The FAA has stated that after Varda’s stranded reentry capsule, they will not issue launch licenses to reentering payloads before they get their reentry licenses.
Sierra working on a reentry license for Dream Chaser suggests that NASA missions are not exempt from this requirement.
The FAA’s Commercial Space Data page lists only two approved reentry licensees: Varda and SpaceX.
Boeing is not on that list, either.
CFT will carry some cargo to the ISS.
Are they able to bypass this for Starliner?
As well as some cargo, CFT will carry a couple of "meatbags"
I imagine that Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams are reasonably keen that Starliner will carry them back to earth as well as up to the ISS.
Wouldn't that require Boeing or ULA to have a reentry license?
Either Boeing would need a Reentry License for Starliner, or Vulcan's Launch License would need to be amended to a Launch and Reentry License.
Starliner launches on Atlas V, not Vulcan. In the Atlas/Starliner flight profile, Atlas's US (Centaur) does not quite reach orbit: this is deliberate. Starliner. boosts itself from this almost-orbital trajectory into orbit and eventually to the ISS orbit. This is done so Starliner will re-enter passively if its engines fail to start.
I have no idea what regulations apply, but logically the Atlas V part of the flight plan must include the Centaur's return to Earth.
Burnup of stages would be part of the 'flight' portion of a Launch License:
“Flight” shall mean the flight of an Atlas V 501 or 551 launch vehicle, commencing with ignition
of the first stage from Launch Complex 41 (SLC-41) at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station
(CCSFS), Florida, for the purposes of transporting payloads to Earth orbit. A flight ends upon
ULA’s last exercise of control over the vehicle, including when ULA commands the passivation
of the upper stage, after vehicle components impact on Earth, after activities necessary to
return vehicle components to a safe condition on the ground after impact, or after activities
necessary to return the site to a safe condition, whichever occurs latest.
Guys!
One
Rhinocerous horn or two?
All these details are irrelevant, particularly the Vulcan and Centaur comments.
Either Boeing has a way to launch without the reentry license that the FAA just made a big deal over, or Boeing is still in the process of applying for that license despite having boarded the astronauts for launch last week, or they have the permit but the FAA is not reporting it.
How can any of these three cases be?
Apparently no one here has any idea about this.
The FAA has stated that after Varda’s stranded reentry capsule, they will not issue launch licenses to reentering payloads before they get their reentry licenses.
Sierra working on a reentry license for Dream Chaser suggests that NASA missions are not exempt from this requirement.
The FAA’s Commercial Space Data page lists only two approved reentry licensees: Varda and SpaceX.
Boeing is not on that list, either.
CFT will carry some cargo to the ISS.
Are they able to bypass this for Starliner?
As well as some cargo, CFT will carry a couple of "meatbags"
I imagine that Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams are reasonably keen that Starliner will carry them back to earth as well as up to the ISS.
Wouldn't that require Boeing or ULA to have a reentry license?
Either Boeing would need a Reentry License for Starliner, or Vulcan's Launch License would need to be amended to a Launch and Reentry License.
Starliner launches on Atlas V, not Vulcan. In the Atlas/Starliner flight profile, Atlas's US (Centaur) does not quite reach orbit: this is deliberate. Starliner. boosts itself from this almost-orbital trajectory into orbit and eventually to the ISS orbit. This is done so Starliner will re-enter passively if its engines fail to start.
I have no idea what regulations apply, but logically the Atlas V part of the flight plan must include the Centaur's return to Earth.
Burnup of stages would be part of the 'flight' portion of a Launch License:
“Flight” shall mean the flight of an Atlas V 501 or 551 launch vehicle, commencing with ignition
of the first stage from Launch Complex 41 (SLC-41) at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station
(CCSFS), Florida, for the purposes of transporting payloads to Earth orbit. A flight ends upon
ULA’s last exercise of control over the vehicle, including when ULA commands the passivation
of the upper stage, after vehicle components impact on Earth, after activities necessary to
return vehicle components to a safe condition on the ground after impact, or after activities
necessary to return the site to a safe condition, whichever occurs latest.
Guys!
One Rhinocerous horn or two?
All these details are irrelevant, particularly the Vulcan and Centaur comments.
Either Boeing has a way to launch without the reentry license that the FAA just made a big deal over, or Boeing is still in the process of applying for that license despite having boarded the astronauts for launch last week, or they have the permit but the FAA is not reporting it.
How can any of these three cases be?
Apparently no one here has any idea about this.
