392
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] VerilyFemme@lemmy.blahaj.zone 154 points 2 years ago

Imagine you're stuck in space... and your two options for getting home are Boeing and SpaceX. Is OceanGate going to branch out into space travel next? I hope these brave souls make it home safely.

[-] ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world 139 points 2 years ago

As much as I detest SpaceX and the literal child in charge of the company, their craft at least has a track record of safely bringing astronauts to and from the ISS. Boeing doesn't even have that.

[-] felbane@lemmy.world 111 points 2 years ago

SpaceX is Shotwell's company, and she's way more capable of driving success than the fuckstick who does their PR. It's difficult to dismiss the objectively astounding leaps in technical progress that the engineers at SpaceX have achieved.

Musk could take a long walk off a short bridge and it wouldn't affect SpaceX's operations at all.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] corroded@lemmy.world 47 points 2 years ago

I feel the same as you, but you really can't deny the fact that the engineers at his various companies have managed to design some really great tech despite their CEO.

Not just spacecraft either. Starlink is really the first usable satellite broadband, and Tesla has mastered the art of putting advanced powertrain in terrible automobiles.

[-] rtxn@lemmy.world 37 points 2 years ago

Those companies have people whose unofficial job is to manage the child when he throws a tantrum and somewhat isolate him from things that could be damaged. Twitter didn't have this protection.

[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago

This. SpaceX and by proxy Starlink have Gwynne Shotwell to actually run things. Elon may be the one talking all the time, but he doesn't actually run daily operations.

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 13 points 2 years ago

I've read that Tesla and SpaceX engineers were actually happy that Musk bought Twitter because it's been keeping him occupied and out of their hair.

[-] VerilyFemme@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 years ago

Well, Twitter's not made up of researchers and engineers. Catering to the whims of a rich guy to get your research funded is a tale as old as the scientific method, they've got it down by now.

[-] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 13 points 2 years ago

some people don't realize that, despite politics and who owns it, they launch like 90% of the things in orbit worldwide. they are essentially the standard.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SeaJ@lemm.ee 53 points 2 years ago

I hate Musk but he is not the one who designed the Falcon rockets and capsule which have the best track record. I would much prefer to go on one of those than Starliner.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] grue@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

I'm OOTL: is Soyuz no longer also an option?

[-] mercano@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago

Russia invading Ukraine has complicated any future dealings with them, especially when there’s a domestic alternative.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

They've been transporting American space personal since at least March

Not sure what could have changed since, but when US/Russia relations at some of the worst levels in history, I'm surprised this last lingering relationship has held out as long as it has.

[-] voluble@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

My understanding is that, in retaliation to US sanctions imposed at the start of the invasion of Ukraine, Russia stopped providing RD-180 rocket engines that were used in the Atlas V. My surprise is that the USA relied on Russian rocket engines to put national security payloads into space.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Prior to the war, relations between the US and Russia were relatively warm. Specifically, during the Bush War on Terror, Russia and China were active partners and enthusiastic participants in crushing "Radical Islamist Extremism".

I suspect you can trace the reliance on Russian rockets back to that period, what with the end of the Shuttle program and a confused path forward between administrations.

Russian industrial rocketry was both world class and dirt cheap, back during the late '00s.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] yogurt@lemm.ee 8 points 2 years ago

SpaceX has a regular scheduled launch that's been sitting around delayed waiting for Starliner to leave the ISS, so kicking two people off it and replacing them with the Starliner crew is convenient and minimizes the schedule disruption.

Soyuz only has three seats and launching a Soyuz with only one crew or empty is something Russia hasn't done since the 60s and would be more work.

[-] lefty7283@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

NASA is still doing a seat exchange and launching Johnny Kim on the next Soyuz in March, but it looks like it’ll be just Russians on at least the next 2 Soyuz’s after that

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] superkret@feddit.org 6 points 2 years ago

It's a decision between a spacecraft that sprung multiple leaks on its first crewed flight and one that carried crew 8 times without issues so far.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

I always feel extreme tension during movies and TV if the scene is an oxygen leak from a space shuttle. Now I'm imagining that, but they have to repair things with their janky Xbox controller setup. Holding things upside-down, of course, because they wired the engines backwards.

load more comments (16 replies)
[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 83 points 2 years ago

Boeing takes it in the nuts.

Not enough billions in taxpayer dollars I guess.

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 35 points 2 years ago

Thank goodness they're too big to fail or they might actually be held accountable for building such shit equipment over the last decade+.

[-] anubis119@lemmy.world 70 points 2 years ago

Of course they waited until Saturday to announce this while the markets are closed. Boeing will plummet on Monday.

[-] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago

Boeing will take a hit, but less than if the thing has fucked up during reentry and killed them ..

[-] AshMan85@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

even a worse case scenario, boeing will survive. i believe their bomber contracts are the golden goose.

[-] crystalmerchant@lemmy.world 21 points 2 years ago
[-] mynameisigglepiggle@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

Pretty sure those astronauts are actually whistleblowers

[-] Noodle07@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Can you fall out a window in micro gravity? 🤔

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago

This was the only option. Glad that they made it.

[-] jayknight@lemmy.ml 12 points 2 years ago

The nice part is that they had two options. They couldn't prove the safety of Starliner completing the crew test flight, but it's good that there are 2 commercial crew vehicles that they could have chosen. That kind of choice is what the commercial crew program is all about.

[-] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago

Okay so they are stuck then. Right?

Wouldn't it be interesting if they make it back safely on the X snap dragons capsule thing and then they bring back the boing capsule and it burns up? It mean, if nothing happens it's okay, but If it does!?

[-] CobblerScholar@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

I almost want to start shorting Boeing

[-] TheRealKuni@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

I dunno man, part of me wants to buy the dip. They’re “too big to fail,” they’ll get enough corporate welfare to bounce back. The question is when.

[-] 11111one11111@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Na this has been an unprecedented scale of fuckups. Dont make investment decisions like timing the market. Make investment decisions based off the quality, scalability and value of the company itself. Warren Buffet 101.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2024
392 points (98.5% liked)

News

36412 readers
499 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS