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

SpaceX launches mission for 2 NASA astronauts who are stuck on the ISS

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 372 posts

Re: SpaceX launches mission for 2 NASA astronauts who are stuck on the ISS

#101

Post by dotnet00 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #90
LeroyRaz wrote: post #87

To everyone saying "oh, the astronauts like having to be up there. It is an opportunity." You get that they have no choice, right? And that for multiple reasons they are going to put the best spin on the event. For one, for their own sanity, they are going to be as positive and optimistic as possible. For two, there is likely a huge PR pressure to be as positive and optimistic as possible. Being in space is a pretty…

> It comes with lots of health risks It also means their forward flight time is curtailed. The near future holds manned missions more exciting than the ISS. There is a real possibility someone who might have gone to the Moon or even Mars doesn’t, now, because of Boeing.

Neither Sunita, nor Butch are candidates for Artemis missions. They are both very experienced senior astronauts in their early 60s (kind of why they were chosen to be test pilots). This was likely to be one of their last trips to space as NASA astronauts regardless.

Re: SpaceX launches mission for 2 NASA astronauts who are stuck on the ISS

#102

Post by Dylan16807 »

iterance wrote: post #73
mannyv wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well hmm. NASA decided Starliner wasn't safe enough to use for the return journey, so the astronauts stayed on the ISS until the next ride became available. Originally the astronauts were supposed to go back on Starliner. Now they're taking another ride back. Is that considered a rescue? Well, it depends. If you get left behind on an island because your ride wasn't safe and another boat picks you up, is that a rescue…

Following the analogy... you're on an island. A ferry has showed up at the island every six months or so for the last 40 years. The last ferry that showed up broke before it could leave the harbor. No need to worry, though. Another ferry's coming in six months and there are plenty of supplies on the island. Is it rescue? Maybe in the sense that you can't leave when you wanted to and now you have to wait. But not in t…

If you took a different boat separate from the normal ferry, intending to leave right away but now stuck unable to use it, I would say the next ferry is rescuing you.

Re: SpaceX launches mission for 2 NASA astronauts who are stuck on the ISS

#103

Post by JumpCrisscross »

dotnet00 wrote: post #101
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It comes with lots of health risks It also means their forward flight time is curtailed. The near future holds manned missions more exciting than the ISS. There is a real possibility someone who might have gone to the Moon or even Mars doesn’t, now, because of Boeing.

Neither Sunita, nor Butch are candidates for Artemis missions. They are both very experienced senior astronauts in their early 60s (kind of why they were chosen to be test pilots). This was likely to be one of their last trips to space as NASA astronauts regardless.

Fair enough. Didn’t look at their profiles. Was generally pushing back on the notion that the ISS is an orbiting beach.

Re: SpaceX launches mission for 2 NASA astronauts who are stuck on the ISS

#104

Post by dotnet00 »

sneak wrote: post #88
neverrroot wrote: post #8

Thank you Elon!

How much of SpaceX’s boring day to day stuff (including ~all of the F9 stuff) do you think he has a hand in anymore? Isn’t he running Tesla, Twitter, Neuralink, The Boring Company, Starlink, and the Starship R&D, including its first-of-it’s-kind Raptor engine design which just hit major version 3? And also raising the remainder of his 12 kids (~8?) that are still speaking to him? I’m fairly certain that most of the “…

Musk is pretty clear about the fact that Shotwell handles the 'boring' operational stuff, so, F9, FH, and very likely includes Starlink now. These have customer-related constraints, which Gwynne is much better at handling.

Elon does decision making for the R&D programs, i.e. Starship, where his style works better.

Re: SpaceX launches mission for 2 NASA astronauts who are stuck on the ISS

#105

Post by panick21_ »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #86
iterance wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Following the analogy... you're on an island. A ferry has showed up at the island every six months or so for the last 40 years. The last ferry that showed up broke before it could leave the harbor. No need to worry, though. Another ferry's coming in six months and there are plenty of supplies on the island. Is it rescue? Maybe in the sense that you can't leave when you wanted to and now you have to wait. But not in t…

> not in the sense that you were ever in any real danger The analogy breaks down because an island isn’t space. Your default state on an island tends towards remaining alive. Your default state in space is dead. A closer analogy is a plane in flight. It takes energy and effort to keep everyone alive. Externally-assisted recovery from peril, in that situation, is a rescue. Even if it’s convenient.

