This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/20/science/boeing-starliner-launch.html

The article has changed 16 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Boeing Starliner Launch Live Updates: Problem in Orbit for New NASA Ride Boeing Starliner Spacecraft Fails to Reach Correct Orbit
(32 minutes later)
Just before sunrise on Friday, the dark sky was lit by an Atlas 5 rocket that launched from Cape Canaveral in Florida. On top of the rocket was Boeing’s Starliner capsule, designed for taking astronauts to and from the International Space Station. This mission will not have anyone aboard, but is designed as a test to check out the systems. Boeing and NASA are calling it O.F.T., short for orbital flight test. The Starliner capsule built by Boeing and launched on Friday ended up in the wrong orbit after it apparently fired its engines at the wrong time.
However, Boeing reported that a final maneuver needed to put the in orbit was “off nominal.” That was a disappointing disruption of a flight that started just before sunrise aboard an Atlas 5. The rocket performed as designed, placing the capsule on an elliptical trajectory. The capsule itself was to make a final maneuver that would shift the orbit from elliptical to circular and allow it to meet up with the International Space Station on Saturday.
“The spacecraft currently is in a safe and stable configuration,” a Boeing spokeswoman said. “Flight controllers have completed a successful initial burn and are assessing next steps.” The flawed engine burn pushed it into the wrong orbit.
The problem was confirmed by Jim Bridenstine, NASA’s administrator. “The spacecraft currently is in a safe and stable configuration,” said a Boeing spokeswoman. “Flight controllers have completed a successful initial burn and are assessing next steps.”
NASA and Boeing did not provide details about the orbit or how long Starliner would be in space if the problem was not fixed. Jim Bridenstine, the NASA administrator, posted updates on Twitter, suggesting that the spacecraft used a lot of its fuel and would not be able to rendezvous with the space station.
The problems mean that the capsule will not be able to meet up with the International Space Station as planned on Saturday morning. This mission did not have anyone aboard, but was designed as a test to check out the systems. The setback could further postpone NASA’s goal of resuming human spaceflight from the United States. Under the commercial crew program, the space agency contracted with Boeing and another company, SpaceX, to build spacecraft to carry astronauts to and from the space station. Friday’s problem is the latest in a series of delays and obstacles, putting it a couple of years behind schedule.
There are no astronauts aboard this flight of Starliner, but there is be a spacesuit-wearing figure sitting in one of the seats. A mannequin fitted with sensors will measure the forces that future astronauts will feel as they ascend to space. The mannequin is nicknamed Rosie, after Rosie the Riveter, the illustrated character used to recruit women to work in factories during World War II. That raises the stakes for SpaceX’s next launch of its Crew Dragon capsule, currently scheduled for Jan. 11. That flight — without crew aboard — a test of the abort system, in which the rocket will be intentionally destroyed during launch. If that succeeds, SpaceX could still launch astronauts in the first half of 2020.
For more than eight years, no people have launched to orbit from the United States, and NASA has had to rely on Russia for the transportation of its astronauts.
In a shift from the space shuttles and NASA’s earlier human spaceflight programs, the Obama administration decided that the agency should hire commercial companies to take astronauts to and from the space station instead of building and operating its own spacecraft. The space agency had already taken this approach for launches of satellites and robotic missions, as well as for taking cargo to the space station.In a shift from the space shuttles and NASA’s earlier human spaceflight programs, the Obama administration decided that the agency should hire commercial companies to take astronauts to and from the space station instead of building and operating its own spacecraft. The space agency had already taken this approach for launches of satellites and robotic missions, as well as for taking cargo to the space station.
In 2014, NASA awarded contracts to Boeing and SpaceX — Boeing for up to $4.3 billion for Starliner, SpaceX for up to $2.5 billion for Crew Dragon. The value of the contracts depends on how many missions are flown.In 2014, NASA awarded contracts to Boeing and SpaceX — Boeing for up to $4.3 billion for Starliner, SpaceX for up to $2.5 billion for Crew Dragon. The value of the contracts depends on how many missions are flown.
The capsule is also carrying 600 pounds of food and other supplies. The hope was that the flights carrying astronauts would begin by the end of 2017. Both companies encountered technical hurdles, including problems with parachutes that the capsules deploy when they return to Earth.
