4 ms·

As noted in the amended post (link below), this isn't actually true. http://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2011/05/03/135919389/a-cosmonauts-fiery-death-retold

As noted in the amended post (link below), this isn't actually true. http://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2011/05/03/135919389/a-cosmonauts-fiery-death-retold http://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2011/05/03/135919389/a-...

goodcanadian 11y ago
I think the update puts some context around events and calls some of the details into question, but it does not really dispute the basic thrust of the story. I think that it is categorically unfair to say, "This isn't true," but it is also inappropriate to put too much stock in this version of events.
drzaiusapelord 11y ago
That isn't a debunking as much as a refinement of the claims. The USSR's early space program was really this dangerous. Soyuz 1 was a failure that lead to a death and Komarov knew he was going to die before he stepped into the craft. Komarov was the first in-flight fatality in the history of spaceflight. Just four years later the Soyuz program killed three more cosmonauts as well.
- dingaling 11y ago
  I'm not sure it's helpful to rattle-off number of fatalities when discussing whose space program might have been more 'dangerous'. Both 'sides' were running at break-neck speed to achieve the most the first. Both were using essentially the same technology in the same manner. Who died when was more a case of chance than anything systematic to either the USA or USSR's philosophy. The Apollo program killed three astronauts before they even left the pad. Apollo 13 was a failure that very nearly killed three more. And we'll not mention STS. But all that pales into insignificance compared to the number of test-pilots who quietly died in the advancement of aviation in the same era. That's how Yuri Gagarin died, for example.
  - drzaiusapelord 11y ago
    My point isn't a us vs them as much as it was showing that the early Soyuz program did results in fatalities and as such posting a curt "No, this is wrong" is fairly disingenious. Also, the USSR engaged in cover-ups fairly routinely. The Nedelin disaster was covered up for 39 years, for example. This cost nearly 200 ground crew lives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nedelin_catastrophe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nedelin_catastrophe >The Apollo program killed three astronauts before they even left the pad. Again, this is public record. Again, the USSR was very dishonest with its space program. Having people still parrot their propaganda is ridiculous in this day and age. There is still a lot we don't know about the daily ins and outs of their program and pretending none of this happened is extremely disingenuous.
    - conistonwater 11y ago
      This is one of those cases where you can study the processes, which people set up, because the structure of the outcomes invariably resembles the structure of the processes that produced them. The difference in processes here (US v USSR) is quite striking.
chillingeffect 11y ago
This is another great example of the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. [1] You're an expert in a field, read an article about it, realize how wrong people are, then read another article and think the author is an expert. Lots of people read this article, thinking the author and the novelist were correct. Then the actual experts wrote in and pointed out where it was wrong. I think this is a great example of media bias toward drama without having the proper time to track down and research the truth. I expect, as the news cycle speeds up even more, articles will continue to be this wrong and worse. It's going to be ever harder to tell what is true and what is not. Anything pertaining to be true will require numerous citations and evidence. We can no longer rely on the brand ("NPR" or "NYT") to determine if something is true. [1] https://embracepith.wordpress.com/2015/09/11/on-gell-mann-amnesia-effect-or-how-crichton-pens-more-than-a-novel/ https://embracepith.wordpress.com/2015/09/11/on-gell-mann-am...
- thrwaway210 11y ago
  In an interesting twist, this story is plagiarized in the book Dept. of Speculation by Jenny Offil. It appears on page 61 of the book.
chengiz 11y ago
The fact that this was reported by "Starman" was enough for me to question its veracity. That is one tall book, written in a conspiratorial tone, telling Soviet tales with no questioning or radar for right and wrong. It is impossible to trust right from the preface.

goodcanadian 11y ago

I think the update puts some context around events and calls some of the details into question, but it does not really dispute the basic thrust of the story. I think that it is categorically unfair to say, "This isn't true," but it is also inappropriate to put too much stock in this version of events.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago

That isn't a debunking as much as a refinement of the claims. The USSR's early space program was really this dangerous. Soyuz 1 was a failure that lead to a death and Komarov knew he was going to die before he stepped into the craft. Komarov was the first in-flight fatality in the history of spaceflight. Just four years later the Soyuz program killed three more cosmonauts as well.

dingaling 11y ago
I'm not sure it's helpful to rattle-off number of fatalities when discussing whose space program might have been more 'dangerous'. Both 'sides' were running at break-neck speed to achieve the most the first. Both were using essentially the same technology in the same manner. Who died when was more a case of chance than anything systematic to either the USA or USSR's philosophy. The Apollo program killed three astronauts before they even left the pad. Apollo 13 was a failure that very nearly killed three more. And we'll not mention STS. But all that pales into insignificance compared to the number of test-pilots who quietly died in the advancement of aviation in the same era. That's how Yuri Gagarin died, for example.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago
  My point isn't a us vs them as much as it was showing that the early Soyuz program did results in fatalities and as such posting a curt "No, this is wrong" is fairly disingenious. Also, the USSR engaged in cover-ups fairly routinely. The Nedelin disaster was covered up for 39 years, for example. This cost nearly 200 ground crew lives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nedelin_catastrophe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nedelin_catastrophe >The Apollo program killed three astronauts before they even left the pad. Again, this is public record. Again, the USSR was very dishonest with its space program. Having people still parrot their propaganda is ridiculous in this day and age. There is still a lot we don't know about the daily ins and outs of their program and pretending none of this happened is extremely disingenuous.
  - conistonwater 11y ago
    This is one of those cases where you can study the processes, which people set up, because the structure of the outcomes invariably resembles the structure of the processes that produced them. The difference in processes here (US v USSR) is quite striking.

chillingeffect 11y ago

This is another great example of the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. [1] You're an expert in a field, read an article about it, realize how wrong people are, then read another article and think the author is an expert. Lots of people read this article, thinking the author and the novelist were correct. Then the actual experts wrote in and pointed out where it was wrong. I think this is a great example of media bias toward drama without having the proper time to track down and research the truth. I expect, as the news cycle speeds up even more, articles will continue to be this wrong and worse. It's going to be ever harder to tell what is true and what is not. Anything pertaining to be true will require numerous citations and evidence. We can no longer rely on the brand ("NPR" or "NYT") to determine if something is true. [1] https://embracepith.wordpress.com/2015/09/11/on-gell-mann-amnesia-effect-or-how-crichton-pens-more-than-a-novel/ https://embracepith.wordpress.com/2015/09/11/on-gell-mann-am...

thrwaway210 11y ago
In an interesting twist, this story is plagiarized in the book Dept. of Speculation by Jenny Offil. It appears on page 61 of the book.

chengiz 11y ago

The fact that this was reported by "Starman" was enough for me to question its veracity. That is one tall book, written in a conspiratorial tone, telling Soviet tales with no questioning or radar for right and wrong. It is impossible to trust right from the preface.