A massive 148-page document reveals the full scope of NASA’s Commercial Crew Transportation Capability (CCtCap) contract with Boeing, detailing the obligations, timelines, and financial incentives tied to getting American astronauts back into orbit-on American hardware.
While much public attention went to Boeing’s competitor SpaceX, this internal contract-quietly finalized in 2014 and later released under pressure-shows just how high the stakes were for Boeing to deliver.
🧾 A $4.2 Billion Commitment
Under the terms of the contract:
-
NASA awarded Boeing up to $4.2 billion to develop and certify its CST-100 Starliner spacecraft
-
The contract called for six post-certification crewed missions to the International Space Station
-
NASA could withhold payments if performance, safety, or testing benchmarks were missed
This wasn’t a cost-plus deal. Payments were tied directly to deliverables-launch milestones, system reviews, crew safety, and flight readiness.
The structure of the deal shows NASA was trying to buy reliability, not just hardware.
👨🚀 Starliner vs. the Deadline
Boeing was contractually bound to pass through critical milestones-including:
-
Integrated Critical Design Reviews (CDR)
-
Orbital Flight Test (OFT)
-
Crewed Flight Test (CFT)
-
Post-Certification Missions (PCM)
The pressure to deliver was immense. NASA could terminate or reduce the contract if Boeing failed to meet risk thresholds or demonstrate safety compliance.
Each milestone came with a "success criteria clause," ensuring accountability not just for building the spacecraft-but proving it could fly safely and repeatedly.
🔐 Redacted Details and Classified Clauses
The contract includes several redacted pages, primarily in areas covering NASA’s internal evaluation systems, proprietary spacecraft design specs, and portions of safety review protocols.
While much of the financial structure is visible, some unit cost data and internal risk assessments remain blacked out.
This is standard for contracts containing proprietary aerospace tech or competitive commercial information.
What’s clear, though, is that Starliner’s success was tied to stringent, test-driven verification-and Boeing’s payouts were locked behind actual launch performance.
📆 Timeline Pressure and Strategic Shifts
While the contract was signed in 2014, it envisioned certified launches as early as 2017.
Delays have pushed timelines far beyond that. Multiple test anomalies-including failed OFTs-have triggered reviews, redesigns, and public scrutiny.
Despite this, NASA has not publicly canceled the agreement, and Boeing continues to pursue full certification.
The document also outlines fallback options for NASA, including the ability to reassign missions to other providers-effectively keeping the pressure on Boeing to deliver or risk losing out to competitors.
📑 Built for Autonomy, Billed for Safety
One of the most interesting elements of the contract is its emphasis on autonomous systems and safety redundancy.
NASA required Boeing to:
-
Develop manual override systems for emergencies
-
Certify lifeboat functionality in case of ISS evacuation scenarios
-
Build with minimum human interaction in mind
This reveals that Starliner wasn’t just designed for transport-it was meant to serve as a lifeline under worst-case conditions in orbit.
