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

211–220 of 372 posts

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

#211

Post by dotancohen »

YeahThisIsMe wrote: post #187
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you’re not in danger, you’re not being rescued. You’re just being transported The ISS isn’t Treasure Island. There is always an elevated degree of peril. Particularly in an emergency condition.

But there's no emergency situation at the moment.

Actually, NASA protocol requires more than a single layer of safety. The astronauts currently do not have a lifeboat home - that is extraordinarily irregular and I believe that it constitutes a danger to the astronauts. The spacecraft are not only for down transport, they are also shelters for radiation and particle events - which could be declared with days or hours notice. For a month these astronauts have had no viable shelter nor transport in case of emergency.

Danger is not when the last later of safety fails. Danger is when the level of risk exceeds a set threshold - and that level has been exceeded as per NASA protocol.

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

#212

Post by dotancohen »

closewith wrote: post #185
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.

> Your default state on an island tends towards remaining alive. I'm guessing you spend most of your life indoors? On Earth, outside of the carefully regulated homes we've built as a society, the default state is dead and it takes tremendous work and constant vigilence to avoid that fate, only ever temporarily.

And that is why if somebody finds a child wandering in the park alone, we say that the man rescued the child. Exactly as SpaceX is doing in this situation.

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

#213

Post by dotancohen »

oaththrowaway wrote: post #145
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 peril…

> A jet liner is safer than the ISS. Maybe not if the jet is a Boeing though?

To be fair, I'd rather be in a 737 Max at 30,000 ft than without the 737 Max at 30,000 ft.

And I'd rather be with the Starliner at 400 km up than without the Starliner at 400 km up.

But neither seem to be of comparable safety to the other options available.

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

#214

Post by rdtsc »

ethbr1 wrote: post #132
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> Starliner stranded two astronauts in space. It didn't, because it wasn't simply broken -- it had unexpected behavior. It ended up landing fine. I'm uncomfortable heaping pejoratives on what we should expect NASA to do: make engineering decisions to minimize risk and maximize chance of mission success. Increasing the reputational or financial penalties to suppliers incentivizes exactly the sort of decisions that ble…

> it wasn't simply broken -- it had unexpected behavior.

Unexpected behavior for NASA was broken enough to send it back empty. That was not the plan to start with. The mission was supposed to be a few days only not this long.

> what we should expect NASA to do: make engineering decisions to minimize risk and maximize chance of mission success.

The criticism is of both NASA and Boeing on what they should have done prior to the trip. How the money was spent and such. I don’t think anyone criticizes NASA for opting to keep the astronauts safe by delaying their return. It’s about what happened before that point.

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

#215

Post by dotancohen »

colordrops wrote: post #117
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…

It sounds like everyone in this thread is in complete agreement about the complex parameters and details and yet we are arguing on the scope of the label.

If I can't bikeshed at the office on Saturday, I'll bikeshed on HN on Saturday.

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

#216

Post by sph »

colordrops wrote: post #117
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…

It sounds like everyone in this thread is in complete agreement about the complex parameters and details and yet we are arguing on the scope of the label.

There's plenty of middle managers on HN on the weekends.

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

#217

Post by dotancohen »

nick3443 wrote: post #135
ethbr1 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was not, considering Starliner landed safely about a month ago. NASA was uncomfortable with the amount of risk in a new vehicle exhibiting anomalous behavior, for its first crewed re-entry. The headline here should be: "US glad to have two separate suppliers for crewed transport"

Three, if you are willing to count Soyuz. Are we still using Soyuz?

Soyuz could not be used to take Jeb and Val back down. Riding a Soyuz requires a custom fitted suit, and though these astronauts had both riden Soyuz in the past, those old measurements are not good enough for a current flight.

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

#218

Post by dotancohen »

ethbr1 wrote: post #144
nick3443 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russian roulette is safe! I played once and didn't die!

The point that half this comment section is missing is this is the sort of thing we want to encourage. The US spent extra money funding two separate vendors. One vendor exhibited a high level of risk in their first return. The astronauts were able to be returned on the second, already proven vendor. That's a great place to be in! The alternative, having to return astronauts on a high risk vehicle because it's the onl…

  > One vendor exhibited a high level of risk in their first return.
  > The astronauts were able to be returned on the second, already proven vendor.
Anyone reading this five years ago would be absolutely shocked to discover which vendor is which.

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

#219

Post by dotancohen »

tjpnz wrote: post #205
nimbius wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Occhams razor might say the reasons to downplay this incident are overwhelmingly more attractive. - Boeing is a fortune 50 company and is a direct contributor to news media advertising revenue. - Boeing is a darling of US aerospace and a bulwark of us international projection of soft power and defense. Telling the truth will destroy the us aircraft market. - china does not have this problem with its space program. Th…

>The comac airliner also directly competes with Boeing's beleaguered 737 Not in any remotely meaningful way. Some estimates suggest it will be more than a decade before Comac will have the manufacturing capacity to fill existing domestic orders (as of now they've built 9). Then there's the fact that their planes aren't nearly as fuel efficient as those from Boeing and Airbus - the engines may be imports but are neute…

  > it will be more than a decade before Comac will have the manufacturing capacity to fill even domestic orders
If you think that a decade is enough time for Boeing (or Airbus) to react to losing one large market and having a new competitor encroach on existing markets, then I suggest looking at past airliner development programs.

A decade is nothing in this industry. And China, specifically, is known for being able to scale manufacturing - so they may not have a decade like us Westerners think.

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

#220

Post by kedv »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #118
karlgkk wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> if you’re not in danger, you’re not being rescued. You’re just being transported The ISS isn’t Treasure Island. There is always an elevated degree of peril. Particularly in an emergency condition.

These individuals are professionals who signed up for this and are paid to do the job. This isn’t a rescue; the media is simply sensationalizing the entire story.
Post reply on HN