6 ms·

They are astronauts... There is some amount of expectation that the rocket will blow up before they get in to space. Nobody wants it, but they are the best of

They are astronauts... There is some amount of expectation that the rocket will blow up before they get in to space. Nobody wants it, but they are the best of us and they are courageous as heck. To be completely honest, the news cycle this summer has been so wild; I kind of forgot they were up there until today. That is something that it seems like they might not have trained the astronauts for, and that's really scary. That and there might be some sort of business politics involved in the plan to get home. We're all sort of engineers here, given the choice, suppose Boeing thought they could land you next week or you would wait until 2025 and ride a Dragon down. Which would you pick?

htrp 2y ago
I think most astronauts and wannabe astronauts would prefer as much time in space as they could get.
- nullfield 2y ago
  I admit I didn’t think of this, but… without another science mission or something, what do they do up there? This said, yeah, I wouldn’t want to come back on Boeing hardware with Dragon available.
  - TheCondor 2y ago
    According to the audio: https://www.youtube.com/live/DYPL6bx87yM https://www.youtube.com/live/DYPL6bx87yM they are helping with standard ISS tasks, like operational maintenance and it is greatly appreciated.
  - bityard 2y ago
    I don't follow Space Stuff as much as I'd like to, but one impression that I have always had is that there is _never_ a lack of stuff for astronauts to do up there. An astronaut's time and resources are just too damn expensive to have them up there just hanging out. Outside of their fairly limited personal leisure time, they have a strict down-to-the-minute schedule handed down to them by mission planners that they must follow if they want to keep their jobs past the next landing. Including when to sleep and when to eat. (Of course, I assume the astronauts are allowed to request a change to their schedule if it's for a good reason.) Common tasks include running tests and maintenance on the station itself and monitoring/performing various science experiments. Perhaps doing a few NASA PR bits, media interviews and short chats with school children over the radio. I once read an article that said the vast majority of the actual work NASA does is "contingency" work that is never actually ends up being used. The problem is that while a mission is under development (or even well underway), you don't always know how things are going to shake out. So you hedge your bets by doing as much preparation and exploration of alternatives as you can, and try to pick the right one at the right time, or as the situation evolves. I guarantee there are entire teams on the ground working _right this second_ on a draft schedule for keeping the two "extra" astronauts gainfully contributing to ISS activities, even though it's not certain that they will be there.
privatebecause 2y ago
> they are the best of us This gets said a lot, so I'll bite. Are they really? Many are just people able to go through the years of soul crushing things like being in the military. There are some straight up scientists on board, sure, I'll give that to them. But a lot are science people that are also fine doing things like flying bombing missions over the middle east. Killing tons of people isn't really a thing I respect.
- rurp 2y ago
  It's awfully uncharitable to assume that someone is a bad person just from serving in the military. The military has done some reprehensible things at times, but it has also done a lot of good and the unfortunate reality is that in the world as it currently exists a strong military is a requirement for a free society. I don't agree with the fetishizing of the service that goes on in some circles, but taking the opposite extreme is not any better. People should be judged on their individual actions.
  - dTal 2y ago
    I don't think they said they were "bad people". But it's a fair objection that anyone who is content to sign away their personal autonomy to a violent organization may not represent "the best" of us, in some philosophically meaningful sense. Insofar that it's true that "a strong military is a requirement for a free society", it's because people like that exist.
    - shiroiushi 2y ago
      >Insofar that it's true that "a strong military is a requirement for a free society", it's because people like that exist. Yes, but there's no way to change that; it's human nature. Without a military, other countries with strong militaries will happily impose themselves on you: Nazi Germany, Russia/SU, etc. History is full of accounts of what happens when people don't have enough military power to resist invasion by a country of evildoers with their own powerful military. Similarly, police frequently suck, but the alternative is even worse. There's no shortage of people who would be happy to ignore laws and prey on others if they didn't have to worry about police enforcement.
WalterBright 2y ago
> There is some amount of expectation that the rocket will blow up before they get in to space. Nobody wants it, but they are the best of us and they are courageous as heck. The B-17 aircrews in WW2 knew they had only a 20% chance of surviving their mission count intact. (not killed, crippled, or POW'd) Neil Armstrong figured he only had a 50% chance of surviving Apollo 11. Personally, I think he was optimistic.
- trte9343r4 2y ago
  Like B-17 crew could refuse orders. That is not how draft works! It was slavery!
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    B-17 crews were all volunteers.
    - trte9343r4 2y ago
      None of them were drafted? In general army only 29% soldiers were volunteers. I find it hard to believe they all volunteered. And I found a few cases where instructors were assigned to B-17 as a punishment.
      - WalterBright 2y ago
        They all joined the Army Air Corps as volunteers.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
- yakz 2y ago
  Not only that, but thousands (>10k) of WW2 aviators died in training before deployment.
throwaway2037 2y ago
The Dragon, obvs! Then, I get more time in space, and I get to try both capsules -- Boeing on the way up, and SpaceX on the way down.
e_y_ 2y ago
But also that willingness to face the risks goes with the expectation that the people on the ground did everything they could to minimize the risks. If that trust is broken, because someone cut corners to save on costs and schedule, it's less likely that astronauts would want to sign up for such a job in the future.

