Enlarge/ NASA astronauts Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore, seen in their Boeing flight suits.
After months of consideration, NASA said Thursday that it will finally decide the fate of two astronauts on board the International Space Station, Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, by this weekend. As soon as Saturday, the two crew members will learn whether they’ll return on a Starliner spacecraft in early September or a Crew Dragon vehicle next February.
On the eve of this fateful decision, the most consequential human spaceflight safety determination NASA has had to make in more than two decades, Ars has put together a summary of what we know, what we believe to be true, and what remains yet unknown.
Why has NASA taken so long?
Wilmore and Williams arrived at the International Space Station 11 weeks ago. Their mission was supposed to last eight days, but there was some expectation that they might stay a little longer. However, no one envisioned the crew remaining this long. That changed when, during Starliner’s flight to the space station, five of the 28 small thrusters that guide Starliner failed. After some touch-and-go operations, the astronauts and flight controllers at Johnson Space Center coaxed the spacecraft to a safe docking at the station.
This failure in space led to months of testing, both on board the vehicle in space and with similar thrusters on the ground in New Mexico. This has been followed by extensive data reviews and modeling by engineers to try to understand the root cause of the thruster problems. On Friday, lower-level managers will meet in a Program Control Board to discuss their findings and make recommendations to senior managers. Those officials, with NASA Administrator Bill Nelson presiding, will make a final decision at a Flight Readiness Review on Saturday in Houston.
What are the two options?
NASA managers will decide whether to send the astronauts home on Starliner, possibly as early as September 2, or to fly back to Earth on a Crew Dragon vehicle scheduled to be launched on September 24. To make room for Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, this so-called “Crew-9” mission would launch with two astronauts instead of a full complement of four. Wilmore and Williams would then join this mission for their six-month increment on board the space station—their eight-day stay becoming eight months.
How are Butch and Suni feeling about this?
We don’t know, as they have not spoken to the media since it became apparent they could be in space for a long time. However, based on various sources, both of the crew members are taking it more or less in stride. They understand this is a test flight, and their training included the possibility of staying in space for an extended period of time if there were problems with Starliner.
That’s not to say it’s convenient. Both Wilmore and Williams have families back on Earth who expected them home by now, and the station was not set up for an extended stay. Wilmore, for example, has been having to sleep in a science laboratory rather than a designated sleeping area, so he has to pack up his personal things every morning.
What does seem clear is that Wilmore and Williams will accept NASA’s decision this weekend. In other words, they’re not going to stage a revolt in space. They trust NASA officials to make the right safety decision, whatever it ends up being. (So, for that matter, does Ars.)
Why is this a difficult decision?
First and foremost, NASA is concerned with getting its astronauts home safely. However, there are myriad other secondary decision factors, and bringing Butch and Suni home on Dragon instead of Starliner raises a host of new issues. Significantly among these is that it would be devastating for Boeing. Their public optics, should long-time rival SpaceX have to step in and “rescue” the crew from an “unsafe” Boeing vehicle, would be terrible. Moreover, the company has already lost $1.6 billion on the Starliner program, and there is the possibility that Boeing will shut it down. NASA does not want to lose a second provider of crew transport services to the space station.
Enlarge/ A high-resolution commercial Earth-imaging satellite owned by Maxar captured this view of the International Space Station on June 7 with Boeing’s Starliner capsule docked at the lab’s forward port (lower right).
Senior NASA leaders, including the agency’s administrator, Bill Nelson, will meet Saturday in Houston to decide whether Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft is safe enough to ferry astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams back to Earth from the International Space Station.
The Flight Readiness Review (FRR) is expected to conclude with NASA’s most consequential safety decision in nearly a generation. One option is to clear the Starliner spacecraft to undock from the space station in early September with Wilmore and Williams onboard, as their flight plan initially laid out, or to bring the capsule home without its crew.
As of Thursday, the two veteran astronauts have been on the space station for 77 days, nearly 10 times longer than their planned stay of eight days. Wilmore and Williams were the first people to launch and dock at the space station aboard a Starliner spacecraft, but multiple thrusters failed and the capsule leaked helium from its propulsion system as it approached the orbiting complex on June 6.
That led to months of testing—in space and on the ground—data reviews, and modeling for engineers to try to understand the root cause of the thruster problems. Engineers believe the thrusters overheated, causing Teflon seals to bulge and block the flow of propellant to the small control jets, resulting in losing thrust. The condition of the thrusters improved once Starliner docked at the station when they weren’t repeatedly firing, as they need to do when the spacecraft is flying alone.
However, engineers and managers have not yet reached a consensus about whether the same problem could recur, or get worse, during the capsule’s journey back to Earth. In a worst-case scenario, if too many thrusters fail, the spacecraft would be unable to point in the proper direction for a critical braking burn to guide the capsule back into the atmosphere toward landing.
The suspect thrusters are located on Starliner’s service module, which will perform the deorbit burn and then separate from the astronaut-carrying crew module before reentry. A separate set of small engines will fine-tune Starliner’s trajectory during descent.
If NASA managers decide it’s not worth the risk, Wilmore and Williams would extend their stay on the space station until at least February of next year, when they would return to Earth inside a Dragon spacecraft provided by SpaceX, Boeing’s rival in NASA’s commercial crew program. This would eliminate the threat that thruster problems on the Starliner spacecraft might pose to the crew’s safety during the trip to Earth, but it comes with myriad side effects.
These effects include disrupting crew activities on the space station by bumping two astronauts off the next SpaceX flight, exposing Wilmore and Williams to additional radiation during their time in space, and dealing a debilitating blow to Boeing’s Starliner program.
If Boeing’s capsule cannot return to Earth with its two astronauts, NASA may not certify Starliner for operational crew missions without an additional test flight. In that case, Boeing probably wouldn’t be able to complete all six of its planned operational crew missions under a $4.2 billion NASA contract before the International Space Station is due for retirement in 2030.
FRR-eedom to speak
The Flight Readiness Review at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston will begin Saturday morning. Ken Bowersox, a former astronaut and head of NASA’s Space Operations Mission Directorate, will chair the meeting. NASA Administrator Bill Nelson will participate, too. If there’s no unanimous agreement around the table at the FRR, a final decision on what to do could be elevated above Bowersox to NASA’s associate administrator, Jim Free or to Nelson.
“The agency flight readiness review is where any formal dissents are presented and reconciled,” NASA said in a statement Thursday. “Other agency leaders who routinely participate in launch and return readiness reviews for crewed missions include NASA’s administrator, deputy administrator, associate administrator, various agency center directors, the Flight Operations Directorate, and agency technical authorities.”
