NASA is about to make its most important safety decision in nearly a generation

jeffw@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.world – 341 points –
NASA is about to make its most important safety decision in nearly a generation
arstechnica.com
97

You are viewing a single comment

Step 1. Fire Boeing.

Step 2. Fucking FUND NASA.

Step 3. NASA builds space stuff that works.

To be fair, some work has always been outsourced.

Like the o rings…

I like my humor like I like my NASA space vehicles - outsourced to the lowest bidder.

I’ve worked for several aerospace companies including Boeing. I have nothing but contempt and hatred for Boeing and couldn’t get out of there fast enough. Management is garbage, safety comes second to schedule, people are treated like disposable cogs, but I would trust Boeing over NASA. I work with a lot of NASA and ex-NASA people right now on a couple major projects. Dear god NASA upper management makes me want to put my head through a wall! The insufferable sense of superiority trying to tell us “how things are done”. Bro, how is SLS coming? That’s what I thought, shut your mouth and stop pretending like you are the Apple of space systems. Luckily, most of the ground level people at NASA are more down to earth (pardon the puns) and easier to work with.

NASA contracting stuff to space X has probably be the most amazing and sound financial decision they have made.

People on this website are so biased because Elon runs it but he genuinely built one of the most amazing companies in the world. Government including the US are miles behind them and struggling to play catch up and they are only trying because Space X has become so much better than them they have to.

It's arguably not even him that it really running it

Seems like he's more involved with starship now than falcon or dragon.

Which is why my expectations have lowered. "Hey can we build a rocket out of steel and power it with natural gas?" "We'd have to give engineers a raise or they'll probably quit."

I'd hope they're paying them more, since they're working very long hours. But I do think starship is likely to do well, they've crossed some huge barriers to cheap reusability.

At what point does cheapness outweigh reliability? It was good to keep wasteful and incompetent military contractors on their toes, but that's going to have diminishing returns, eventually.

Elon's vision is spaceflight cheap enough for extremely wealthy consumers to frequent, any further in that direction and SpaceX maybe might no longer benefit the general public.

We'll see.

You don't think starship will be able to be reliable? I think they'll get falcon 9 like reliability performance at least, and they're aiming for a lot better.

Don't care. He built the company, he's the face of it. People hate the company and live in a dreamland where it's failing because they want what Elon owns to be shit.

It isn't and they are wrong because they can't see past their bias.

Space x doesn't work thanks to Musk. It works DESPITE him, and it requires careful management.

This is all irrelevant to the point I was making which is about people thinking Spacex is a terrible company due to bias.

No more. No less.

Yes, Musk has made people hate anything he's involved in, or that enriches him. It's only natural; Actions have consequences. He's a severely mentally ill billionaire, increasingly detached from reality. And now his politics and disinformation are a danger to millions of people. If SpaceX or Tesla wants to feel the love, they know what to do. Until then, I can only assume they accept the consequences.

I'm not sure how peoples delusions are a logical outcome.

If I don't like America that doesn't mean it suddenly isn't the richest country in the world just because I don't like it.

People really need to understand their bias, wanting SpaceX to be shit doesn't make it so. That's what we are talking about. Nothing else. SpaceX rockets aren't powered on feels.

You keep bringing up people wanting spacex to be shit but I don't think that's a prevailing sentiment

I have definitely seen that. You see it more on the tests of Starship. Even when it is successful and goes better than expected. Because it blows up a lot of people are laughing at how bad the company is.

From what I see Gwynne Shotwell is the one that's really doing the heavy lifting in the company.

Seriously what is going on here?

Okay? If that is or isn't correct what did I say that was wrong?

Are you saying. People think Spacex is a failing company (when it isn't) because of Shotwell?

They're just adding context. Calm down you have a real victim complex going on, and it's boring.

It's not context because it's irrelevant to the point at hand. It's an adjacent point but it isn't related.

I'm talking about people perception of SpaceX. The actual inner workings of the company is an irrelevant point.

You can practically hear him flop sweating and hyperventilating.

It's not a complex, he's reacting to the downvotes (that do seem unfair).

He's being downvoted because people are pointing things out and he's arguing about them, even though they are reality.

Exactly what "things" are you referring to? Also, his last post wasn't really even arguing... It was asking questions.

He said

Okay? If that is or isn't correct what did I say that was wrong?

Which I have to say, is a more than reasonable question, it's an attempt to start a dialogue. Down voting a reply like that is just childish.

I haven't said anything about it being a failing company, I'm just introducing some much needed information because of how much glazing I've noticed.

Glazing for what? How?

You don't seem to understand how spaceX works, so your assertions ignore those internals and paint the wrong picture.

1 more...
1 more...

People on this website are so biased because Elon runs it but he genuinely built one of the most amazing companies in the world

Elon didn't build it. They literally have a manager whose entire job is to make sure Elon doesn't get too close to the technical stuff because he'll break it with some random order to change it for no reason

I read quite a bit about how spacex was formed, including the book that obviously will tell the hero tales of Elon. But I've never seen any mention of this and would like to learn more. Would you be able to share a link?

It’s not just blind hate for Elon, they’re genuinely terrible stewards of the environment in south Texas. They constantly lie about their intentions and impact to avoid having to take responsibility for anything. Say what you will about how independently they operate from his input, this is definitely a company culture that he cultivates and promotes.

https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1823378186836889699

CNBC updated its story yesterday with additional factually inaccurate information.

While there may be a typo in one table of the initial TCEQ's public version of the permit application, the rest of the application and the lab reports clearly states that levels of Mercury found in non-stormwater discharge associated with the water deluge system are well below state and federal water quality criteria (of no higher than 2.1 micrograms per liter for acute aquatic toxicity), and are, in most instances, non-detectable.

The initial application was updated within 30 days to correct the typo and TCEQ is updating the application to reflect the correction.

The news story you are linking was incorrect and based on a typo in a report.

So I’ve read.  

They still blew up their launch pad and showered a protected wildlife area with particulate, metal, and concrete debris. 

They then built and operated their water deluge system without obtaining permits.

Typo or no, they’re still taking a fast and loose, “better to ask forgiveness than permission” approach that is a detriment to a protected natural environment. They intend to test the limits of the Texas government’s ability to show disdain for the environment in favor of private enterprise.

I agree, I'm just saying this story in particular is untrue. That, obviously, doesn't excuse all the other things they actually did, like the ones you linked here.

Those are valid points. The people that actually know even small amounts about the company do have interesting insights.

But I wasn't talking about those people. I was talking about people that see the name Elon and immediately "know" the company is in a shambles, failing and can't keep up with the competition and all other sorts of nonsense based on no facts.

1 more...

Step 4. NASA builds planes that work (on the side).

If BASA build aircraft they would have to throw it all away at the end of the flight.

Need better funding but they absolutely shouldn't be building spacecraft, they are too scared of getting yelled at to innovate, and innovation is required.

Their idea of building a new rocket is by reusing as much of the 1970's shuttle tech as they can.

reusing as much of the 1970's shuttle tech as they can

And reusing the tech, but not the hardware. NASA are throwing four RS-25 shuttle engines (some of which flew multiple shuttle missions) into the ocean with every SLS launch.

We need to support and upgrade sls

Do we? It's already years behind schedule, billions over budget, and doesn't really have a use beyond Artemis. Also, the Exploration Upper Stage (one of the major planned upgrades) is being developed by... Boeing.

1 more...