3 ms·
How would you feel if you were one of them? I'd feel pretty upset. A few days in space is no big deal. Months in space is hard on the body, plus you're missi
by cryptonector 2y ago
How would you feel if you were one of them?
I'd feel pretty upset. A few days in space is no big deal. Months in space is hard on the body, plus you're missing out on months of life on Earth -- maybe you're going to miss the birth of a child or grandchild, or a loved one's death and funeral, or some other big event. And are you getting paid while up there? Are there enough supplies? What if NASA and Boeing finally decide it's OK to return on Starliner, and as you know you basically must then, so now you're risking your life on a vehicle that you have much reason to think is not safe.
It'd be hard not to be hopping mad in private. I'd make the best of it, since there's no other choice, but I would not be happy about it.
- layer8 2y agoPresumably, equanimity is a selection criterion for astronauts.
- cryptonector 2y agoThere's always a limit to equanimity.
- CommieBobDole 2y agoThe counterpoint to this is these are people who have dedicated their lives to becoming astronauts. They want to go to space and they want to do things in space, and they have sacrificed a lot of the comforts of a normal life to reach that goal. I suspect most astronauts feel like they don't spend enough time in space. These are people who are driven by a passion to do the thing that they're (involuntarily) having to do more of than originally planned. I don't know if "how would you feel" is a good yardstick here; I would probably get sick of it pretty quick, but I'm not the kind of person who would make a good astronaut.
- HPsquared 2y agoAlso they get to be all heroic if the equipment doesn't work properly. It makes an (already interesting) trip more interesting and memorable.
- TMWNN 2y ago>How would you feel if you were one of them? >I'd feel pretty upset. Agreed. Yes, flying in space is cool. No, most people don't want to do this indefinitely. Astronauts retire all the time even when they are 100% guaranteed more flight time if they didn't retire; a whole bunch did that in the 1960s and 1970s (some, like Frank Borman, 100% guaranteed to walk on the moon), and more during the shuttle era. It's one thing to have a mission extended by a day, as happened to the shuttle routinely because of bad weather at the landing site. Skylab 4's mission I believe got extended by 28 days, but that was a known possibility before launch. To have an eight-day mission be possibly extended to eight months is in no way shape or form OK.
- teractiveodular 2y agoWould you prefer 8 months and a safe ride down on a Dragon, or 8 days and taking your chances on the Starliner? Not a rhetorical question, since you can argue both sides of the case. Even floating around in space for 8 months is not risk free.
- TMWNN 2y ago>Even floating around in space for 8 months is not risk free. Correct. That said, ISS's quarter century of operations is a pretty good track record. Starliner's so far is dismal. The best solution is to bring Wilmore and Williams back sooner than February. If that means Boeing paying for a rescue Crew Dragon launch, so be it.
- amy-petrik-214 2y ago[flagged]
- DiggyJohnson 2y agoOf course you’re getting paid?
- gus_massa 2y agoDo they get a different salary when they are up?
- DiggyJohnson 2y agoThat would be interesting. Thankfully I don't know about federal employee compensation yet to be sure of the answer, but I'm on my way.