Hacker News Reader

Comment by _bin_ | Hacker News Reader

Why would Qantas have the implicit right to the airspace first? Space travel and air travel are both value-added human activities. I can't see why we would always prioritize air travel (particularly in very remote locations like this) over space travel.

Most flights will never be impacted this way.

View on HN

You're kidding right? This is space debris. If a Qantas flight crashed into your neighborhood, you know who's responsible right?

Are international waters in the southern Indian ocean Qantas' neighborhood?

It's not the waters that's important here. It's the debris passing through the flight path.

Qantas doesn't own the flight path either?

Oh common?! Do you own the travel path when driving down the highway? No you don't but there are agreed upon and codified rules on right of way that protect your right to safe passage or navigation. Similar convention applies to air space and air travel, look up Annex 2: Rules of the Air by ICAO which outlines right of way principles for air travel

What does it say has right of way between a rocket stage, that cannot be steered, and aircraft, that can?

> between a rocket stage, that cannot be steered

This is just trash. Debris as they call it.

If drive in front of you on a highway and throw some "debris" out of the window, will you enjoy it ?

Will I enjoy it? What's that got to do with anything?

The FAA confirmed that debris fell outside designated areas, temporarily disrupting air traffic and causing several aircraft to divert or delay flights.

You can read more here and other news sources

https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/spacexs-starship-grou...

Another way of phrasing the situation is that Quantas _very inconveniently_ chose to put their flight path straight through the projected trajectory of rocket debris.

Would you ask the same question if it were Long March rocket debris falling into the Atlantic with very short notices from China?

It's not space debris, it's the deliberate disposal of the upper stage of the rocket precisely to prevent it from becoming space debris. The time and location of re-entry are planned and controlled. This is not going to crash into your neighborhood (except if you're neighborhood is in certain areas of China, where they they happily dump spent rocket stages on populated areas).

To be fair, I’m not sure happily describes it. Indifferently? ‘We warned them and they didn’t move, so f them?’ Ly?

That’s because I own my back yard. Qantas doesn’t own a 3D space in the sky.

A flight is using a very narrow path, the rocket debris is "claiming" a huge unavoidable areas over probably a relatively long period of time.

I wonder what the math is on the plane actually getting hit if it took it's normal route.

Something with a lot of significant decimal places that are mostly zeroes.

Unfortunately "got hit by space debris in designated NOTAM area" looks bad in headlines.

> Space travel ... value-added human activities

Heavily debatable.

And you're equating to SpaceX dumping debris and trash in addition to their original flight path to a plane's flight path. Those are not equal things.

Why not? Both are an essential part of the operation.

Do you consider launching spy satellites "value added human activities"?

depends who's doing it. china, for instance, classifies everything they send up as "military" with the ITU to avoid disclosure. the US is a net positive in the world, so our satellites are too.

Curious which countries you think are net positives. China?

china is a tougher one. she has been strongly positive in the past, as well as strongly negative; now she is much closer to negative. net all that i'd say negative overall.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com