Monday, August 19, 2024

Boeing Starliner: Crisis or Routine Glitch?

 

Since 2020, the SpaceX Dragon has been the primary spacecraft in which U. S. astronauts have traveled to and from the International Space Station (ISS).  But for at least a decade, it has always been NASA's plan to get Boeing to develop a second spacecraft for the same purpose, called the Starliner.  After two unmanned flights, the first only partially successful, last June the Starliner carried Barry Wilmore, 61, and Sunita Williams, 58, to the ISS.  But during the flight, five of the 28 thrusters used to orient the spacecraft failed.  Although the Starliner was successfully docked to the ISS, Boeing engineers have been puzzling ever since over why the thrusters failed and whether the Starliner is safe enough to return Wilmore and Williams, who otherwise will have to wait as long as eight months before returning to earth after what was supposed to be an eight-day visit to space.

 

Putting aside all questions of whether having people live in space is useful or beneficial, the fact that we have two independent companies providing transportation to the ISS is a big step forward from the early stages of manned space exploration, which were basically state-sponsored stunts put on for quasi-military reasons, to something resembling commercial operations, in which competition and a certain routine emerge.  Think of the contrast between the hype surrounding Lindbergh's 1927 solo flight across the Atlantic, and the milder publicity accompanying the first commercial flight from New York to Marseilles a dozen years later.  The same firm (Boeing) provided the B-314 flying boat that Pan American Airways used in 1939, and passengers paid $375 for a one-way ticket, which in terms of today's dollars is north of $8200.  Not exactly busfare, but it was one of the first steps in making international air travel routine.

 

As for the Boeing Starliner, thrusters are vital to preserving the orientation of a spacecraft on re-entry, when the vehicle has to face a certain way in order for the heat shield to absorb the punishing friction of air as it slows the craft down.  Entering the atmosphere pointing the wrong way is a guarantee of disaster, so Boeing is wise in delaying the return flight until they can get to the bottom of the thruster failures.

 

So far, Wilmore and Williams have not made any public comments about their unexpected delay.  It's a little more extreme than the delays experienced by thousands of commercial air travelers in the last few weeks when a computer glitch upset the schedule applecarts of dozens of airlines.  Spending an extra day or two in an airport is not much compared to eight months in space, but the two astronauts concerned are seasoned veterans, and presumably their families and whatever other commitments they had back on Earth have been dealt with satisfactorily.  I don't know how I would feel if I watched my ride home take off without me and achieve a successful landing, but I suppose it depends on how much I was enjoying myself in the ISS.  Space flight is not for everybody, and the selection process probably yields personalities who can handle nearly anything unexpected except maybe death.  And in this case, erring on the side of caution at the price of inconveniencing a couple of astronauts is probably the best thing to do.

 

We will know that space flight has finally achieved routine status when occurrences such as the one about the failed thrusters don't make news at all.  After all, we don't hear much about Amereican Airlines flight XYZ that was cancelled because of a problem with their battery backup system, because such things happen every day and the airlines have found ways to deal with them without inconveniencing their customers—well, not much, anyway. 

 

Space flight is still far from a purely commercial endeavor, however, and it's not clear whether it ever will be.  The ISS itself is a creature of international agreements of fiendish complexity, and is perhaps the best example of an institution that self-perpetuates because you can't simply shut it down and send messages up to tell everybody they're fired.  But given the obvious need to swap people in and out of the ISS, it's good that NASA persisted in getting two contractors to develop different vehicles for the same purpose.  And if history is any guide, Boeing will straighten out the thruster problem, if not on this flight, then the next one.  And the astronauts will have the luxury of knowing that their ride back to Earth isn't built by a company with a lock on the business. 

 

When the current ISS reaches the end of its planned lifespan in 2030 after being up there for about three decades, what comes next for manned space flight?  It's hard to imagine how a space station would be profitable on its own.  We already do the most commercially valuable things in space without having people up there to do them:  satellite communications and remote sensing.  And as robotics advances, the argument that having people in space allows us to do things that no robot could do may become weaker and weaker.  Because of the life-support and safety systems needed to keep people alive in space, any manned flight is going to be orders of magnitude more costly than an unmanned flight to do the same thing, unless the thing happens to be simply putting people in a new place such as Mars. 

 

It may ultimately come down to a question of international politics.  If a new space race develops between China and the U. S., or China and Europe if the U. S. loses its will to keep up, then companies like SpaceX will be able to provide the hardware and software needed.  But if a plague of space indifference spreads worldwide, as it seems to have in the U. S., I'm not sure that even a dozen Elon Musks could afford to put people into space simply for the glory of the thing, or to make enough money to recoup their astronomical investments. 

 

I hope Wilmore and Williams enjoy their extended stay, and that Boeing gets their thrusters working right the next time.  As for whether we'll ever be able to afford pleasure trips to a space station, I reserve my judgment. 

 

Sources:  I referred to an AP article on the Boeing Starliner thruster problems at https://apnews.com/article/nasa-spacex-boeing-starliner-astronauts-922b43fa8d0e1f9622022a52f8c8e2ed.  Information on the first commercial transatlantic flight was from https://www.centennialofflight.net/essay/Commercial_Aviation/atlantic_route/Tran4.htm, and I also referred to the Wikipedia articles on the Boeing Starliner and the SpaceX Dragon.

No comments:

Post a Comment