Case 4: The license was published, but then removed and will be replaced by a new license when needed. The FAA commercial space site infuriatingly does not have an archive of past licenses.
Guys!
One Rhinocerous horn or two?
All these details are irrelevant, particularly the Vulcan and Centaur comments.
Either Boeing has a way to launch without the reentry license that the FAA just made a big deal over, or Boeing is still in the process of applying for that license despite having boarded the astronauts for launch last week, or they have the permit but the FAA is not reporting it.
How can any of these three cases be?
Apparently no one here has any idea about this.
Case 4: The license was published, but then removed and will be replaced by a new license when needed. The FAA commercial space site infuriatingly does not have an archive of past licenses.
That’s an idea, but why and how?
If it’s required to get a launch permit then it was needed last week.
Varda’s permit is still on the list and they have nothing in orbit and their next capsule will be larger and very different from the one for which they got the permit, unlike the Dragons which are all of two proven types and mostly reflights. So the FCC isn’t casually removing permits from the list.
But we are still guessing
Does anyone here know how to ask any of the major space reporters like Berger?
Guys!
One Rhinocerous horn or two?
All these details are irrelevant, particularly the Vulcan and Centaur comments.
Either Boeing has a way to launch without the reentry license that the FAA just made a big deal over, or Boeing is still in the process of applying for that license despite having boarded the astronauts for launch last week, or they have the permit but the FAA is not reporting it.
How can any of these three cases be?
Apparently no one here has any idea about this.
Case 4: The license was published, but then removed and will be replaced by a new license when needed. The FAA commercial space site infuriatingly does not have an archive of past licenses.
That’s an idea, but why and how?
If it’s required to get a launch permit then it was needed last week.
Varda’s permit is still on the list and they have nothing in orbit and their next capsule will be larger and very different from the one for which they got the permit, unlike the Dragons which are all of two proven types and mostly reflights. So the FCC isn’t casually removing permits from the list.
But we are still guessing
Does anyone here know how to ask any of the major space reporters like Berger?
Publishing of the license is not required for the flight, just the existence of the license. IIRC there have been occasions in the past where the license was not published until after the flight it was licensing.
The FAA has stated that after Varda’s stranded reentry capsule, they will not issue launch licenses to reentering payloads before they get their reentry licenses.
Sierra working on a reentry license for Dream Chaser suggests that NASA missions are not exempt from this requirement.
The FAA’s Commercial Space Data page lists only two approved reentry licensees: Varda and SpaceX.
Boeing is not on that list, either.
CFT will carry some cargo to the ISS.
Are they able to bypass this for Starliner?
As well as some cargo, CFT will carry a couple of "meatbags"
I imagine that Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams are reasonably keen that Starliner will carry them back to earth as well as up to the ISS.
Wouldn't that require Boeing or ULA to have a reentry license?
Either Boeing would need a Reentry License for Starliner, or Vulcan's Launch License would need to be amended to a Launch and Reentry License.
They’re not “meatbags”, they’re real live human beings. Can we not keep repeating this dehumanizing idea that humans on a spacecraft are “cargo” or “meat”?
The FAA has stated that after Varda’s stranded reentry capsule, they will not issue launch licenses to reentering payloads before they get their reentry licenses.
Sierra working on a reentry license for Dream Chaser suggests that NASA missions are not exempt from this requirement.
The FAA’s Commercial Space Data page lists only two approved reentry licensees: Varda and SpaceX.
Boeing is not on that list, either.
CFT will carry some cargo to the ISS.
Are they able to bypass this for Starliner?
As well as some cargo, CFT will carry a couple of "meatbags"
I imagine that Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams are reasonably keen that Starliner will carry them back to earth as well as up to the ISS.
Wouldn't that require Boeing or ULA to have a reentry license?
Either Boeing would need a Reentry License for Starliner, or Vulcan's Launch License would need to be amended to a Launch and Reentry License.
They’re not “meatbags”, they’re real live human beings. Can we not keep repeating this dehumanizing idea that humans on a spacecraft are “cargo” or “meat”?
I'd bet a quarter of my IRA balance that no one meant to dehumanize Butch and Suni.
More like astronaut/test pilot "gallows humor." See "spam in a can" from the 1960's.
I believe the intent was that, if you need a license to re-enter with cargo, all the more so when that cargo is a life form "reasonably keen" on getting back to
terra firma.
The FAA has stated that after Varda’s stranded reentry capsule, they will not issue launch licenses to reentering payloads before they get their reentry licenses.
Sierra working on a reentry license for Dream Chaser suggests that NASA missions are not exempt from this requirement.
