When I was young, the future was exciting: cities on the Moon, computers that can fly spaceships, and more.
Then we tried making those dreams a reality; which we’ve been doing. In part.
One goal of this week’s Starliner test flight was having a human pilot handle part of the spacecraft’s approach and docking at the International Space Station. It was a methodical process, pretty much the opposite of dramatic. Starliner handled the actual docking; which, again, was a methodical process. And successful.
If you read nothing else in today’s post, by the way, read Butch Wilmore’s “Just a Thought”, a Few Minutes Before Liftoff. Or check out whatever looks interesting:
Boeing Starliner Crew Flight Test
The Boeing Starliner has flown before, but not with people aboard. The first crewed test flight was supposed to be in 2017. Uncrewed orbital flight tests in 2019 and 2022 weren’t flawless, but the Starliner came back in one piece each time.
I talked about that, and what would have been the first Starliner test flight carrying people, last month. Briefly, an oxygen relief valve wouldn’t stop buzzing at about 40 cycles per second, so decision-makers canceled that launch.
They tried again last Saturday. That time a ground launch sequencer balked.
“NASA, Mission Partners Target June 5 Crew Flight Test Launch”
Danielle Sempsrott, NASA’s Boeing Crew Flight Test (June 2, 2024)“…Technicians and engineers with ULA (United Launch Alliance) worked overnight and on Sunday to assess the ground support equipment at the launch pad that encountered issues during the countdown and scrubbed the June 1 launch attempt. The ULA team identified an issue with a single ground power supply within one of the three redundant chassis that provides power to a subset of computer cards controlling various system functions, including the card responsible for the stable replenishment topping valves for the Centaur upper stage. All three of these chassis are required to enter the terminal phase of the launch countdown to ensure crew safety….”
[emphasis mine]“NASA, Mission Partners Forgo June 2 Launch of Crew Flight Test”
Elyna Niles-Carnes, NASA’s Boeing Crew Flight Test (June 1, 2024)“…Saturday’s launch to carry NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams to the International Space Station scrubbed due to an observation of a ground launch sequencer. The system was unsuccessful in verifying the sequencer’s necessary redundancy….”
[emphasis mine]
There’s probably a detailed description of ground launch sequencers somewhere, but I didn’t find it. Instead, I’ll paraphrase what folks doing NASA TV coverage of Saturday’s launch attempt said.1
Speaking of which, it’s a delight to have coverage of a launch done by folks who actually know something about spacecraft, technology, and science.
Saturday’s Attempt, a Ground Launch Sequencer, and Paying Attention
Anyway, the ground launch sequencer is a computer — software running on a computer, actually — that sends instructions to equipment, and keeps track of the equipment’s responses.
If a piece of equipment doesn’t respond, or responds oddly, then the ground launch sequencer stops the countdown and tells a human that’s something’s not right.
At this point I could have conniptions over computers controlling our lives. But I won’t.
Launching a spacecraft involves thousands of devices doing what they’re supposed to do, when they’re supposed to do it. That sort of meticulous attention to detail is something computers are good at. Humans, most of us, not so much.
So I’ll be glad that the ground launch sequencer spotted something amiss, three minutes and 50 seconds before launch: and that the humans decided to pay attention.
Another Glimpse Inside Starliner’s Crew Capsule
I’m probably more interested than most in how spacecraft designers make the most use of very limited cabin volume.
I spent more time than I probably should have this week, trying to find something more up-to-date and detailed than last month’s BBC News infographic. And finding nothing either recent or consistent with other descriptions.
I suspect my frustration’s partly due to Boeing’s having changed details in their design over the last decade, and partly to Starliner’s flexibility. The capsule carries up to seven people, or a mix of crew and cargo.
Or will, assuming that it gets crew-rated.2
Launch Complex 41, the Crew Access Arm, and — Starliner: Lucky 13??
Launch Complex 41 predates Boeing’s Starliner by a half-century. It’s been in use since the mid-1960s; launching the Helios, Viking, and Voyager probes. Enough name-dropping.
In 2015, Launch Complex 41 started getting set up for human spaceflight: including the Crew Access Tower and its Crew Access Arm.
Together, the tower and arm let crew enter or leave their spacecraft in comparative safety. And without tracking dust and dirt into the spacecraft.
