Some links on this page are affiliate links: if you buy through them we may earn a commission, at no extra cost to you.
In September 2024, NASA sent Boeing’s Starliner away from the International Space Station using a rapid sequence of separation maneuvers because the spacecraft’s propulsion problems made a prolonged departure near the station an unnecessary risk. Starliner was not being launched from Earth: it was already in orbit, docked to the ISS, and was being commanded to undock and clear the station autonomously.
The spacecraft ultimately returned to Earth uncrewed and landed successfully. NASA judged that returning astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams aboard Starliner carried more uncertainty than using an alternative spacecraft. The astronauts later returned aboard SpaceX’s Crew-9 Dragon in March 2025.
The short version
- Starliner carried Wilmore and Williams to the ISS on June 5, 2024, arriving the next day.
- During the flight, NASA dealt with helium leaks and anomalous or degraded reaction-control-thruster performance.
- On August 24, NASA decided the astronauts would not return aboard Starliner.
- Starliner undocked autonomously on September 6 using a rapid breakout sequence intended to reduce the time it spent near the station.
- It reentered and landed uncrewed at White Sands Space Harbor, New Mexico.
- The astronauts remained on the ISS and returned aboard Crew-9 in March 2025.
NASA described the decision as risk management, not a prediction that Starliner would certainly fail.
What NASA meant by “launch Starliner away”
The wording can be misleading. Starliner was already in orbit and attached to the ISS; NASA was not firing a rocket to launch it from Earth. The plan was to undock the capsule, perform a series of controlled separation burns, clear the station’s immediate safety zone, and later conduct a deorbit burn for reentry.
#1 Best Overall
- HOBBY MODEL KIT – Unassembled model packed in an envelope with easy to follow instructions. Ideal for ages 14 and up.
- NO GLUE OR SOLDER NEEDED – Parts can be easily clipped from the metal sheets. Tweezers are the recommended tool for bending and twisting the connection tabs.
- BOEING CST-100 STARLINER – 1 Sheet Model with an easy difficulty level. Assembled Size: 1.97 (Diameter) x 2.17 H inches.
- FROM STEEL SHEETS TO 3D – Pop out the pieces and connect using tabs and holes. Includes illustrated instructions.
- HIGHLY DETAILED ETCHED MODEL – Display your 3D model once completed - collect and build them all.
NASA’s return timeline recorded initial separation maneuvers, a breakout sequence, Starliner’s departure from the station’s keep-out sphere, and the later deorbit operation. A contemporary report described the breakout as 12 small burns of roughly 1 meter per second of delta-v each. The aim was not an uncontrolled sprint or a maximum-thrust escape. It was a carefully sequenced departure designed to clear the station quickly while limiting demands on a propulsion system already under scrutiny.
NASA’s official timeline provides the detailed maneuver sequence. The spacecraft’s later deorbit burn lasted 59 seconds, delivered 129.9 meters per second of delta-v, and used four OMACS burns.
Why NASA wanted Starliner away from the station quickly
The ISS is a continuously occupied spacecraft with limited room for an unexpected vehicle problem. Starliner’s propulsion system had already shown anomalous behavior, including underperforming reaction-control thrusters and multiple helium leaks. That created a risk-management problem: even if the capsule could probably depart and return, keeping it close to the station for additional maneuvering would extend the period in which a control or propulsion problem could affect the ISS.
A rapid breakout reduced that exposure in several ways:
- Less time near the ISS: Starliner could move outside the station’s immediate safety zone sooner.
- Fewer close-proximity maneuvers: NASA removed a planned fly-around inspection from the departure profile.
- Lower crew exposure: No astronauts were aboard if the spacecraft experienced another propulsion problem.
- Conservative propulsion use: The departure used distributed, relatively small burns rather than relying on a single demanding maneuver.
The phrase “as fast as possible,” used in the contemporary headline, should therefore be read as “clear the station as quickly and safely as the mission plan allowed,” not as an attempt to use maximum thrust.
Rank #2
- UNASSEMBLED HOBBY MODEL KIT – packed in an envelope with easy to follow instructions. Ideal for ages 14 and up.
- NO GLUE OR SOLDER NEEDED – Parts can be easily clipped from the metal sheets. Bundle includes tweezers, which are recommended for bending and twisting the connection tabs.
- BOEING CST-100 STARLINER – 1 Sheet Model with an easy difficulty level. Assembled Size: 1.97 (Diameter) x 2.17 H inches
- FROM STEEL SHEETS TO 3D – Pop out the pieces and connect using tabs and holes. Includes illustrated instructions.
- HIGHLY DETAILED ETCHED MODEL – Display your 3D model once completed - collect and build them all.
What was wrong with Starliner?
Starliner’s first crewed test flight encountered two major categories of propulsion concern: helium-system leaks and problems with reaction-control thrusters. Some thrusters did not perform as expected, raising questions about how much control margin the spacecraft would have during a crewed return.
The original mission was expected to last roughly eight to 14 days. Instead, Starliner remained associated with the mission for 93 days while NASA and Boeing analyzed the anomalies and evaluated whether a crewed return was acceptable. NASA and Boeing also conducted ground testing at White Sands Space Harbor. Contemporary engineering explanations included the possibility that heat caused a Teflon seal in a thruster-valve assembly to swell, restricting oxidizer flow and reducing thruster performance.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors2Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches3Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsThat explanation should not be treated as a complete, final explanation for every anomaly. It was part of the technical understanding available before the return, while later investigation and corrective-action work continued.
