Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What happens when an astronaut in orbit says he's not coming back?

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 230 posts

Re: What happens when an astronaut in orbit says he's not coming back?

#101

Post by shermantanktop »

gwbas1c wrote: post #90
wantsanagent wrote: post #17

If you hate the format of these kinds of article let me summarize: Guy builds an experiment, flies it, it doesn't work, requests more time to get it working, is denied, threatens 'not to come back', goes into a depression, worries crew that he'll open the door to space, eventually granted more time to work on the experiment, gets it working. There are consequences for letting this kind of person fly and dealing with…

> There are consequences for letting this kind of person fly and dealing with mental health while on a mission, but that's the basic plot. I got the impression this was a cultural issue and not a mental stability issue.

Sounds to me like both, and I bet where one draws the line between the two depends one one’s cultural background.

Re: What happens when an astronaut in orbit says he's not coming back?

#102

Post by hutzlibu »

pdonis wrote: post #96
hutzlibu wrote: post #87

The reason was this: "When I turned on my own instrument, it didn't work," Wang said. "You can imagine my panic. I had spent five years preparing for this one experiment. Not only that, I was the first person of Chinese descent to fly on the Shuttle, and the Chinese community had taken a great deal of interest. You have to understand the Asian culture. You don't just represent yourself; you represent your family. The…

> Which means that in a real emergency, astronauts maybe could then not open the door in time. The lock was only installed while in orbit--where the hatch is not an emergency escape anyway.

Oh, then I saw problems, where they did not exist. Thanks for clarifying.

Re: What happens when an astronaut in orbit says he's not coming back?

#103

Post by Guvante »

gwbas1c wrote: post #90
wantsanagent wrote: post #17

If you hate the format of these kinds of article let me summarize: Guy builds an experiment, flies it, it doesn't work, requests more time to get it working, is denied, threatens 'not to come back', goes into a depression, worries crew that he'll open the door to space, eventually granted more time to work on the experiment, gets it working. There are consequences for letting this kind of person fly and dealing with…

> There are consequences for letting this kind of person fly and dealing with mental health while on a mission, but that's the basic plot. I got the impression this was a cultural issue and not a mental stability issue.

It was very explicitly a mental health issue.

Culture only came up as a reasoning for why failure was so devastating.

Re: What happens when an astronaut in orbit says he's not coming back?

#104

Post by jlund-molfese »

picadores wrote: post #86

NASA seems to have a long standing tradition of sweeping problems under the rug. No skylab mutiny, no depressed payload specialists, all fine here gentleman, nothing to see here. I always wondered why this is written that way. To protect the organisation? But the human part of us all is part of that organization, to disacknowledge that is literally inhumane. Because they are funded by taxpayer dollars and should scre…

The "Skylab mutiny" really is a myth[0], as Ed Gibson said, "What were we going to do? Threaten to live on the moon?"

I don't think NASA hides incidents more than, say, the Soviet space program or its other peers. But at the same time, no organization is going to make a bigger deal out of negative events than positive ones. The media found out and reported on it, so the system is working.

[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-56346001

Re: What happens when an astronaut in orbit says he's not coming back?

#105

Post by pdonis »

ethbr1 wrote: post #38
m3kw9 wrote: post #32

So leave a switch to kill all crew available at all times till you think someone is unstable, then lock it. Genius

It's a pro and con. What happens in the event the commander in incapacitated and the crews needs to open the hatch? They probably aren't ever going to do that in space, but I'm sure there are scenarios that might require it? Maybe fire? Centralizing control also centralizes a failure point. Sometimes that's a good thing, sometimes not. I thought the discussion of undertrained / -bonded payload specialists was a good…

> I'm sure there are scenarios that might require it? Maybe fire?

Not in orbit. In orbit there is no scenario where you want to open that hatch. And the lock was only installed in orbit.

Re: What happens when an astronaut in orbit says he's not coming back?

#106

Post by shermantanktop »

verisimi wrote: post #74
wantsanagent wrote: post #17

If you hate the format of these kinds of article let me summarize: Guy builds an experiment, flies it, it doesn't work, requests more time to get it working, is denied, threatens 'not to come back', goes into a depression, worries crew that he'll open the door to space, eventually granted more time to work on the experiment, gets it working. There are consequences for letting this kind of person fly and dealing with…

Good ai bot.

For all we know, your post is AI-generated.

Re: What happens when an astronaut in orbit says he's not coming back?

#107

Post by stcredzero »

wantsanagent wrote: post #17

If you hate the format of these kinds of article let me summarize: Guy builds an experiment, flies it, it doesn't work, requests more time to get it working, is denied, threatens 'not to come back', goes into a depression, worries crew that he'll open the door to space, eventually granted more time to work on the experiment, gets it working. There are consequences for letting this kind of person fly and dealing with…

In both Sci-fi books and history, there's a situation where colonists get their own ideas, once they figure out they're no longer dependent on the mother country/home planet.

I hope this happens.

A cheaper and easier alternative to colonizing Mars to prevent losing all of the "human beans," if we should happen to smash the one bean jar, would be to colonize the Moon. The Moon is lacking in a lot of the elements needed to sustain human life, but in terms of orbits and energy, it's not that far from the asteroids where the rest of the elements could be found. It's also mere days away from Earth, so it would be practical to send a rescue mission if something happened, like the algae tanks all dying at once.

The moon might he a harsh mistress, but it might be an even harsher target for a space marine landing.

Re: What happens when an astronaut in orbit says he's not coming back?

#108

Post by shermantanktop »

chris-orgmenta wrote: post #95
picadores wrote: post #86

NASA seems to have a long standing tradition of sweeping problems under the rug. No skylab mutiny, no depressed payload specialists, all fine here gentleman, nothing to see here. I always wondered why this is written that way. To protect the organisation? But the human part of us all is part of that organization, to disacknowledge that is literally inhumane. Because they are funded by taxpayer dollars and should scre…

> NASA seems to have a long standing tradition of sweeping problems under the rug I can't comment on whether the premise is correct, but I think "So why is it not okay to write about this?" would be mostly due a 'tug of rope phenomenon'. If you see a tug of rope game on an issue and are a centrist, people feel they can't go and start tugging the middle of the rope in a different axis (or from the 'opposing side'). In…

This is the “both sides”/“race horse” mentality in political reporting.

A race isn’t interesting if isn’t competitive. But beyond that, the centrist impulse is definitely to bolster the weaker side, especially if that side is unattractive and feckless.

Re: What happens when an astronaut in orbit says he's not coming back?

#110

Post by ethbr1 »

picadores wrote: post #86

NASA seems to have a long standing tradition of sweeping problems under the rug. No skylab mutiny, no depressed payload specialists, all fine here gentleman, nothing to see here. I always wondered why this is written that way. To protect the organisation? But the human part of us all is part of that organization, to disacknowledge that is literally inhumane. Because they are funded by taxpayer dollars and should scre…

> So why is it not okay to write about this? Is this a remnant of the "epic hero" with a rocket from the early scifi days?

I would argue that it's by NASA design, to produce better outcomes in spaceflight by lessening useless pressure on astronauts.

   Premise: Human incidents happen
   Premise: Press is personally bad for the individuals involved
Consequently, if astronauts know they're going to be thrown under the bus in the event of an incident, they are more likely to attempt to cover it up.

NASA doesn't want this -- it wants full transparency and cooperation from astronauts, even when they freak out or things go wrong, so the ground support team can reason from correct information and better help.

So, in order to create an environment in which astronauts can be fully transparent, NASA protects them from negative media coverage.

IMHO, seems a reasonable trade-off.

Post reply on HN