Because there's no need to fully evacuate the ISS, which has another 6 years of anticipated operating lifespan, and further, the Starliner capsule isn't equipped to support a deorbit operation?
To my understanding, the situation is that the 'service module' to the capsule is what's having helium leaks, but the capsule has redundant thrusters and can deorbit on it's own. Because the service module can't reenter the atmosphere, there's no way to look at it after the astronauts return, so engineers' only opportunity to analyze the issue is before the Starliner returns.
Not a safety issue, but a capability issue. And the ISS has the supplies to support the astronauts for a while, so why not. A quick up-and-down was probably originally planned as it reduces risk in some respects (what if there's unknown capsule problems?), provides more flight data faster, but now you get more crew flight time and the ground control can investigate known problems.
9 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 47.0 ms ] threadKind of like what Comcast did when then renamed to Xfinity.
I don't think that works for a company the size of Boeing. It will cause the Streisand effect more than anything.
Then use the starliner to deorbit the ISS.
It would save the Billion dollars they want to give SpaceX to develop a booster for the job.
Not a safety issue, but a capability issue. And the ISS has the supplies to support the astronauts for a while, so why not. A quick up-and-down was probably originally planned as it reduces risk in some respects (what if there's unknown capsule problems?), provides more flight data faster, but now you get more crew flight time and the ground control can investigate known problems.
"Duddint fit in the budget son+. Let's just hope we have a cold winter and maybe we can check it out in January "
(+) I am pretty sure this boss would call anybody either son or darlin' but not both. Rewrite it as you wish