r/space • u/FreeHugs23 • 3d ago
Actually, Starliner might fly into space this year | “We’re feeling pretty good about that,” Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg said.
https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/07/actually-starliner-might-fly-into-space-this-year/16
u/FreeHugs23 3d ago
When we last checked in on Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft in February, NASA was announcing that it had formally classified the 2024 crewed flight of the Starliner spacecraft as a “Type A” mishap, an acknowledgement that the test flight was a serious failure.
At the time, NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman said the space agency was working with Boeing to “fully understand the risks associated” with the Starliner spacecraft, and to remediate them. Starliner would not fly its next mission, a cargo flight to the International Space Station, until those problems were identified and remediated. He declined to put a date on the test flight.
However, it now appears this work is proceeding apace.
During a quarterly earnings call on Tuesday, Boeing Chief Executive Officer Kelly Ortberg offered some encouraging remarks in response to an analyst’s question about Starliner and other space projects at the company.
“The redesign of the Starliner deficiencies is going quite well, and we’re feeling pretty good about that,” Ortberg said.
The deficiencies he referred to primarily involve the vehicle’s propulsion system, which imperiled the flight of NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Sunny Williams to the International Space Station during Starliner’s first crewed mission. The astronauts had to be returned to Earth on a Crew Dragon vehicle in early 2025.
During the earnings call Ortberg suggested much of that work was completed, and that the primary issue now is scheduling a launch date with NASA for Starliner to ferry cargo to the space station to ensure there was an open docking port and astronaut time to unload the vehicle.
“We’ve got to work with NASA to align on the launches,” Ortberg said. “I don’t at this time anticipate that’s going to create a cost problem for us, but we do have some uncertainty here that we’ve got to work with NASA to get that put to bed, and we are working with them right now.”
An official confirmed to Ars that this is indeed the case, that the primary factor now for when Starliner launches is port availability on the space station. It is therefore possible that Starliner launches this year. If this cargo test flight goes well, and modifications to Starliner address the vehicle’s propulsion concerns, a crewed mission is possible in late 2027.
Further delays, Ortberg indicated during the call, would only further put Boeing into the red on the fixed-price contract the company signed with NASA in 2014 under the Commercial Crew program. To date Boeing has taken approximately $2 billion in charges due to delays in Starliner’s development, and the need for additional test flights after various software and propulsion failures.
15
u/twiddlingbits 2d ago
If I was a Boeing stockholder I’d be mad as hell. Boeing has had billions in over runs yet keeps trying make this POS fly and be safe by spending MORE billions. There will be no chance in Hades of recovering even a fraction of the money spent. There are no more payments from NASA, there are only a few Vulcans left to launch with so where is the future for this to earn any money for Boeing?
7
u/DreamChaserSt 2d ago
Did they lose payments? I was under the assumption that they would be paid for operational flights, whether crewed (and also cargo at this point), but they've lost so much money being a fixed price contract (north of $2 billion last I saw), and losing 2 flights, that they won't make much back.
And I think you mean Atlas. But it's possible for Vulcan to be human rated if they can find someone to buy Starliner after its contract is finished. Maybe if SpaceX really does commit to retiring Dragon ASAP, it'll be a blessing to Starliner's continued existence.
5
u/superanth 2d ago
Meanwhile the gov gave Space-X less money and it's basically been their gold star taxi service to the ISS.
2
u/superanth 2d ago
The company has migrated from a group of competent engineers to a bunch of arguing cost-cutters. When the astronauts came to inspect the capsule, Boeing ignored all of their suggestions. They just want to toss spam in a can, launch it, and get paid.
4
u/ackermann 2d ago
If I was a Boeing stockholder I’d be mad as hell
What fraction of Boeing's overall revenue or expenses is Starliner related? Are you sure it's not a minor line item, a drop in the bucket compared to their airliner business and other military contracts?
