While the entire world heaved a sigh of relief over the safe homecoming of the stranded astronauts — Sunita Williams and Butch Wilmore — their nine-month-long ordeal has exposed the vulnerabilities of space missions and loopholes in the present system of planning, testing procedures and safety standards.
What was originally planned as a brief eight-day mission intended to test the capabilities of the Boeing Starliner, a spacecraft developed as part of NASA’s Commercial Crew Programme, had turned out to be a nightmarish experience for the astronauts. They were stuck at the International Space Station (ISS) since June last year due to critical technical issues with the Starliner.
The glitches in its propulsion system and thrusters prevented their safe return to the Earth. After overcoming moments of uncertainties and a few last-minute postponements, the stranded astronauts are finally back home. A SpaceX Dragon capsule, carrying them along with two other astronauts, successfully splashed down in the Gulf of Mexico after a 17-hour descent. This brings the curtains down on a rollercoaster space drama that had several anxious moments.
Egg on their faces
Both NASA and Boeing, the aerospace behemoth, have egg on their faces, as the delayed mission raises several questions over human safety and exposes the dark side of space capitalism. Long been a monopoly player, Boeing has come under intense scrutiny due to the problems with Starliner, highlighting the challenges in the commercial space industry. A helium leak was detected in the Starliner even before its June 5 launch, but NASA and Boeing leadership dismissed the issue as too minor to delay the mission.
Williams and Wilmore lifted off in the Starliner from the Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Cape Canaveral, Florida, and were scheduled to return on June 14. But as the starliner approached the ISS, it encountered multiple issues including further helium leaks and thruster malfunction, making it unsafe for the return trip.
Also read: Metamorphosis of Indian Marxists
There is growing criticism—justifiably so—against the aerospace giant for prioritising profits over human safety. The questions are being raised over whether the company followed the prescribed modules of safety and rescue operations without any waste of time when such glitches started appearing. Technical glitches are not predictable, but safety modules for rescue cannot have the same uncertainty. It cannot escape the accountability for the failure of thrusters and leakage of helium resulting in the deterioration of the health of the astronauts inside the auto-locked vehicle.
The sequence of events raises questions about whether the launch should have gone ahead in spite of the leak. Another issue for NASA’s review is why these issues were not identified in any of the two previous uncrewed flight tests of Starliner.
It’s advantage Musk
Boeing is the biggest loser in the whole episode while billionaire technocrat Elon Musk has emerged as the winner. It was Musk’s SpaceX that provided the successful back-up option for NASA to bring the astronauts home.
The last-minute reliance on SpaceX’s Dragon capsule exposed the friction between Elon Musk-owned relatively upstart company and Boeing, the 108-year-old aerospace giant that has been plagued by safety issues for years. Given Boeing's repeated missteps, NASA has become increasingly dependent on SpaceX, giving Musk an undue advantage in the commercial space market.
Musk's growing influence over American space policy has understandably triggered concern among lawmakers. Moreover, he is now at the helm of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a position he could use to shift NASA's priorities further in SpaceX's favour, potentially side-lining competitors like Boeing.
Another important area of concern is the Space Launch System (SLS), NASA's massive rocket developed for ‘Artemis’ moon missions. Boeing, the primary contractor for the SLS core and upper stages, has faced repeated delays and cost overruns. As Musk looks to cut down government spending with DOGE, there is a speculation in political circles that the programme could face the chopping block.
The SLS is currently scheduled to launch ‘Artemis II’ in 2027, followed by ‘Artemis III’—the first crewed lunar landing attempt since the Apollo missions. However, with growing political pressure to cut costs, there is increasing speculation that the Trump administration could push for a commercially built alternative, such as SpaceX's Starship, to replace the troubled Boeing-led SLS. It has already secured NASA contracts, further cementing SpaceX's role in the agency's long-term plans.
Dark side of space capitalism
With the entry of private corporations in the space sector, it appears that the space economy is not about exploration anymore but about exploitation and greed. In the bargain, the lives of astronauts are being pushed to the edge.
Having already suffered a loss of around $1.6 billion in cost overruns on the Starliner fiasco, Boeing simply dreads the idea of being upstaged by its SpaceX competitor. Using a SpaceX craft to bring the astronauts home is a blow to Boeing, which has for years tried to compete with the company and its more experienced Crew Dragon.
Stiff competition to gain a niche in the space sector by flaunting shiny new missions keeps risk and safety issues under wraps, far away from public scrutiny.
Follow us
