logo
2 Astronauts Blasted Off to Space for Short Mission. They Ended Up Being 'Stranded' for Nearly 300 Days

2 Astronauts Blasted Off to Space for Short Mission. They Ended Up Being 'Stranded' for Nearly 300 Days

Yahoo06-06-2025
On June 5, 2024, two NASA astronauts set off in a Boeing Starliner spacecraft for a trip that turned into a nine-month stay at the International Space Station
The Starliner faced helium leaks and issues with the reaction control thrusters as it approached the space station — and over the coming months, their return home kept getting delayed
286 days later, Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams returned to Earth on March 18Back in June 2024, two NASA astronauts had no idea that their mission, which was supposed to take less than two weeks, would turn into a nine-month stay at the International Space Station.
One year later after liftoff, PEOPLE is looking back at the Boeing Starliner saga.
Even before Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams launched into space on June 5, 2024 from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, their mission faced a series of delays.
That May, the astronauts were strapped into the spacecraft and just hours away from launch when the flight was canceled because of an issue with the rocket that helped propel the vehicle, according to NBC News. While working to address the issue, a helium leak in the propulsion system was discovered, NASA reported at the time.
Almost a month later, on June 1, the spacecraft was less than four minutes away from liftoff when the ground launch sequencer — the computer that launches the rocket — triggered an automatic hold. A launch the following day was also scrubbed.
After successfully launching into space, the astronauts arrived at the ISS the next day. But mechanical problems with their spacecraft quickly set off another series of delays that resulted in them spending 286 days in space.
As they arrived at the space station, the Starliner faced helium leaks and issues with the reaction control thrusters, Boeing said at the time.
NASA and Boeing then announced on June 18, that the crew would need to remain in space for at least a week longer than expected.
"We want to give our teams a little bit more time to look at the data, do some analysis, and make sure we're really ready to come home," Steve Stich, manager of NASA's commercial crew program, said during a media teleconference at the time.
But that timeframe came and went — and months later, Wilmore and Williams were still in space.
In August — 63 days into the mission — NASA announced that there was a chance that they would remain in space until 2025. By the end of the month, NASA announced that that they had decided that they had decided to bring the Starliner back to Earth without the crew, who would would remain at the ISS until February 2025.
'They will fly home aboard a Dragon spacecraft with two other crew members assigned to the agency's SpaceX Crew-9 mission,' a spokesperson for NASA said.
The duo welcomed the SpaceX crew, which consisted of NASA's Nick Hague and the Russian Space Agency's Alexander Gorbunov, to the ISS on Sept. 30.
While in space, the astronauts celebrated Thanksgiving — complete with a dehydrated food feast —and Christmas, voted in the 2024 presidential election and spoke with the media. During a press conference from space in early March, Williams even described her time at the ISS as 'fun.'
'Every day is interesting because we're up in space and it's a lot of fun,' she said, but added that "the hardest part is having the folks on the ground have to not know exactly when we're coming back.'
About seven months after she arrived at the ISS, Williams took her first space walk in January 2025 — and that same month, President Donald Trump claimed that the astronauts had been "abandoned" by the Biden administration and that he had personally asked Elon Musk and SpaceX to bring them back.
'Terrible that the Biden administration left them there so long,' Musk wrote in a social media response posted on X, the social media platform he owns, echoing Trump's rhetoric.
(Despite their remarks, NASA had, of course, already been collaborating with SpaceX for months on a plan to bring the astronauts home — and back in December, NASA set late March as a target for their return.)
NASA had long pushed back on the idea that the astronauts were "stranded," and after Trump's remarks, the astronauts seconded that.
"That's been the narrative from day one: stranded, abandoned, stuck," Wilmore told CNN's Anderson Cooper from the International Space Station on Feb. 13.
"But that is, again, not what our human spaceflight program is about," he added. "We don't feel abandoned, we don't feel stuck, we don't feel stranded."
Finally, the pair started their journey back to Earth alongside Hague and Gorbunov on March 18, undocking from the ISS "right on time" early in the morning, splashing down hours hours later that same day.
In their first interview after their return, both Williams and Wilmore spoke about having to be flexible in real-time as the situation unfolded.
"My first thought was, 'We just gotta pivot,' you know?" Williams told Fox News. "If this was the destiny, if our spacecraft was going to go home, based on decisions made here, we were going to be up there 'til February, I was like, 'Okay, let's make the best of it.' "
"It's not about me," Wilmore added. "It's not about my feelings. It's about what this human space flight program is about. It's our national goals. And I have to wrap my mind around, what does our nation need out of me right now?"
Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer​​, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories
In a separate interview with the BBC, they both said that although the idea of never coming home 'definitely went through our minds."
But, Williams added, through it all, they 'knew nobody was going to just let us down" and that, "everybody had our back and was looking out for us.'
Read the original article on People
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Airbus Is About to Eclipse a Record That Boeing Held for Decades
Airbus Is About to Eclipse a Record That Boeing Held for Decades

