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

91–100 of 185 posts

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

#91

Post by somat »

quacked wrote: post #55

This isn't a failure of PowerPoint. I work for NASA and we still use it all the time, and I'll assure anyone that the communication errors are rife regardless of what medium we're working in. The issue is differences in the way that in-the-weeds engineers and managers interpret technical information, which is alluded to in the article but the author still focuses on the bullets and the PowerPoint, as if rewriting sim…

I love it when some company gets one of the engineers to do a demonstration, you know you got an actual engineer because it will be the worst sales pitch you ever received. They will tell you in excruciating detail all the problems with their product. Recognize and cherish these moments for what they are worth, despite the terrible presentation it is infinitely more valuable than yet another sales rat making untenable promises.

It is something to do with that being the engineers actual job, to find and understand the problems with the product. so when talking to a customer, that is what tends to come across, all the problematic stuff. The good stuff that works, not important to them.

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

#92

Post by tgv »

ricksunny wrote: post #88
quacked wrote: post #55

This isn't a failure of PowerPoint. I work for NASA and we still use it all the time, and I'll assure anyone that the communication errors are rife regardless of what medium we're working in. The issue is differences in the way that in-the-weeds engineers and managers interpret technical information, which is alluded to in the article but the author still focuses on the bullets and the PowerPoint, as if rewriting sim…

>if you want to be heard... and really understood ... you have to say things up front that come across as overly simple, controversial, and poorly-founded, and then you can reveal your analyses as people question you. I question your premise. :J I'm just kidding, that's interesting I'll have to think about applying that. I don't suppose that would translate over to blogging? The fear of course is that one makes a sta…

>if you want to be heard

It would have been nicer if that had been the first sentence of that (interesting) comment.

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

#93

Post by somat »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #44

I don't see how this has anything to do with PowerPoint. There wasn't clear communication; the medium was completely incidental to that. They could have been writing on a chalkboard and had a communication failure, does that mean that chalkboards should be blamed in that case?

Speaking of chalkboards, next time you have to give a presentation, bring a chalkboard and do your slides in realtime. Something about the visual show, auditory overload, and not least the novelty of the act makes it much more impactful and memorial than "another powerpoint that puts you to sleep"

White boards are... ok... better than powerpoint but still fail to sell it like a chalkboard does. I think it is the noise.

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

#94

Post by os2warpman »

> Why, given that the foam strike had occurred at a force massively out of test conditions had NASA proceeded with re-entry?

What was the alternative?

Columbia could not have made it to ISS.

Columbia could not have repaired the damage in orbit.

Columbia could not have lasted, after two weeks in space, long enough to launch a rescue mission.

I know the "In Flight Options Assessment" said they could launch at an accelerated pace but the assessment assumes that it's ok to launch another vehicle with the same problem, no fix, and no completed analysis of the cause.

Yeah, they suspected the external tank bipod foam, but WHY did the foam come off? Was it a fluke? Had some unknown factor not present in previous external tank bipod foam applications but now present in all external tank bipod foam applications manifested?

>Two major assumptions, apart from the already stated assumption that the damage had to be visible, have to be recognized – the first is that there were no problems during the preparation and rollout of Atlantis, and the second is the question of whether NASA and the government would have deemed it acceptable to launch Atlantis with exposure to the same events that had damaged Columbia. At this point, at least two of the last three flights (STS-112 and STS-107) had bipod ramp foam problems, and the flight in-between these two, STS-113, was a night launch without adequate imaging of the External Tank during ascent.

https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/caib/news/report/pdf/vol2/pa... (page 397)

That's not a valid assumption.

This is from a pre-flight safety report for STS-113

>“More than 100 External Tanks have flown with only 3 documented instances of significant foam loss on a bipod ramp”

STS-1 through STS-111, April 1981 - June 2002: three "significant" bipod foam losses

STS-112, October 2002: significant foam loss

STS-113, November 2002: night time, but they saw 112 and went "oh shit" and wrote a report

STS-107, January 2003: yet another, fatal, significant foam loss

If two of the last three flights had foam problems and the one that didn't only didn't because you couldn't see if it did, and over 100 of the preceding flights only had three, you don't risk four more lives.

You start designing a memorial at Arlington.

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

#95

Post by Earw0rm »

phonon wrote: post #82
GarnetFloride wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want a slide to really hurt your brain search for “Iraq war PowerPoint slide” The principles of that slide apply to a lot of other circumstances.

This? https://armsandinfluence.typepad.com/photos/arms_and_influen...

If it weren't for the millions of lives ruined, that would be hilarious.

Has anyone checked in with Daesh about their Q3 OKRs?

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

#96

Post by jkaptur »

quacked wrote: post #55

This isn't a failure of PowerPoint. I work for NASA and we still use it all the time, and I'll assure anyone that the communication errors are rife regardless of what medium we're working in. The issue is differences in the way that in-the-weeds engineers and managers interpret technical information, which is alluded to in the article but the author still focuses on the bullets and the PowerPoint, as if rewriting sim…

PowerPoint actually fine

  - bad communication possible in any medium
  - pptx in NASA even today!
  - issue is managers/SMEs communication differences
    - issues with technical papers
      - long
      - boring
  - vs word, excel, pdf...
(Next slide please)

Manager/SME Differences

  - context vs conclusion 
  - tell a compelling story
    - but give away the ending FIRST 
  - inherent personality differences
  - motivations/incentives/mindsets
(Next slide)

Learning from disasters

  - medium guides message and messenger
  - blame tool - binary choice?
  - presentation aide vs distributed technical artifact
(Next slide)

Questions?

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

#97

Post by dclowd9901 »

mintplant wrote: post #9

My dad headed up the redesign effort on the Lockheed Martin side to remove the foam PAL ramps (where the chunk of foam that broke off and hit the orbiter came from) from the external tank, as part of return-to-flight after the Columbia disaster. At the time he was the last one left at the company from when they had previously investigated removing those ramps from the design. He told me how he went from basically wor…

It's funny how the thankless jobs of quality assurance become so critical so quickly. And I mean that ironically of course.

To folks out there: do the important work, not the glamorous work, and you'll not only sleep well, but you might actually matter as well.

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

#98

Post by dclowd9901 »

wredcoll wrote: post #63
quacked wrote: post #55

This isn't a failure of PowerPoint. I work for NASA and we still use it all the time, and I'll assure anyone that the communication errors are rife regardless of what medium we're working in. The issue is differences in the way that in-the-weeds engineers and managers interpret technical information, which is alluded to in the article but the author still focuses on the bullets and the PowerPoint, as if rewriting sim…

I was just reading a great discussion about how "academics use qualifiers as to how confident they are in the information" and you can see similar trends in spaces like hacker news. But using "uncertain" language seems unconvincing to people outside of these types of cultures. Also of course the power dynamics.

Oh yeah, I've certainly seen this before. I'll assess my ability to complete a project under a time frame as "reasonably confident."

In my mind, I'm thinking "so long as a meteor doesn't cause an extinction event," but the manager graciously pushes the target date back a week.

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

#99

Post by testing22321 »

js2 wrote: post #16
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?

> There was actually an exercise done to work this out, at the direction of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB). [...] In the CAIB’s scenario, Atlantis would have launched with a four-person crew: two pilots, and two EVA mission specialists. [...] > A Columbia rescue mission would have been the most monumentally difficult and epic space mission in history, and it would have required absolutely everything…

I read that ars article every time it comes up, and I daydream of them making a movie about it.

I can’t imagine it will ever happen, it will be such a bad look for NASA

Post reply on HN