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

241–250 of 372 posts

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

#241

Post by lupusreal »

unethical_ban wrote: post #51
joe_the_user wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It isn't a rescue mission, it's a regular crew rotation mission with modifications..." Rescue definition: an act of saving or being saved from danger or distress . The mission to take astronauts off the space station clearly fits this definition - an extended, unplanned and indefinite stay in space has to be distressing at the least. Has the HN standard become that you can argue the most ridiculous thing if you make…

If my car breaks down while I'm at my fully-loaded villa on day 2 of my 30 day vacation, my friend coming to pick me up isn't a rescue mission. You shift from talking about danger or distress, to "not regular or expected". Which is it? I think danger and urgency are marks of "rescue". If they had supplies and were in no immediate danger, I don't see how the term or the alarmism qualifies.

> If my car breaks down while I'm at my fully-loaded villa on day 2 of my 30 day vacation, my friend coming to pick me up isn't a rescue mission.

If you chose to say it was, nobody would be doing the "Well ACKSHULLY..." routine with you because that is in fact totally in line with common use of the word rescue and not worth making a stink about even if you think it sounds a little melodramatic.

The ISS situation is more extreme than your example in every way, but you're pulling the ackshully bullshit because you don't like the company that has done it.

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

#242

Post by afh1 »

mlyle wrote: post #148
natch wrote: post #142

Was the title edited after the fact by mods? The original title has the word "rescue." The top comment is questioning the use of this word. It seems likely that when the story originally appeared on HN, it had the accurate title reflecting the title of the article. Thus the comment from dotnet00, which I'm neutral on. But then, it would appear, the title was altered, to dampen a controversy? Is this how things are do…

They regularly tamp down on sensationalist headlines.

Is that even possible to do in an unbiased way?

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

#243

Post by maxerickson »

mannyv wrote: post #56
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…

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…

The thing is that rescue implies they were imperiled by not using Starliner to return. That isn't the case, there has been a way to get them back without Starliner since they got there.

Sending this SpaceX capsule up with seats reserved for their return fixes the overall operating tempo, but it doesn't make the 2 astronauts any more or less safe.

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

#244

Post by hayd »

LightBug1 wrote: post #208
rig666 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be honest. The mental gymnastics to avoid calling it a rescue is just a political knee jerk reaction to Elon Musk's ownership in SpaceX. If you lose your ability to become objective based on your view no amount of philosophical discourse is going to be meaningful. It's comments like this why "cope & seeth" has flourished in the modern lexicon

Personally, that's a part of it. I might it find more tasteful if Shotwell and her team (the actual heroes) were ones getting the credit here, but Musk will get the headlines. But it's not a political knee jerk reaction. It's an actual jerk reaction to him being such an actual jerk. The guy, and his current cohot, are distateful wankers. Excuse my English.

Politicians should not, indeed in the US it can be illegal for government branches to, make decisions based on the political views of a vendor’s CEO.

Clearly the current administration have been doing this willy nilly. Excuse my English.

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

#245

Post by notahacker »

blowsand wrote: post #169

I’ve nothing substantive to add, but I note that the logic gymnastics on display in comments from all perspectives is somehow telling. Of something. Not sure what.

It's HN, arguing about semantics is what people do :)

If the half page of arguing by analogies to holidays about what is and isn't a rescue feels like an unwarranted response to a headline, the comments insisting the only reason people could consider labelling accommodating them on the next scheduled return flight a 'rescue mission' overly dramatic is deep love for Boeing or deep hatred for Elon's politics are wild.

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

#246

Post by chainingsolid »

jbkkd wrote: post #188

What's the suit situation here? Did SpaceX make two new suits for them to use on the way back, or are they using their Boeing suits to fly back? I'd imagine the former, but genuinely curious this time.

I believe new suits where made/available somehow. The SpaceX and Boeing suits are not compatible with the others space craft.

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

#247

Post by philipwhiuk »

perihelions wrote: post #232

There was an anomaly in the second stage deorbit burn (which did not impact the payload). Falcon is apparently grounded. https://www.space.com/spacex-pause-launches-crew-9-falcon-9-... ( "SpaceX pausing launches to study Falcon 9 issue on Crew-9 astronaut mission" ) - "After today’s successful launch of Crew-9, Falcon 9's second stage was disposed in the ocean as planned, but experienced an off-nominal deorbit burn.…

FAA pedantry will tell you they are not ground, they merely may not have a license to fly more missions.

Also, it's unclear yet whether the FAA has pulled the license - SpaceX has potentially paused voluntarily.

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

#248

Post by mc32 »

throwaway290 wrote: post #237
mc32 wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main reason people don’t want to call it a rescue is because they dislike Musk. If there were no politics involved people wouldn’t be handwringing themselves so much over the word rescue. If the spaceship that took you somewhere wasn’t able to get you back as planned and cannot get you back as planned and someone else has to go get those people, that’s a rescue.

> If the spaceship that took you somewhere wasn’t able to get you back as planned and cannot get you back as planned and someone else has to go get those people, that’s a rescue. If you were on cruise then yes, if you are a professional team who trained for years to stay in dangerous conditions and the only thing out of ordinary is delayed transport back then not. If politics were not involved no one would call it a…

Seems like similar things in the past were called rescues: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/science/russia-launches-res...

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

#249

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF »

afh1 wrote: post #242
mlyle wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They regularly tamp down on sensationalist headlines.

Is that even possible to do in an unbiased way?

I would think it’s not. I’ve also never once seen dang claim that the moderation team do their job without bias. Indeed, I suspect he’d even go as far as to say that the primary purpose of moderation is to promote a certain bias.

That said, it’s also very easy to see what HN’s intended bias is since the publish it; it’s explained in the “on-topic” and “off-topic” paragraphs at the top of the guidelines page.

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

#250

Post by philipwhiuk »

maxerickson wrote: post #243
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…

The thing is that rescue implies they were imperiled by not using Starliner to return. That isn't the case, there has been a way to get them back without Starliner since they got there. Sending this SpaceX capsule up with seats reserved for their return fixes the overall operating tempo, but it doesn't make the 2 astronauts any more or less safe.

> That isn't the case, there has been a way to get them back without Starliner since they got there.

That is pushing it until Crew 9 arrives. It's a set of straps attached to cargo pallets in the luggage compartment of the Crew 8 capsule. It's like jamming a kid in your trunk when you're out of seats.

They've never had to use this reserve plan and it was only first dreamt of when Soyuz had issues recently.

Post reply on HN