No astronaut has died on ISS in 30 years. Claiming they are in significant danger simply isn't accurate. Saying 'the default state in space is dead' when historically basically nobody has died in space.

Re: SpaceX launches mission for 2 NASA astronauts who are stuck on the ISS

#106

Post by dotnet00 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #74
dotnet00 wrote: post #3

Man the reporting on this ordeal has been so awful and so representative of how media misleads the public into thinking things are worse than they actually are. It isn't a rescue mission, it's a regular crew rotation mission with modifications to account for the extra crew left on the station, and those crew are 'stuck' only in the sense that they're expected to stay there as part of their duties and it would be unne…

> it's a regular crew rotation mission with modifications Standard but modified is an oxymoron. This is an irregular mission. NASA plans with tonnes of redundancy. That’s paying off here. Being prepared doesn’t poof away a fuck-up, it just means you can take it in stride. Starliner stranded two astronauts in space. Dragon is fixing that. Being saved from being stranded sure as hell sounds like being rescued, even if…

>This is a threshold met by a torn parachute on a jet.

Not when it was the preferred option over sticking seats in Crew-8, right up until Starliner's software changes for uncrewed return started.

Re: SpaceX launches mission for 2 NASA astronauts who are stuck on the ISS

#107

Post by gpm »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #68
gpm wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This launch was normal and expected crew rotation, they just kicked a few people off the mission so that there would be open seats on the way back.

> normal and expected crew rotation, they just kicked a few people off the mission so that there would be open seats That’s neither normal nor expected! Go back to the age of exploration. A crew’s ship strands them on an island. Another ship was due to come anyway in 6 weeks, and the crew have enough food to last them that interval. They use witches to tell the coming crew of their problems, and that ship agrees to l…

Is it a rescue? Maybe. Is it a rescue mission? No. It's a normal crew rotation mission that has happened to (arguably) rescue a few people on the way. The mission itself is ordinary, expected, and planned prior to any crisis.

Arguable because everyone has a way back already, the modification to the crew rotation mission just provides a somewhat safer way back.

Edit: And the distinction here matters. A rescue mission would be an expensive unexpected endeavour. The regular crew rotation is an expected operating cost. The modification to the details of the plan for the crew rotation haven't significantly impacted the mission goals - i.e. for the same cost there are still the same number of fresh qualified crew members up there for the same duration, just a slightly different set of people.

Re: SpaceX launches mission for 2 NASA astronauts who are stuck on the ISS

#108

Post by karlgkk »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #102
iterance wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Following the analogy... you're on an island. A ferry has showed up at the island every six months or so for the last 40 years. The last ferry that showed up broke before it could leave the harbor. No need to worry, though. Another ferry's coming in six months and there are plenty of supplies on the island. Is it rescue? Maybe in the sense that you can't leave when you wanted to and now you have to wait. But not in t…

If you took a different boat separate from the normal ferry, intending to leave right away but now stuck unable to use it, I would say the next ferry is rescuing you.

No? Because if you’re not in danger, you’re not being rescued. You’re just being transported.

If I miss the last train across the bay, my uber isn’t rescuing me. I can always stay up to 5am by making a shady deal at the endup.

But yeah, this is a black eye on boeing and definitely something that nobody wants to have to deal with.

Re: SpaceX launches mission for 2 NASA astronauts who are stuck on the ISS

#110

Post by JumpCrisscross »

panick21_ wrote: post #105
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not in the sense that you were ever in any real danger The analogy breaks down because an island isn’t space. Your default state on an island tends towards remaining alive. Your default state in space is dead. A closer analogy is a plane in flight. It takes energy and effort to keep everyone alive. Externally-assisted recovery from peril, in that situation, is a rescue. Even if it’s convenient.

No astronaut has died on ISS in 30 years. Claiming they are in significant danger simply isn't accurate. Saying 'the default state in space is dead' when historically basically nobody has died in space.

> No astronaut has died on ISS in 30 years. Claiming they are in significant danger simply isn't accurate

Nobody claimed as much. A jet liner is safer than the ISS. The analogy is conservative.

> Saying 'the default state in space is dead' when historically basically nobody has died in space

Our default state at cruising altitude is dead.

Note: I’m not suggesting anyone would have died. Just that they were in a perilous place where things were going wrong. Being relieved from that position is a rescue.

Post reply on HN