NASA has scheduled a press conference for no earlier than 1 pm ET (17: 00 UTC) Saturday to announce the agency’s decision and next steps, the agency said.
Lower-level managers will meet Friday in a so-called Program Control Board to discuss their findings and views before the FRR. At a previous Program Control Board meeting, managers disagreed on whether the agency was ready to sign off that the Starliner spacecraft was safe enough to return its astronauts to Earth.
There’s one new piece of information that engineers will brief to the Program Control Board on Friday:
“Engineering teams have been working to evaluate a new model that represents the thruster mechanics and is designed to more accurately predict performance during the return phase of flight,” NASA said. “This data could help teams better understand system redundancy from undock to service module separation. Ongoing efforts to complete the new modeling, characterize spacecraft performance data, refine integrated risk assessments, and determine community recommendations will fold into the agency-level review.”
Enlarge/ A Falcon 9 booster returns to landing at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station following a launch Thursday with two WorldView Earth observation satellites for Maxar.
Welcome to Edition 7.07 of the Rocket Report! SpaceX has not missed a beat since the Federal Aviation Administration gave the company a green light to resume Falcon 9 launches after a failure last month. In 19 days, SpaceX has launched 10 flights of the Falcon 9 rocket, taking advantage of all three of its Falcon 9 launch pads. This is a remarkable cadence in its own right, but even though it’s a small sample size, it is especially impressive right out of the gate after the rocket’s grounding.
As always, we welcome reader submissions. If you don’t want to miss an issue, please subscribe using the box below (the form will not appear on AMP-enabled versions of the site). Each report will include information on small-, medium-, and heavy-lift rockets as well as a quick look ahead at the next three launches on the calendar.
A quick turnaround for Rocket Lab. Rocket Lab launched its 52nd Electron rocket on August 11 from its private spaceport on Mahia Peninsula in New Zealand, Space News reports. The company’s light-class Electron rocket deployed a small radar imaging satellite into a mid-inclination orbit for Capella Space. This was the shortest turnaround between two Rocket Lab missions from its primary launch base in New Zealand, coming less than nine days after an Electron rocket took off from the same pad with a radar imaging satellite for the Japanese company Synspective. Capella’s Acadia 3 satellite was originally supposed to launch in July, but Capella requested a delay to perform more testing of its spacecraft. Rocket Lab swapped its place in the Electron launch sequence and launched the Synspective mission first.
Now, silence at the launch pad … Rocket Lab hailed the swap as an example of the flexibility provided by Electron, as well as the ability to deliver payloads to specific orbits that are not feasible with rideshare missions, according to Space News. For this tailored launch service, Rocket Lab charges a premium launch price over the price of launching a small payload on a SpaceX rideshare mission. However, SpaceX’s rideshare launches gobble up the lion’s share of small satellites within Rocket Lab’s addressable market. On Friday, a Falcon 9 rocket is slated to launch 116 small payloads into polar orbit. Rocket Lab, meanwhile, projects just one more launch before the end of September and expects to perform 15 to 18 Electron launches this year, a record for the company but well short of the 22 it forecasted earlier in the year. Rocket Lab says customer readiness is the reason it will be far short of projections.
The easiest way to keep up with Eric Berger’s space reporting is to sign up for his newsletter, we’ll collect his stories in your inbox.
Defense contractors teaming up on solid rockets. Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics are joining forces to kickstart solid rocket motor production, announcing a strategic teaming agreement today that could see new motors roll off the line as early as 2025, Breaking Defense reports. The new agreement could position a third vendor to enter into the ailing solid rocket motor industrial base, which currently only includes L3Harris subsidiary Aerojet Rocketdyne and Northrop Grumman in the United States. Both companies have struggled to meet demands from weapons makers like Lockheed and RTX, which are in desperate need of solid rocket motors for products such as Javelin or the PAC-3 missiles used by the Patriot missile defense system.
Pressure from startups … Demand for solid rocket motors has skyrocketed since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as the United States and its partners sought to backfill stocks of weapons like Javelin and Stinger, as well as provide motors to meet growing needs in the space domain. Although General Dynamics has kept its interest in the solid rocket motor market quiet until now, several defense tech startups, such as Ursa Major Technologies, Anduril, and X-Bow Systems, have announced plans to enter the market. (submitted by Ken the Bin)
Going polar with crew. SpaceX will fly the first human spaceflight over the Earth’s poles, possibly before the end of this year, Ars reports. The private Crew Dragon mission will be led by a Chinese-born cryptocurrency entrepreneur named Chun Wang, and he will be joined by a polar explorer, a roboticist, and a filmmaker whom he has befriended in recent years. The “Fram2” mission, named after the Norwegian research ship Fram, will launch into a polar corridor from SpaceX’s launch facilities in Florida and fly directly over the north and south poles. The three- to five-day mission is being timed to fly over Antarctica near the summer solstice in the Southern Hemisphere, to afford maximum lighting.
Wang’s inclination is Wang’s prerogative … Wang told Ars he wanted to try something new, and flying a polar mission aligned with his interests in cold places on Earth. He’s paying the way on a commercial basis, and SpaceX in recent years has demonstrated it can launch satellites into polar orbit from Cape Canaveral, Florida, something no one had done in more than 50 years. The highest-inclination flight ever by a human spacecraft was the Soviet Vostok 6 mission in 1963 when Valentina Tereshkova’s spacecraft reached 65.1 degrees. Now, Fram2 will fly repeatedly and directly over the poles.
Enlarge/ Artist’s illustration of NASA’s Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer spacecraft.
Last week, NASA decommissioned a nearly 15-year-old spacecraft that discovered 400 near-Earth asteroids and comets, closing an important chapter in the agency’s planetary defense program.
From its position in low-Earth orbit, the spacecraft’s infrared telescope scanned the entire sky 23 times and captured millions of images, initially searching for infrared emissions from galaxies, stars, and asteroids before focusing solely on objects within the Solar System.
Wising up to NEOs
The Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer, or WISE, spacecraft launched in December 2009 on a mission originally designed to last seven months. After WISE completed checkouts and ended its primary all-sky astronomical survey, NASA put the spacecraft into hibernation in 2011 after its supply of frozen hydrogen coolant ran out, reducing the sensitivity of its infrared detectors. But astronomers saw that the telescope could still detect objects closer to Earth, and NASA reactivated the mission in 2013 for another decade of observations.
