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

Crew-9 Returns to Earth

spacex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 712 posts

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#601

Post by foldr »

davidmurdoch wrote: post #596
foldr wrote: post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s downvoted because you seem to be suggesting that Joe Biden could have have overridden the decision making process led by domain experts at NASA. While in theory the President could do that, it would be a silly thing to do.

Well yes, I was suggesting exactly that. I'm pretty sure I'm correct, and that you are too: the president could theoretically do that. Or, in the very least, strongly influence decisions made by NASA. I'm also saying that the NASA _is_ part of President Biden's administration, as the "NASA Administrator" at the time, Bill Nelson, was actually nominated by President Biden. --- But maybe I'm wrong and the downvoters co…

The President could theoretically muck around with decision making in all kinds of federal agencies. That doesn’t mean that the President’s administration is responsible for every technical decision made by every agency. If the NTSB fails to correctly identify the cause of an air accident, is that the President’s fault because the President nominates the board? Most people wouldn’t think so. They realise that as the President isn’t an expert at investigating air accidents, it doesn’t make sense for the President to interfere directly with the agency that investigates them.

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#602

Post by enragedcacti »

_cs2017_ wrote: post #507
enragedcacti wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The need for reporting on this stems from the massive blatant lies coming from the admin backed up by the media parroting the narrative. From NASA on Aug 7, 2024: > Wilmore and Williams will continue their work formally as part of the Expedition 71/72 crew through February 2025. They will fly home aboard a Dragon spacecraft with two other crew members assigned to the agency’s SpaceX Crew-9 mission. Starliner is expec…

The fault in the Starliner was known in June 2024 ( https://www.space.com/nasa-boeing-starliner-crew-flight-test... ). By August 2024, NASA said that the crew would stay until Feb 2025. That was not the original plan like you claim. See also: https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/nasa-astronauts-hea... .

It's mind-numbingly obvious from context that the plan I was referring to was the rescue plan announced in August, not the starliner mission as a whole.

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#603

Post by nailer »

sanderjd wrote: post #578
nailer wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Project 2025 is a project from the Heritage foundation, there was a conspiracy during the election to say this was the platform of the Republican Party, the GOP platform is Agenda 47.

Dude, you really need to take the partisan blinders off. They are actively, and extremely obviously, executing on the Project 2025 plan, which they wrote up for exactly this reason. This is primarily being driven by Russell Vought, whose plan this is, through his role at the head of the Office of Management and Budget. There was no "conspiracy" about this, there was only a candidate who brazenly lied about his connec…

Yes there is, the idea that Project 2025 was the GOP platform is provably false. You can read Agenda 47 yourself on the GOP website. The false allegation relies on the fact that very few people will know to do that.

As you believe Vought is conspiring - you have stated this yourself, the only gaslighting is pretending you have not - and presumably that publishing Agenda 47 was also a conspiracy to hide a secret alternative platform, provide evidence of the conspiracy.

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#604

Post by nailer »

sanderjd wrote: post #579
nailer wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Nobody in this thread has said "this is a single-party regime akin to Iraq or North Korea".

No, they used the term ‘authoritarian regime’ which commonly means this. See the references I have posted elsewhere in this thread.

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#605

Post by kybernetikos »

bheadmaster wrote: post #128
pavlov wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Berger is an excellent journalist. He’s very knowledgeable about space topics, has good sources, and has been extremely fair to Musk in the past. When he says it’s a “throne of lies”, a line has been crossed.

I wasn't very convinced by his arguments - the main one being: Senior NASA officials earlier this month confirmed, publicly and on the record, that the decision was made by the space agency in the best interests of the International Space Station Program. Not for political reasons. To be a little snarky here - so Senior NASA officials: honest, Musk: liar? If, hypothetically, NASA was pressured for political reasons,…

I'm confused by this. You can just go and look.

Hacker News comment from 6 months ago, you know, during the Biden administration. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41339804:

- They'll reconfigure Crew-8 for 6 occupants for contingency evac between Starliner undock and Crew-9 arrival.

- Starliner leaving ISS autonomously early September

- Crew 9 launching no later than Sept 24th with 2 crew + 2 empty seats

- Crew 9 coming back down in ~Feb 2025

The advent of Trump and Musk into government seems not to have changed that plan one whit, which makes absolutely no sense if they're telling the truth.

