3 ms·

I don't think SpaceX is a great example. They have incidents of all kinds but the community has accepted that as the price of advancing the technology. This i

I don't think SpaceX is a great example. They have incidents of all kinds but the community has accepted that as the price of advancing the technology. This is probably okay given their goal. They are not a passenger airliner manufacturer. It also sounds like you are misinformed as to why the astronauts have not returned. Granted, the media is not really doing a commendable job explaining it, because clicks matter more. But it has been discussed accurately here on HN a few times. Spoiler: the astronauts can leave anytime they want, on the Starliner, and nobody (aside from laypersons unfamiliar with the situation) thinks otherwise. Nobody is going to need to 'rescue' them, because they are staying voluntarily.

somenameforme 2y ago
SpaceX has literally the lowest incident rate of any space launch company in existence (though it is dramatically higher than for any airplanes). You're confusing public test launches with incidents on commercial (let alone crewed) flights. And no, the astronauts cannot return from the ISS. The article hits on all the recent findings, --- Just a few days ago, on Tuesday, officials from NASA and Boeing set a return date to Earth for June 26. But that was before a series of meetings on Thursday and Friday during which mission managers were to review findings about two significant issues with the Starliner spacecraft: five separate leaks in the helium system that pressurizes Starliner's propulsion system and the failure of five of the vehicle's 28 reaction-control system thrusters as Starliner approached the station. The NASA update did not provide any information about deliberations during these meetings, but it is clear that the agency's leaders were not able to get comfortable with all contingencies that Wilmore and Williams might encounter during a return flight to Earth, including safely undocking from the space station, maneuvering away, performing a de-orbit burn, separating the crew capsule from the service module, and then flying through the planet's atmosphere before landing under parachutes in a New Mexico desert. --- NASA is understating everything because this flight should never have been greenlit in the first place. It's Challenger all over again. Nobody has died and for that we should be thankful, but NASA is behaving in a way that will result in deaths if they don't fix whatever is going on over there. It's like the most safety conscious culture from the outside, and then they just greenlight flights that are leaking like a sieve in every test, failing to properly deploy parachutes, and more. But Boeing always gets the 'special' treatment from the government.

somenameforme 2y ago

SpaceX has literally the lowest incident rate of any space launch company in existence (though it is dramatically higher than for any airplanes). You're confusing public test launches with incidents on commercial (let alone crewed) flights. And no, the astronauts cannot return from the ISS. The article hits on all the recent findings, --- Just a few days ago, on Tuesday, officials from NASA and Boeing set a return date to Earth for June 26. But that was before a series of meetings on Thursday and Friday during which mission managers were to review findings about two significant issues with the Starliner spacecraft: five separate leaks in the helium system that pressurizes Starliner's propulsion system and the failure of five of the vehicle's 28 reaction-control system thrusters as Starliner approached the station. The NASA update did not provide any information about deliberations during these meetings, but it is clear that the agency's leaders were not able to get comfortable with all contingencies that Wilmore and Williams might encounter during a return flight to Earth, including safely undocking from the space station, maneuvering away, performing a de-orbit burn, separating the crew capsule from the service module, and then flying through the planet's atmosphere before landing under parachutes in a New Mexico desert. --- NASA is understating everything because this flight should never have been greenlit in the first place. It's Challenger all over again. Nobody has died and for that we should be thankful, but NASA is behaving in a way that will result in deaths if they don't fix whatever is going on over there. It's like the most safety conscious culture from the outside, and then they just greenlight flights that are leaking like a sieve in every test, failing to properly deploy parachutes, and more. But Boeing always gets the 'special' treatment from the government.