259
submitted 6 months ago by Wilshire@lemmy.world to c/space@lemmy.world
all 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] casmael@lemm.ee 31 points 6 months ago

Dafuq they doing over there

[-] stevecrox@kbin.run 27 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

SpaceX are on track to launch 130 times this year. The industry competitors launch 6-12 times per year.

I suspect the higher incident rate is related, since you will need to manufacture, roll out, etc.. much more often.

The article also talks about most the incidents being in booster recovery. Only 2 Space competitors do that,

Blue Origins sub orbital booster always returned to launch site and at best managed monthly launch. This rocket hasn't launched in more than a year.

Rocket Lab perform ocean recovery but only launched 11 times last year and only recovered the booster twice.

So its hard to really compare

[-] Carighan@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago

Still, the specific injuries sound gruesome, like amputations and crushing. And sure, to a degree this just happens if you do something often enough, but we have safety standards for a reason, it's wild to me that this isn't something where safety is paramount.

After all, think about all the product that could get damaged! 😑

[-] Donebrach@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Elongated Muskrat runs his companies like the cyberpunk villain he aspires to be. Wouldn’t be surprised if all the employees at his companies signed over their physical bodies and implants as part of an NDA because he lives in a fantasy land where it’s 2019 rain-drenched fire-spewing-tower L.A.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 6 months ago

Of course Elon Musk doesn't actually run SpaceX

[-] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

SpaceX also launches more rockets than any other launch provider. What is the injury rate per mass-to-orbit? The Reuters report smells suspiciously like a hit piece.

[-] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 71 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

RATE. Injury rate per person.

The only thing that matters is how many injuries happen per person. That's the whole point. Every company could increase output by sacrificing worker's health, but we as society strongly condemn that because that's truly fucked up.

[-] pezhore@lemmy.ml 19 points 6 months ago

We should frame things in terms of injuries per worker per stock price. If our shareholders are happy who cares if Tommy's dad only has one leg now?

/s

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

You gotta keep in mind that spacex is more mass manufacturing things compared to legacy space.

They're aiming for 144 launches this year, that's 144 2nd stages. A second stage is being manufactured every 2.5 days.

Hundreds, if not thousands of satellites.

A better comparison would be to other manufacturers of this scale and complexity. Not someone who launches 2 rockets this years, maybe.

[-] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 15 points 6 months ago

No absofuckinglutely not. That's psychotic and you should feel like garbage for even thinking that. Being ok with more people being hurt and killed just so a company can churn out more product is vile.

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I never said I'm okay with people being injured, but it is FACT that injury rates change based off type of work.

No one in the space industry is mass manufacturing at the scale that SpaceX is so they are not a valid comparison.

[-] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 12 points 6 months ago

If space projects can't be done faster without pushing kids into the orphan crushing machine, then it shouldn't be done faster.

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Let me help your outraged mind understand this basic concept.

Lets say it takes 10 people to take a 2nd stage rocket from the loading bay, to the launch pad and get it mounted.

Lets say there are 1000 processes and safety checks to do this task, and 5% of the parts involved can only do the task 5 times before being inspected, replaced and/or refurbished for whatever reason.

SLS if I'm reading things right (I might be wrong) are going to launch ONCE in 2024.

That's 10 people doing 1000 processes with 0 part inspection or refurbishments required. (Edit: And they sit in an office for the rest of the year planning the next launch)

SpaceX with those same 10 people, because it only takes 10 people to do the task, are going to do 144 launches in 2024. Every 2.5 days they're going to move this thing.

That's 144,000 processes and safety checks, and 28.8 times that parts need to be monitored for wear and tear, refurbishment and replacements.

You don't think that there's a higher chance that those 10 people might do something wrong in those 144,000 times, or in one of the 28.8 inspections? That even if those 10 people did everything perfectly every single time, that maybe, a piece of hardware might fail unexpectedly?

You think those 10 people should have the exact same injury rate as the SLS people who did it once (edit: and then sat in an office the rest of the year)?

It's bonkers to think that.

[-] crapwittyname@lemm.ee 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The bottom line is this: if your accelerated processes are causing more workers to get injured, then you need to slow down. You must not churn out a second stage every 2.5 days if it means more injuries per worker.
Your argument is that these workers are doing more dangerous tasks more often and therefore that raises the injury rate, right? Well then they should be doing fewer dangerous tasks, and less often, then.

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I never said otherwise. I just said that comparing the injury rate to the existing space industry wasn't accurate.

If accidents are happening because they are moving to fast they should of course address that.

They'll still have more accidents than the regular space industry because they are on incomparable scales.

[-] crapwittyname@lemm.ee 5 points 6 months ago

Fair enough. A quick Google tells me the rate in the automotive industry is 6.3 per 100, which is close to SpaceX at 5.9 per 100. Might be more comparable to be fair.

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

That might be a closer comparison ya.

Both work with large objects at large scale.

Edit: And just because SpaceX is lower doesn't mean it's fine. There's clearly room for large improvement, especially if injuries are due to moving too fast. I'd also intuitively expect higher numbers in automotive as things are larger scale (millions) and faster.

[-] Carighan@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

I never said I’m okay with people being injured, but it is FACT that injury rates change based off type of work.

That's a good point. We need better safety regulations for mass-manufactured space debris I imagine, since we just don't have that type so far.

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I imagine to some extent they are writing their own as they go given that's the case. It probably wouldn't hurt to have regulators come in and see if any new rules are needed (and being followed). Not like ocean rocket recovery on a drone ship was a thing before.

[-] ech@lemm.ee 23 points 6 months ago

Your account smells suspiciously of bootlicking.

[-] lobut@lemmy.ca 14 points 6 months ago

I was about to check their history but just looking at the name is a dead giveaway.

[-] stanleytweedle@lemmy.world 23 points 6 months ago

What is the injury rate per mass-to-orbit?

Weird metric. So if SpaceX puts 10 tons in orbit and injures 10 people that should basically count the same as if ULA puts 1 ton in orbit and injures 1?

[-] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

He's an Elon fanboi, in their world any amount of human suffering is fine as long as the profits keep coming in.

[-] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago

He’s an Elon fanboi

I love the rockets, but have been very disappointed with his recent antics.

[-] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

So if SpaceX puts 10 tons in orbit and injures 10 people that should basically count the same as if ULA puts 1 ton in orbit and injures 1?

That's more or less what I was getting at. Is the metric that weird?

Building off of your example, suppose SpaceX puts 15 tons in orbit and injures 10 people, while ULA puts 1 tons in orbit and injures 1. If one wanted to launch 30 tons to orbit, what would the best decision be?

[-] stanleytweedle@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Yeah fuck it- let's just start doing all safety ratings by pounds-of-flesh per unit output for every industry.

"Your company had 10 deaths this year but you only made 7K tires... You'll need to make up the balance by producing 3K more tires before end of fiscal year or we'll have to fine you for safety violations." lol- twisted but could be a fun comedy premise.

Or wait- should we do output or actual sales? That would make more financial sense ;)

[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 18 points 6 months ago

How many injuries per Elon boot licks is that?

[-] casmael@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago
[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

I think you may have your numerator and denominator mixed up, have you been on Twitter lately?

[-] casmael@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

Well it’s 12 per lick and there’s a lot of licking going on. Twitter is something birds do when relaxed.

[-] EarMaster@lemmy.world 18 points 6 months ago

How about injuries per billion dollar CEO worth? Or injuries per roadster in orbit (Spoiler alert: SpaceX is really bad in this category)?

[-] pennomi@lemmy.world 17 points 6 months ago

It is adjusted per capita, anything else is pretty meaningless.

The situation doesn’t appear to be improving. In 2023, the SpaceX facility in Brownsville, Texas, for example, reported an injury rate of 5.9 per 100 workers, a notable increase from 4.8 in 2022. Comparatively, the industry average remains significantly lower at 0.8 injuries per 100 workers, according to figures provided by Reuters.

[-] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago

I wonder how much of this increase is due to the current expansion at Starbase, which is very much an active construction site right now. I would be interested to see if these numbers go down once the facilities become more established.

[-] bbuez@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

Ajajaja number go down after hard part, is like video game ajajaja I can afford you some missing fingers ajajaja

[-] ricdeh@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

Lol the injuries are not due to rocket launches, they are due to manufacturing. So your metric has absolutely no meaning whatsoever.

[-] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago

Of course they are due to manufacturing (not launches), but SpaceX also manufactures and refurbishes more rockets than other launch providers. How is the metric meaningless?

[-] riodoro1@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

This idiot thinks space junk is more important than human lives.

[-] GladiusB@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

The "hit piece" that reports another company being run like absolute shit from the guy that is running a car company like shit, a space company like shit, a tube company that closed down and couldn't even come close to what was promised.

Am I missing something? Maybe it's a hit piece because the guy is a piece...of shit.

[-] fidodo@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

Musk is trying to make the US labor board unconstitutional. The reason why is outrageously transparent based on this article. Fuck that monster.

[-] OrkneyKomodo@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 6 months ago

This image gives me Subnautica vibes.

[-] guacupado@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago

A previous Reuters investigation found that the approximately 600 reported injuries in 2022 included crushed limbs, cuts, burns, eye injuries, electrocutions, amputations, and serious head injuries, according to the news outlet, which noted that data from prior years are either incomplete or non-existent.

Oh my lanta.

[-] masquenox@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

This tells me a lot not just about SpaceX but also "industry norms."

[-] Beetschnapps@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

TRW got us to from Pioneer to the fucking moon without shitting on unions or massively injuring their workers.

Elon takes his parents blood money and buys Tom Mueller… yet people act like it’s the second coming of Jesus while the same engineers now suffer for his ego.

All so a single trust fund baby can claim land in LEO.

[-] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

Injuries such as guy got stuck in the rocket during countdown, guy minding his own business when rocket part fell on him and it was still burning. Probably things like that... parking at the wrong place during horizontal engine tests, etc.

this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2024
259 points (100.0% liked)

Space

8724 readers
4 users here now

Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.


Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive.
  2. No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  3. Engage in constructive discussions.
  4. Share relevant content.
  5. Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
  6. Use appropriate language and tone.
  7. Report violations.
  8. Foster a continuous learning environment.

Picture of the Day

The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula


Related Communities

🔭 Science

🚀 Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography


Other Cool Links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS