Boeing's Starliner capsule just landed with no crew aboard. What's next for this astronaut taxi?

black and white photo of a space capsule descending through the sky under three parachutes
Boeing's Starliner capsule descends through Earth's atmosphere on Sept. 7, 2024, heading for the touchdown that ended its Crew Flight Test mission. (Image credit: NASA)

Boeing's Starliner capsule just returned to Earth without astronauts, marking the beginning of a new set of investigations by NASA.

Starliner left the International Space Station (ISS) on Friday evening (Sept. 6), then aced a landing in New Mexico just after midnight on Saturday (Sept. 7). The touchdown brought an end to Crew Flight Test (CFT), Starliner's first-ever astronaut mission. But no astronauts came down with the capsule on Saturday; Starliner experienced problems with its reaction control system (RCS) thrusters shortly after CFT's June 5 liftoff, and NASA decided not to risk putting Williams and Wilmore aboard the capsule again.

The duo have a solid homecoming plan: They'll ride back to Earth in February 2025 aboard a SpaceX Crew Dragon capsule — the one that will fly the company's Crew-9 mission, which is set to launch toward the ISS on Sept. 24. But what's next for the Starliner program is a bigger question.

NASA tasked SpaceX and Boeing in 2014 with sending astronauts to and from the ISS. SpaceX, borrowing knowledge from its Cargo Dragon spacecraft, flew a Crew Dragon test mission to the station in 2019 without astronauts and passed all metrics, allowing the company to launch its debut astronaut test flight the following year. That effort was successful, and SpaceX quickly moved to operational, long-duration astronaut missions to the ISS for NASA. It's in the middle of its eighth such flight and is gearing up for the ninth (Crew-9).

Related: NASA astronauts can't wear Boeing Starliner spacesuits in SpaceX's Dragon. Here's why

Starliner, a new design, has required quite a few adjustments. Its first mission, an uncrewed test flight in December 2019, failed to reach the ISS due to software glitches. The capsule succeeded on its second ISS try in May 2022 but experienced a few issues with its propulsion system during that flight. 

CFT has had hiccups as well — namely, helium leaks and the thruster issues. (Five of Starliner's 28 RCS thrusters failed as it chased the ISS down shortly after launch.) The mission was supposed to last just 10 days or so, but NASA kept Starliner at the ISS for three months as it analyzed the thruster problems and what to do about them.

Those issues appear to be linked to overheating — a result, perhaps, both of the frequency of thruster use and their placement inside heat-retaining shelters on the outside of the spacecraft known as "doghouses." Bulging seals and insulation shedding appear to restrict the flow of propellant to the RCS thrusters. 

NASA and Boeing had hoped that CFT would pave the way for Starliner's first operational crewed flight. That mission, known as Starliner-1, is tentatively targeted for August 2025. But it's too soon to tell if Starliner will hit that timeline. 

"I think we'll see where we're at in another month or so, and have a little bit better idea of what the overall schedule will be," Steve Stich, manager of NASA's Commercial Crew Program, said during a post-landing press conference on Saturday morning. 

That schedule could even include another test flight before Starliner is certified for operational astronaut missions.

"I would say it's probably too early to think about exactly what the next flight looks like. I think we want to take the next step to go look at all the data," Stich said.

"We've got some things we know we've got to go work on," he added. "And we'll go do that and fix those things, and then go fly when we're ready."

Boeing Starliner docked at the International Space Station during Crew Flight Test in 2024. (Image credit: NASA)

Much of this work will focus on the RCS thruster overheating issue and how to mitigate it.

"What we need to do now is go take a thruster at White Sands [Test Facility in New Mexico] and make sure we understand the exact pulse sequences that cause the heating," Stich said. "And then, at the same time, in parallel, look at software changes to reduce the number of demands on the thrusters."

Teams will also investigate removing or altering the thermal blankets inside the doghouses, to help keep the thrusters cooler, he added.

"So it's really three different thrusts, I would say," Stich said.

But there were plenty of positives to take from CFT, Stich stressed. Starliner performed very well during its entry, descent and landing today, he said, describing the touchdown in White Sands Space Harbor as a "bullseye." And he estimated that, despite Starliner's issues, Boeing was able to notch 85% to 90% of CFT's mission objectives.

Joel Montalbano, deputy associate administrator for NASA's Space Operations Mission Directorate, also emphasized the positives, and sought to put CFT into the proper perspective.

"It's important to remember: This was a test mission, right?" Montalbano said during the post-landing press conference. "We learned from this mission."

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.

Elizabeth Howell
Staff Writer, Spaceflight

Elizabeth Howell (she/her), Ph.D., is a staff writer in the spaceflight channel since 2022 covering diversity, education and gaming as well. She was contributing writer for Space.com for 10 years before joining full-time. Elizabeth's reporting includes multiple exclusives with the White House and Office of the Vice-President of the United States, an exclusive conversation with aspiring space tourist (and NSYNC bassist) Lance Bass, speaking several times with the International Space Station, witnessing five human spaceflight launches on two continents, flying parabolic, working inside a spacesuit, and participating in a simulated Mars mission. Her latest book, "Why Am I Taller?", is co-written with astronaut Dave Williams. Elizabeth holds a Ph.D. and M.Sc. in Space Studies from the University of North Dakota, a Bachelor of Journalism from Canada's Carleton University and a Bachelor of History from Canada's Athabasca University. Elizabeth is also a post-secondary instructor in communications and science at several institutions since 2015; her experience includes developing and teaching an astronomy course at Canada's Algonquin College (with Indigenous content as well) to more than 1,000 students since 2020. Elizabeth first got interested in space after watching the movie Apollo 13 in 1996, and still wants to be an astronaut someday. Mastodon: https://qoto.org/@howellspace

  • steve_foston
    It is sensible that NASA have more than 1 way for the USA to get there and back to the ISS so I wish Starliner well for the future. However is it sensible that the spacesuits for both vehicles are incompatible surely this needs sorting out - its like the air filters on A13 were a makeshift device allowed a square peg to go into a round hole surely we should have learnt something from this
    Reply
  • Unclear Engineer
    Glad to see it made the return flight without any more problems.