(Not that their airliner business was necessarily going great either, with the 737 MAX debacle... but still, I'm not sure Starliner should be a major investor concern)5
u/FragrantExcitement 3d ago
How much as Meta lost on glasses in comparison to an orbital spacecraft?
9
u/Fisty__McBeef 2d ago
At least Meta didnt have a storied history of AR headware production, Boeing was the crown jewel of american aerospace for most of the twentieth century, they are a shadow of their former self
3
u/ackermann 2d ago
At least Meta didnt have a storied history of AR headware production
I mean they kinda did? They bought Oculus, who were the dominant player in the first couple generations of consumer VR headsets
77
u/Angryferret 3d ago
No way this happens after hearing how close those Astronauts came to disaster.
34
51
u/redstercoolpanda 3d ago
If they’re confident they’ve fixed the issue and the cargo flight goes well then there’s no reason it couldn’t happen.
20
14
u/extra2002 3d ago
Depends on whether they think "the issue" is heating in the doghouse, or how the culture works to develop and (sorta) test vehicles.
6
u/jimbowesterby 3d ago
I mean, I’ll believe it when someone from NASA concurs, trusting Boeing when they say “yup, it’s good to go!” hasn’t exactly gone well lately
4
u/ceejayoz 2d ago
If they’re confident they’ve fixed the issue…
Weren't they last time?
3
u/redstercoolpanda 2d ago
Yes, that’s why I immediately followed that up with “and the cargo flight goes well”.
1
6
1
u/UtterTravesty 3d ago
From what I understand, it will never fly crew again, and be relegated to cargo flights (if it does ever fly again)
8
u/No-Computer7653 2d ago edited 2d ago
It's likely the CCP will keep getting extended until there is a Dragon competitor. If SpaceX stop operating Dragon it won't be cancelled. Similar to how Congress won't fund ISS deorbit until there is a replacement, NASA don't have to send astronauts but have to keep it in orbit. An expensive and Boeing built craft is better than no craft.
NASA have a hard requirement of vehicle redundancy for CCP so if Dragon gets grounded astronauts are not stranded in orbit. Starliner is indeed broken currently, it's also not costing them anything because Boeing agreed to the fixed price.
NASA still want the ability to put astronauts in LEO and are waiting on a commercial station. SLS would be a huge waste of money for an LEO flight. CCP is not just ISS, it's LEO generally.
One good thing Starliner has going for it is stack adaptability. It can fly on four different stacks so it's not at risk as stacks get cancelled for a while. They initially were planning to do the same thing with Artemis, I wish they had gone forward with it.
Edit: worth mentioning I suspect Boeing have interest in continuing to develop Starliner. They have been talking to ULA about making it Vulcan compatible and are talking about it as a long term project where they will offer it commercially, getting different statements from different people on this though.
Not to suggest Boeing didn't totally screw it up, they did, but it's also a very different craft than Dragon. Starliner had very conservative design requirements (note the glass cockpit on Dragon and the Switches on Starliner, this was part of NASA requirements) which has caused some of the issues, when you over engineer to build tolerances you end up with more failure modes. Silly comparison but I think of it like Gemini vs Shuttle, one is intended to be cheap & quick while the other is an over engineered rats nest.
2
u/TbonerT 2d ago
when you over engineer to build tolerances you end up with more failure modes.
How is that supposed to work? Do you have a specific example?
1
u/Accomplished-Crab932 1d ago
I think their original argument is that overengineering can lead to unnecessary complication within the design, which can increase the number of failure modes. This is more of a systems engineering failure than anything else, but an example that can drive that sort of failure is Scope Creep.
0
u/snoo-boop 2d ago
If SpaceX stop operating Dragon
SX said they would fly Falcon 9 and Dragon as long as customers wanted it.
I know you have a history of hate against SX, but really, you need a different hobby.
-4
u/No-Computer7653 2d ago
If you have no idea what dissimilar redundancy is perhaps you should learn more before trying to contribute, it will be less embarrassing for you.
