4 ms·

What I don't get is why the heck are the astronauts willing to risk their lives on something they must know by now is so dangerous? Is it really better to risk

What I don't get is why the heck are the astronauts willing to risk their lives on something they must know by now is so dangerous? Is it really better to risk death than to risk getting fired?

shawn_w 6mo ago
There aren't many people left who've been that close to the moon. Lots of people would love to be on that list.
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
FpUser 6mo ago
Some people go to war for the thrill of it, others do base jumping, free solo climbing and whole lot of other activities that eventually kill many of them. It is in their genes.
renewiltord 6mo ago
This degree of lifespan-maximization is something you might have but others don’t necessarily share. E.g. old people went to Fukushima to sort it out. “Was it really better to risk death than to risk getting fired?” Neither of these are major risks compared to never being what you want to be.
- wiseowise 6mo ago
  > Neither of these are major risks compared to never being what you want to be. I want you to repeat those words as you melt away re-entering the atmosphere.
  - renewiltord 6mo ago
    That’s not my purpose so dying that way doesn’t seem that appealing.
    - wiseowise 6mo ago
      Replace it with whatever you consider “worth dying for”.
      - renewiltord 6mo ago
        In that case it seems all right. Certainly if I died in Apollo 1 and I cared about spaceflight and making it to the Moon before the Russians I wouldn’t see it as unworthy. The Shuttle deaths no problem.
spike021 6mo ago
To be honest I don't know how close to non-fiction "The Right Stuff" (book or film) was but if you watch it you'd maybe gain an understanding for why astronauts do these things. At least that part is believable.
SideburnsOfDoom 6mo ago
> why are the astronauts willing to risk their lives There are a lot of funerals in chapter 1 of Tom Wolfe's book, "The Right Stuff". I suggest that some choice of profession come with a higher life-risk tolerance than others. "Accountants willing to risk their lives for the job" would be news. Firefighters, less so. Test pilots or astronauts, not much at all.
- dataflow 6mo ago
  You're completely ignoring the nature of the risk. It's one thing to accept a risk of death because it's intrinsic to a noble job. It's a whole other thing to accept a totally avoidable risk that's only introduced due to management's self-interests getting in the way.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 6mo ago
    I agree, to the extent that those two categories are easily and clearly separable and not murky due to the nature of risk, and efforts to pass off one as the other.
voxic11 6mo ago
Because even in the worst case what we are really talking about is just much higher risk than the government is claiming, but its still far more likely to succeed than fail. Plenty of people would take a 1 in 10 or 1 in 100 chance of dying if it meant they could walk on the moon.

What I don't get is why the heck are the astronauts willing to risk their lives on something they must know by now is so dangerous? Is it really better to risk death than to risk getting fired?

shawn_w 6mo ago

There aren't many people left who've been that close to the moon. Lots of people would love to be on that list.

deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]

FpUser 6mo ago

Some people go to war for the thrill of it, others do base jumping, free solo climbing and whole lot of other activities that eventually kill many of them. It is in their genes.

renewiltord 6mo ago

This degree of lifespan-maximization is something you might have but others don’t necessarily share. E.g. old people went to Fukushima to sort it out. “Was it really better to risk death than to risk getting fired?” Neither of these are major risks compared to never being what you want to be.

wiseowise 6mo ago
> Neither of these are major risks compared to never being what you want to be. I want you to repeat those words as you melt away re-entering the atmosphere.
- renewiltord 6mo ago
  That’s not my purpose so dying that way doesn’t seem that appealing.
  - wiseowise 6mo ago
    Replace it with whatever you consider “worth dying for”.
    - renewiltord 6mo ago
      In that case it seems all right. Certainly if I died in Apollo 1 and I cared about spaceflight and making it to the Moon before the Russians I wouldn’t see it as unworthy. The Shuttle deaths no problem.

spike021 6mo ago

To be honest I don't know how close to non-fiction "The Right Stuff" (book or film) was but if you watch it you'd maybe gain an understanding for why astronauts do these things. At least that part is believable.

SideburnsOfDoom 6mo ago

> why are the astronauts willing to risk their lives There are a lot of funerals in chapter 1 of Tom Wolfe's book, "The Right Stuff". I suggest that some choice of profession come with a higher life-risk tolerance than others. "Accountants willing to risk their lives for the job" would be news. Firefighters, less so. Test pilots or astronauts, not much at all.

dataflow 6mo ago
You're completely ignoring the nature of the risk. It's one thing to accept a risk of death because it's intrinsic to a noble job. It's a whole other thing to accept a totally avoidable risk that's only introduced due to management's self-interests getting in the way.
- SideburnsOfDoom 6mo ago
  I agree, to the extent that those two categories are easily and clearly separable and not murky due to the nature of risk, and efforts to pass off one as the other.

voxic11 6mo ago

Because even in the worst case what we are really talking about is just much higher risk than the government is claiming, but its still far more likely to succeed than fail. Plenty of people would take a 1 in 10 or 1 in 100 chance of dying if it meant they could walk on the moon.