Yahoo

time4 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Airbus Is About to Eclipse a Record That Boeing Held for Decades

(Bloomberg) -- In 1981, the year Airbus SE announced it would build a new single-aisle jetliner to take on Boeing Co., the 737 ruled the roost. The US-made narrowbody, already in use for more than a decade, had reshaped the airline industry by making shorter routes cheaper and more profitable to operate. By 1988, when Airbus began producing its upstart A320, Boeing had built a formidable lead by delivering some 1,500 of its cigar-shaped best-seller. The US-Canadian Road Safety Gap Is Getting Wider Festivals and Parades Are Canceled Amid US Immigration Anxiety A Photographer's Pipe Dream: Capturing New York's Vast Water System To Head Off Severe Storm Surges, Nova Scotia Invests in 'Living Shorelines' Five Years After Black Lives Matter, Brussels' Colonial Statues Remain It's taken the better part of four decades, but Airbus has finally caught up: The A320 series is poised to overtake its US competitor as the most-delivered commercial airliner in history, according to aviation consultancy Cirium. As of early August, Airbus had winnowed the gap to just 20 units, with 12,155 lifetime A320-family shipments, according to the data. That difference is likely to disappear as soon as next month. 'Did anyone back then expect it could become number one – and on such high production volumes?' Max Kingsley-Jones, head of advisory at Cirium Ascend, wrote of the A320 in a recent social-media post. 'I certainly didn't, and nor probably did Airbus.' The A320's success mirrors the European planemaker's decades-long rise from fledgling planemaker to serious contender, and finally Boeing's better. By the early 2000s, annual deliveries of the A320 and its derivatives had surpassed the 737 family; total orders eclipsed the Boeing jet in 2019. But the 737 stubbornly remained the most-delivered commercial aircraft of all time. At the outset, Airbus faced an uphill battle. The European planemaker, an assemblage of aerospace manufacturers formed in 1970 with backing from European governments, didn't yet offer a full aircraft lineup. Infighting hindered everything from product planning to manufacturing, and leadership decisions had to finely balance French and German commercial and political interests. Yet it was clear even then that Airbus needed a presence in the narrowbody segment to firmly establish itself as Boeing's top rival. Those aircraft are by far the most widely flown category in commercial aviation, typically connecting city pairs on shorter routes. Higher fuel costs and the deregulation of the US aviation industry in the late 1970s had given the European planemaker an opening with American airline executives, who clamored for an all-new single-aisle, according to a history of Airbus written by journalist Nicola Clark. To set the A320 apart, Airbus took some risks. It selected digital fly-by-wire controls that saved weight over traditional hydraulic systems, and gave pilots a side-stick at their right or left hand instead of a centrally mounted yoke. The aircraft also sat higher off the ground than the 737 and came with a choice of two engines, giving customers greater flexibility. Airbus's gamble paid off. Today, the A320 and 737 make up nearly half of the global passenger jet fleet in service. And the A320's success contrasts with strategic blunders like the A380 behemoth that proved short-lived because airlines couldn't profitably operate the giant plane. Boeing maintained that smaller, nimbler planes like the 787 Dreamliner would have an edge — a prediction that proved right. Yet the longtime dominance of the two narrowbody aircraft raises questions about the vitality of a duopoly system that favors stability over innovation. Both airplane makers have repeatedly opted for incremental changes that squeeze efficiencies out of their top-selling models, rather than going the more expensive route of designing a replacement aircraft from scratch. Airbus was first to introduce new engines to its A320, turning the neo variant into a huge hit with airlines seeking to cut their fuel bill. Under pressure, Boeing followed, but its approach proved calamitous. The US planemaker came up with the 737 Max, strapping more powerful engines onto the aircraft's aging, low-slung frame. It installed an automated flight-stabilizing feature called MCAS to help manage the higher thrust and balance out the plane. Regulators later found MCAS contributed to two deadly 737 Max crashes that led to a global grounding of the jet for 20 months, starting in 2019. More recently, Airbus has been bedeviled by issues with the fuel-efficient engines that power the A320neo. High-tech coatings that allow its Pratt & Whitney geared turbofans to run at hotter temperatures have shown flaws, forcing airline customers to send aircraft in for extra maintenance, backing up repair shops and grounding hundreds of jets waiting for inspection and repair. With both narrowbody families near the end of their evolutionary timeline, analysts and investors have begun asking about what's next. China, for its part, is seeking to muscle into the market with its Comac C919 model that's begun operating in the country, but hasn't so far been certified to fly in Europe or the US. Boeing Chief Executive Officer Kelly Ortberg said in July that the company is working internally toward a next-generation plane, but is waiting for engine technology and other factors to fall into place, including restoring cash flow after years of setbacks. 'That's not today and probably not tomorrow,' he said on a July 29 call. Airbus's healthier finances give it more flexibility to explore design leaps. CEO Guillaume Faury toyed with rolling out a hydrogen-powered aircraft — potentially with a radical 'flying wing' design — in the mid-2030s but has since pushed back the effort to focus on a conventional A320 successor. The Toulouse, France-based company is considering an open-rotor engine that would save fuel through its architecture rather than the current jet turbines that push the limits of physics to eke out gains. Speaking at the Paris Air Show in June, Faury called the A320 'quite an old platform' and affirmed plans to launch a successor by the end of this decade, with service entry in the mid-2030s. 'I have a lot of focus on preparing that next-generation of single aisle,' Faury said. 'We are very steady and very committed to this.' --With assistance from Jinshan Hong. What Declining Cardboard Box Sales Tell Us About the US Economy Americans Are Getting Priced Out of Homeownership at Record Rates Bessent on Tariffs, Deficits and Embracing Trump's Economic Plan How Syrian Immigrants Are Boosting Germany's Economy Twitter's Ex-CEO Is Moving Past His Elon Musk Drama and Starting an AI Company ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Where Will Oklo Be in 3 Years?
Where Will Oklo Be in 3 Years?