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#606

Post by nailer »

sanderjd wrote: post #581
nailer wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Nothing you pasted here suggests that those attributes are required for the definition of "authoritarian regime", it is just a characterization of "the most notable authoritarian regimes" as it itself says in the text.

[flagged]

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#607

Post by russdill »

game_the0ry wrote: post #566
russdill wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how someone aware of the facts and timeline of the situation can read this: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/1141790813395... And say oh, yes, it's the people with TDS/EDS trying to set the record straight that have the problem.

The problem comes when the few things they do that are good are perceived as bad bc the people doing the good are perceived to be bad.

Certainly, credit should be given here to SpaceX for making such a successful and versatile crew capable vehicle with less budget and time than Boeing. Especially given the things that were being said about the two parties around the time the contracts were being handed out.

If contract had instead been given to only Boeing, there would be a decent chance Butch and Suni would have needed to come home on a Soyuz.

To people who have watched this saga from the grounding of shuttle until today, the number of administrations and administrators this has passed though, it's just totally bizarre that instead of just a PR boost for the reliability of SpaceX and Crew Dragon (and the failures of Boeing) this has been made into a political issue.

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#608

Post by sophacles »

trompetenaccoun wrote: post #583
sophacles wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It turns out, no matter how hard you squint, no matter how many drugs you take, or how many times you smash yourself in the head with a hammer, the fact remains: Elon is a human person. As such, he has many skills and many faults. This is something true of all humans. It seems that two of Elon's skills are: hire rocket scientists and not insert him self too much in the process of rocket science to cause catastrophe.…

>not insert him self too much in the process of rocket science to cause catastrophe The fact that many believe all these companies thrive despite the leadership is fascinating. I've heard this same take over and over. One can't keep hiring the right people and make the right decisions without understanding how things work. Bezos is an extremely skilled manager yet his space company, which has actually been around lon…

I think you're being just a bit too triggered by my calling out one of his negatives - and it's delusional to think a grown man lying about his video game prowess to impress randoms isn't extremely pathetic - to see that this is an actual skill.

A common failure mode of leaders is to get too down into the trenches and insert themselves into places that would be better left alone. Even very technical leaders in an area of their expertise - they can demoralize a team by telling them to do it better and belittling them, they can be too excited and change plans too often for the boring but necessary work to get done right, they can just be over-bearing and take on a pile of work they hired others to do (to "do it right myself") and fail from the load/burnout. It's a genuine skill to not over-insert oneself.

My literal message was Elon Musk is a human, with good and bad traits - then I listed some of each.

> I feel like that often when people talk about Musk they aren't even talking about him but some sort of fictional character that seems to exist purely in the imagination of certain people.

I know this psychological phenomenon its called projection - I'm not worshiping a fictional engineering and management god called Elon Musk, so when I call out bad things he's done you take your fictionalization and assume I'm doing the same sort of thing.

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#609

Post by pimlottc »

piokoch wrote: post #276

There are certain historical inadequacies in the article. "That is, the Apollo Program brought the country together in the turbulent 1960s and helped make everyone feel good about the country" This certainly was not 100% true, as some communities protested against Apollo program [1], even though, overall, the progress it has caused helped eventually those communities as well. Nevertheless there were kind of bipartisa…

I think you meant “inaccuracies”

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#610

Post by avmich »

foldr wrote: post #601
davidmurdoch wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well yes, I was suggesting exactly that. I'm pretty sure I'm correct, and that you are too: the president could theoretically do that. Or, in the very least, strongly influence decisions made by NASA. I'm also saying that the NASA _is_ part of President Biden's administration, as the "NASA Administrator" at the time, Bill Nelson, was actually nominated by President Biden. --- But maybe I'm wrong and the downvoters co…

The President could theoretically muck around with decision making in all kinds of federal agencies. That doesn’t mean that the President’s administration is responsible for every technical decision made by every agency. If the NTSB fails to correctly identify the cause of an air accident, is that the President’s fault because the President nominates the board? Most people wouldn’t think so. They realise that as the…

> That doesn’t mean that the President’s administration is responsible for every technical decision made by every agency.

I disagree. There's a known point of view "the buck stops here", meaning the President is the ultimately responsible. Yes, it's hard for President to do that all, even harder - without expertise, but still.

I disagree with the original comment - look, the article this thread is attached to isn't Arstechnica's anymore - because it suggests the article is a political hit piece. I don't think so at all.

Post reply on HN