The reborn mission was known as NEOWISE (Near-Earth Object Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer). Its purpose was to use the spacecraft’s infrared vision to detect faint asteroids and comets on trajectories that bring them close to Earth.
“We never thought it would last this long,” said Amy Mainzer, NEOWISE’s principal investigator from the University of Arizona and UCLA.
Ground controllers at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California sent the final command to the NEOWISE spacecraft on August 8. The spacecraft, currently at an altitude of about 217 miles (350 kilometers), is falling out of orbit as atmospheric drag slows it down. NASA expects the spacecraft will reenter the atmosphere and burn up before the end of this year, a few months earlier than expected, due to higher levels of solar activity, which causes expansion in the upper atmosphere. The satellite doesn’t have its own propulsion to boost itself into a higher orbit.
“The Sun’s just been incredibly quiet for many years now, but it’s picking back up, and it was the right time to let it go,” Mainzer told Ars.
Astronomers have used ground-based telescopes to discover most of the near-Earth objects detected so far. But there’s an advantage to using a space-based telescope, because Earth’s atmosphere absorbs most of the infrared energy coming from faint objects like asteroids.
With ground-based telescopes, astronomers are “predominantly seeing sunlight reflecting off the surfaces of the objects,” Mainzer said. NEOWISE measures thermal emissions from the asteroids, giving scientists information about their sizes. “We can actually get pretty good measurements of size with relatively few infrared measurements,” she said.
The telescope on NEOWISE was relatively modest in size, with a 16-inch (40-centimeter) primary mirror, more than 16 times smaller than the mirror on the James Webb Space Telescope. But its wide field of view allowed NEOWISE to scour the sky for infrared light sources, making it well-suited for studying large populations of objects. One of the mission’s most famous discoveries was a comet officially named C/2020 F3, more commonly known as Comet NEOWISE, which became visible to the naked eye in 2020. As the comet moved closer to Earth, large telescopes like Hubble were able to take a closer look.
“The NEOWISE mission has been an extraordinary success story as it helped us better understand our place in the universe by tracking asteroids and comets that could be hazardous for us on Earth,” said Nicola Fox, associate administrator of NASA’s science mission directorate.
What’s out there?
The original mission of WISE and the extended survey of NEOWISE combined to discover 366 near-Earth asteroids and 34 comets, according to the Center for Near-Earth Object Studies. Of these, 64 were classified as potentially hazardous asteroids, meaning they come within 4.65 million miles (7.48 million kilometers) of Earth and are at least 500 feet (140 meters) in diameter. These are the objects astronomers want to find and track in order to predict if they pose a risk of colliding with Earth.
There are roughly 2,400 known potentially hazardous asteroids, but there are more lurking out there. Another advantage of using space-based telescopes to search for these asteroids is that they can observe 24 hours a day, while telescopes on the ground are limited to nighttime surveys. Some hazardous asteroids, such as the house-sized object that exploded in the atmosphere over Chelyabinsk, Russia, in 2013, approach Earth from the direction of the Sun. A space telescope has a better chance of finding these kinds of asteroids.
WISE, and then the extended mission of NEOWISE, helped scientists estimate there are approximately 25,000 near-Earth objects.
“The objects (NEOWISE) did discover tended to be overwhelmingly just dark, [and] these are the objects that are much more likely to be missed by the ground-based telescopes,” Mainzer said. “So that, in turn, gives us a much better idea of how many are really out there.”
Enlarge/ Administrator Bill Nelson delivering remarks and answering questions from the media at the OFT-2 prelaunch press conference.
Trevor Mahlmann
Ars Technica recently had the opportunity to speak with NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, who has now led the US space agency for more than three years. We spoke about budget issues, Artemis Program timelines, and NASA’s role as a soft power in global diplomacy. What follows is a very lightly edited transcript of the conversation between Senior Space Editor Eric Berger and Nelson.
Ars Technica: I wanted to start with NASA’s budget for next year. We’ve now seen the numbers from the House of Senate, and NASA is once again facing some cuts. And I’m just wondering, what are your big concerns as we get into the final budgeting process this fall?
Administrator Bill Nelson: Well, the big concern is that you can’t put 10 pounds of potatoes in a five-pound sack. When you get cut $4.7 billion over two years, and when $2 billion of that over two years is just in science, then you have to start making some hard choices. Now, I understand the reasons for the cuts. Had I still been a member of the Senate I would’ve voted for it simply because they were held hostage by a small group in the House to get what they wanted. Which was reduced appropriations in order to raise the artificial, statutory budget debt ceiling in order for the government not to go into default. That’s part of the legislative process. It’s part of the compromises that go on. It happened over a year ago, and it was called the Fiscal Responsibility Act. The price for doing that wasn’t cuts across the entire budget. Remember, two-thirds of the budget is entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare, and it certainly wasn’t in defense. So, all the cuts came out of everything left over, including NASA. I’m hoping that we’re going to get a reprieve come fiscal year ’26 when we will not be in the budgetary constraints of the Fiscal Responsibility Act. But who knows? Because lo and behold, they’ve got another artificial debt ceiling they’re going to have to raise next January.
Ars: What would you say to scientists who are concerned about Chandra, the cancellation of Viper, and Mars Sample Return, who see the budget for Artemis Program holding steady or even going up? It seems to me those of us who lived through Constellation saw this unfolding 15 to 20 years ago. Is the same thing happening with Artemis, is science being cannibalized to pay for human exploration?
Nelson: My response to the scientists is, I feel your pain. But, when I am faced with $2 billion of cuts over two years just in Science, I can’t go and print the dollars. And so, we have to make hard choices. Now, let’s go through those ones that you mentioned. Mars Sample Return. This was getting way out of control. It was going up to $11 billion, and we weren’t even going to get a sample return until 2040. And that’s the decade that when we’re going to land astronauts on Mars. So, something had to be done.
I convinced the budget director, Shalanda Young (director of the US Office of Management and Budget), and she was a partner in this, that we need to get those samples back. And so we pulled the plug on it. We said, “We’re going to start over, and we’re going to go out to all the NASA centers and to private industry, and we’re going to solicit and give some incentive money for their studies. And those studies will come back in, and by the end of the year, we will make a decision.” I’m hopeful that we are going to find such creativity and fiscal discipline that we’re going to end up with a much cheaper Mars sample return that will come back in the mid-30s, instead of all the way to 2040. So, if that’s what happens, and every indication I get is we’re getting some really creative proposals, if that’s what happens, then it’s a win-win. It’s a win for the taxpayer clearly. It’s a win for NASA because we didn’t have the money to spend $11 billion on it.
