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

The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)

mcdreeamiemusings.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 185 posts

Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)

#21

Post by gjejcjekdnfnwja »

cntainer wrote: post #19
gjejcjekdnfnwja wrote: post #10

As an engineer, that slide looks completely reasonable to me. Its purpose was to communicate technical info, which it did adequately. Keep in mind that the subject matter is highly technical, given that we're literally talking about the Space Shuttle, and more than a high school level of reading comprehension is heavily implied. If the NASA personnel weren't competent enough to review technical data without a pithy s…

I can't remember the last time I saw a slide as mangled as the one in the article. It hurts my brain just reading it. But you are right, most engineers would consider that reasonable, while complaining about the "muggles" that just don't get it. As a Software Architect, one of my main responsibilities has been to take information presented like above and turn it into something that non-technical people can digest. Be…

We're talking about something a lot more technically sophisticated than a B2B SAAS CRUD web app. PhD level education is considered a prerequisite.

Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)

#22

Post by sidewndr46 »

hydrox24 wrote: post #5

This article (as it makes clear) owes it's analysis at least largely to what Tufte has written about the Challenger disaster (1986) and Columbia Disaster (2003). He wrote about the Columbia one more fully in the second edition of The Cognitive Style of Powerpoint. Given that the link in the article to his report on his website is now broken, people might be interested in teh few page grabs that he has included in the…

If you haven't read it, I highly suggest you read Feynman's addendum to the Challenger disaster report:

https://www.nasa.gov/history/rogersrep/v2appf.htm

The words "a safety factor of three" will live with me for every day of my life.

Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)

#23

Post by wat10000 »

gjejcjekdnfnwja wrote: post #10

As an engineer, that slide looks completely reasonable to me. Its purpose was to communicate technical info, which it did adequately. Keep in mind that the subject matter is highly technical, given that we're literally talking about the Space Shuttle, and more than a high school level of reading comprehension is heavily implied. If the NASA personnel weren't competent enough to review technical data without a pithy s…

"That's on them" is not acceptable for an engineer when lives are on the line. Part of your job is making people understand what they need to understand. If their lack of understanding means people die, then you need to do your job and figure out how to communicate effectively to the audience you have, not the audience you want.

Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)

#24

Post by bhickey »

tekla wrote: post #14
suzzer99 wrote: post #7

How realistic was the idea of sending another shuttle up to rescue them? Would they have had enough oxygen? If they did a spacewalk and found the damage, what were their options?

They did a bunch of studies. While it was POSSIBLE to get a rescue shuttle up to them if they ignored a bunch of safety and refurbishment procedures, the sheer amount of complexities probably meant they would lose 2 shuttles and 2 crew.

The second shuttle would've flown with a crew of two, working with the knowledge that their ship was even more vulnerable than the one they intended to rescue.

Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)

#25

Post by gjejcjekdnfnwja »

wat10000 wrote: post #23
gjejcjekdnfnwja wrote: post #10

As an engineer, that slide looks completely reasonable to me. Its purpose was to communicate technical info, which it did adequately. Keep in mind that the subject matter is highly technical, given that we're literally talking about the Space Shuttle, and more than a high school level of reading comprehension is heavily implied. If the NASA personnel weren't competent enough to review technical data without a pithy s…

"That's on them" is not acceptable for an engineer when lives are on the line. Part of your job is making people understand what they need to understand. If their lack of understanding means people die, then you need to do your job and figure out how to communicate effectively to the audience you have, not the audience you want.

People with a high school level education should not have been making life and death decisions about the Space Shuttle.

Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)

#26

Post by dooglius »

gjejcjekdnfnwja wrote: post #10

As an engineer, that slide looks completely reasonable to me. Its purpose was to communicate technical info, which it did adequately. Keep in mind that the subject matter is highly technical, given that we're literally talking about the Space Shuttle, and more than a high school level of reading comprehension is heavily implied. If the NASA personnel weren't competent enough to review technical data without a pithy s…

> which it did adequately

What makes you think this, given the subsequent events?

Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)

#27

Post by gamma42 »

gjejcjekdnfnwja wrote: post #10

As an engineer, that slide looks completely reasonable to me. Its purpose was to communicate technical info, which it did adequately. Keep in mind that the subject matter is highly technical, given that we're literally talking about the Space Shuttle, and more than a high school level of reading comprehension is heavily implied. If the NASA personnel weren't competent enough to review technical data without a pithy s…

The NASA personnel gambled and it costed 7 lives. Somehow, a powerpoint slide was what caused it? Lol.

Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)

#28

Post by wat10000 »

cntainer wrote: post #19
gjejcjekdnfnwja wrote: post #10

As an engineer, that slide looks completely reasonable to me. Its purpose was to communicate technical info, which it did adequately. Keep in mind that the subject matter is highly technical, given that we're literally talking about the Space Shuttle, and more than a high school level of reading comprehension is heavily implied. If the NASA personnel weren't competent enough to review technical data without a pithy s…

I can't remember the last time I saw a slide as mangled as the one in the article. It hurts my brain just reading it. But you are right, most engineers would consider that reasonable, while complaining about the "muggles" that just don't get it. As a Software Architect, one of my main responsibilities has been to take information presented like above and turn it into something that non-technical people can digest. Be…

It's really terrible. It's basically:

> Everything is fine.

> Stuff is good.

> There's no problem.

> It's all going great.

> Actually, everyone on board is likely to die.

Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)

#29

Post by gjejcjekdnfnwja »

dooglius wrote: post #26
gjejcjekdnfnwja wrote: post #10

As an engineer, that slide looks completely reasonable to me. Its purpose was to communicate technical info, which it did adequately. Keep in mind that the subject matter is highly technical, given that we're literally talking about the Space Shuttle, and more than a high school level of reading comprehension is heavily implied. If the NASA personnel weren't competent enough to review technical data without a pithy s…

> which it did adequately What makes you think this, given the subsequent events?

That's a completely unremarkable slide in the aerospace industry. If there was a communication problem, it was with the NASA personnel not being able to operate in their own field.

Re: The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and the over-reliance on PowerPoint (2019)

#30

Post by wat10000 »

gjejcjekdnfnwja wrote: post #25
wat10000 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That's on them" is not acceptable for an engineer when lives are on the line. Part of your job is making people understand what they need to understand. If their lack of understanding means people die, then you need to do your job and figure out how to communicate effectively to the audience you have, not the audience you want.

People with a high school level education should not have been making life and death decisions about the Space Shuttle.

First of all, is that actually their level of education or are you just making stuff up?

Second, that's irrelevant to my point that the engineer is responsible for communicating, not just figuring stuff out. You cannot say "if you don't get it, that's your problem" when their not getting it means people die.

Post reply on HN