Though even then, this is something that should have been flat-out mandated when the contracts where going out: "You'll be compatible with one another, and don't even dare start a sentence bitching about it or this contract is immediately torn up".

But damn... this must be so weird for the two astronauts. Second time something on this scale has happened, no? Where someone was uncertainly "stranded" in space? After the stuff with the blown oxygen tank on one of the Apollo missions?

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 29 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

It is a touch surprising that a discussion like

we have standardized electrical, fluid, and gaseous connectors. You will conform to their hardware interface specifications if you want the contract accepted. This is not a debate.

never occurred.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I have zero doubt the lawyers (probably contractors) involved with writing up the contracts aren't also in the pockets of the "competing" corporations.

Even if it wasn't defined in the contract, the competitors knew of each others involvement and made no effort to address a very obvious engineering necessity (probably brpught up by engineers at both companies) — management (at the very least) let this happen on purpose, as a strategic decision.

It's all part of the hyper efficiency of privatizing profits and regulatory capture.

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social -5 points 3 weeks ago

Because these contracts aren't about creating something. They are about funneling wealth to the already wealthy.

[–] MartianSands@sh.itjust.works 17 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The crew of Apollo 13 weren't really stranded, as such. They were far from home and not sure if they had the means to get home before the supplies ran out, which is a different problem

[–] nslatz@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Sergei Krikalev was stuck on the Mir space station for 311 days after the Soviet Union broke up.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What an absolutely wild situation to be in.

go to space
your country becomes another country while you’re there
congrats on your new citizenship, I guess…?

[–] clay_pidgin@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago

Tom Hanks in The Terminal 2: Waiting for Korolev

[–] mercano@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

It was intentionally not specified. NASA wanted two dissimilar spacecraft so a flaw with one wouldn’t ground the other. If they had specified a common space suit and an issue came up with it, then both Dragon and Starliner would be out of action.

[–] Travelator@thelemmy.club 24 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

How could they not think of this during design? Rocket science, my ass.

[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 38 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Private companies competing for things ends up with stuff like this. Unless NASA or someone designs a spec and contractually enforces everyone to implement it, problems like this can crop up in all kinds of places.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

In most fields, even private companies understand the need for industry standards.

[–] astrsk@fedia.io 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

And in new fields of privatization, someone has to win out on the standard. It should have been NASA demanding an interoperable spec but someone will win out here eventually and it will be standard in the future.

[–] robolemmy@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

XLCD: Standards

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 weeks ago

When you make a new standard to consolidate related-but-drifting standards, all you’ve done is make n+1 standards.

[–] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

XLCD

Ah yes, XLCD, created by Rbndall Mvnroe.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah, like how Apple works with other phone and tablet manufacturers to use a unified charging and data port.

[–] astrsk@fedia.io 3 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I can’t tell if this is sarcastic because Apple contributed over 20% of the engineers credited with developing USB-C.

All told, Apple contributed 18 of 79 named engineers listed on the connector certification project or under 23%. 9to5

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 21 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

It's sarcasm, because it took EU legislation to force them to actually fucking use it in their phones a decade later.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

They don't contribute engineers out of the kindness of their hearts. They do it for entirely selfish reasons — to have a large influence in industry standards, and the competitive advantages that enables.

Do you also believe Google created Chrome for "freedom", instead of to gain a competitive advantage in web and ad tech standards?

[–] Illuminostro@lemmy.world -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Do you believe any for-profit entity give two shits about anything except for profit? Oh, that's right, the one you like/work for is different.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

In what universe was my comment promoting any for-profit? Are you mentally deficient?

[–] Illuminostro@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago

Why do you think any "privatized" entity does anything? Altruism? Charity?

[–] BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Only when it's their standard most of the time, which is the reason why we have so many standards for so many things that do basically the same thing

[–] witx@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

And that's why we have the EU telling apple and their fanboys to eat shit and use USB-C :) without these legislators we get the chaos you mention

For consumer products I don't agree with enforcing it through the beginning though as it might hinder innovation. But once you have a few working cases you enforce the better one

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world -4 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Elon and his companies seem to have a propensity for preferring proprietary bullshit over standards

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

There is no general spacesuit "standard". Suits up to this point have all been designed for a specific purpose and often even a specific vehicle. Newer vehicles have used newer suit designs to go with them. The upcoming Orion system for Artemis uses an entirely new and different suit as well. Not to mention the Russian and Chinese suits are different as well to work with their vehicles.

[–] dgriffith@aussie.zone 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

So what we need to do is keep a bunch of umbilical adaptor hoses in the glovebox of every spacecraft.

"Do we have a Boeing to SpaceX adaptor?"

"No but we can do Boeing to ESA to Soyuz to Shuttle to SpaceX. It's 8 feet long but it will work."

"Good enough then."

[–] burble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 weeks ago

The internet would absolutely lose it if SpaceX started selling dongles.

[–] witx@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

That's because you are illiterate in the matter and want to criticize spacex for the sake of it.Unfortunately there is no current "standard" for space suits.

[–] kokesh@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

I don't think there is a standard. NASA should have mandated something in this department.

[–] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 8 points 3 weeks ago

This Starliner debacle just keeps getting better and better.

[–] BastingChemina@slrpnk.net 6 points 3 weeks ago

I think SpaceX stated a while ago that they have two suits that could fit Wilmore and William that could do up with the next dragon.