![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/NSF_20180104_191300.jpg\")
<\/p>\nAs NASA prepares to provide updated launch date targets for the uncrewed and crewed Commercial Crew demonstration missions from both SpaceX and Boeing \u2013 as well as flight crew assignments for each provider \u2013 the agency\u2019s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) held its quarterly meeting last Thursday, during which they outlined a failure on Boeing\u2019s part that could potentially lead to a redesign of a critical element of Starliner. The ASAP also outlined multiple points of positive progress on SpaceX\u2019s part.<\/p>\n
Boeing suffers critical failure with Starliner:<\/b><\/p>\n
As was first reported by Eric Berger on Ars Technica, Boeing suffered a test stand failure of Starliner\u2019s critical pad abort thrusters in late-June, a failure that reportedly ended with the leaking of volatile propellant from the thruster system.<\/p>\n
In multiple statements to numerous outlets thereafter, Boeing stated that they were \u201cconfident we found the cause and are moving forward with corrective action.\u201d<\/p>\n
But that wasn\u2019t quite the take-away from the ASAP meeting that occurred days after the company issued its statement.<\/p>\n
\u201cBoeing recently conducted a hot fire test for their low-altitude abort milestone for the CST-100,\u201d noted a member of the ASAP panel. \u201cAnd there was an anomaly on that test that we need to better understand in terms of its potential impact on the design and operation and the schedule.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Abort testing Starliner \u2013 by Nathan Koga for NSF\/L2<\/p>\n
\u201cAnd so although there\u2019s a lot of interest in this issue, Boeing has asked for some additional time to step back and understand that a little better.\u201d<\/p>\n
During its admittedly brief discussion of Boeing, ASAP members made no mention of any potential corrective action, instead indicating that Boeing was still in the process of understanding exactly what happened with the failure.<\/p>\n
Space Shuttle models (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});<\/p>\n It is possible that ASAP was referring to information that predated the Boeing statement; however, it is also possible that the panel \u2013 which provides a cautious and measured approach \u2013 had not yet been presented evidence of such corrective action for the abort thruster issue.<\/p>\n Regardless, one thing was clear from ASAP: Boeing\u2019s current schedules for both their uncrewed and crew test flights, known as the Orbital Flight Test (OFT) and the Crew Flight Test (CFT), respectively, are in a state of flux and not well understood.<\/p>\n \u201cWe can expect some uncertainty and their near-term schedules at least for the Boeing provider while they go through that,\u201d noted the ASAP. \u201cAnd then we should have a much better sense of the Orbital Flight Test and the Crew Flight Test for that provider.\u201d\n<\/p>\n Starliner launches atop an Atlas V N22 rocket from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL, carrying new crewmembers to the International Space Station (Credit: Nathan Koga, for NSF\/L2).<\/p>\n This statement is telling, especially ahead of NASA\u2019s plan to announce new target launch dates for the OFT and CFT missions for Boeing (as well as for both of SpaceX\u2019s uncrewed and crewed missions) this Friday, 3 August, at an event at the agency\u2019s Johnson Space Center.<\/p>\n With this ASAP statement, it is now understood that those dates for Boeing to be announced Friday might not be completely realistic as the company continues to work through mitigation and potential redesign, as stated by ASAP, resulting from the test stand issue.<\/p>\n Praise for SpaceX, but still work to do:<\/b><\/p>\n Contrasting quite significantly from the above, the ASAP panel had high praise for SpaceX regarding a number of areas related to the production of the crew Dragon and the Falcon 9 boosters that will be used to launch the crew craft to the International Space Station.<\/p>\n Of particular note in the panel\u2019s praise for SpaceX was the company\u2019s strides both at innovation and adaptability while also developing procedures and computer tracking systems to greatly aid in Systems Engineering & Integration (SE&I) to properly track all changes to the vehicle and understand how those changes relate to the overall integrated design for crew Dragon and the Falcon 9 rocket.<\/p>\n In fact, perhaps no better praise for these tools and systems came from an ASAP member who said they \u201cwould have been great to have for the Space Shuttle program\u201d \u2013 which ASAP member, and former NASA astronaut Lieutenant General (Ret.) Susan Helms noted \u201cwas a great \u2018attaboy\u2019 for the program\u2019s current visions of how the tools are not just evolving but how the SpaceX force is adapting to using them.\u201d<\/p>\n Crew Dragon heads uphill on the Falcon 9 \u2013 via Nathan Koga for NSF\/L2<\/p>\n ASAP discussed these positive attributes for SpaceX while discussing the Commercial Crew Program\u2019s (CCP\u2019s) overall positive progress on strategies and approaches to meeting the panel\u2019s SE&I recommendations.<\/p>\n \u201cYou can never review enough times what SE&I principals actually mean,\u201d noted Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Helms. \u201cIt means understanding the margins of the integrated system designs, verifying that those margins exist through test and analysis, and then controlling both the configuration and the operation of the system to ensure those margins exist when flown and that these principles are both absolutely essential for culture and practice to achieve the best possible outcomes for the safety of space flight.\u201d<\/p>\n Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Helms also had great praise for SpaceX\u2019s \u201cextreme transparency\u201d with the CCP office on all of their data, \u201cincluding how the tools can help them with risk management.<\/p>\n \u201cAssuming that the program continues to have confidence that SpaceX\u2019s principles are evolving in a way that gets them to meeting the intent of our recommendations, it looks like things are on a good path to what we had originally intended with our recommendations.\u201d<\/p>\n Nonetheless, there were a couple of issues (more items to watch than issues) ASAP brought forward regarding SpaceX in relation to vehicle hardware.<\/p>\n The CRS-4 Dragon prepares for splashdown in the Pacific Ocean. Credit: SpaceX<\/p>\n One such area is an upcoming change to the vendor that provides the parachute reef line cutters for Dragon. The original vendor selected by SpaceX was the only NASA-qualified vendor for reef line cutters, and it had to serve Dragon, Starliner, and Orion. <\/p>\n That vendor is an extremely small company, and challenges in ensuring the quantity and \u2013 most importantly \u2013 the quality of the delivered product due to increased demand from the three crewed vehicles developed.<\/p>\n As such, SpaceX made the decision to switch vendors to ensure a continuous and quality supply of reef line cutters. That new vendor is currently going through the qualification process, which is nearing completion.<\/p>\n What SpaceX is now in the process of deciding is on which mission they will switch to the new vendor\u2019s hardware \u2013 the uncrewed DM-1 flight or the crewed DM-2 mission.<\/p>\n The parachutes for the DM-1 mission have already been packed inside the crew Dragon capsule, and changing out the reef line cutters would delay the DM-1 flight. SpaceX is actively engaged in risk management and risk posture discussions for potentially switching to the new reef line cutters on the crewed DM-2 flight, with ASAP noting that they are eagerly awaiting the results of those discussions.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/2018-07-30-184032.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/2018-07-13-134628.jpg\")
<\/p>\nSee Also<\/h4>\n
\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/16166753344_79516c7f5c_k.jpg\")
<\/p>\n