Boeing Starliner capsule lands back on Earth, without astronauts, to end troubled test flight (video)

Starliner's long space odyssey is over.

The Boeing capsule, named Calypso, returned to Earth early this morning (Sept. 7), touching down in the New Mexico desert at 12:01 a.m. EDT (0401 GMT; 10:01 p.m. local time on Sept. 6).

"Great landing of Calyspo!" NASA astronaut Suni Williams said on the agency's webcast. "I don't think that could have gone better."

The landing was long-delayed, coming more than three months into an orbital mission originally expected to last about 10 days. And, while Starliner launched with two NASA astronauts aboard — Williams and Butch Wilmore — nobody rode it home. 

It wasn't supposed to end like this.

Boeing's Crew Flight Test Starliner spacecraft sits at its desert landing spot at White Sands Space Harbor, New Mexico after a successful landing on Sept. 7, 2024. (Image credit: Boeing)
Build Boeing's Starliner!

Boeing Starliner model from Metal Earth

(Image credit: Amazon)

You can build your own Boeing Starliner space capsule with this Metal Earth Boeing CST-100 Starliner 3D Metal Model Kit, available for $10.95 at Amazon.

A crucial test flight

The roots of the just-completed mission, known as Crew Flight Test (CFT), go back a decade. In 2014, NASA gave SpaceX and Boeing multibillion-dollar contracts to finish work on their astronaut taxis — capsules known as Crew Dragon and Starliner, respectively.

The agency wanted one or both of those vehicles to start flying astronauts to and from the International Space Station (ISS) by 2017, reestablishing a homegrown orbital human spaceflight capability — something the U.S. had lacked since the retirement of the space shuttle in 2011. 

Related: NASA's space shuttle program in pictures: A tribute

Neither capsule hit that ambitious target. SpaceX's first astronaut mission, a test flight to the ISS called Demo-2, lifted off in May 2020. Starliner's crewed debut was CFT, which launched atop a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket on June 5, sending Williams and Wilmore to the orbiting lab for a planned eight-day stay.

CFT had been slated to fly last year, but it was delayed to deal with parachute issues and to remove large amounts of insulating tape from the capsule's wiring system. (Analsyes determined that the tape was flammable and thus posed a safety risk.)

The mission encountered issues more recently as well. A planned May 25 launch attempt was scrubbed, for example, after team members noticed a small helium leak in Starliner's service module. More helium leaks popped up after launch, as Starliner chased the ISS down in orbit. And, more concerningly, the capsule experienced propulsion problems: Five of its 28 reaction control system (RCS) thrusters conked out not long after liftoff.

The thruster problems scuttled Starliner's first ISS docking attempt on June 6. The capsule succeeded on its second try that day, and team members eventually brought four of the five faulty thrusters back online. But the issue loomed large over the rest of the mission.

Boeing's Starliner capsule approaches the International Space Station for docking on June 6, 2024. (Image credit: NASA)

A tough decision

NASA extended CFT's orbital stay repeatedly, giving mission team members more time to analyze and troubleshoot the thruster problems. Such work included modeling studies and testing both in space (with Starliner) and on the ground (with a Starliner RCS thruster at NASA's White Sands Test Facility in New Mexico).

Ultimately, NASA concluded that bringing Williams and Wilmore home on Starliner posed an unacceptable safety risk.

"The decision to keep Butch and Suni aboard the International Space Station and bring Boeing’s Starliner home uncrewed is the result of our commitment to safety: our core value and our North Star," NASA Administrator Bill Nelson said in a statement on Aug. 24, the day the agency announced the news.

Related: Boeing Starliner astronauts will return home on a SpaceX Dragon in 2025, NASA confirms

Williams and Wilmore will stay aboard the ISS until February, when they'll hitch a ride home on a SpaceX Crew Dragon — the one flying the company's Crew-9 mission, which is set to lift off later this month. To make room for them, Crew-9 will lift off with two astronauts instead of the usual four.

Starliner, meanwhile, was packed up for an uncrewed return to Earth. Among the gear that it carried home were the "Boeing Blue" spacesuits that Williams and Wilmore wore aboard the capsule. The astronauts have no need for them now.

