zlacker

>>belter+(OP)
That official statement seems incredibly light on detail, almost as if written for children, or worse, members of congress.

I wonder, is there a technical publication elsewhere that has more substantial coverage for interested people?

>>inopin+hb
What more is there to say? It seems like a pretty clear explanation to me.

>>michae+Ne
Well, congressman, I might be curious what the actual commands were, why they were issued, how it led to the unfavourable outcome, how they detected and measured the degree of misalignment, what a corrected command sequence might’ve been, and then cross-referenced to a hopefully existing article on how the spacecraft will eventually re-align itself, and perhaps some further reading on other commands that are routinely or not-so-routinely issued and how they are received, decoded, and executed on board the spacecraft. Basic stuff, y’know; after all, this isn’t rocket science.

If there is such an archive, or some approximation thereof, it would surely be fascinating to pore over it.

>>inopin+Hh
Why would they owe you such detailed explanations? You're asking for a full-on incident report. These take days to write and there's no reason for the public at large to need it.

>>hfkwer+km
> Why would they owe

> there's no reason for the public at large to need it

As a member of said public, I would be curious to know. There's no need for taxpayer-funded agencies to operate in a cloak of darkness.

Most everything done by government should by default be open to the public, with an exceedingly high bar that must be met to be otherwise. Otherwise, you run into nonsensical things like how some details around the assassination of a president 60 years ago are still classified on "national security" grounds.

>>gottor+0o
which of these is 'operating in a cloak of darkness':

- NASA informs the public immediately, and then makes the details available later after they've had time to compile the news and information into a format useful for the public

- NASA waits to inform the public until said report is finished

or perhaps you're after option c:

- NASA's network drives are open to the www in read-only mode, because, you know, 'open by default' entails realtime information (even though he doesn't actually care 99.9999% of the time. yet, someone should deliver this functionality, without it costing the taxpayer extra).

NASA routinely makes a LOT of data open to the public. Like, you can get very detailed JWST data directly from NASA. Probably far more detailed than you'd ever care to, because NASA does care about exactly your concern.

Actually, many agencies publish very detailed data if you care to look.

>>MAGZin+i81
"This is light on info but they're making a report later." would be a non-darkness answer.

But do you have reason to believe they're working on a detailed public report?

Because if they're not, then you missed option "NASA informs the public immediately, but never makes the details available" which would be unfortunate.

Also they probably already answered a lot of these questions internally during the last week, so it wouldn't hurt to put some of that information out.