It may be in trouble. Initial tracking data tweeted by Jonathan McDowell indicates that their orbit is off in inclination by about 0.4 degrees, which is about 50 m/s (probably a hundred kg of propellant). Their total budget for the ascent is about 100 m/s, and it seems unlikely that they have that much margin. So it’s possible that they don’t have enough to both get to ISS and then do a later deorbit, which means they’d have to abort without going to the station.
But the most likely explanation is that it’s just bad tracking data (maybe measuring during a burn?). We’ll find out at the next trajectory update.
[Friday-morning update]
Well, they docked, so presumably, they also have enough to get home.
Safe Is Not An Option, by Rand Simberg is a reliability expert’s look at the space program. The book is discussed at length on its own web site. Those interested in the space program should read it: the book is quite critical of current space policies. It has endorsements from both astronauts and space policy analysts.
His general thesis is that NASA’s obsession, born of the days when “ours always blow up” and brought back with a vengeance by the Challenger disaster, is eliminating all human risk from spaceflight. That doesn’t work and the obsession is a huge obstacle to progress. There will always be risks, and we will always have heroes.
Simberg is an aerospace engineer with considerable experience and his analyses of various space incidents such as the Challenger Disaster are spot on, which is to say, I agree with them. Recommended.
Some thoughts on the demonization of innovation. Sadly, from both sides of the aisle. It brings to mind the stupid attacks on Newt, by Romney and others, when he proposed a bold space policy.
It’s actually the least hacktastic piece I’ve ever seen from him, except he doesn’t seem to realize that Atlas V alrady requiers “cryogenic handling” because LOX.