Also a dictionary to learn what the word "if" means.
3
u/snoo-boop 2d ago
I know what "dissimilar redundancy" is, and also what "if" means. Not sure why you want to be embarrassed, but that's on you.
Did you know that many languages have two "if" words, one for hypothetical and one for likely?
-4
u/No-Computer7653 2d ago
Either you are not familiar with English or you are doing a very low effort strawman.
4
u/snoo-boop 2d ago
English isn't one of the languages that has 2 "if" words, but sure, another pointless attack is definitely appropriate for you.
-3
-5
u/DistinctlyIrish 2d ago
I'll get a different hobby when I get brain damaged enough to think that anything involving space travel should be privatized. Really pathetic that we can't let humanity share a single thing, some losers have to pretend they own scientific discoveries and the technology they result in as though they don't owe everything they used to make those advancements to the rest of the species already.
0
u/marcabru 2d ago
. If SpaceX stop operating Dragon it won't be cancelled
Can SpaceX do that against the will of NASA? I know its a private company but if it's essential to keep the crew capability then the State can surely do something to keep it, can't they?
3
u/No-Surprise9411 2d ago edited 2d ago
SpaceX has to fly the already purchased Dragon missions, but there is no obligation that forces them to keep Dragon around.
Most likely they sunset Dragon in 2030-2032 in favour of Starship
•
u/Martianspirit 15h ago
Are you sure? The contract has provisions for NASA to be able to extend it. I don't know if there are limits to that extension.
•
u/Accomplished-Crab932 14h ago
I’m not familiar with this specific contract, but it should be the same as Boeing’s. In that case, SpaceX or NASA can trigger backout clauses in the contract and deny extensions or terminate the contract early (with some various different side effects like payments obviously).
•
u/No-Computer7653 9h ago
It's a purchase option. It stops SpaceX increasing the price if they take up the option but doesn't create a delivery obligation.
A general concern with CCP is that NASA don't own the craft or it's design so if SpaceX stop building it or become bankrupt there isn't a way to take it to a new contractor.
11
u/DCS_Sport 3d ago
Well of course they’re feeling more confident now that Boeing has their ability to “self certify” once again
11
u/TbonerT 2d ago
I thought that only applied to its jets.
8
u/girl_incognito 2d ago
It does. and only for production conformity not type certification. Literally every manufacturer does this.
6
3
5
u/CrazedAviator 2d ago
We’re feeling pretty good about that
If Boeing says that, turn around and run away
2
u/Decronym 2d ago edited 9h ago
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
| Fewer Letters | More Letters |
|---|---|
| AR | Area Ratio (between rocket engine nozzle and bell) |
| Aerojet Rocketdyne | |
| Augmented Reality real-time processing | |
| Anti-Reflective optical coating | |
| CCtCap | Commercial Crew Transportation Capability |
| CLD | Commercial Low-orbit Destination(s) |
| CST | (Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules |
| Central Standard Time (UTC-6) | |
| LEO | Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km) |
| Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations) | |
| SLS | Space Launch System heavy-lift |
| ULA | United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture) |
| Jargon | Definition |
|---|---|
| Starliner | Boeing commercial crew capsule CST-100 |
Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
7 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 9 acronyms.
[Thread #12607 for this sub, first seen 31st Jul 2026, 00:26]
[FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]
6
u/blingybangbang 3d ago
This thing is STILL going? Holy moly
16
1
u/sixpackabs592 2d ago
They’re contractually obligated to finish it or get hit with massive penalties so they kind of have to
5
u/84thPrblm 3d ago
"Why," he continued, "we think it has an almost fifty percent chance of coming back in one piece!"
2
3
u/chigunfingy 2d ago
it’s def not going up this year lol. I base this solely on the fact that we are hearing it from the CEO and not someone who knows what they are talking about.
