Eight days. That’s how long Boeing Starliner’s mission — its first flight test with crew aboard — was supposed to last. But this mission has been singular in almost every way, and astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams have instead spent the past nine and a half months aboard the International Space Station.
Now, finally, they’re headed home. Their SpaceX Crew Dragon capsule is slated to begin undocking from the ISS at 1:05 am ET Tuesday and is scheduled for splashdown at 5:57 pm ET, according to NASA’s timetable. (Portions of the mission will stream live on the agency’s website.)
The Starliner crew was never truly stranded, to be clear. They always had a way off the space station in an emergency. But if this mission’s foibles taught us one thing, it was to expect the unexpected. Even now, six months after the troubled spacecraft autonomously undocked from the ISS and landed at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico, leaving its crew behind and effectively ending the flight test, the mission is still making headlines. Boeing Starliner CFT went from a symbol of the myriad struggles in Boeing’s aviation business to a political punching bag, courtesy of President Donald Trump and Elon Musk.
Why did it take so long to bring the astronauts home? And did NASA cave to political pressure in setting the return date? Lets take a look at how we got here and what the evidence suggests.
Boeing Starliner had a long, troubled history before it even got off the ground. Back in 2014, the Space Shuttle era had ended, and the United States was dependent on Russian Soyuz capsules to fly its astronauts. To remedy this, NASA awarded two companies — Boeing and SpaceX — Commercial Crew contracts to build new spacecraft to ferry astronauts to and from the ISS.
The official target date for a crewed flight test for these two companies was flexible. But, according to a 2016 report from William Gerstenmaier, the agency’s head of human spaceflight at the time, it was clear NASA expected these demonstration flights to occur in 2017. (Gerst now works for SpaceX.)
Obviously, that did not happen. SpaceX’s uncrewed orbital test occurred in 2019, while the crewed demonstration flight was in 2020. Boeing also finally launched its Starliner capsule to the ISS for an uncrewed test in December 2019. However, that flight went so badly (the capsule did not reach its intended orbit or dock with the station) that NASA required Boeing to implement fixes and perform a second test in May 2022. That test went mostly well, though two of the capsule’s thrusters failed during the orbital insertion burn, and post-flight inspections revealed nearly a mile of flammable tape in the capsule wiring which required removal.
Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner attached to an Atlas V rocket. (ASSOCIATED PRESS)
The May 2024 launch was delayed a few times due to rocket issues and problems with ground systems. NASA and Boeing also detected a helium leak in the propellant system (helium is used to push propellant to the thrusters). They attributed it to a defective seal, but after the spacecraft launched on June 5, it sprung a total of five helium leaks. What’s more, five thrusters failed on approach to the ISS.
Astronauts Wilmore and Williams were able to successfully dock with the ISS, but their mission changed significantly in those few hours; they had to figure out what, exactly, was wrong with the spacecraft and whether it was safe to bring them home.
It’s important to remember that NASA has only tested six total new crewed spacecraft (Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Space Shuttle, SpaceX Crew Dragon, and Boeing Starliner). It’s a very difficult process, and everyone expects there to be problems — that’s why NASA does these tests. But even for a test flight, this was bad.
Over the summer of 2024, NASA quietly tested and re-tested Starliner’s thrusters, both in orbit and on the ground, to find out why the thrusters failed. In the absence of meaningful updates from NASA, people started to seriously question whether the agency thought Starliner was safe to bring the astronauts home.
In mid-July, NASA paid SpaceX to study bringing more than four astronauts home on a single Crew Dragon capsule, as well as launching two astronauts on a Crew Dragon instead of the usual four. The agency insisted this was related to Frank Rubio’s extended stay on the ISS the year before. However, at a press conference in early August, Commercial Crew program manager Steve Stich confirmed that, in July, NASA had started working with SpaceX on contingency scenarios for Butch and Suni’s possible return, as they continued to troubleshoot Starliner’s faulty thrusters.
Finally on August 24, NASA announced that Starliner would return to Earth uncrewed. There were serious issues with Starliner’s propulsion system. NASA was concerned about a worst-case scenario in which the thrusters failed and, at the same time, the helium leak rates increased. This could have left the astronauts in orbit, unable to perform a re-entry burn. Butch and Suni would become part of SpaceX’s ninth Commercial Crew flight (aptly named Crew-9), which would launch on September 28 with just two astronauts. They would serve out the remainder of this mission, which would keep them on the ISS through mid- to late-February.
But why leave them in space until 2025? The bottom line is that the agency chose the least risky option. An extra return mission would have added unnecessary complexity. “Relative to sending up a new Dragon so that Butch and Sunny didn’t have to stay up until February, we really never considered that option,” Steve Stich, the program manager for NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, explained at a press conference on August 7. Plus, it takes around four months to prepare a SpaceX Crew Dragon capsule for launch, and the extra cost would have been too much for NASA to absorb.
Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams aboard the ISS. (ASSOCIATED PRESS)
Astronauts are accustomed to mission delays and extensions; Frank Rubio had his ISS long-duration stay extended from 6 months to over one year because of a leaky Soyuz capsule, finally returning to Earth after a record-breaking 371 days in space. NASA astronauts can handle a year in space.
“While it’s not great to stay up there longer, the ISS has the appropriate countermeasures to maintain their health out to a year at least,” Dr. Dan Buckland, a space medicine researcher at Duke University explained to Engadget in an email. “Put another way, the expected recovery time on Earth might get longer the longer they stay, but the health plateau they are currently at is probably sustainable for the next few months at least.”
