Uncertain Launch Feelings

[krpalmer]

I’d known in a general sort of way a “civilians in space” flight was in preparation to launch in a Crew Dragon spacecraft (it had a reality show on Netflix and everything), but as it turned out I first realised the launch had happened via the old-fashioned method of reading my newspaper this morning. To be honest, though, the news still left me with a “shouldn’t I have more of a reaction?” feeling. This does seem to have something to do with looking in directions that turned up a good deal of distaste towards the two five-minute “moneybags up and down” launches earlier this year; one of the civilians just happens to have made a lot of money as well.

That SpaceX has worked through problems (rather than “getting it perfect to start with, because its designs are from private industry”) and kept its rockets flying has impressed me a bit, even if I do wonder if having avoided making a first grand claim of flight frequency and costs of the sort that kept getting thrown back at the space shuttle helped. At the same time, it’s easy enough to be suspicious of both its corporate controller and its “fans.” It’s one thing to say “airline travel started out as a high-end indulgence,” another to consider the energy alone required to climb and accelerate to orbital speed.

With all of that said, there’s at least an effort being made to talk up the flight. Complaints and accusations that “space flight wasn’t sold properly” do leave me wondering whether “nonstop TV coverage of real life” is necessarily exciting in itself. So far as finding inspiration goes, though, it could just be an impression the Martian mini-helicopter Ingenuity has eked out its battery power longer than first expected is as good as anything else to me.

Comments

[austin_dern]

Somebody on Mastodon (I forget) articulated something that I realize is a big part of my distaste for the current generation of Private Rockets. To work in space, capitalism is going to demand new and more severe methods of control, control of people, of habits, of activities. Partly because of need; any spaceflight demands a lot of time spent on simple maintenance of the spacecraft or space station done to rules or everyone dies. Partly because of money; it costs so much to put someone up there that it's unthinkable to not have them doing revenue-generating activities all the time.

It can be harsh enough with government spaceflight and that's done by an organization that isn't explicitly money-driven (and done by people who are, you know, civil servants and protected by a union), and even so, the pressure to perform got so bad that, like, the last Skylab crew went on strike for time to be people.

And the techniques of control developed for that will be brought back and inflicted on everyone. It's hard enough being expected to act as if you care about the two-to-eight shift at Sammy's Sandwich Stand now, but when management is trained on a rulebook designed for keeping people alive in the South Atlantic Anomaly? So it's left me feeling dismal about where this is leading.

[krpalmer]

With "tech guys" linked with the "new space" companies, I can understand the train of thought leading to that dystopian take on "the astronauts drink Tang; you can, too." (Or maybe it's just "more dystopian," depending on your thoughts about "instant powdered breakfast drinks.") The thought did come to me, though, that maybe "absolute cost effectiveness" will just lead to that old threat/promise of "there's no real need to put people in space at all," so there's that.

(Anyway, you mentioning Skylab reminded me that one of the sources I glanced to for jaundiced takes on the moment did go so far as to try and offer some context on that past moment...)