The FAA’s Commercial Space Data page lists only two approved reentry licensees: Varda and SpaceX.
Boeing is not on that list, either.
CFT will carry some cargo to the ISS.
Are they able to bypass this for Starliner?
As well as some cargo, CFT will carry a couple of "meatbags"
I imagine that Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams are reasonably keen that Starliner will carry them back to earth as well as up to the ISS.
Wouldn't that require Boeing or ULA to have a reentry license?
Either Boeing would need a Reentry License for Starliner, or Vulcan's Launch License would need to be amended to a Launch and Reentry License.
They’re not “meatbags”, they’re real live human beings. Can we not keep repeating this dehumanizing idea that humans on a spacecraft are “cargo” or “meat”?
No offense, but with the CCP vehicles being fully autonomous (manual override is merely a back-up) the astronauts are really just passengers. Some would say: living cargo. "Spam in the can" if you will.
The FAA has stated that after Varda’s stranded reentry capsule, they will not issue launch licenses to reentering payloads before they get their reentry licenses.
Cross post:
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/10/sierra-space-ceo-talks-ipo-plans-satellite-launch-and-dream-chaser.html
[In] the CNBC article on Dream Chaser, Vice said he’s “very confident” it will make its first flight in the fourth quarter of this year. He added the spaceplane passed the first phase of environmental testing in March and said since it will be carrying cargo to the ISS on this first demonstration, the company is dependent on NASA’s manifest and it’s working with the FAA to get a reentry license.
Sierra working on a reentry license for Dream Chaser suggests that NASA missions are not exempt from this requirement.
The FAA’s Commercial Space Data page lists only two approved reentry licensees: Varda and SpaceX.
Boeing is not on that list, either.
CFT will carry some cargo to the ISS.
Are they able to bypass this for Starliner?
It's because test flights under CCtCAP are considered NASA missions, thus do not need FAA license.
Only post-certification operational missions are commercial missions and would require FAA license.
See paper
FAA LICENSING AND THE NASA COMMERCIAL CREW PROGRAM:
Certification flights would be fully overseen and
directed by NASA to verify compliance with NASA
requirements and standards. During test flights,
NASA would have oversight of astronaut safety,
mission assurance, and public safety. As a result,
these government certification missions would not be
licensed by the FAA.
The FAA has stated that after Varda’s stranded reentry capsule, they will not issue launch licenses to reentering payloads before they get their reentry licenses.
Sierra working on a reentry license for Dream Chaser suggests that NASA missions are not exempt from this requirement.
The FAA’s Commercial Space Data page lists only two approved reentry licensees: Varda and SpaceX.
Boeing is not on that list, either.
CFT will carry some cargo to the ISS.
Are they able to bypass this for Starliner?
As well as some cargo, CFT will carry a couple of "meatbags"
I imagine that Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams are reasonably keen that Starliner will carry them back to earth as well as up to the ISS.
Wouldn't that require Boeing or ULA to have a reentry license?
Either Boeing would need a Reentry License for Starliner, or Vulcan's Launch License would need to be amended to a Launch and Reentry License.
They’re not “meatbags”, they’re real live human beings. Can we not keep repeating this dehumanizing idea that humans on a spacecraft are “cargo” or “meat”?
No offense, but with the CCP vehicles being fully autonomous (manual override is merely a back-up) the astronauts are really just passengers. Some would say: living cargo. "Spam in the can" if you will.
Ehhh it's a test flight. Demonstrating manual operation is probably a test objective on this mission.
And for what it's worth, Boeing was claiming after the OFT-1 debacle that if there were astronauts onboard, they could have saved the mission by doing a manual orbital insertion burn.
The FAA has stated that after Varda’s stranded reentry capsule, they will not issue launch licenses to reentering payloads before they get their reentry licenses.
Cross post:
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/10/sierra-space-ceo-talks-ipo-plans-satellite-launch-and-dream-chaser.html
[In] the CNBC article on Dream Chaser, Vice said he’s “very confident” it will make its first flight in the fourth quarter of this year. He added the spaceplane passed the first phase of environmental testing in March and said since it will be carrying cargo to the ISS on this first demonstration, the company is dependent on NASA’s manifest and it’s working with the FAA to get a reentry license.
Sierra working on a reentry license for Dream Chaser suggests that NASA missions are not exempt from this requirement.
The FAA’s Commercial Space Data page lists only two approved reentry licensees: Varda and SpaceX.
Boeing is not on that list, either.