"The suits are not compatible," Steve Stich, manager of NASA's Commercial Crew Program, said during a press conference on Wednesday (Sept. 4). "So the Starliner suits would not work in Dragon, and vice versa." 

Sticking the landing

Starliner undocked from the ISS on Friday (Sept. 6) at 6:04 p.m. EDT (2204 GMT) as planned. It performed a series of burns to set itself up for the uncrewed landing, which occurred under parachutes in New Mexico's White Sands Space Harbor just after midnight today.

Everything went well.

"I'm happy to report that Starliner did really well today in the undocking, reentry and landing sequence," Stich told reporters after the touchdown. "It was a bullseye landing, a great landing out at White Sands."

He added that Wilmore and Williams would have been fine if they'd been aboard the capsule. "It would have been a safe, successful landing with the crew on board," Stich said. But he added that NASA's decision to err on the side of safety with the data they had on hand before landing still stands: "I think we made the right decision."

Boeing representatives did not participate in the post-landing briefing, instead ceding mission representation to NASA, the space agency said. But Boeing did release a statement shortly after Starliner's return.

"I want to recognize the work the Starliner teams did to ensure a successful and safe undocking, deorbit, reentry and landing," Mark Nappi, Boeing's vice president and program manager of Boeing's Commercial Crew Program, said in the statement. "We will review the data and determine the next steps for the program."

This was the third touchdown overall for Starliner, by the way. The capsule also flew two uncrewed test flights to the ISS, one in December 2019 and one in May 2022. Starliner failed to meet up with the orbiting lab on the first flight after suffering several glitches. The second uncrewed mission was a success, though Starliner experienced some thruster issues on that flight as well. (These were a different set, associated not with the RCS but with Starliner's orbital maneuvering and control system.)

A cloudy future

Boeing and NASA had hoped that CFT would pave the way for Starliner's certification, allowing the capsule to begin flying six-month-long astronaut missions to the ISS. 

The first such operational flight, Starliner-1, had been targeted for February 2025. That launch has already been pushed back, however, to August 2025 at the earliest. And it's unclear at the moment if Starliner will be certified by then — or what additional tests, if any, NASA will require before certification can occur.

"I think what we need to do now is really lay out the overall plan, which we have not had time to do," Stich said in the Sept. 4 press conference.

"We haven't, because the teams have been so focused on this flight, laying out that overall search strategy, the overall amount of work we've got to go do," he added. "And then when we do that, we'll have a better understanding of, When can we certify the vehicle, and when can we resume flights?"

Crew Dragon, meanwhile, was certified shortly after Demo-2's successful conclusion in 2020. The SpaceX vehicle is now gearing up for its ninth operational astronaut flight to the ISS for NASA. (That would be Crew-9, as the name suggests.) 

SpaceX has also flown a handful of private crewed missions to the station, as well as the Inspiration4 astronaut flight to Earth orbit, which did not meet up with the orbiting lab. And it's preparing to launch Polaris Dawn, another free-flying commercial astronaut mission, which aims to conduct the first-ever private spacewalk.

Editor's note: This story was updated at 4:10 a.m. ET on Sept. 7 with information and quotes from the post-landing press conference.

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Mike Wall
Senior Space Writer

Michael Wall is a Senior Space Writer with Space.com and joined the team in 2010. He primarily covers exoplanets, spaceflight and military space, but has been known to dabble in the space art beat. His book about the search for alien life, "Out There," was published on Nov. 13, 2018. Before becoming a science writer, Michael worked as a herpetologist and wildlife biologist. He has a Ph.D. in evolutionary biology from the University of Sydney, Australia, a bachelor's degree from the University of Arizona, and a graduate certificate in science writing from the University of California, Santa Cruz. To find out what his latest project is, you can follow Michael on Twitter.

  • trailrider
    Admin said:
    Boeing's Starliner capsule returned to Earth early this morning (Sept. 7), wrapping up its first-ever crewed mission. But it came home without any astronauts on board.