So, that’s one example. Another one that you used is Viper. Viper was running 40 percent over budget. Now, there comes a limit, and when you have to take a $2 billion hit just to science, you have to make tough choices. And so, that decision was made. We’re still getting (to the Moon) with Intuitive Machines at the end of the year. We are getting a lander that is going to drill to see if there is water underneath the surface. Understand that Viper was a much bigger rover, and it was going to rove around, but it was also 40 percent over budget. And so, these are the choices that you have to make.
You mentioned Chandra. By the way, I think we’ve worked Chandra out. Although it’s not going to have the funding way up there at the top funding. What we have worked out is, we are going to from what we requested, which was $41 million, it’s going to be some amount in excess of that. Although there will be some layoffs, not nearly as many, and all of the science will be protected. There will not be any diminution of the science.
Enlarge/ Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft, seen docked at the International Space Station through the window of a SpaceX Dragon spacecraft.
As soon as this week, NASA officials will make perhaps the agency’s most consequential safety decision in human spaceflight in 21 years.
NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams are nearly 10 weeks into a test flight that was originally set to last a little more than one week. The two retired US Navy test pilots were the first people to fly into orbit on Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft when it launched on June 5. Now, NASA officials aren’t sure Starliner is safe enough to bring the astronauts home.
Three of the managers at the center of the pending decision, Ken Bowersox and Steve Stich from NASA and Boeing’s LeRoy Cain, either had key roles in the ill-fated final flight of Space Shuttle Columbia in 2003 or felt the consequences of the accident.
At that time, officials misjudged the risk. Seven astronauts died, and the Space Shuttle Columbia was destroyed as it reentered the atmosphere over Texas. Bowersox, Stich, and Cain weren’t the people making the call on the health of Columbia‘s heat shield in 2003, but they had front-row seats to the consequences.
Bowersox was an astronaut on the International Space Station when NASA lost Columbia. He and his crewmates were waiting to hitch a ride home on the next Space Shuttle mission, which was delayed two-and-a-half years in the wake of the Columbia accident. Instead, Bowersox’s crew came back to Earth later that year on a Russian Soyuz capsule. After retiring from the astronaut corps, Bowersox worked at SpaceX and is now the head of NASA’s spaceflight operations directorate.
Stich and Cain were NASA flight directors in 2003, and they remain well-respected in human spaceflight circles. Stich is now the manager of NASA’s commercial crew program, and Cain is now a Boeing employee and chair of the company’s Starliner mission director. For the ongoing Starliner mission, Bowersox, Stich, and Cain are in the decision-making chain.
All three joined NASA in the late 1980s, soon after the Challenger accident. They have seen NASA attempt to reshape its safety culture after both of NASA’s fatal Space Shuttle tragedies. After Challenger, NASA’s astronaut office had a more central role in safety decisions, and the agency made efforts to listen to dissent from engineers. Still, human flaws are inescapable, and NASA’s culture was unable to alleviate them during Columbia‘s last flight in 2003.
NASA knew launching a Space Shuttle in cold weather reduced the safety margin on its solid rocket boosters, which led to the Challenger accident. And shuttle managers knew foam routinely fell off the external fuel tank. In a near-miss, one of these foam fragments hit a shuttle booster but didn’t damage it, just two flights prior to Columbia‘s STS-107 mission.
“I have wondered if some in management roles today that were here when we lost Challenger and Columbia remember that in both of those tragedies, there were those that were not comfortable proceeding,” Milt Heflin, a retired NASA flight director who spent 47 years at the agency, wrote in an email to Ars. “Today, those memories are still around.”
“I suspect Stich and Cain are paying attention to the right stuff,” Heflin wrote.
The question facing NASA’s leadership today? Should the two astronauts return to Earth from the International Space Station in Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft, with its history of thruster failures and helium leaks, or should they come home on a SpaceX Dragon capsule?
Under normal conditions, the first option is the choice everyone at NASA would like to make. It would be least disruptive to operations at the space station and would potentially maintain a clearer future for Boeing’s Starliner program, which NASA would like to become operational for regular crew rotation flights to the station.
But some people at NASA aren’t convinced this is the right call. Engineers still don’t fully understand why five of the Starliner spacecraft’s thrusters overheated and lost power as the capsule approached the space station for docking in June. Four of these five control jets are now back in action with near-normal performance, but managers would like to be sure the same thrusters—and maybe more—won’t fail again as Starliner departs the station and heads for reentry.
Enlarge/ Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft is lifted to be placed atop an Atlas V rocket for its first crewed launch.
United Launch Alliance
NASA is planning to significantly delay the launch of the Crew 9 mission to the International Space Station due to ongoing concerns about the Starliner spacecraft currently attached to the station.
While the space agency has not said anything publicly, sources say NASA should announce the decision this week. Officials are contemplating moving the Crew-9 mission from its current date of August 18 to September 24, a significant slip.
Nominally, this Crew Dragon mission will carry NASA astronauts Zena Cardman, spacecraft commander; Nick Hague, pilot; and Stephanie Wilson, mission specialist; as well as Roscosmos cosmonaut Alexander Gorbunov, for a six-month journey to the space station. However, NASA has been considering alternatives to the crew lineup—possibly launching with two astronauts instead of four—due to ongoing discussions about the viability of Starliner to safely return astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams to Earth.
As of late last week, NASA still had not decided whether the Starliner vehicle, which is built and operated by Boeing, should be used to fly its two crew members home. During its launch and ascent to the space station two months ago, five small thrusters on the Starliner spacecraft failed. After extensive ground testing of the thrusters, as well as some brief in-space firings, NASA had planned to make a decision last week on whether to return Starliner with crew. However, a Flight Readiness Review planned for last Thursday was delayed after internal disagreements at NASA about the safety of Starliner.
At issue is the performance of the small reaction control system thrusters in proximity to the space station. If the right combination of them fail before Starliner has moved sufficiently far from the station, Starliner could become uncontrollable and collide with the space station. The thrusters are also needed later in the flight back to Earth to set up the critical de-orbit burn and entry in Earth’s atmosphere.
Software struggles
NASA has quietly been studying the possibility of crew returning in a Dragon for more than a month. As NASA and Boeing engineers have yet to identify a root cause of the thruster failure, the possibility of Wilmore and Williams returning on a Dragon spacecraft has increased in the last 10 days. NASA has consistently said that ‘crew safety’ will be its No. 1 priority in deciding how to proceed.
