Hacker News Reader

Comment by slfnflctd | Hacker News Reader

Ugh. This not only makes Boeing & NASA look bad, it makes the whole country look bad. The global general public is not going to be understanding, especially with all the PR bluster. Engineers may be sympathetic to the immense challenges here, but maybe we shouldn't have hyped this particular launch so much. The launch system is not yet proven.

View on HN

As a non American the idea that it makes the US look bad didn't enter my mnd until I read your post. First off, space is hard, rocket science is, wel, rocker science, space engineering is hard and everybody is entitled to off days, including NASA.

But besides that, NASA is not the US, American are not their country. Why would some bad luck with a launch reflect onto people who have nothing to do with it?

We all know that the US is very successful in terms of launches shit into space. It's gonna take a bit more than this to change that record.

Buddy, America does _far worse_ things on the international stage than scrub a few rocket missions. Like, you remember the Iraq and Afghanistan wars right? You're making a really bizarre leap of faith here that the world only cares about some rocket missions.

Don’t think he ever said, or even slightly implied, that the world “only” cares about rocket missions.

And I don’t understand the point more broadly. Because the US did some unpopular things, it doesn’t matter if it also looks impotent trying and failing to launch a big rocket? I don’t see how that follows at all. It seems to me that the opposite perspective is just as plausible: the American space program is one of the most important things the US does to build and maintain its global credibility, so it really matters if it fails on a global stage.

This is pretty typical for new launch vehicles. As long as NASA doesn't drop the 1st stage on a retirement home in Florida, the US space program doesn't have much to be ashamed of in comparison to other countries.

Was right there with until you said whole country. This just makes SpaceX look even better. It shows that what ever the established procedures with NASA are not working, while whatever SpaceX has going on is working. The weight of bureaucracy keeping NASA from iterating faster? The complacency of Boeing knowing they are getting paid regardless? NASA basically just being a jobs program? All of that compared to SpaceX has to work or company goes bust.

That's why I used the phrase 'global general public'. Your average citizen in India, China or many other places is only going to see egg on Uncle Sam's face here.

I do agree that it makes SpaceX look better, especially in terms of Falcon 9. But their fate is so closely tied to Starship now that if it runs into serious problems and/or has to go back to the drawing board, the company's very viability could be threatened and it would be yet another big blow to the national image. Our hopes are riding on a lot of untested stuff right now, and the hype magnifies every failure along the way.

Does anyone else have the equivalent launch capabilities of SLS or Starship? If not, then everyone else can sit down and shut up until they can do better.

> Your average citizen in India, China or many other places is only going to see egg on Uncle Sam's face here.

That's a prejudiced view.

As somebody from one of those countries, I'm curious to know why you felt that way.

Rest assured that average citizens in India don't give a damn about whether or not America launches a rocket.

Nobody here has any doubt that the US is fully capable of handling this mission.

It's a good thing that they caught the flaw early and aborted the mission before anything catastrophic happened. They can now look into things, make corrections, and try again.

(And besides, thoughts about "what will others think" should be the least concern of anybody actually involved with this project. It's an indication of small minds.)

Because SpaceX doesn't make errors? SpaceX rockets don't blow up?

Finding am error before lift off is not a bad thing.

SpaceX would have just let the rocket blow up. NASA does things differently.

You say that like NASA never had a candlestick blow up. Or shrugged their shoulders when a piece of insulating foam fell onto the leading edge of the wing during launch and decided to let that vehicle re-enter atmo.

Yea, you're right. NASA has never done anything like that, at all.

SpaceX wouldn't spend $50 billion to develop a rocket that will cost $4 billion per launch.

Do people focus on the apollo failures? (there were a lot along the way to the moon the first time)

That was a long time ago and people my age only see that we went to the moon a few times. The only failure most people are aware of is due to a movie.

Strange, to me NASA looks like they take security seriously like professionals do

Reply on news.ycombinator.com