Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I've always thought the same, that something like space travel is inherently incredibly dangerous. I mean surely someone during the Apollo program spoke out about something. Like landing on the moon with an untested engine being the only way back for instance.

Nixon even had a 'if they died' speech prepared, so someone had to put the odds of success not at 100.




I think the deal was there was already a pretty high threshold for risk. I don't know the percentage exactly but the problem was the o-ring thing put it over the threshold which should triggered a a no-go.

For example, you could say "we'll tolerate a 30% chance of loss of life on this launch" but then an engineer comes up and says "an issue we found puts the risk of loss of life at 65%". That crosses the limit and procedure means no launch. What should not happen is "well, we're going anyway" which is what happened with Challenger.


Neil Armstrong figured that he only had a 50% chance of making it back from the moon alive.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: