NROL-70 | Delta IV Heavy

[lone walrus]

Was that Intelsat 40e?

[placid ember]

I am legally unable to say which mission it was. There very likely was more than one flight similar, I just happen to have the full scoop on one in particular

[lone walrus]

Mmmm it's either that mission or SES-18/19

Those are the only two that weren't sent to proper GTO last year

(From the US)

[blissful talon]

I’m sorry, what? If the %s are of some number of standard deviations then the repeated closeness to 0 either means it’s majorly stacked - by using a large number of them to mean 100% - or using sigmas that aren’t representative of the reality of the vehicle performance. Either way that’s not very useful as a reference. Furthermore, the bounds are not labelled on the chart and it provides no information as to where you can find those bounds, so a member of the general public these graphics are intended for will not be able to easily find what it’s actually saying without some kind of lucky advance knowledge. Lastly, the layout of the bullseye, with seemingly linear scales placed in a circle, is geometrically misleading because the larger area on the outside presents an idea of there being more space to “avoid” out on the fringes than there actually is. It’s like how you shouldn’t use 3-d pie charts because the depth screws with the visible proportions. These data would be much better served with independent or aligned linear scales instead of being combined into a stylised bullseye that makes low numbers seem visually more impressive than they actually are.

What’s observable about these charts shows that even though they are derived from real data, the choices made in their presentation makes them very difficult to get meaningful information out of. If this is a standard way to display this information then the standard is bad communication.

[lone walrus]

Someone pinch me or something, I agree with Ryan

[placid ember]

A major part of technical communication is being able to rapidly show results in a qualitative way to people who don't understand the math that went into the numbers (project management)

Charts like that are great to show during overview and summary sections of presentations and reviews. You can quickly say "We're in the box and green to keep moving forward", everyone can look at the chart and see that's true, and then you can move on. Not all information needs to be presented all the time to every audience

[blissful talon]

But charts like that, due to the reasons I’ve explained, misrepresent the information within them by not providing the means to properly evaluate them and being laid out in a misleading geometric way. There are many much better and more informative ways you could present that same information, and those would allow people to actually see that’s true by providing them some reference and not tricking their eyes.

[placid ember]

I completely disagree that the chart is misrepresenting anything or trying to mislead the reader

[blissful talon]

I can’t say precisely what the intention is, what the chart is trying to do, but it kind of doesn’t matter. It does lack the information necessary to place those numbers in meaningful context and it is laid out in a misleading way.

All it not trying to do those things means is that it failed to avoid them

[placid ember]

Again, I disagree. The chart is telling me that DIVH hit its TIP state with low dispersions, that seems to be the intention as well.

[cobalt island]

The chart also isn’t really for “us”, it’s for payload providers

[blissful talon]

The chart does not contain that information, it has percentages for orbital elements without context to place them in. If it communicates that to you, it’s because you were provided with necessary information by something else. And the geometric layout is still misleading because it exaggerates the outskirts by placing inaccessible “target” area there.

[blissful talon]

Big whoop? It’s presented to “us” regardless and in that role it fails to be informative. Maybe the payload providers get some extra context but that doesn’t help you and I.

[cobalt island]

I don’t really care lol

[blissful talon]

Then quit your yapping

[placid ember]

Again, not everything is intended for every audience all the time. ULA has produced similar charts for Vulcan's first flight so clearly they're valuable to someone

[cobalt island]

I’ve seen two messages in here today lmao

[blissful talon]

Again, it doesn’t really matter what their intentions are, because (at least I am) talking about what actually did happen, not what they wanted to happen. And these charts were presented to the public, and they do lack that information.

[blissful talon]

if you don’t care then maybe don’t barge in to say you don’t know what’s up and don’t care to

[placid ember]

Ok well I explained my take on it, it's cool that you have a different take. I think we've hit the limits of this conversation.

[blissful talon]

I guess. I think I’ve made my point about what actually did happen, and it’s true that we can’t tell the intentions of the person who made it from that.

[pure snow]

how tf u can type so much jeez 💀

[sullen skiff]

personally i struggle to understand any of this

its a chart

okay guys done

[pure snow]

fr

Touch some grass

[fluid hawk]

Ryan hand reveal

[tranquil copper]

Now eat it