CFT will carry some cargo to the ISS.
Are they able to bypass this for Starliner?
It's because test flights under CCtCAP are considered NASA missions, thus do not need FAA license.
Only post-certification operational missions are commercial missions and would require FAA license.
See paper FAA LICENSING AND THE NASA COMMERCIAL CREW PROGRAM:
Certification flights would be fully overseen and directed by NASA to verify compliance with NASA requirements and standards. During test flights, NASA would have oversight of astronaut safety, mission assurance, and public safety. As a result, these government certification missions would not be licensed by the FAA.
Good but DreamChaser is also a NASA program, under COTS or some equivalent and Sierra seems to need a reentry permit.
However
In an April 10 briefing at the 39th Space Symposium, Kelvin Coleman, FAA associate administrator for commercial space transportation, said that policy changes were planned given the experience with Varda.
“We did allow them to launch on a SpaceX Falcon vehicle without a reentry license,” he said of Varda. “There were some lessons that we learned from that. We will probably shortly have a policy statement that will come out from our office that will speak to reentry and how we will tackle that challenge of companies needing to have their reentry licenses prior to launch.”
So the policy was not yet in effect last month, and may not have been when Starliner launch was approved. But CFT can’t wait on orbit while they process the reentry license application.
Lots of timeline detail from https://www.nasa.gov/nasatv/ (PDF attached):
https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/tv-schedule-for-nasas-boeing-starliner-crew-flight-test-rev-a.pdf
NASA TELEVISION SCHEDULE
NASA BOEING STARLINER MISSION (CREW FLIGHT TEST)
Rev. A (dated 03-May-2024)
NASA TV has not yet published a CFT-specific schedule, but in the meantime they
have today published their
regular schedule of programming for this week, and it includes:
Sat 8:15am : Live Coverage of the Launch of the Boeing Starliner Spacecraft to the International Space Station
Sat 2:00pm : Live Boeing Starliner Crew Flight Test Post-Launch News Conference
Sun 2:13pm : Live Docking of the Boeing Starliner Spacecraft to the International Space Station
Sun 4:00pm : Live Hatch Opening and Welcoming Remarks by NASA Astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams
Sun 5:15pm : Live Boeing Starliner Post-Docking News Conference
(all times US Eastern; add 4 hours for UTC)
I do expect them to publish a CFT-focused schedule (i.e. Rev B of the PDF schedule that I posted on May 4th, above), and it'll get linked here when it does come out, presumably after one of the reviews completes successfully.
And just a reminder to those monitoring this thread that the launcher thread has more updates; see below (with slightly better link edited in):
FYI there's more coverage in this thread in the launcher (Atlas) section:
Atlas V N22 - Starliner CFT (Crewed) - CCSFS SLC-41
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=47978.new#new
I think the NSF norm is for coverage / discussion of the mission to pivot to this thread after the launch phase is complete.
It's because test flights under CCtCAP are considered NASA missions, thus do not need FAA license.
Only post-certification operational missions are commercial missions and would require FAA license.
See paper FAA LICENSING AND THE NASA COMMERCIAL CREW PROGRAM:
Certification flights would be fully overseen and directed by NASA to verify compliance with NASA requirements and standards. During test flights, NASA would have oversight of astronaut safety, mission assurance, and public safety. As a result, these government certification missions would not be licensed by the FAA.
Good but DreamChaser is also a NASA program, under COTS or some equivalent and Sierra seems to need a reentry permit.
However
In an April 10 briefing at the 39th Space Symposium, Kelvin Coleman, FAA associate administrator for commercial space transportation, said that policy changes were planned given the experience with Varda.
“We did allow them to launch on a SpaceX Falcon vehicle without a reentry license,” he said of Varda. “There were some lessons that we learned from that. We will probably shortly have a policy statement that will come out from our office that will speak to reentry and how we will tackle that challenge of companies needing to have their reentry licenses prior to launch.”
So the policy was not yet in effect last month, and may not have been when Starliner launch was approved. But CFT can’t wait on orbit while they process the reentry license application.
It's the difference between a commercial mission which just happens to have NASA as customer vs a NASA mission where NASA is fully in charge.
CRS missions are considered to be the former, so they need a FAA license. Artemis I is an example of the latter, which does not need a FAA license.
NASA decided a while ago that test flights under CCtCAP is also considered to be the latter case.
It's because test flights under CCtCAP are considered NASA missions, thus do not need FAA license.
Only post-certification operational missions are commercial missions and would require FAA license.
