• Tiger666@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    Not only did they broadcast the explosion they also caused it. Haha(not funny)

    Richard Feynman was the one who let slip innocently what the cause was during an international press conference and made a lot of people in Washington very very mad.

    Basically, the Whitehouse pushed NASA to launch despite the weather being too cold and that caused an expansion joint of an SRB to fail.

    Feynman showed the world what happens to the expansion joint material by putting it in some ice water for five minutes during the press conference and showed it crumbled after he took it out of the glass.

    That man was an international treasure and I miss him very much.

  • zod000@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    We watched it live in elementary school, most of the kids didn’t get what had happened right away. Our teacher was just standing there stunned until an announcement came on the intercom asking all the teachers to turn it off. They didn’t say anything to us, just tried to pretend like we didn’t just watch people blow up live.

    • Punkie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s the “not handling” part that gets us as kids. We knew better. Adults didn’t. In my case, I was in high school, but it was on a “Teacher workday, student holiday” we had each semester. I watched it live on NASA TV, which we had on channel UHF 55 in the DC area. Even the voice of mission control delayed about a minute or two. I remember thinking, “THAT didn’t look good…” but then they said nothing but normal speed and temp readings, so I thought it was just the angle of the chase plane. Only when the famous “forked cloud” appeared that the announcer said, “we have an apparent major malfunction,” or something.

      • zod000@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I remember that last part from the announcer and we were all like “you don’t say…”.

  • Bluewing@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Turns out risky business has risks.

    The interesting thing isn’t how many fatalities NASA has had but rather how few they have had. Exploration has always gotten people killed.

  • Jerb322@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I think I was in 7th grade. We were watching. Right in front of our eyes and could hardly believe it. Everyone inhaled sharply and then a couple of short screems, then silence. After a good 5 minutes, our teacher came to his senses, turned off the TV, and started talking about being right with god because you never know when it’s your turn.

  • Schwim Dandy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    The crew didn’t blow up(src).

    The flight, and the astronauts’ lives, did not end at that point, 73 seconds after launch. After Challenger was torn apart, the pieces continued upward from their own momentum, reaching a peak altitude of 65,000 feet before arching back down into the water. The cabin hit the surface 2 minutes and 45 seconds after breakup, and all investigations indicate the crew was still alive until then.

    We were led out of our classrooms to watch it since we lived in FL. When the launch went pear-shaped, nobody really understood what had happened, we just thought it was part of the fuel tanks dropping away. We went back in, sat down and continued our day. I don’t think the teachers ever told us something went wrong and I found out about it that night at home.

  • candyman337@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    The engineers knew! They begged them to stop the launch, but of course, no one makes the wheels not capitalism stop rolling! profit progress at all costs!

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    The soviet space program took fewer lives than the US’s program, yet the US constantly made it seem like it was the soviets that didn’t care about human lives.

    • Bldck@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I mean… not really.

      🛰️ Space Race Fatalities Comparison: Soviet Union vs United States

      Aspect 🇺🇸 United States 🇷🇺 Soviet Union
      Total astronaut/cosmonaut deaths 9–10 (incl. test/training accidents) 8 (official)
      On-mission fatalities 3 (Apollo 1, ground test) 4 (Soyuz 1, Soyuz 11)
      Training/test deaths (astronauts) 6+ (e.g. Theodore Freeman, C.C. Williams) 4+ (e.g. Valentin Bondarenko, others possibly unacknowledged)
      Deaths among ground personnel <10 100+ (notably the Nedelin disaster)
      Transparency High (accidents publicized and investigated) Low (many incidents hidden until after 1989)
      Major catalyst event Apollo 1 fire Soyuz 1, Nedelin disaster

      Key Takeaways
      • 🇺🇸 U.S. suffered more astronaut fatalities, including test pilots and training accidents.
      • 🇷🇺 Soviets had higher total human losses, especially among engineers and soldiers during explosive launch and fuel testing incidents.
      • 🔥 The Apollo 1 fire led to sweeping design and safety reforms in NASA.
      • 🚨 The Soyuz 1 and Soyuz 11 tragedies were fatal in-flight accidents; Soyuz 11 remains the only in-space human fatality.
      • 🕵️ The Nedelin disaster, one of the worst rocket catastrophes in history, killed over 100 but was kept secret for decades.
      • 🧾 Transparency and institutional accountability were key differences: NASA publicly investigated accidents; the USSR often concealed failures.
      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        You can certainly blur the space race with missile development as they were intimately tied on both sides, and if you want to include it then the deaths from the US ICBM disasters need to be included as well, but I do think it’s a bit absurd to uncritically report that 100+ people died in Nedelin when official numbers revealed it to be 54. Plus, wherever you sourced this from is clearly generally biased against the soviets beyond the scope of this report.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Gotcha, I’ll be sure to only repeat word for word what’s in the post. No new angles, no new ways of looking at the post content, just a single 👏 emoji.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Can you elaborate? I’m certainly very pro-Soviet, as I’m a communist. I don’t hide that. I’m pro-communism, I support the PRC, Cuba, AES in general. The main purpose of my Lemmy.ml account is to talk about socialism and communism through a Marxist-Leninist lens.

            • Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              I’m very anti-NATO, like the vast majority of Marxists, and I don’t fall for the hysteria around the Russian Federation as some ultimate evil, though,

              You in another comment. The Russian federation is currently occupying multiple neighbouring countries, bombing civilians, and generally having a war crime of a time. And you’re saying they’re not evil?

              You’re off the deep end, my friend.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Eastern Ukraine, the Donbass region, is very pro-Russia and very anti-Ukraine. Western Ukraine was shelling them for a decade, post-2014 coup, due to the hard shift from being aligned with Russia to being aligned with NATO. For these citizens, Russian presence is a good thing. Western Ukraine certainly hates that Russia has invaded, but the “hysteria” I am referring to is the kind that thinks even Eastern Ukraine opposes the Russian Federation.

                So no, this isn’t a “pro-Russian” stance, in my opinion. Recognizing western-Ukraine’s shelling of civilians in eastern-ukraine for a decade, and the overwhelming support for Russian annexation of the Donbass region among Donbass residents in Donetsk and Luhansk, is something that even pro-NATO people need to recognize in order to figure out how to best deal with that underlying fact.

                • Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  I can’t believe you’ve fallen for the “dey dombed bombas” story, you really are that brainwashed. All of Ukraine voted to leave Russia, most of it quite overwhelmingly.

                  And there was no coup, that was entirely orchestrated by Russia.

                  You really need to read some media from outside your bubble.