2 ms·
> this leads to uninformed reporters to make stupid claims like "a probe only designed to last 90 days...". C'mon let's not blame the reporters. NASA pushes th
by wolverine876 3y ago
> this leads to uninformed reporters to make stupid claims like "a probe only designed to last 90 days...".
C'mon let's not blame the reporters. NASA pushes this line - why do think everyone repeats it, using the same language almost every time? You can even see it here on HN.
- autoexec 3y agoIf NASA says "We're going to send a helicopter to mars with the mission of taking 5 flights" is that somehow bad? If the quality of the engineering and the quality of the parts, and all the redundant systems and fail-safes required to absolutely guarantee that the helicopter will complete its mission of five flights then go on to allow the helicopter to take more flights before it finally breaks down, that isn't NASA lying to anyone or "pushing a line". If the media then tells the public that the helicopter was designed to make 5 flights, but got over 70 that's not misleading anyone.
- wolverine876 3y agoYou're just making statements, with no argument behind them other than a strawperson or two (it's 'bad'). Anyway, the arguments seem to have all been said.
- giantrobot 3y agoNASA doesn't push that line. They say the primary mission is X flights or whatever. When the probe lasts longer reporters translate that into "designed to only last X flights!!1!" NASA never wants to say a probe will probably last longer than its primary mission because then reporters go the complete opposite direction and claim NASA said a "probe failed to last the claimed X+Y flights".