The Crew Access Arm swings out of the way for launch.
From the screenshots I took, it looks like the ULA Crew Access Arm is custom-fitted for the Boeing Starliner. Which makes sense, since it’s probably the only crewed spacecraft that’ll be launched from that particular site. In the immediate future, at any rate.
In the long run, though, I think crew access arms will be more like today’s passenger boarding bridges: those one-size-fits-all movable corridors connecting airport terminals and airplanes.
We’re still very early in the Space Age.
So far, only a dozen types of spacecraft have carried people into space: defined in this case as 50 miles or more above Earth’s sea level.3
- Spacecraft carrying people
- Vostok (1961-1963)
- Mercury (1961-1963)
- X-15 (1962-1968)
- Voskhod (1964-1965)
- Gemini (1965-1966)
- Soyuz (1967-still in use)
- Apollo (1968-1975)
- Space Shuttle (1981-2011)
- Shenzhou (2003-still in use)
- SpaceShipOne (2004-still in use)
- Crew Dragon (2020-still in use)
- New Shepard (2021-still in use)
- Starliner (2024-flight test scheduled)
- Space stations
- Salyut (1971-1986)
- Skylab (1973-1974)
- Almaz (1974-1977)
- Mir (1986-2000)
- International Space Station (ISS) (2000-still in use)
- Tiangong program (2012-2016)
- Tiangong Space Station (2021-still in use)
The Boeing Starliner would be the 13th type of crewed spacecraft. About that:
Superstition: The attribution of a kind of magical power to certain practices or objects, like charms or omens. Reliance on such power, rather than on trust in God, constitutes an offense against the honor due to God alone, as required by the first commandment. (2110)
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, Glossary)“Superstition is the deviation of religious feeling and of the practices this feeling imposes. It can even affect the worship we offer the true God, e.g., when one attributes an importance in some way magical to certain practices otherwise lawful or necessary. To attribute the efficacy of prayers or of sacramental signs to their mere external performance, apart from the interior dispositions that they demand, is to fall into superstition.”
(Catechism, 2111)
Butch Wilmore’s “Just a Thought”, a Few Minutes Before Liftoff
On the whole, I like being an American.
That doesn’t mean I’m a conservative.
I’m not a liberal, either.
I’m a Catholic, and think that what Calypso’s mission commander Barry “Butch” E. Wilmore said about unity, resilience, and unified efforts for the common good, makes sense.
“… Just a thought … As we were reached the pad … there’s that American flag … on the side of the rocket itself, and we know that that represents unity, and resilience, and unified efforts for the common good. And that’s what Suni and I have witnessed this last month: each of you displaying what this nation’s forefathers envisioned: a people committed to God, family and country, a people who use their gifts and talents for the common good, and are passionate, and tough. And we all know that when the going gets tough … the tough get going … Let’s get going….”
(Barry “Butch” E. Wilmore, astronaut, a little over four minutes before launch of the Starliner Calypso, from NASA video coverage (June 5, 2024))
And get going they did, a few minutes later. Calypso matched orbit with the International Space Station Thursday.
The docking happened about an hour later than it would have on a perfect flight. A few thrusters didn’t fire correctly during a step-by-step test of that system. More about that, and why it wasn’t a major problem, from NASA:
- “Boeing’s Crew Flight Test on Starliner Docks to Station”
Mark Garcia, Commercial Crew, Expedition 71, NASA’s Boeing Crew Flight Test (June 6, 2024)
Commercial Spaceflight
The last I checked, the International Space Station will be deorbited in January of 2031. Probably after detaching several modules for use elsewhere.
What’s left of Earth’s largest space station will be dropped in the South Pacific’s “spacecraft cemetery”. That’s not an ideal recycling solution, but it’s the best we’ve got right now.
As the ISS transitions from working laboratory to historic memory, it looks like we’ll have a growing number of smaller orbiting stations.
“Next-Generation Commercial Space Stations Are Serious Business for NASA”
Commercial Low Earth Orbit Development Program, NASA
(February 3, 2022)“Over two decades ago, NASA and an international team of space agencies began something long dreamt of and quite remarkable: a permanent human presence in space aboard the International Space Station. About the size of a football field, the orbiting laboratory and human habitat is a bastion of science and discovery where research is making life better on Earth and paving the way to the Moon and Mars….
“…While individual commercial space stations will have more niche, specialized uses, the capabilities of future space destinations overall will become much more versatile. Right now, the International Space Station is primarily focused on scientific research and technology demonstrations, making it more akin to a lab where astronauts live and work amongst scientific equipment. Some future commercial destinations will contain the lab equipment that NASA needs to advance its mission in low-Earth orbit. Non-NASA space travelers flying to low-Earth orbit, like private individuals or companies, may seek out commercial space stations that serve as hotels or perhaps even a movie studio to shoot a film.…”
[emphasis mine]
I haven’t checked on the status of the Axiom Port Module, Nanoracks, Northrup Grumman, Blue Origin, and other proposed space stations. I like the sound and idea of Blue Origin’s Orbital Reef, and that’s almost another topic.4
We Can’t Go On Flying Like This
I can imagine an airline that throws away aircraft after each flight, and stays in business.
But I’ve got a lively imagination. Profligateaire’s clientele would be ultra-rich nitwits with a favorable — to Profligateaire — brains-to-cash ratio.
Even so, I’m not convinced that Profligateaire [a thoroughly fictional company] would really work.
Then again, I once saw an advertisement for solid-gold diamond-tipped swizzle sticks. But only once. Decades back. Looks like there’s a limit to human folly. Or maybe marketing for such things isn’t wasted on folks in my socioeconomic strata. And I’m wandering off-topic.
The point I’m groping for is that commercial spaceflight is viable now, despite all launch systems being single-use, at least in part.
Confirming my impression that commercial human spaceflight is currently confined mostly to space tourism, and that space tourism is limited to a fraction of the world’s very rich, would take more time and effort than I like.5
But the rest — companies that put communications, Earth observation, and other satellites in orbit — apparently are making a profit, even with today’s throwaway launch technology.
That’s impressive, but not an argument for accepting space technology’s status quo.
For one thing, I see no problem with outfits like Orbital Sciences Corporation and SpaceX making higher profits. For another, we’re learning that there are limits to how much junk we can safely drop into landfills. Or the South Pacific’s “spacecraft cemetery”.
Which is why I think designing partly-reusable spacecraft like Dragon and Starliner was a good idea. Designing fully-reusable ones would be even better: but that’ll take time.
Dream Chaser Tenacity: Another Step in the Right Direction
“NASA, Sierra Space Deliver Dream Chaser to Florida for Launch Preparation”
Jamie Groh, Brian Newbacher; Kennedy Space Center, NASA (May 20, 2024)“As part of NASA’s efforts to expand commercial resupply in low Earth orbit, Sierra Space’s uncrewed spaceplane arrived at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida ahead of its first flight to the International Space Station.
“The Dream Chaser spaceplane, named Tenacity, arrived at Kennedy on May 18 inside a climate-controlled transportation container from NASA’s Neil Armstrong Test Facility in Sandusky, Ohio, and joined its companion Shooting Star cargo module, which arrived on May 11….”
Development of the Sierra Space Dream Chaser has been similar to the SpaceX Dragon’s.
The version that’s now ready for flight testing carries cargo only. I gather that getting an airworthiness (spaceworthiness?) okay is easier for cargo carriers than getting human-rating certification.
The Dream Chaser was originally planned as a spacecraft that carries up to seven people into low Earth orbit and back.
Sierra Space apparently still plans to build a human-rated Dream Chaser. How long it will take for that version to be ready, or if it ever will be, I don’t know.
Dream Chaser Tenacity, a cargo-only version, should be ready for flight testing in September. Whether it’s successful, and where it’ll land: that, I also don’t know.
Dream Chasers are designed to land as gliders at commercial airports, like Huntsville International Airport. Taking off again is another matter.
The Dream Chaser rides into space on the top of a conventional launch vehicle. So again, part of the launch system is still single-use. Except for the SpaceX Falcon series, if that’s an option: and even those aren’t fully reusable.
Another throwaway part of the Dream Chaser system is its Shooting Star module, with extra cargo space and solar panels.6 Cool name, but — I’ll leave it at that.
