Comments by "Bo McGillacutty" (@Mrbfgray) on "The New York Times" channel.

Doc Possum It's not about the cost of fuel it's the compounding effect of adding ANY additional weight as that requires more weight of fuel which requires more weight of fuel.... The price of fuel is small compared to total launch costs and if you were to add safety devices for every contingency there would be NO payload at all.
56
M. Redleg More than evidence. It should have been expected as you can see it carry on it's same trajectory, even the boosters only got pushed off track apparently completely intact. It wasn't an "explosion" in like a firecracker, it was a fast burn up that took a couple of seconds. Yes it's safe to assume all on board were alive, some of them conscious until impact with the water.
32
Molly Baker Hard to believe 'they had no clue', rockets were always extremely risky biz and they should have been well aware of that.
28
@damian246 He wasn't expecting to die obviously you moron.
20
Imagine how embarrassing it would be to F-up that badly on film in front of friends, he'd never "live that down". :D
10
It didn't effect me so profoundly perhaps because I was well aware of the potential for failure, it had almost blown up at least a couple time prior. Part of the problem was NASA began to buy their own propaganda as they pretended the risk was similar to an airliner which was always laughable, even the name "Shuttle" was intended to convey safe and routine which rocket launches NEVER were.
7
valkor73 They probably didn't know how to react, also that was not beyond memory the '60's and early 1970's when our rockets 'always blew up'.
4
So your an expert? And just how much more are you willing to pay for a ticket--want to double the price of flying to drop your risk from one in a billion to one in 1.1 billion?
4
Says Max Stupid.
3
John Arsebuckle Are you projecting, envious or just a stupid troll, actually the 1st two are the most pathetic. Tell us you are just trolling?
3
@dozzer009 Yes much of the wreckage was recovered and 'reassembled'. NASA put on a 3 yr circus pretending to not know exactly what happened when there were almost fistfights the night before launch between M.T. engineers (rocket booster mfg) and others, over exactly this issue. AND they had footage from an F-16 cam plane at 60,000 ft that showed exactly what happened Drag out the farce, misleading naïve gullible reporters long enough that the public loses interest. Everyone involved knew they'd almost blown it up previously due to cold launches that weren't even that cold. NASA bean counters in charge thought that if they could fool the public they could fool nature. Doesn't work like that.
1
@jozefmak984 Curious that spectators are excluded within 3 miles of rocket and then expect launch to be safe or something
1
When Liberals do live their values it also results in destruction.
1
@A E I don't know about criminal, but yeah maybe that's not enough, you are talking some 250 hr.s in this particular model I believe, not total experience. However--by some accounts, the Lion pilots were either severely drunk or may as well have been: 1st the particular plane had problems with the AOA that should have been taken care of but hadn't been, 2nd they took off without tower clearance, then they fumbled in the cockpit, misunderstanding the situation, failing to switch off MCAS and apparently not even scanning their instruments as they didn't know the attitude of the aircraft and when the "bank angle" warning came on they turned INTO it instead of out of it causing the fatal near vertical dive. (time will tell how much of this is on Boeing and how much on maintenance, operation standards and pilots, account above could be partially incorrect too)
1
@vladsnape6408 Quit pretending you have any idea what the facts are, you don't, we don't know yet.
1
@andis9076 But YOU can make snap judgments on Boeing with only preliminary information? NEVER does one take off without tower clearance but (apparently Lion crew did), and again, apparently they continued to screw up unforgivably.
1
@andis9076 It's NOT irrelevant it's an indicator of lack of BASIC pilot discipline. It's like getting on a bus and the very first thing the driver does is blow through a red light fast, if you were aware of it would you not want off that bus? And the beginning of (preliminary, I don't know how good my info is but none of us know at this point) a series of sever fuckups including failing to scan their artificial horizon screens, imagine THAT!... then turning into the already too steep bank resulting in the dive.
1
How do you know the pilots in one or both cases weren't too drunk to walk straight? Don't pretend you know how this will play out. By some accounts Lion pilots were completely negligent and clueless as though they were stoned or drunk and apparently the AOA wasn't repaired as it should have been.
1
Imagine how embarrassing it would be to F-up that badly on film in front of friends, he'd never "live that down".
1
"What!?!" "The vehicle has exploded!" "Don't say that!" Sorry folks, that's what rockets DO, they blow up frequently, they always had that's why you are miles away from the launch site. Did you think it was safe or something?
1
@dzonikg Either are fine. I focus on the dangerous parts of travel and ALL of that happens on the surface....driving.
1
@dzonikg I know of a woman who was absolutely terrified of flying--obviously she survived the flight but then she died in a head on collision in her car after leaving the airport. The disconnect from reality here is not trivial, a complete disregard for relative risks. She should have been relaxing on the plane and stressing about her OWN driving instead of the other way around and maybe she would have lived. (just an anecdote but a common theme)
1
@dzonikg Sounds like she let irrational input override thoughtfulness, but how would I know.
1
@nickl5658 Is this some sort of revelation to you? Why are you repeating what everyone knows. Were BOTH crews too drunk to walk or just the Lion pilots?
1
Spooky MGTOW Yeah I'm sure someone who doesn't even know the definition of engineering or what an aerodynamicist is one to listen to. Back to the crib child.
1