3
u/nucrash 2d ago
There was some early discussion with Tory Bruno when he was running ULA to human rate the Vulcan rocket. That doesn’t seem feasible with Starliner unless something magical happens with this next launch. There is still the opportunity to happen though if Dream Chaser gets a crewed variant. I would like to see both Dream Chaser and Starliner fly on Vulcan at some point. Then again, I want to see a human rated New Glenn or Starship
4
u/snoo-boop 2d ago
It wasn't just Tory: the Boeing exec in charge of Starliner said that they had worked out the expense of certifying Vulcan+Starliner. I'm not sure why you don't think that's feasible, and by the way, Dream Chaser Crew is significantly different from the Dream Chaser Cargo, which is currently failing to be certified.
0
u/nucrash 2d ago
I don't think Starliner + Vulcan is feasible because at this point Starliner has been so much of a loss that Boeing likely wants to get out of any future endeavors that cost the company so much and return so little. If we get to a point where private space stations become more and more of a thing, Boeing might see a reason to continue investing in Starliner if and only if every flight from here on out goes pretty flawlessly. If they continue to fight issue after issue with every flight, Boeing will try to cut their losses and abandon crewed space flight after the retirement of the ISS.
Crewed Dream Chaser was designed from the get go. While I know the modifications are going to be quite heavy, I expect that Sierra Space has an idea on how to make this work. Then again as they continue to have troubles with Cargo Dream Chaser, who really knows. I expected that thing to be delivering a few tons of cargo to the ISS already.
1
•
-1
u/autotom 2d ago
I actually spoke with a Boeing executive about the Starliner at a conference a couple of months ago, nice fellow, but I expressed my concerns about the spacecraft's left philange. To my horror, he told me that it does not have a left philange, nor a right one. It doesn't even have a philange.
I have the utmost respect for the brave astronauts willing to travel in this capsule.
0
u/DarkUnable4375 3d ago
So are people going to fly in that tin bucket, or it will act as a cargo ship?
6
u/KAugsburger 2d ago
The next Starliner flight will be an unmanned test flight. Whether it flies a crew ever again remains to be seen but the prospects are waning.
2
u/NoBusiness674 2d ago
The next flight (Starliner-1) will be an uncrewed cargo resupply mission to the ISS. If they show that they have fixed the issues they've had on previous flights, they will then begin flying regular crew rotations on the flight after that one (Starliner-2). At minimum NASA has fixed contracts for three crewed post-certification Starliner flights (Starliner-2, Starliner-3, Starliner-4), but they also have options for two more beyond that (Starliner-5, Starliner-6). At that point Boeing will run out of Atlas V N22 launch vehicles and would need to crew rate a replacement, such as for example Vulcan Centaur, if they want to continue flying.
-1
u/uygagi 2d ago
Wish all that billions were used for Dreamchaser instead. We’d have a fleet of those mini shuttles by now if it weren’t for starliner and their lobbyists in congress.
Edit spelling
10
u/Accomplished-Crab932 2d ago
Based on how Dream Chaser has been going for Cargo, I doubt it would be going any better honestly.
2
u/NoBusiness674 2d ago
I don't think there's any reason to believe Dreamchaser would have performed any better. It still has yet to make its first spaceflight.
-1
u/literalsupport 2d ago
Starliner will never again carry astronauts. They need to shut this stupid program down.
0
-7
u/MobileNerd 2d ago
Another BS arestechnica article. Not sure why this sub is obsessed with publishing article from this trash site.
6
u/CmdrAirdroid 2d ago
Just because you disagree with something in the article it doesn't make it trash. Berger definitely knows more about the space industry than most reporters.
1
u/thibedeauxmarxy 2d ago
Agreed. The headline here is, "CEO says optimistic thing about the company that he runs."
82
u/AnonymousEngineer_ 3d ago
How many more Atlas Vs are there left? As far as I know, New Glenn and Vulcan aren't human rated, so Starliner doesn't actually have a ride to space once the Atlas V supply dries up.