« Digital music business needs numbersense | Main | The need to think about what you're seeing: an incomplete geography lesson »

Comments

Dan

In your graphic I have to count the icons to get a correct interpretation, because the astronaut icon is not as wide as the robot icon. I also think that the stacking in the original chart is useful to compare the total number of missions.

Kaiser

Dan: Based on the original caption, I did not feel comfortable that those two numbers could be added. Does "soft lunar landing" includes or excludes "manned missions"? I don't know. This is why my chart discourages adding, which I suppose I succeeded!

Dan

The text does state that China's landing was the 20th overall soft landing, so I think it's logical to assume that they are using manned missions (6) + unmanned missions (14).

Ken

A table is the only reasonable solution

Unmanned Manned
US 5 6
USSR 8 0
China 1 0

Jeff

The biggest problem with this bar chart is the data. Who cares? The landings are broken up by country as though lunar exploration were an Olympic event, but even to the extent that the space race is still a proxy for international prestige and power, the number of soft landings feels a bit arbitrary and not very meaningful. There have been plenty of other successful lunar missions that don't fall into this category. Also, while the accompanying text does mention it, the graph completely ignores an important fact that would add context: the only recent landing is the Chinese one.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Kaiser Fung. Business analytics and data visualization expert. Author and Speaker.
Visit my website. Follow my Twitter. See my articles at Daily Beast, 538, HBR.

See my Youtube and Flickr.

Book Blog



Link to junkcharts

Graphics design by Amanda Lee

The Read



Keep in Touch

follow me on Twitter

Residues