Spacecraft: One Step at a Time
I mentioned Max Valier’s spaceplanes last month, and discussed a might-have-been 20th century that didn’t happen a couple years back.
Valier’s transatlantic propeller-driven airliners with rocket boosters look weird these days. But I think Ron Miller is right about Valier’s “greatest contribution”:
“…Valier’s greatest contribution was that he developed an incremental, evolutionary approach to the development of the spaceship. He began with an ordinary commercial aircraft. Step-by-step through different generations of design, this would gradually develop into rocket-assisted flight and then into full-fledged rocket transport. Finally, it would result in a wingless interplanetary spacecraft. He also promoted the idea of a transatlantic passenger rocket. He envisioned that this would make the trip from Berlin to New York in less than an hour….”
“By Rocket Plane Across the Atlantic“, Ron Miller/io9, HistoricWings.com (March 23, 2018))
A century later, outfits like SpaceX and Sierra Space have been taking a similarly “incremental, evolutionary approach to the development of the spaceship….”
The Dragon 1 and 2 spacecraft have been making supply runs to the International Space Station since 2012. By this time next year, the Dream Chaser may be world’s first commercial spaceplane.7
A decade from now, fully-reusable spacecraft may be making regular runs to orbiting labs, manufacturing stations, luxury resorts: and businesses we haven’t invented yet.
Meanwhile, some of us will be preparing for longer journeys.
“…Given ships or sails adapted to the breezes of heaven, there will be those who will not shrink from even that vast expanse….”
(Johannes Kepler (1610) from “Kepler’s Conversation with Galileo’s Sidereal Messenger“, trans. Edward Rosen (1965) via Wikiquote)
The sky is no longer the limit:
- “Boeing Starliner in Context: Apollo, Shuttles, and American History”
(May 11, 2024) - “International Space Station: Seven More Years”
(May 6, 2023) - “Commercial Space Services and Changing Times”
(April 29, 2023) - “Single Stage to Orbit, Eventually”
(December 17, 2022) - “Commercial Spaceflight: Another Step”
(March 8, 2019)
1 The crew, the spacecraft, and a little background:
- Wikipedia
- NASA
- NASA TV Live
- “Spacesuits, Cargo Ops on Station as Starliner Targets June 5 Launch”
Mark Garcia, NASA’s Boeing Crew Flight Test (June 3, 2024) - “NASA, Mission Partners Target June 5 Crew Flight Test Launch”
Danielle Sempsrott, NASA’s Boeing Crew Flight Test (June 2, 2024) - “NASA, Mission Partners Forgo June 2 Launch of Crew Flight Test”
Elyna Niles-Carnes, NASA’s Boeing Crew Flight Test (June 1, 2024)
- Wikipedia
- What I said last month
- Wikipedia
- Airport terminal
- Cape Canaveral Space Launch Complex 41
- Jet bridge (AKA Jetway, Jetwalk, gangway, aerobridge/airbridge, expedited suspended passenger entry system (E-SPES); or — industry’s official name — passenger boarding bridge (PBB))
- Kármán line (One “edge of space”: 100 kilometers above Earth’s sea level)
- List of crewed spacecraft
- Service structure
- Space Age
- Triskaidekaphobia
- Vertical Integration Building
- Launch Complex 41 (Active)
Cape Canaveral Space Force Museum - “Boeing Starliner crew access arm’s ‘awesome’ launch pad installation”
Ken Kremer, Universe Today, via Phys.org (August 18, 2016 ) - “Crew Access Arm Installed for Starliner Missions”
Steven Siceloff, Humans in Space, NASA (August 15, 2016) - “United Launch Alliance Selects Hensel Phelps Construction Co. for Program Management Support of Commercial Crew at Launch Complex 41”
United Launch Alliance (ULA) release, via collectSPACE (November 8, 2012)
4 Space stations, and a temporary solution:
- Wikipedia
- International Space Station
- List of space stations
- Orbital Reef (Blue Origin & Sierra Nevada Corporation’s planned commercial station)
- Spacecraft cemetery
- Wikipedia
6 (Somewhat) reusable spacecraft:
7 Something old, something new:
- Wikipedia
- A 20th century opportunity that didn’t work out, my view
- “Single Stage to Orbit, Eventually” (December 17, 2022)