The Crew 9 delay is relevant to the Starliner dilemma for a couple of reasons. One, it gives NASA more time to determine the flight-worthiness of Starliner. However, there is also another surprising reason for the delay—the need to update Starliner’s flight software. Three separate, well-placed sources have confirmed to Ars that the current flight software on board Starliner cannot perform an automated undocking from the space station and entry into Earth’s atmosphere.
At first blush, this seems absurd. After all, Boeing’s Orbital Flight Test 2 mission in May 2022 was a fully automated test of the Starliner vehicle. During this mission, the spacecraft flew up to the space station without crew on board and then returned to Earth six days later. Although the 2022 flight test was completed by a different Starliner vehicle, it clearly demonstrated the ability of the program’s flight software to autonomously dock and return to Earth. Boeing did not respond to a media query about why this capability was removed for the crew flight test.
Welcome to Edition 7.05 of the Rocket Report! The Federal Aviation Administration grounded SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket for 15 days after a rare failure of its upper stage earlier this month. The FAA gave the green light for Falcon 9 to return to flight July 25, and within a couple of days, SpaceX successfully launched three missions from three launch pads. There’s a lot on Falcon 9’s to-do list, so we expect SpaceX to quickly return to form with several flights per week.
As always, we welcome reader submissions. If you don’t want to miss an issue, please subscribe using the box below (the form will not appear on AMP-enabled versions of the site). Each report will include information on small-, medium-, and heavy-lift rockets as well as a quick look ahead at the next three launches on the calendar.
Big delay for a reusable rocket testbed. The French space agency, CNES, has revealed that the inaugural test flight of its Callisto reusable rocket demonstrator will not take place until late 2025 or early 2026, European Spaceflight reports. CNES unveiled an updated website for the Callisto rocket program earlier this month, showing the test rocket has been delayed from a debut launch later this year to until late 2025 or early 2026. The Callisto rocket is designed to test techniques and technologies required for reusable rockets, such as vertical takeoff and vertical landing, with suborbital flights from the Guiana Space Center in South America.
Cooperative action … Callisto, which stands for Cooperative Action Leading to Launcher Innovation in Stage Toss-back Operations, is a joint project between CNES, German space agency DLR, and JAXA, the Japanese space agency. It will stand 14 meters (46 feet) tall and weigh about 4 metric tons (8,800 pounds), with an engine supplied by Japan. Callisto is one of several test projects in Europe aiming to pave the way for a future reusable rocket. (submitted by EllPeaTea and Ken the Bin)
The easiest way to keep up with Eric Berger’s space reporting is to sign up for his newsletter, we’ll collect his stories in your inbox.
Small step for Themis. Another European project established to demonstrate reusable rocket tech is making slow progress toward a first flight. The Themis project, funded by the European Space Agency, is similar in purpose to the Callisto testbed discussed above. This week, the German aerospace manufacturing company MT Aerospace announced it has begun testing a demonstrator of the landing legs that will be used aboard the Themis reusable booster, European Spaceflight reports. The landing legs for Themis are made of carbon fiber-reinforced plastic composites, and the initial test demonstrated good deployment and showed it would withstand the impact energy of landing.
Also delayed … Like Callisto, Themis is facing delays in getting to the launch pad. ArianeGroup, the ESA-selected Themis prime contractor, had been expected to conduct an initial hop test of the demonstrator before the end of 2024. However, officials have announced the initial hop tests won’t happen until sometime next year. The Themis booster is intended to eventually become the first stage booster for an orbital-class partially reusable rocket being developed by MaiaSpace, a subsidiary of ArianeGroup. (submitted by Ken the Bin)
Falcon 9 is flying again. A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket returned to flight on July 27, barely two weeks after an upper stage failure ended a streak of more than 300 consecutive successful launches, Ars reports. By some measures this was an extremely routine mission—it was, after all, SpaceX’s 73rd launch of this calendar year. And like many other Falcon 9 launches this year, the “Starlink 10-9” mission carried 23 of the broadband Internet satellites into orbit. However, after a rare failure earlier this month, this particular Falcon 9 rocket was making a return-to-flight for the company and attempting to get the world’s most active booster back into service.
Best part is no part … The Falcon 9 successfully deployed its payload of Starlink satellites about an hour after lifting off from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Later in the weekend, SpaceX launched two more Starlink missions on Falcon 9 rockets from Florida and California, notching three flights in less than 28 hours. The launch failure on the previous Falcon 9 launch was caused by a liquid oxygen leak on the upper stage, which led to a “hard start” on the upper stage engine when it attempted to reignite in flight. Engineers and technicians were quickly able to pinpoint the cause of the leak, a crack in a “sense line” for a pressure sensor attached to the vehicle’s liquid oxygen system.
Atlas V’s NSSL era is over. United Launch Alliance delivered a classified US military payload to orbit Tuesday for the last time with an Atlas V rocket, ending the Pentagon’s use of Russian rocket engines as national security missions transition to all-American launchers, Ars reports. This was the 101st launch of an Atlas V rocket since its debut in 2002, and the 58th and final Atlas V mission with a US national security payload since 2007. The Atlas V is powered by an RD-180 main engine made in Russia, and with a little prodding from SpaceX (via a lawsuit) and Congress, the Pentagon started making moves to end its reliance on the RD-180 a decade ago.
Other options available … The RD-180 never failed on a National Security Space Launch (NSSL) mission using the Atlas V rocket, but its use became politically untenable after Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, which predated Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine eight years later. SpaceX began launching US military missions in 2018, and ULA debuted its new Vulcan rocket in January. Assuming a successful second test flight of Vulcan in September, ULA’s next-generation rocket has a good shot at launching its first national security mission by the end of the year. The Space Force’s policy is to maintain at least two independent launch vehicles capable of flying military payloads into orbit. Vulcan and SpaceX’s Falcon rocket family fulfill that requirement, so the military no longer needs the Atlas V. However, 15 more Atlas V rockets remain in ULA’s inventory for future commercial flights.
Crackdown at the Cape. While this week’s landmark launch of the Atlas V rocket is worthy of celebration, there’s a new ULA policy that deserves ridicule, Ars reports. Many of the spectacular photos of rocket launches shared on social media come from independent photographers, who often make little to no money working for an established media organization. Instead, they rely on sales of prints to recoup at least some of their expenses for gas, food, and camera equipment needed to capture these images, which often serve as free publicity for launch providers like ULA. Last month, ULA announced it will no longer permit these photographers to set up remote cameras at their launch pads if they sell their images independently. This new policy was in place for the Atlas V launch from Cape Canaveral, Florida, on Tuesday morning.