This was NASA’s return plan for the Starliner astronauts, which it began working on in July 2024 and announced to the public that August. Fast forward to March of 2025 and almost nothing has changed, except that the mission has become a political punching bag.
Delays and political posturing
The story got even more complicated in mid-December, when NASA announced that Crew-9’s return would be delayed because of a problem with the Crew-10 SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft. When a relief crew arrives at the International Space Station, NASA schedules their missions to overlap for a few days. These are called handovers, and they typically run about five days long.
Crew-10 was scheduled to fly on the brand new Crew Dragon, but problems with the batteries on the spacecraft meant that it wouldn’t be ready for a mid-February launch. As a result, Crew-10 wouldn’t launch until late March, and Crew-9 wouldn’t return until after the in-person handover.
Delays with space missions are extremely common, so no one expected that on January 28 Boeing Starliner would come roaring back into the headlines. On Truth Social, President Trump posted the following:
“I have just asked Elon Musk and @SpaceX to “go get” the 2 brave astronauts who have been virtually abandoned in space by the Biden Administration. They have been waiting for many months on @Space Station. Elon will soon be on his way. Hopefully, all will be safe. Good luck Elon!!!”
The same day, Elon Musk, the CEO of SpaceX, published a post on X claiming that the Biden administration had left the astronauts aboard the ISS. He later said in a Fox News interview on February 18 that the decision to leave Wilmore and Williams in orbit until the end of the Crew-9 mission had been politically motivated.
However, Steve Stich confirmed in a March 7 press briefing that the decision to return Butch and Suni as a part of Crew-9 was made between himself and ISS program manager Dana Weigel, after which it was run up to the administrator. This was not a top-down decision.
What about the return date for Crew-9, though? After this political kerfuffle with Trump and Musk, NASA announced February 11 it was swapping the Crew Dragon capsule for Crew-10 to a previously flown spacecraft. This meant that they could move up Butch and Suni’s return date by two weeks, to mid-March.
Well, as far as anyone can tell, this was also not the result of political pressure.
At a Crew-10 media briefing on Friday, March 7, Stich made it clear that the capsule swap was driven by other motivations, including needing to fit the Crew-10 launch in between the Intuitive Machines mission which launched on February 27 from the same pad (RIP Athena) and the Soyuz handover on the ISS in April. Officials were discussing swapping the capsules a month before the president’s Truth Social post (though it’s possible the President was aware of the discussion when it was happening.)
Intuitive Machines’ Athena lander nearing the lunar surface. (ASSOCIATED PRESS)
“The president’s interest sure added energy to the conversation,” said Ken Bowersox, NASA’s associate administrator for space operations, during that media teleconference. In the end, it’s hard to believe any narrative in which the timeline of Butch and Suni’s return was politically motivated, whether by the Biden administration or the Trump administration.
It’s incorrect to say that NASA isn’t subject to political whims, because it’s a government agency, with a budget proposed by the president and determined by Congress. The agency is bracing itself for drastic budget cuts to its science operations this year. Generally speaking, that means it’s likely that if NASA can safely and reasonably do something that the president asks for, it will try.
But changing around mission timelines and sending up “rescue” missions for astronauts who aren’t in danger? A NASA spokesperson refused to comment on this directly.. But it’s unlikely this was the case, especially considering they stuck with a flight plan that’s been in place since August 2024.
“They simply make the best decisions based on the evidence that they have at the moment, taking into account that their top priority is the lives of the astronauts,” Laura Forczyk, founder of the space consulting firm Astralytical, explained. “NASA makes the best decisions that it can in the moment, regardless of what the popular opinion is.”
Once the Crew-9 capsule splashes down, that will truly bring an end to the Boeing Starliner mission, but its ramifications will be felt for a very long time. There are serious questions about the direction of the agency going forward, given the political climate and the new administration’s priorities.
NASA acting administrator Janet Petro has already eliminated the Office of the Chief Scientist, in compliance with the Trump administration’s Reduction in Force order. More cuts are likely; rumors suggest that as much as half of NASA’s science budget will be slashed. This raises questions about whether NASA will be able to operate iconic observatories like the Hubble Space Telescope and the James Webb Space Telescope.
And NASA’s incoming administrator, Jared Isaacman, is a friend of Elon Musk and works closely with SpaceX. Isaacman conducted the first private spacewalk with Sarah Gillis on Polaris Dawn, a flight he paid SpaceX for, last year. Isaacman still hasn’t been confirmed as administrator, but if he is, he will likely change NASA’s human spaceflight program, starting with the return to the moon: The Artemis III moon landing is currently scheduled for no earlier than mid-2027).
What’s more, we still don’t know the fate of the Starliner program. While NASA continues to work with Boeing to close out in-flight anomaly investigations, it’s uncertain when (or if) the next flight of Starliner might occur. There are also questions surrounding whether Boeing even wants to fly another mission. Back in October, The Wall Street Journal reported that Boeing — which also built many modules for the ISS — was considering selling off its space business altogether. As of February 2025, Boeing’s total losses on Starliner had reached $2 billion.
Whatever happens with Boeing Starliner, the massively disproportionate political backlash to a routine NASA decision that prioritized the health and safety of their astronauts is a troubling indicator of what’s to come for the agency.
