned contribute to crew and mission safety of future Starliner flights and all NASA programs. Due to the loss of the spacecraft's maneuverability as the crew approached the space station and the associated financial damages incurred, NASA has classified the test flight as a Type A mishap. While there were no injuries and the mission regained control prior to docking, this highest-level classification designation recognizes there was potential for a significant mishap.

NASA will continue to work closely with Boeing to fully understand and solve the technical challenges with the Starliner vehicle alongside incorporating the investigative recommendations before flying the next mission.

The full report includess redactions in coordination with our commercial partner to protect proprietary and privacy-sensitive material.

posted 02-20-2026 10:57 AM               

The failures of 737-Max are well documented and it is now obvious that Boeing would be held accountable for technical and managerial failure only when someone dies. That the crew of Starliner are still with us is blind luck. The statement from NASA says that implicitly.

So I will just repeat this from before the crewed mission.

posted 02-20-2026 11:30 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by star61:
The statement from NASA says that implicitly.

---

During rendezvous and proximity operations, propulsion anomalies cascaded into multiple thruster failures and a temporary loss of six-degree-of-freedom control. Controllers and crew performed with extraordinary professionalism. Flight rules were appropriately challenged, control was recovered, and docking was achieved.

It is worth restating what should be obvious. At that moment, had different decisions been made, had thrusters not been recovered, or had docking been unsuccessful, the outcome of this mission could have been very different.

posted 02-21-2026 10:20 AM               

I think we can agree that the crew and Mission Control certainly did act with skill and professionalism. Never a doubt about that in my mind.

The blind luck aspect is that Starliner failed in ways that crew and MC were able to overcome. Stating that an alternative and, therefore, more dire outcome was possible, means they couldn't be sure other failures were imminent.

posted 02-21-2026 10:34 AM               

Starliner was designed to be an astronaut's spacecraft, in that it had the ability for the crew to take over in situations that other spacecraft do not. It was designed from the start to give its pilots the capability of manually firing the thrusters even in a case where the computers were all offline. That was not due to luck; that was planning.

posted 02-21-2026 01:59 PM               

Sixty years after Gemini, having a manual back-up ability is not anything special. After years of development and billions of dollars, Boeing has managed to put two astronauts into space... and not return them.

I suspect when a hopefully clear eyed history is written of this era in spaceflight, Boeing will not appear in a good light. I wouldn't take good odds on there not being any more issues to be made public at some point.

My negativity with regards to current space exploration is not how I want to see things but how things actually are.

I realise the days of Apollo and Gemini were a different era, with almost unlimited money and a very intense time table. It was "War." However, it does genuinely feel like we have lost the ability to do what should be straight forward. I am immensely frustrated after being a space cadet since the 60s that we are still struggling to escape Earth's gravity well. The technology we have should make this easier not harder.

posted 02-21-2026 02:43 PM               

Starliner could be celebrated if, for example, at some point in the future, the Boeing ship begins routinely flying NASA astronaut crews to and from the space station and then SpaceX suffers a tragedy. In that situation, Boeing will be celebrated for sustaining U.S. human spaceflight in low Earth orbit.

posted 02-22-2026 03:43 AM               

Whether Starliner flies is probably doubtful. There is a lot to fix, and not much time left to fix it to achieve their Commercial Crew Contract promise. Even if commercial space stations come online, Starliner will struggle to compete with SpaceX for crew launches.

What would SpaceX charge Boeing to launch Starliner on a Falcon 9? Would it be cheaper than a Dragon launch? Is Falcon 9 cheaper than any other launch vehicle capable of launching Starliner? Starliner may die a death of a thousand cuts.

posted 02-23-2026 12:04 AM               

The contract was not a lump sum payment; Boeing got incrementally paid based on meeting certain milestones, which were agreed upon in the contract. Boeing did not meet the objectives of the first flight test, so it did not get paid and had to fund a second flight to meet the objectives to get paid for meeting that milestone.

In 2024, NASA and Boeing mutually agreed to modify the contract, reducing the order to four crewed missions, with the other two as options. This allowed NASA and Boeing to focus on safely certifying the system in 2026.