Yahoo

time4 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Where Will Oklo Be in 3 Years?

Key Points Nuclear power is experiencing a resurgence amid rising energy demand, primarily driven by AI. Oklo is pioneering advanced nuclear fuel technologies, including its Aurora powerhouse product line. It's awaiting regulatory approval, and plant operations may not begin until 2027 at the earliest. 10 stocks we like better than Oklo › Nuclear energy stocks are heating up, and for good reason. This year, U.S. President Donald Trump has put nuclear power in the spotlight, and countries around the globe have pledged to triple their nuclear capacity by 2050. The excitement even extends beyond our planet, with Sean Duffy, Secretary of the Department of Transportation and acting National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) administrator, floating the idea of using nuclear power on the Moon. What's fueling this nuclear renaissance? The unstoppable rise of artificial intelligence (AI). As AI systems grow more powerful, their appetite for energy soars, and nuclear is emerging as a leading contender to meet this demand. Enter Oklo (NYSE: OKLO), an upstart innovator in the nuclear sector. Founded in 2013, Oklo develops small modular reactors (SMRs) and innovative nuclear fuel solutions. Here's what investors can expect from Oklo over the next few years. Oklo's secret sauce in the nuclear space Oklo's Aurora powerhouse product line is based on proven liquid-metal-cooled sodium fast reactor technology, specifically leveraging the technology of the Experimental Breeder Reactor-II (EBR-II), which operated for over 30 years at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). The Aurora powerhouse product line is designed to produce 15 to 75 megawatts electric (MWe) and has the potential to expand to 100 MWe and higher. As a metal-fueled fast reactor, Aurora powerhouses are designed to operate by harnessing the power of high-energy, or "fast," neutrons. This enables them to tap into the vast energy reserves remaining in existing used nuclear fuel from conventional nuclear power plants. Oklo's reliance on mature and validated technology is a key differentiator, as it allows it to move directly into commercialization without the need for a costly and time-consuming demonstration plant. The Aurora is designed from the ground up as a full commercial deployment. What to watch for in the next few years Oklo was the first advanced fission company to submit a custom Combined Operating License Application (COLA) to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in 2020. The NRC initially denied the application in 2022, citing the need for more information. The company initiated a pre-application readiness assessment with the NRC in early 2025 for its Aurora-INL Powerhouse COLA, indicating it is on track. Oklo plans to submit the first phase of this application by the end of the year. The NRC's review process can take two to four years, especially with Oklo's unconventional fast reactor design. If everything stays on schedule, Oklo could receive the green light from the NRC by 2027 or 2028, paving the way for plant operations to begin soon after. Oklo has also submitted its Licensed Operator Topical Report to the NRC, proposing a model where operators are licensed for the Aurora powerhouse technology rather than individual sites. This approach is a departure from traditional nuclear plant models and aims to streamline approvals and reduce timelines, enabling operators to monitor multiple powerhouses centrally. By strategically submitting topical reports like this one, Oklo is laying the regulatory foundation for faster licensing pathways. This "regulatory efficiency is central to Oklo's plan for scalable deployment across its fleet," Jacob Dewitte, co-founder and CEO, told investors during its first-quarter earnings call. A high-risk stock that may not generate meaningful cash flow for years With all this said, Oklo is still in its early stages of development and doesn't have a commercially available product at the moment. The company will continue to incur costs as it obtains its license and builds out its first reactors. It expects to spend $65 million to $80 million on operations this year. Analysts covering Oklo don't think it will generate revenue in 2027 -- between $5.2 million and $18 million in 2028. Meanwhile, they project the company will continue to rack up losses and may not be profitable until 2030 at the earliest. Oklo's long-term vision is compelling, especially given the rising demand for clean, reliable energy. However, Oklo's path to profitability remains years out and hinges on regulatory milestones, technological execution, and market adoption, making it a high-risk stock for investors buying it today. Should you buy stock in Oklo right now? Before you buy stock in Oklo, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Oklo wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $649,544!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,113,059!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,062% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 185% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 13, 2025 Courtney Carlsen has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Where Will Oklo Be in 3 Years? was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