Why the astronauts did not return aboard Starliner
NASA’s decision was based on uncertainty and available alternatives. The agency did not need to prove that Starliner would fail before deciding that the risk of a crewed return was not justified. If an uncrewed return was possible and the astronauts could remain on the ISS and later use another spacecraft, NASA had a lower-risk option.
As NASA explained in its Starliner return-status FAQ, sending the capsule home without the crew allowed NASA and Boeing to gather additional flight data without exposing astronauts to the same propulsion uncertainty.
Rank #3
- Brand new box. Lakes pipes. Floor shifter. Black vinyl tires. Pad-printed tires. 352 cubic inch motor. Colorful decal artwork. Vintage style packaging. Officially licensed product. Chrome plated small parts. Contains 118 detailed parts. Dual carb and triple carb options. Paint and cement required (not included). Manufacturer's original unopened packaging. Parts molded in WHITE, unless otherwise indicated. "Chrome" trim detail can be striped on with silver paint.
The alternative required changes to SpaceX’s Crew-9 mission. Crew-9 launched with two people instead of four, leaving seats available for Wilmore and Williams. They returned to Earth aboard Crew-9 in March 2025—not the earlier February target sometimes mentioned in contemporary coverage.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →What happened during the departure?
June 5–6, 2024: Launch and docking
Wilmore and Williams launched aboard Starliner on June 5 and reached the ISS on June 6. This was Starliner’s first crewed flight to the station.
August 24: NASA changes the return plan
NASA announced that Starliner would return without its crew. Wilmore and Williams would remain aboard the station and return later with Crew-9.
September 4: The breakout strategy is explained
NASA replaced the originally planned fly-around inspection with a faster departure profile. The spacecraft would undock autonomously and use a sequence of separation burns to clear the station before beginning its return to Earth.
September 6: Autonomous undocking
Starliner undocked at 6:04 p.m. EDT. It completed the separation and breakout sequence, exited the station’s keep-out sphere, and later performed its deorbit maneuver.
Rank #4
- High-quality 1:200-scale plastic model
- Simple snap-fit design
- Authentic markings
- Measures 7.5"H x 11.5"L x 12"W
- Recommended for ages 14 and up
September 6–7: Uncrewed landing
Starliner reentered and landed at White Sands Space Harbor in New Mexico at 10:01 p.m. MDT on September 6. NASA and Boeing described the uncrewed landing as successful.
What was the canceled fly-around?
The original mission profile included a fly-around of the ISS. This was not simply a sightseeing pass. Demonstrating the ability to maneuver around the station was part of the capability NASA expected commercial crew vehicles to show before full certification.
By dropping the fly-around, NASA prioritized safe separation and return over collecting that additional certification data. The choice simplified the immediate operation, but it also meant the flight did not demonstrate every capability originally planned for Starliner’s crewed test.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Was Starliner’s return successful?
The answer depends on what “successful” means:
- As an uncrewed departure and landing: Yes. Starliner undocked, cleared the station, performed its deorbit maneuver, reentered, and landed intact.
- As the originally planned crewed round trip: No. The astronauts did not return aboard Starliner.
- As a complete certification milestone: It was incomplete. The canceled fly-around and unresolved propulsion concerns left additional qualification and corrective work.
A successful landing did not erase the reason NASA had rejected a crewed return. It showed that the vehicle could complete an uncrewed return under the conditions of that flight; it did not by itself establish that the spacecraft was ready for routine crewed operations.
Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minutePC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Were the astronauts stranded?
“Stranded” is an incomplete and sensational description. Wilmore and Williams stayed aboard a continuously crewed space station with life support, supplies, established operations, and an alternative return plan. Their planned eight-to-14-day mission became a 93-day flight, but NASA integrated them into the station’s Expedition 71/72 crew and returned them on Crew-9 in March 2025.
The situation was still a serious mission deviation. The astronauts had to remain in orbit far longer than planned, and the spacecraft assigned to their return could not safely be treated as a normal crewed transport until NASA had greater confidence in its propulsion system.
What this meant for Boeing’s commercial-crew program
NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was designed to maintain more than one U.S. system capable of carrying astronauts to and from the ISS. That redundancy is strategically valuable, but it does not make certification easier. A spacecraft can reach the station and land successfully while still failing to demonstrate enough margin for routine human transport.
Starliner’s uncrewed return preserved the possibility of future use and provided additional flight data. It did not prove that the vehicle was permanently canceled, nor did it prove that another crewed mission was ready to proceed. NASA later chartered an independent Program Investigation Team in February 2025; its report was completed in November 2025. NASA’s later account said technical root-cause and corrective-action work continued.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
The broader lesson is that human-rating is not a single pass-or-fail event at landing. NASA must understand the failure modes, verify fixes, demonstrate required maneuvering capabilities, and establish adequate safety margins before accepting astronauts aboard again.
The bottom line
NASA rushed Starliner away from the ISS because a spacecraft with known thruster and helium-system problems was safer to remove from the station’s vicinity quickly than to keep maneuvering nearby. The breakout sequence was a controlled separation strategy, not an emergency launch from Earth. Starliner ultimately landed successfully without astronauts, while Wilmore and Williams returned on Crew-9 in March 2025. The landing was an operational success, but the original crewed test remained incomplete and Starliner’s future depended on resolving the propulsion and qualification issues.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