See paper FAA LICENSING AND THE NASA COMMERCIAL CREW PROGRAM:
Certification flights would be fully overseen and directed by NASA to verify compliance with NASA requirements and standards. During test flights, NASA would have oversight of astronaut safety, mission assurance, and public safety. As a result, these government certification missions would not be licensed by the FAA.
Good but DreamChaser is also a NASA program, under COTS or some equivalent and Sierra seems to need a reentry permit.
However
In an April 10 briefing at the 39th Space Symposium, Kelvin Coleman, FAA associate administrator for commercial space transportation, said that policy changes were planned given the experience with Varda.
“We did allow them to launch on a SpaceX Falcon vehicle without a reentry license,” he said of Varda. “There were some lessons that we learned from that. We will probably shortly have a policy statement that will come out from our office that will speak to reentry and how we will tackle that challenge of companies needing to have their reentry licenses prior to launch.”
So the policy was not yet in effect last month, and may not have been when Starliner launch was approved. But CFT can’t wait on orbit while they process the reentry license application.
It's the difference between a commercial mission which just happens to have NASA as customer vs a NASA mission where NASA is fully in charge.
CRS missions are considered to be the former, so they need a FAA license. Artemis I is an example of the latter, which does not need a FAA license.
NASA decided a while ago that test flights under CCtCAP is also considered to be the latter case.
So Boeing has until the Starliner's first operational launch to get the paperwork completed for Starliner's FAA license. It might be interesting to see if NASA gives Boeing a deadline to have their FAA license with the penalty being another SpaceX Dragon flight before Starliner's first operational mission.
... with the penalty being another SpaceX Dragon flight before Starliner's first operational mission.
That's ... not how government contracts work.
... with the penalty being another SpaceX Dragon flight before Starliner's first operational mission.
That's ... not how government contracts work.
It's not a formal contractual penalty. It's just the way CCP operations are going to work for "Crew mission 10". NASA has already said that the Crew mission 10 will be Starliner-1 if the CPT evaluation is complete in time, and will be Crew Dragon (Crew-10) if the evaluation is not complete in time. NASA presumably has discretion for what is required to complete the evaluation.
https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2023/10/12/nasa-updates-commercial-crew-planning-manifest/The 10th commercial crew rotation opportunity to the space station is targeted for early 2025. NASA is planning for either SpaceX’s Crew-10 or Boeing’s Starliner-1 mission in this slot. The Starliner-1 date was adjusted to allow for the post-flight review of the Crew Flight Test and incorporation of anticipated learning, approvals of final certification products, and completion of readiness and certification reviews ahead of that mission.
I do not know what the latest possible date for this decision could be, but I would guess that it is as least six months prior to the mission, so no later than mid-august 2024.
... with the penalty being another SpaceX Dragon flight before Starliner's first operational mission.
That's ... not how government contracts work.
It's not a formal contractual penalty. It's just the way CCP operations are going to work for "Crew mission 10". NASA has already said that the Crew mission 10 will be Starliner-1 if the CPT evaluation is complete in time, and will be Crew Dragon (Crew-10) if the evaluation is not complete in time. NASA presumably has discretion for what is required to complete the evaluation.
https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2023/10/12/nasa-updates-commercial-crew-planning-manifest/
The 10th commercial crew rotation opportunity to the space station is targeted for early 2025. NASA is planning for either SpaceX’s Crew-10 or Boeing’s Starliner-1 mission in this slot. The Starliner-1 date was adjusted to allow for the post-flight review of the Crew Flight Test and incorporation of anticipated learning, approvals of final certification products, and completion of readiness and certification reviews ahead of that mission.
I do not know what the latest possible date for this decision could be, but I would guess that it is as least six months prior to the mission, so no later than mid-august 2024.
My use of the word 'penalty' in my previous post was referring simply to Boeing having to wait 5-6 months longer to get paid for Starliner-1 if they are unable to have everything NASA requires for them to perform the 10th crew rotation.
I also suspect that the final decision as to which mission (Crew-10 or Starliner-1) will launch in 1Q 2025 might be made as late as early November 2024, with both groups training as if they would be launching in that timeframe until the final decision is made.
... I also suspect that the final decision as to which mission (Crew-10 or Starliner-1) will launch in 1Q 2025 might be made as late as early November 2024, with both groups training as if they would be launching in that timeframe until the final decision is made.
Have we ever learned how far in advance NASA needs to assign a Commercial Crew mission per their contracts with the providers?
If they havn't flown Dragon before they will also have to have suits created as well.
How long does that take ?