I wonder if the astronauts are upset at being stuck or excited by the extra time in space they otherwise may have never got.
I'd feel pretty upset. A few days in space is no big deal. Months in space is hard on the body, plus you're missing out on months of life on Earth -- maybe you're going to miss the birth of a child or grandchild, or a loved one's death and funeral, or some other big event. And are you getting paid while up there? Are there enough supplies? What if NASA and Boeing finally decide it's OK to return on Starliner, and as you know you basically must then, so now you're risking your life on a vehicle that you have much reason to think is not safe.
It'd be hard not to be hopping mad in private. I'd make the best of it, since there's no other choice, but I would not be happy about it.
These are people who are driven by a passion to do the thing that they're (involuntarily) having to do more of than originally planned. I don't know if "how would you feel" is a good yardstick here; I would probably get sick of it pretty quick, but I'm not the kind of person who would make a good astronaut.
>I'd feel pretty upset.
Agreed.
Yes, flying in space is cool. No, most people don't want to do this indefinitely. Astronauts retire all the time even when they are 100% guaranteed more flight time if they didn't retire; a whole bunch did that in the 1960s and 1970s (some, like Frank Borman, 100% guaranteed to walk on the moon), and more during the shuttle era.
It's one thing to have a mission extended by a day, as happened to the shuttle routinely because of bad weather at the landing site. Skylab 4's mission I believe got extended by 28 days, but that was a known possibility before launch. To have an eight-day mission be possibly extended to eight months is in no way shape or form OK.
Not a rhetorical question, since you can argue both sides of the case. Even floating around in space for 8 months is not risk free.
Correct. That said, ISS's quarter century of operations is a pretty good track record. Starliner's so far is dismal.
The best solution is to bring Wilmore and Williams back sooner than February. If that means Boeing paying for a rescue Crew Dragon launch, so be it.
But it's likely overshadowed by the concerns and fears building from the possible return trip.
It must get old after a month or so (or less), and long term effects beat your body up pretty badly.
If you're genuinely interested, PBS and Apple+ have the documentary series "A Year In Space", which details Scott Kelly's experiences.
As with most other things in life, it seems to be a mix of excitement, fun, awe, tedium, homesickness, etc. Missed some stuff from Earth; misses being in space for some reasons now.
We continue to study the impact versus his identical twin. Some impacts, but the man isn't exactly "withered".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleg_Kononenko apparently liked it enough to go back five times, for almost three years in space so far.
He certainly seems ok now, but wasn't in great shape when he first returned. Had quite a lot of pain from what I remember.
In the case of Oleg Kononenko (5 trips to space) that the parent mentioned, while one assumes he could quit if he wanted to, I doubt he keeps getting sent because he's the one begging hardest to go back ... more likely the Russians want to be able to claim space achievements, and "most time in space" is one they can at least achieve, as long as they have a place to send him.