htrp 2y ago

I think most astronauts and wannabe astronauts would prefer as much time in space as they could get.

nullfield 2y ago
I admit I didn’t think of this, but… without another science mission or something, what do they do up there? This said, yeah, I wouldn’t want to come back on Boeing hardware with Dragon available.
- TheCondor 2y ago
  According to the audio: https://www.youtube.com/live/DYPL6bx87yM https://www.youtube.com/live/DYPL6bx87yM they are helping with standard ISS tasks, like operational maintenance and it is greatly appreciated.
- bityard 2y ago
  I don't follow Space Stuff as much as I'd like to, but one impression that I have always had is that there is _never_ a lack of stuff for astronauts to do up there. An astronaut's time and resources are just too damn expensive to have them up there just hanging out. Outside of their fairly limited personal leisure time, they have a strict down-to-the-minute schedule handed down to them by mission planners that they must follow if they want to keep their jobs past the next landing. Including when to sleep and when to eat. (Of course, I assume the astronauts are allowed to request a change to their schedule if it's for a good reason.) Common tasks include running tests and maintenance on the station itself and monitoring/performing various science experiments. Perhaps doing a few NASA PR bits, media interviews and short chats with school children over the radio. I once read an article that said the vast majority of the actual work NASA does is "contingency" work that is never actually ends up being used. The problem is that while a mission is under development (or even well underway), you don't always know how things are going to shake out. So you hedge your bets by doing as much preparation and exploration of alternatives as you can, and try to pick the right one at the right time, or as the situation evolves. I guarantee there are entire teams on the ground working _right this second_ on a draft schedule for keeping the two "extra" astronauts gainfully contributing to ISS activities, even though it's not certain that they will be there.

privatebecause 2y ago

> they are the best of us This gets said a lot, so I'll bite. Are they really? Many are just people able to go through the years of soul crushing things like being in the military. There are some straight up scientists on board, sure, I'll give that to them. But a lot are science people that are also fine doing things like flying bombing missions over the middle east. Killing tons of people isn't really a thing I respect.

rurp 2y ago
It's awfully uncharitable to assume that someone is a bad person just from serving in the military. The military has done some reprehensible things at times, but it has also done a lot of good and the unfortunate reality is that in the world as it currently exists a strong military is a requirement for a free society. I don't agree with the fetishizing of the service that goes on in some circles, but taking the opposite extreme is not any better. People should be judged on their individual actions.
- dTal 2y ago
  I don't think they said they were "bad people". But it's a fair objection that anyone who is content to sign away their personal autonomy to a violent organization may not represent "the best" of us, in some philosophically meaningful sense. Insofar that it's true that "a strong military is a requirement for a free society", it's because people like that exist.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    >Insofar that it's true that "a strong military is a requirement for a free society", it's because people like that exist. Yes, but there's no way to change that; it's human nature. Without a military, other countries with strong militaries will happily impose themselves on you: Nazi Germany, Russia/SU, etc. History is full of accounts of what happens when people don't have enough military power to resist invasion by a country of evildoers with their own powerful military. Similarly, police frequently suck, but the alternative is even worse. There's no shortage of people who would be happy to ignore laws and prey on others if they didn't have to worry about police enforcement.

WalterBright 2y ago

> There is some amount of expectation that the rocket will blow up before they get in to space. Nobody wants it, but they are the best of us and they are courageous as heck. The B-17 aircrews in WW2 knew they had only a 20% chance of surviving their mission count intact. (not killed, crippled, or POW'd) Neil Armstrong figured he only had a 50% chance of surviving Apollo 11. Personally, I think he was optimistic.

trte9343r4 2y ago
Like B-17 crew could refuse orders. That is not how draft works! It was slavery!
- WalterBright 2y ago
  B-17 crews were all volunteers.
  - trte9343r4 2y ago
    None of them were drafted? In general army only 29% soldiers were volunteers. I find it hard to believe they all volunteered. And I found a few cases where instructors were assigned to B-17 as a punishment.
    - WalterBright 2y ago
      They all joined the Army Air Corps as volunteers.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
yakz 2y ago
Not only that, but thousands (>10k) of WW2 aviators died in training before deployment.

throwaway2037 2y ago

The Dragon, obvs! Then, I get more time in space, and I get to try both capsules -- Boeing on the way up, and SpaceX on the way down.

e_y_ 2y ago

But also that willingness to face the risks goes with the expectation that the people on the ground did everything they could to minimize the risks. If that trust is broken, because someone cut corners to save on costs and schedule, it's less likely that astronauts would want to sign up for such a job in the future.