5 ms·

Two space shuttles exploded, killing everyone on board. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disaster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shu

Two space shuttles exploded, killing everyone on board. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disaster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disas... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Columbia_disaster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Columbia_disaste...

cr125rider 1y ago
And a bunch of other missions worked great. Learn from failures, progress.
- voidspark 1y ago
  Yeah it's not "bonkers" or "insane". They learned the hard way. Painful lessons.
jaredhansen 1y ago
Good point, let's just shut it down, nobody should do anything
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- voidspark 1y ago
  That's not my point. The learned painful lessons and their success rate is high.
  - wqaatwt 1y ago
    Didn’t they just stop crewed space flights for (almost)decades instead?
  - j4coh 1y ago
    Wasn’t that more the point of the person you replied with counterexamples to?
    - thom 1y ago
      Let’s assume good faith all round. One poster rightly highlights the overwhelmingly positive track record. Another points out the negatives went a little beyond an “oopsie”.
      - voidspark 1y ago
        Yeah just being respectful to those 14 astronauts who died. They are worth mentioning. Nasa had major setbacks - not an "oopsie". Didn't mean to hijack the thread. Well done Voyager team.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
        mulmen 1y ago
        I think this is an unfair characterization of the comment. Nobody is dismissing the shuttle crews. The “oopsie” was in reference to the Mars Climate Orbiter mishap that did not involve loss of human life.
CobrastanJorji 1y ago
They did, yes. And there are fascinating failure stories for each one. But my point is that there were more miraculous successes than miraculous failures. Heck, in my opinion, given that the Space Shuttle flew in atmosphere like a brick, and given that there was no possible way to get a second shot at the landing strip, the fact that they landed successfully every time (except for Columbia, of course) is amazing. The Apollo flights in particular were interesting. For example, in the case of Apollo 14, when Houston was literally reading new machine code to the astronauts over radio who were punching in POKE instructions by hand to change the code.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- mulmen 1y ago
  > except for Columbia, of course And Challenger.
  - ben_w 1y ago
    Given that exploded on the way up because of the SRBs, this doesn't say anything about the orbiter (the bit that flies like a brick) landing.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - mulmen 1y ago
      Columbia was doomed before it reached orbit. It wasn’t lost to a flaw in the landing process.
HenryBemis 1y ago
The cost of doing things (I remember watching the Challenger live on TV at the time). Every now and then we watch/read in the news that # of workers died while building that bridge/road/building/etc. We don't stop making bridges/roads/buildings. We just make it safer. Will people continue dying unnecessary/unnatural deaths? Unfortunately, yes. Let's minimise this.

cr125rider 1y ago

And a bunch of other missions worked great. Learn from failures, progress.

voidspark 1y ago
Yeah it's not "bonkers" or "insane". They learned the hard way. Painful lessons.

jaredhansen 1y ago

Good point, let's just shut it down, nobody should do anything

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
voidspark 1y ago
That's not my point. The learned painful lessons and their success rate is high.
- wqaatwt 1y ago
  Didn’t they just stop crewed space flights for (almost)decades instead?
- j4coh 1y ago
  Wasn’t that more the point of the person you replied with counterexamples to?
  - thom 1y ago
    Let’s assume good faith all round. One poster rightly highlights the overwhelmingly positive track record. Another points out the negatives went a little beyond an “oopsie”.
    - voidspark 1y ago
      Yeah just being respectful to those 14 astronauts who died. They are worth mentioning. Nasa had major setbacks - not an "oopsie". Didn't mean to hijack the thread. Well done Voyager team.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - mulmen 1y ago
        I think this is an unfair characterization of the comment. Nobody is dismissing the shuttle crews. The “oopsie” was in reference to the Mars Climate Orbiter mishap that did not involve loss of human life.

CobrastanJorji 1y ago

They did, yes. And there are fascinating failure stories for each one. But my point is that there were more miraculous successes than miraculous failures. Heck, in my opinion, given that the Space Shuttle flew in atmosphere like a brick, and given that there was no possible way to get a second shot at the landing strip, the fact that they landed successfully every time (except for Columbia, of course) is amazing. The Apollo flights in particular were interesting. For example, in the case of Apollo 14, when Houston was literally reading new machine code to the astronauts over radio who were punching in POKE instructions by hand to change the code.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
mulmen 1y ago
> except for Columbia, of course And Challenger.
- ben_w 1y ago
  Given that exploded on the way up because of the SRBs, this doesn't say anything about the orbiter (the bit that flies like a brick) landing.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - mulmen 1y ago
    Columbia was doomed before it reached orbit. It wasn’t lost to a flaw in the landing process.

HenryBemis 1y ago

The cost of doing things (I remember watching the Challenger live on TV at the time). Every now and then we watch/read in the news that # of workers died while building that bridge/road/building/etc. We don't stop making bridges/roads/buildings. We just make it safer. Will people continue dying unnecessary/unnatural deaths? Unfortunately, yes. Let's minimise this.