    Hopefully, Boeing will stick with this project and make the capsule work reliably without having to "baby" the thrusters. Having tight limits on thruster use that are OK when everything else works as planned does not sound like a prudent policy, because there might not be enough margin to handle the thruster needs when something else is not going right.

    Considering that the capsule had thruster problems on its last 2 flights and NASA was unwilling to bet the crew's lives on the capsule for this reentry, it seems logical that Boeing is going to need to do another uncrewed flight to show that it has fixed the thruster problem sufficiently to warrant certifying it for crew.
    Reply
  • trailrider
    If I understand correctly, one objective in creation of both crew and cargo spacecraft is reusability. Also, being able to check over major systems postflight is smart. How, then does Boeing justify a design like Starlink that discards a major portion of its RCS after a single flight?

    It is probably too late in the game for Boeing to do a redesign of Starlink, but perhaps some other company would be willing to come up with a spacecraft to back up Dragon, perhaps in conjunction with some commercial space station when ISS is deorbited. Also, there definitely should be compatability between space suits.
    Reply
  • Unclear Engineer
    Trailrider,

    First, Boeing's capsule is "StarLiner" and this one was named "Calypso". " StarLink" is the SpaceX communication satellites.

    SpaceX's Dragon capsule also has a "service module" between the Falcon 9 booster and the Dragon capsule, which gets burned-up and not reused. When Sierra Space gets it DreamChaser capsule going, it will have a similar small service module that will not be reused.

    The huge SpaceX "StarShip" and its "SuperHeavy" first stage will be the first (nearly) totally reusable system, with both stages being able to reenter and be reused without an intermediate service module.

    The service modules for the current crop of capsules are designed to be the least expensive parts.
    Reply
  • SDelMonte
    How long till we hear if the capsule was actually human-safe on reentry? Seems like it might have been, but I want actual confirmation.
    Reply
  • Maurizio88100
    It seems clear that the service module needs to be substantially revised. I think this will push back the availability of the StarLiner capsule by another year. At that point the Vulcan rocket will have to be certified. How many missions will it be possible to fly before the ISS is retired? Yet another epic fail for Boeing, I'm afraid.
    Reply
  • Unclear Engineer
    I just saw an article that says there were additional problems detected in the reentry leg of the mission. From that other space news site:

    "The return to Earth was not without issues. Steve Stich, NASA commercial crew program manager, said at the post-landing briefing that during the 58-second deorbit burn, two RCS thrusters got hotter than expected but did not fail. He said that controllers had changed software to keep it from turning off thrusters that got too hot during that burn, but didn’t know if the thrusters reached temperatures that would have triggered a shutdown without the software change.

    "One of 12 separate thrusters on the crew module also did not work in tests before reentry. Stich said those thrusters are a different design from those on the service module and it wasn’t clear why it failed. A redundant thruster, though, did operate normally and did not pose a problem during reentry."

    So, there is some substantial work to be done before this capsule is ready for commercial certification.
    Reply
  • newtons_laws
    Yes, there were some additional problems during the Starliner reentry according to https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/09/leaving-behind-its-crew-starliner-departs-space-station-and-returns-to-earth/
    Quote "A couple of fresh technical problems cropped up as Starliner cruised back to Earth. One of 12 control jets on the crew module failed to ignite at any time during Starliner's flight home. These are separate thrusters from the small engines that caused trouble earlier in the Starliner mission. There was also a brief glitch in Starliner's navigation system during reentry."
    Reply
  • Unclear Engineer
    And now there is a strike at Boeing. see https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8jlj3dnlw7o

    The big issue seems to be pay, with Boeing offering 25% increase and the workers demanding 40%, and voting to strike even though the union leadership recommended taking the 25% deal.

    Last time that happened, in 2008, it lasted 8 weeks and cost Boeing $3billion.

    This can't be good for Boeing's prospects for even wanting to try to complete their StarLiner capsule project at their own cost, especially when they are already at 1.5billion loss on that project.

    NASA needs a Plan C to get redundancy for crew launches, now that only Plan B (SpaceX) has actually worked, and Plan A (Boeing) is looking less and less hopeful.
    Reply
  • newtons_laws
    Unclear Engineer said:
    NASA needs a Plan C to get redundancy for crew launches, now that only Plan B (SpaceX) has actually worked, and Plan A (Boeing) is looking less and less hopeful.
    Sierra Space Corporation's Dream Chaser seems like the obvious candidate, they've already got a NASA contract for the cargo version. As regards a crewed version much preliminary work has already been done, Dream Chaser was a candidate for the initial crew vehicle contest run by NASA to find two suppliers, but they opted for Boeing and Space X. ESA have also expressed strong interest in a crewed version.
    Reply