But why? … “ULA will periodically confirm editorial publication for media participating in remote camera placement,” ULA stated in an email distributed to photographers last month. “If publication does not occur, or photos are sold outside of editorial purposes, privileges to place remote cameras may be revoked.” To the photographers who spend many hours preparing their equipment, waiting to set up and remove cameras, and persevering through scrubs and more, it seemed like a harsh judgment. And nobody knows why it happened. ULA has offered no public comment about the new policy, and the company did not respond to questions from Ars about the agreement.
Astroscale achieves a first in orbit. There are more than 2,000 mostly intact dead rockets circling the Earth, but until this year, no one ever launched a satellite to go see what one looked like after many years of tumbling around the planet, Ars reports. A Japanese company named Astroscale launched a small satellite in February to chase down the derelict upper stage from a Japanese H-IIA rocket. Astroscale’s ADRAS-J spacecraft arrived near the H-IIA upper stage in April, and the company announced this week that its satellite has now completed two 360-degree fly-arounds of the rocket. This is the first time a satellite has maneuvered around an actual piece of space junk, and it offers an unprecedented snapshot of how an abandoned rocket holds up to 15 years in the harsh environment of space.
Prepping for the future … Astroscale’s ADRAS-J mission is partially funded by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA). Astroscale and JAXA also have a contract for a follow-up mission named ADRAS-J2, which will attempt to link up with the same H-IIA rocket and steer it on a trajectory to burn up in Earth’s atmosphere. This would be the first demonstration of active debris removal, a concept pursued by Astroscale and other companies to help clear space junk out of low-Earth orbit.
An update on Ariane 6. The European Space Agency has released its first update on the results from the first flight of the Ariane 6 rocket since its launch July 9. Europe’s new flagship rocket had a mostly successful inaugural test flight. Its first stage, solid rocket boosters, and upper stage performed as expected for the first phase of the flight, delivering eight small satellites into an on-target orbit. The launch pad at the Guiana Space Center in South America also held up to the violent environment of launch, ESA said.
Still investigating … However, the final phase of the mission didn’t go according to plan. The upper stage’s Vinci engine was supposed to reignite for a third time on the test flight to deorbit the rocket, which would have released two small reentry capsules on technology demonstration missions to test heat shield technologies. This didn’t happen. An Auxiliary Propulsion Unit, which is a small engine to provide additional bursts of thrust and pressurize the upper stage’s propellant tanks, shut down shortly after startup ahead of the third burn of the primary Vinci engine. “This meant the Vinci engine’s third boost could not take place,” ESA said. “Analysis of the APU’s behavior is ongoing and further information will be made available as soon as possible, while the next task force update is expected in September.” (submitted by Ken the Bin)
Room to grow at Starbase. SpaceX has since launched Starship four times from its launch site in South Texas, known as Starbase, and is planning a fifth launch within the next two months, Ars reports. However, as it continues to test Starship and make plans for regular flights, SpaceX will need a higher flight rate. This is especially true as the company is unlikely to activate additional launch pads for Starship in Florida until at least 2026. To that end, SpaceX has asked the FAA for permission for up to 25 flights a year from South Texas, as well as the capability to land both the Starship upper stage and Super Heavy booster stage back at the launch site.
The answer is probably yes … On Monday, the FAA signaled that it is inclined to grant this request. The agency released a draft assessment indicating that its extensive 2022 analysis of Starship launch activities on the environment, wildlife, local communities, and more was sufficient to account for SpaceX’s proposal for more launches. There is more to do for this conclusion to become official, including public meetings and a public comment period this month.
SpaceX eyes Australia. SpaceX is in talks with US and Australian officials to land and recover one of its Starship rockets off Australia’s coast, a possible first step toward a bigger presence for Elon Musk’s company in the region as the two countries bolster security ties, Reuters reports. At the end of SpaceX’s fourth Starship test flight in June, the rocket made a controlled splashdown in the Indian Ocean hundreds of miles off the northwest coast of Australia. The discussions now underway are focused on the possibility of towing a future Starship vehicle from its splashdown point in the ocean to a port in Australia, where SpaceX engineers could inspect it and learn more about how it performed.
Eventually, it’ll come back to land … On the next Starship flight, currently planned for no earlier than late August, SpaceX plans to attempt to recover Starship’s giant Super Heavy booster using catch arms on the launch pad tower in Texas. On Sunday, Elon Musk told SpaceX and Tesla enthusiasts at an event called the “X Takeover” that it will take a few more flights for engineers to get comfortable returning the Starship itself to a landing onshore. “We want to be really confident that the ship heat shield is super robust and lands at the exact right location,” he said. “So before we try to bring the ship back to the launch site, we probably want to have at least three successful landings of the ship [at sea].” (submitted by Ken the Bin)
Next three launches
August 2: Electron | “Owl for One, One for Owl” | Mahia Peninsula, New Zealand | 16: 39 UTC
August 3: Falcon 9 | NG-21 | Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida | 15: 28 UTC
August 4: Falcon 9 | Starlink 11-1 | Vandenberg Space Force Base, California | 07: 00 UTC
Enlarge/ Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft is seen docked at the International Space Station on June 13.
It has now been eight weeks since Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft launched into orbit on an Atlas V rocket, bound for the International Space Station. At the time NASA officials said the two crew members, Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, could return to Earth as soon as June 14, just eight days later.
Yes, there had been some problems on Starliner’s ride to the space station that involved helium leaks and failing thrusters. But officials said they were relatively minor and sought to downplay them. “Those are pretty small, really, issues to deal with,” Mark Nappi, vice president and manager of Boeing’s Commercial Crew Program, said during a post-docking news conference. “We’ll figure them out for the next mission. I don’t see these as significant at all.”
But days turned to weeks, and weeks turned to months as NASA and Boeing continued to study the two technical problems. Of these issues, the more pressing concern was the failure of multiple reaction control system thrusters that are essential to steering Starliner during its departure from the space station and setting up a critical engine burn to enter Earth’s atmosphere.
In the last few weeks, ground teams from NASA and Boeing completed testing of a thruster on a test stand at White Sands, New Mexico. Then, last weekend, Boeing and NASA fired the spacecraft’s thrusters in orbit to check their performance while docked at the space station. NASA has said preliminary results from these tests were helpful.
