• atocci
    link
    1505 months ago

    Just to be clear on this again, they aren’t “stuck” because they’re in danger, the stay keeps getting extended so engineers can gather as much information as possible about the leaks before they return. Starliner is still fully capable of reentry, but this is Boeing’s last chance to collect data that can be used to fix these issues in the future. The leak problem is in Starliner’s service module, which detaches from the capsule before reentry and burns up in the atmosphere, so there won’t be anything left to study after the astronauts return.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      95 months ago

      I agree the headline isn’t accurate to NASA’s statements, but I also feel everyone is weighing whether there is something we don’t know.

      • atocci
        link
        2
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        I get that, but because the leak isn’t even on the part of Starliner that will go through reentry, whether or not it will impact its ability to survive the return trip shouldn’t be in question.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          135 months ago

          People keep saying that, but it isn’t true that the leak being in the disposable part of the vehicle means it’s not a safety problem.

          It’s the pressurisation system for the thrusters. If that fails, then they won’t be able to control the capsule until it hits the atmosphere. That could mean they get stuck on the ISS, in the most extreme case, or it could mean that they lose thrust mid-manouvre and they re-enter the atmosphere incorrectly. That could be anywhere from inconvenient (they miss their landing spot and someone has to come get them), to dangerous (they land so far away that they’re in danger of sinking or being eaten by bears before anyone reaches them) to outright fatal (they skip off the atmosphere, or tumble their way into reentry and burn up)

          • @grue
            link
            English
            15 months ago

            to dangerous (they land so far away that they’re in danger of… being eaten by bears before anyone reaches them)

            I know Soyuz was designed to land in Kazakhstan or whatever, but is Starliner (or Dragon, for that matter) even capable of landing on solid ground without damage and/or injuries?

            • atocci
              link
              3
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Yes it is actually! When it finally returns, this Starliner will be landing in New Mexico at the White Sands Space Harbor, which is basically a backup space shuttle landing strip.

              • @grue
                link
                English
                25 months ago

                Neat, thanks! (What about Dragon?)

                • atocci
                  link
                  2
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  It’s not designed to like Starliner, but Dragon can in emergency situations. Starliner has airbags to cushion it on touchdown, but Dragon doesn’t so it would probably be a much rougher landing for the astronauts.

              • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod
                link
                English
                25 months ago

                White Sands Space Harbor

                That is a really cool name

          • atocci
            link
            15 months ago

            This is a good point. It’s definitely a possibility something catastrophic could happen like that, but the small scale of the leaks and amount of extra helium on board makes it very unlikely at least.

    • @CptEnder
      link
      45 months ago

      Don’t they have a backup Soyuz docked there as well?

      • atocci
        link
        15 months ago

        No, there’s only one Soyuz from the Russian side of things, and its seats are spoken for

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        275 months ago

        I’m sure the astronauts that have to do all this extra overtime because boeing thought their space capsule didn’t have to be airtight probably feel that way

        • atocci
          link
          6
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Wanted to clarify again since I wasn’t specific earlier. The capsule itself is airtight, no danger there. What’s leaking is helium, which is kept in compressed tanks in the service module and used to pressurize the reaction control system thrusters. The tanks aren’t leaking though, it sounds like the leak is somewhere between the tank and the thrusters, which is what needs to be researched.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            75 months ago

            I’ll also clarify. I was being totally hyperbolic. I do understand it’s not actually air, but I’m not too worried about misrepresenting Boeing at the moment

            • @SkyezOpen
              link
              25 months ago

              I’m not too worried about misrepresenting Boeing at the moment

              That’s fine, it’s telling the truth about Boeing that gets really dangerous.

        • @9tr6gyp3
          link
          -15 months ago

          They are probably also interested in the 3000+ safety protocols in place that keeps them alive in the event of a leak in the vacuum of space.