The two capsules have similar capabilities — each can seat up to seven people. The Starliner launches on top of an Atlas 5 rocket from the United Launch Alliance, a joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin. SpaceX is using its own rocket, the Falcon 9, for launching the Crew Dragon. SpaceX performed its crewless flight test of Crew Dragon in March. But in July, during a ground test of the abort engines on the same capsule, the Crew Dragon exploded. No one was injured, but that pushed back SpaceX’s schedule as the company figured out what happened and how to fix it.
SpaceX’s trips are cheaper. A report released in November by the NASA Inspector General estimated the per seat cost at about $55 million for SpaceX, and $90 million for Boeing. On Thursday, Jim Bridenstine, the NASA administrator, disputed that calculation, saying NASA has not negotiated those prices with Boeing or SpaceX. Starliner’s first test was postponed multiple times this year. The launch on Friday morning proceeded as planned, with the capsule separating from the rocket as intended.
NASA officials have been careful not to promise a launch date yet, saying that the schedule depends on how well Starliner performs during its flight test and how long it takes to ensure safety for its astronauts. (The losses of the space shuttles Challenger in 1986 and Columbia in 2003 were both blamed in part on NASA officials pushing too hard to meet schedule deadlines.) Because the spacecraft is designed to take astronauts to orbit, the trajectory was designed to enable an easy return to Earth if anything goes wrong during launch.
When NASA awarded the commercial crew contracts in 2014, the hope was that the flights carrying astronauts would begin by the end of 2017. Both companies encountered technical hurdles, including problems with parachutes that the capsules deploy when they return to Earth. Instead of putting the capsule into orbit, the Atlas 5 rocket and Centaur upper stage left it in an elliptical suborbital path, and a burn by the capsule’s engines would shift it from elliptical to circular.
SpaceX performed its crewless flight test of Crew Dragon in March. But in July, during a ground test of the abort engines on the same capsule, the Crew Dragon exploded. No one was injured, but that pushed back SpaceX’s schedule as the company figured out what happened and how to fix it. SpaceX is currently scheduled to perform its next flight without crew aboard — a test of the abort system, in which the rocket will be intentionally destroyed during launch — on Jan. 11. There were no astronauts aboard this flight of Starliner, but it did carry a spacesuit-wearing figure sitting in one of the seats. A mannequin fitted with sensors were to measure the forces that future astronauts will feel as they ascend to space. The mannequin is nicknamed Rosie, after Rosie the Riveter, the illustrated character used to recruit women to work in factories during World War II.
Two other companies, Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, have developed vehicles for short-hop space tourism trips. Those basically just go up and down like a big roller coaster and never accelerate to the speeds needed to reach orbit around Earth. Watchdogs in government have raised concerns about the costs of commercial crew launches. A report by the NASA Inspector General reviewing the program estimated the per seat cost at about $55 million for SpaceX, and $90 million for Boeing. (The Boeing cost is higher than what NASA has paid for seats on Russia’s Soyuz.)
Virgin Galactic has completed multiple test flights with its crews aboard. It charges $250,000 for a seat, which will offer a few minutes of weightlessness; after years of delays, company officials are optimistically saying that commercial flights will begin in 2020. On Thursday, Mr. Bridenstine disputed that estimate, saying NASA has not negotiated those prices with Boeing or SpaceX.
This month, Blue Origin, the rocket company started by Jeffrey P. Bezos, the chief executive of Amazon, conducted a 12th test flight of its suborbital New Shepard spacecraft. But it has not yet put any people aboard, and has not yet said when it would start flying passengers or how much a ticket will cost. The inspector general also criticized a NASA decision to pay $287.2 million above the fixed prices for three of the Boeing missions, saying those were unnecessary.
It remains unclear whether the Starliner capsule will be recovered intact to examine what caused the mission’s failure. But even if they do, the next launch could be delayed by months.
NASA officials had been careful not to promise any launch dates, saying that the schedule depends on how well Starliner performs during its flight test and how long it takes to ensure safety for its astronauts. (The losses of the space shuttles Challenger in 1986 and Columbia in 2002 were both blamed in part on NASA officials pushing too hard to meet schedule deadlines.)