Dragon becomes a real option
One week ago, the last time NASA officials spoke to the media, the agency’s program manager for commercial crew, Steve Stich, would not be drawn into discussing what would happen should NASA conclude that Starliner’s thrusters were not reliable enough for the return journey to Earth.
“Our prime option is to complete the mission,” Stich said one week ago. “There are a lot of good reasons to complete this mission and bring Butch and Suni home on Starliner. Starliner was designed, as a spacecraft, to have the crew in the cockpit.”
For a long time, it seemed almost certain that the astronauts would return to Earth inside Starliner. However, there has been a lot of recent activity at NASA, Boeing, and SpaceX that suggests that Wilmore and Williams could come home aboard a Crew Dragon spacecraft rather than Starliner. Due to the critical importance of this mission, Ars is sharing what we know as of Thursday afternoon.
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.”
Enlarge/ A rendering of NASA’s proposed lunar gateway.
NASA
Do you remember the Lunar Gateway? You could be forgiven if not, as the program continues to be tossed around by NASA planners, and it is still not entirely clear what purpose the lunar space station is supposed to serve.
The Gateway—a small space station that will fly in a halo orbit around the Moon and spend most of its time far from the lunar surface—was initially supposed to launch in 2022. That obviously did not happen, and now, according to a new report from the US Government Accountability Office, the space agency does not expect the launch of the initial elements of the Gateway until at least December 2027. The baseline cost estimate is $5.3 billion.
NASA’s present plans contemplate using the Gateway as part of the Artemis IV mission, presently scheduled for September 2028. Unfortunately, the Gateway’s current launch target is already three months later than needed to support Artemis IV, the second mission to land humans on the Moon. But that’s OK. There are a lot of other moving parts for this mission, so a launch any time this decade would be a win.
The report includes a helpful cartoon to explain the complicated sequence that needs to happen for Gateway to be involved in the Artemis IV mission:
Launch of the initial segments of the Gateway, a power and propulsion module, and a habitation module, to a halo orbit around the Moon
Launch of a SpaceX Dragon XL vehicle to bring supplies to the Gateway
Launch of multiple SpaceX Starships to fuel a Lunar Starship, which will then fly to and dock with the Gateway
Launch of a NASA Space Launch System rocket carrying four astronauts inside an Orion spacecraft as well as another Gateway module
After launch, Orion separates from the rocket and docks with this module, the International Habitat
Orion tugs the International Habitat to the Gateway and docks; the crew exits onto Gateway
Two crew members board the Lunar Starship and go down to the Moon for six days
Starship flies back to the Gateway, and the four astronauts return to Earth inside Orion.
How the Artemis IV mission will (probably) take place.
US GAO
In a rather understated manner, the report notes that this plan is fairly complex and faces some serious schedule risks.
“This mission will be complex because NASA will need to coordinate across seven NASA programs, multiple contractors that support those programs, and international partners to execute the mission,” the report states. “It will also be the first launch of an upgraded version of the Space Launch System rocket.”
Developmental difficulties
The report also finds that the Gateway program is running into some pretty serious technical difficulties. One involves a defective network chip that facilitates communication throughout the lunar space station. Its failure could cause myriad problems onboard the Gateway.
“For example, these defects could lead the flight computers to unexpectedly restart,” the report states. “If the network is not functioning properly, it could result in loss of control of the Gateway. Program officials are also concerned that they might identify more defects with the communication network, based on the number found already.”
Another risk involves something called “stack controllability.” This essentially means that because SpaceX’s Lunar Starship is so much more massive than the Gateway, when it is docked to the space station, the Gateway’s power and propulsion element (PPE) will not be able to maintain a proper orientation of the entire stack.
“Program officials estimate that the mass of the lunar lander Starship is approximately 18 times greater than the value NASA used to develop the PPE’s controllability parameters,” the report states. “According to NASA’s system engineering guidance, late requirements and design changes can lead to cost growth and schedule delays.”
The report also has some sobering conclusions about the potential utility of the Lunar Gateway for Mars missions. (In the past, NASA officials have spoken about the Gateway as a staging area for spacecraft and propellant for human missions to the surface of Mars.) However, the “stack controllability” issue poses a serious constraint to hosting large Mars transit vehicles. Moreover, the planned 15-year lifetime of the Gateway may not be long enough to sustain Mars missions.
“The Gateway could have exceeded its planned 15-year on-orbit life as early as 2042 when crewed missions to Mars are potentially just beginning,” the report states.
All in all, the report seems to suggest that the Gateway is way behind schedule and is of limited use to lunar and Mars landings. The report suggests the Gateway will be complex to undertake at the very same time NASA is attempting to establish a lunar surface program. But other than that, everything is going great.
Enlarge/ A Starliner spacecraft departs Boeing’s spacecraft processing facility before the program’s first orbital test flight in 2019.
Boeing announced another financial charge Wednesday for its troubled Starliner commercial crew program, bringing the company’s total losses on Starliner to $1.6 billion.
In its quarterly earnings report, Boeing registered a $125 million loss on the Starliner program, blaming delays on the spacecraft’s still-ongoing Crew Flight Test, the program’s first mission to carry astronauts into orbit. This is not the first time Boeing has reported a financial loss on Starliner. Including the new charge announced Wednesday, Boeing has now suffered an overall loss on the program of nearly $1.6 billion since 2016.
These losses have generally been caused by schedule delays and additional work to solve problems on Starliner. When NASA awarded Boeing a $4.2 billion contract to complete development of the Starliner spacecraft a decade ago, the aerospace contractor projected the capsule would be ready to fly astronauts by the end of 2017.
It turns out the Crew Flight Test didn’t launch until June 5, 2024.
In a separate announcement Wednesday, Boeing named Kelly Ortberg as the company’s CEO, effective August 8. He will replace Dave Calhoun, whose tenure as Boeing’s chief executive was marred by scandals with the 737 MAX passenger airplane. Ortberg was previously CEO of Rockwell Collins, now known as Collins Aerospace, a major supplier of avionics and other parts for the aerospace industry.
Boeing is on the hook
When NASA selected Boeing and SpaceX to develop the Starliner and Crew Dragon spacecraft for astronaut missions, the agency signed fixed-price agreements with each contractor. These fixed-price contracts mean the contractors, not the government, are responsible for paying for cost overruns.
So, with each Starliner delay since 2016, Boeing’s financial statements registered new losses. It will be Boeing’s burden to pay for solutions to problems discovered on Starliner’s ongoing crew test flight. That’s why Boeing warned investors Wednesday that it could lose more money on the Starliner program in the coming months and years.