    Boeing Starliner capsule lands back on Earth, without astronauts, to end troubled test flight (video) : Read more
    Well, it worked as intended. So, let the second guessing begin. Should Butch and Suni have ridden it home? IMHO, NO! There was too much uncertainty about the thrusters' performances to risk it. The thing for Boeing to do now, is do some extensive/intensive investigative work, including testing the thrusters they have on the ground to see what changes to make, either in the spacing of the thrusters inside the doghouses, or the sequencing of firing, or whatever. I certainly don't see how NASA can certify the Starliner without more and better data and perhaps a reflight of an unmanned capsule with better instrumentation of the thrusters.
    Unfortunately, Butch and Suni will have an extended stay, but as military officers they certainly know about extended deployments. (The crews on board some of our ships in the Middle East have been out there a lot longer than they anticipated.)
    Best of luck up there!
    Reply
  • Totally_Lost
    trailrider said:
    Well, it worked as intended. So, let the second guessing begin. Should Butch and Suni have ridden it home? IMHO, NO! There was too much uncertainty about the thrusters' performances to risk it. The thing for Boeing to do now, is do some extensive/intensive investigative work, including testing the thrusters they have on the ground to see what changes to make, either in the spacing of the thrusters inside the doghouses, or the sequencing of firing, or whatever. I certainly don't see how NASA can certify the Starliner without more and better data and perhaps a reflight of an unmanned capsule with better instrumentation of the thrusters.
    Unfortunately, Butch and Suni will have an extended stay, but as military officers they certainly know about extended deployments. (The crews on board some of our ships in the Middle East have been out there a lot longer than they anticipated.)
    Best of luck up there!
    I agree ... it comes down to probability ... was a successful Starliner return only projected as a 25% chance of success and they got lucky, or was a successful Starliner return projected with 90% chance of success and they still got lucky to miss the real 10% chance of crew loss?
    Reply
  • Mars Tafts
    So a HUGE part of the problem was NASA all along as usual.
    Reply
  • Unclear Engineer
    Mars Tafts said:
    So a HUGE part of the problem was NASA all along as usual.
    I am going to disagree with that!

    That is the same type of logic as a drunk driver telling the police officer that he has always gotten home alive in the past, even if he had some new scratched on the car in the morning.

    The issue is what level of certainty can you get that the craft is going to work sufficiently well to provide a safe trip.

    "Modeling" risk is not a prefect science. The models "fail" as well as the hardware and the human operators, in that there are problems that are not modeled correctly or completely and others that are just not known so are not in the models at all.

    So, at best, the results of a risk model need to be considered in the context of saying that the risk is at least as bad as the results. If there is a lot of uncertainty in how to model something, sometimes all you can really do is look at the "importance" of the system failing, to see what the conditional probability is for unacceptable results.

    In this case, with so many thrusters needing to fire in so many directions so many times, the logic model for what can go wrong enough to cause a fatal situation is quite complicated. And, with a "common cause" for failure affecting of all of the thrusters, the model has to consider if one thruster failure will create higher demand on other thrusters and cause them to fail too , in a cascading process. So the end result of the calculation becomes extremely sensitive to the input probability that a thruster will fail, which is not even a single number. For a single thruster, the probability is going to be a function of the firing sequence - involving the time between firings, their duration and total times fired - for each possible scenario of multiple thruster failures at various times.

    I doubt anybody on this forum, including myself, is in a position to realistically second-guess NASA on this decision.

    I fully support their decision.
    Reply
  • Totally_Lost
    Unclear Engineer said:
    I am going to disagree with that!

    That is the same type of logic as a drunk driver telling the police officer that he has always gotten home alive in the past, even if he had some new scratched on the car in the morning.


    I doubt anybody on this forum, including myself, is in a position to realistically second-guess NASA on this decision.

    I fully support their decision.
    I think that NASA learned their lessons with the loss of crews and Space Shuttles Columbia and Challenger. 14 deaths that shut the program down. It really doesn't matter how many times you get lucky, it really matters how many times you are likely to fail and have crew losses. The real answer should be very close to zero.
    Reply
  • Viking
    Mars Tafts said:
    So a HUGE part of the problem was NASA all along as usual.
    OK Captain Dunsel.
    Reply
  • Classical Motion
    It was great to watch. I was hypnotized with the parachute oscillation on the way down.
    Reply
  • doseas
    "Everything went well." Um, no. In the post-landing briefing (the one that Boeing personnel skipped), Stich indicated that a different thruster failed during re-entry. Fortunately, a redundant thruster was able to be used. Also, the capsule experienced an abnormal, temporary failure of guidance system during descent.
    Reply