A 'groundbreaking' ocean discovery may be a clue about extraterrestrial life
A 'groundbreaking' ocean discovery may be a clue about extraterrestrial life

USA Today

time5 hours ago

  • USA Today

A 'groundbreaking' ocean discovery may be a clue about extraterrestrial life

Scientists say the findings help explain how life can exist in extreme environments using the chemical compound methane instead of sunlight. Strange animals that get their energy from chemical reactions instead of the sun have been discovered at the bottom of ocean trenches up to 31,000 feet deep in the northwest Pacific between Russia and Alaska, a new study reports. Scientists say the findings shed new light on the potential for life to exist in extreme environments using the chemical compound methane instead of sunlight. The animals were discovered by researchers using a human-crewed submersible vehicle. "What makes our discovery groundbreaking is not just its greater depth – it's the astonishing abundance and diversity of chemosynthetic life we observed," said marine geochemist Mengran Du of the Institute of Deep-sea Science and Engineering, part of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, one of the authors of the research published July 30 in the peer-reviewed British journal Nature. The authors suggest that similar communities may be more widespread than previously thought, and their findings challenge views about how the ecosystems might be supported. "Even though living in the harshest environment, these life forms found their way in surviving and thriving," Du said. To some, the findings prompt questions about the potential for finding life on other planets. Marine geologist and study co-author Xiaotong Peng said "we suggest that similar chemosynthetic communities may also exist in extraterrestrial oceans, as chemical species like methane and hydrogen are common there." Could this kind of life be found on other planets? Du told USA TODAY that similar chemosynthetic life forms could exist on Jupiter's moon Europa, or even Saturn's moon Enceladus. Europa might be the most likely: "Europa's ocean is considered one of the most promising places in the solar system to look for life beyond Earth," according to NASA. "There is very strong evidence that the ingredients for life exist on Europa," said planetary scientist Bonnie Buratti of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, who was not part of this study. At the bottom of Europa's ocean, where the water meets the rocky mantle, there may be thermal vents where heat releases chemical energy. "They may be similar to thermal vents in the deep oceans of the Earth where primitive life exists and where life may have originated on the Earth," Buratti said. Europa Clipper will tell us more NASA hopes the Europa Clipper spacecraft will help "determine whether (Europa's) subsurface ocean harbors a habitable environment," Buratti said. She added that the current thinking is that life arose in the depth's of the Earth's oceans, so seeking a similar environment on Europa is the first step to answering questions about undersea life on other planets or moons. "Europa is the first ocean world to be studied in detail. Other bodies in the Solar System, such as Titan, Enceladus, possibly Ganymede and even Pluto, as well as many exoplanets or exomoons could also harbor habitable environments similar to those on Earth," she told USA TODAY. "We'll know much more after we get some results from Europa Clipper, starting in 2030." More: NASA's Europa Clipper launches in search for 'ingredients of life' on Jupiter's icy moon On Earth, amazing deep sea tube worms and clams Researchers found animal communities – dominated by tube worms and clams – during a series of dives to the bottom of the Kuril-Kamchatka and Aleutian trenches. The ecosystems were discovered at depths greater than the height of Mount Everest, Earth's tallest peak. The deepest one was 31,276 feet below the ocean surface in the Kuril-Kamchatka Trench. This was almost 25% deeper than such animals had previously been documented anywhere on Earth. This environment harbors "the deepest and the most extensive chemosynthetic communities known to exist on our planet," said marine geologist and study co-author Xiaotong Peng. The study reported that organisms such as these that live in extreme environments need to adapt to produce energy in different ways. Known as "chemosynthesis-based communities," they derive their energy from chemical reactions rather than from photosynthesis, which requires sunlight. Such communities can be found in deep sea habitats where chemicals such as hydrogen sulfide and methane seep from the sea floor, according to the study. Contributing: Reuters

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store