“Risk remains that we may record additional losses in future periods,” Boeing wrote in an SEC filing.
Taking into account the financial loss revealed Wednesday, NASA and Boeing have committed at least $6.7 billion to the Starliner program since 2010, including expenses for spacecraft development, testing, and the government’s payment for six operational crew flights with Starliner.
It’s instructive to compare these costs with those of SpaceX’s Crew Dragon program, which started flying astronauts in 2020. All of NASA’s contracts with SpaceX for a similar scope of work on the Crew Dragon program totaled more than $3.1 billion, but any expenses paid by SpaceX are unknown because it is a privately held company.
SpaceX has completed all six of its original crew flights for NASA, while Boeing is at least a year away from starting operational service with Starliner. In light of Boeing’s delays, NASA extended SpaceX’s commercial crew contract to cover eight additional round-trip flights to the space station through the end of the 2020s.
Boeing’s leaders blame the structure of fixed-price contracts for the losses on the Starliner program. The aerospace giant has similar fixed-price contracts with the Pentagon to develop new two new Air Force One presidential transport aircraft, Air Force refueling tankers, refueling drones, and trainer airplanes. Boeing has reported losses on those programs, too.
SpaceX, meanwhile, has excelled with fixed-price contracts, which NASA uses on several elements of the Artemis program aiming to land astronauts on the Moon. For example, NASA selected SpaceX and Blue Origin, Jeff Bezos’s space company, for fixed-price contracts to develop human-rated lunar landers. SpaceX also won a fixed-price contract to provide NASA with a vehicle to deorbit the International Space Station at the end of its life.
Decision time
The first crew mission aboard Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft is expected to end sometime in August with the return of NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams from the International Space Station. A successful conclusion of the test flight would pave the way for Boeing to start launching its backlog of six operational crew missions to the space station.
But it hasn’t been that simple. The Starliner test flight was initially expected to stay at the space station for at least eight days. Before the launch in June, NASA and Boeing officials left open the possibility for a mission extension, but managers didn’t anticipate Starliner to still be docked at the space station more than 50 days later.
Mission managers ordered Starliner to stay at the station through the rest of June and July while engineers investigated problems in the spacecraft’s propulsion system. There are helium leaks in Starliner’s service module, and the craft’s small maneuvering thrusters overheated during the final approach for docking at the space station.
NASA, which oversees Boeing’s commercial crew contract, is getting close to clearing Starliner for return to Earth, perhaps as soon as next week. On Saturday, ground controllers commanded Starliner to test-fire its maneuvering thrusters, and 27 of the 28 jets appeared to function normally despite overheating earlier in the mission. Despite the leaks, the spacecraft also has ample helium to pressurize its propulsion system, NASA officials said.
Before giving final approval for Starliner to undock from the space station and return to Earth, senior NASA leaders will convene a readiness review to go over the results of the investigation into the propulsion issues.
Boeing has some work to do to find a long-term fix for the helium leaks and overheating thrusters on future Starliner missions. NASA officials hoped a flawless Starliner test flight would allow the agency to formally certify the capsule for regular six-month expeditions to the space station by the end of the year, allowing Boeing to launch the first operational Starliner flight, known as Starliner-1, in February 2025.
Last week, NASA announced a six-month delay for the Starliner-1 mission to allow more time to solve the problems the spacecraft experienced on the crew test flight.
Enlarge/ A Crew Dragon spacecraft is seen docked at the International Space Station in 2022. The section of the spacecraft on the left is the pressurized capsule, while the rear section, at right, is the trunk.
NASA
Sometime next year, SpaceX will begin returning its Dragon crew and cargo capsules to splashdowns in the Pacific Ocean and end recoveries of the spacecraft off the coast of Florida.
This will allow SpaceX to make changes to the way it brings Dragons back to Earth and eliminate the risk, however tiny, that a piece of debris from the ship’s trunk section might fall on someone and cause damage, injury, or death.
“After five years of splashing down off the coast of Florida, we’ve decided to shift Dragon recovery operations back to the West Coast,” said Sarah Walker, SpaceX’s director of Dragon mission management.
Public safety
In the past couple of years, landowners have discovered debris from several Dragon missions on their property, and the fragments all came from the spacecraft’s trunk, an unpressurized section mounted behind the capsule as it carries astronauts or cargo on flights to and from the International Space Station.
SpaceX returned its first 21 Dragon cargo missions to splashdowns in the Pacific Ocean southwest of Los Angeles. When an upgraded human-rated version of Dragon started flying in 2019, SpaceX moved splashdowns to the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico to be closer to the company’s refurbishment and launch facilities at Cape Canaveral, Florida. The benefits of landing near Florida included a faster handover of astronauts and time-sensitive cargo back to NASA and shorter turnaround times between missions.
The old version of Dragon, known as Dragon 1, separated its trunk after the deorbit burn, allowing the trunk to fall into the Pacific. With the new version of Dragon, called Dragon 2, SpaceX changed the reentry profile to jettison the trunk before the deorbit burn. This meant that the trunk remained in orbit after each Dragon mission, while the capsule reentered the atmosphere on a guided trajectory. The trunk, which is made of composite materials and lacks a propulsion system, usually takes a few weeks or a few months to fall back into the atmosphere and doesn’t have control of where or when it reenters.
Air resistance from the rarefied upper atmosphere gradually slows the trunk’s velocity enough to drop it out of orbit, and the amount of aerodynamic drag the trunk sees is largely determined by fluctuations in solar activity.
SpaceX and NASA, which funded a large portion of the Dragon spacecraft’s development, initially determined the trunk would entirely burn up when it reentered the atmosphere and would pose no threat of surviving reentry and causing injuries or damaging property. However, that turned out to not be the case.
In May, a 90-pound chunk of a SpaceX Dragon spacecraft that departed the International Space Station fell on the property of a “glamping” resort in North Carolina. At the same time, a homeowner in a nearby town found a smaller piece of material that also appeared to be from the same Dragon mission.
These events followed the discovery in April of another nearly 90-pound piece of debris from a Dragon capsule on a farm in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan. SpaceX and NASA later determined the debris fell from orbit in February, and earlier this month, SpaceX employees came to the farm to retrieve the wreckage, according to CBC.
Pieces of a Dragon spacecraft also fell over Colorado last year, and a farmer in Australia found debris from a Dragon capsule on his land in 2022.
