6 ms·

I'd say on a scale of bad 1-10, 9 and 10 are reserved for incidents that cause loss of human life. YMMV.

dlcarrier 4mo ago
The Plainly Difficult channel on YouTube reserves 1 and 2 for incidents that don't cause loss of human life.
AustinDev 4mo ago
Loss of human life in a static fire is criminal. Why would anyone be that close? There was no loss of life in this static fire failure.
- kqr 4mo ago
  I can think of a few reasons: - Test commences prematurely when people are still around - Test is aborted partway through but then spontaneously resumes when people have started coming back - Error in design or failure of hold-down structure turns static fire into dynamic fire, moving fire to where people are These are unlikely, of course, but they are the things we have to seriously think about and try to design out of the system in order to create safe systems.
- tmtvl 4mo ago
  No one should ever be that close, but it's a worst case scenario within the realm of possibility (people do get themselves into danger sometimes, for example by wandering onto a railroad track when there's a train approaching). I don't think it's unreasonable to reserve the 10 on the 1-10 scale for 'loss of human life'.
  - robocat 4mo ago
    The train driver saw a man on the track ahead holding a cell phone to one ear and cupping his hand to the other ear to block the noise. https://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2002-24.html https://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2002-24.html
- krisoft 4mo ago
  > Loss of human life in a static fire is criminal. True. And yet it is not without precedent. Scaled Composites had an explosion while performing a cold flow test of SpaceShipTwo’s engine which killed 3. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2007-jul-27-me-explode27-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2007-jul-27-me-explo...
- russdill 4mo ago
  I mean, there was that one static fire recently where the rocket broken loose and started flying. This was not for from a populated area. Ok, maybe that was pretty criminally negligent.
logicallee 4mo ago
yeah if you want to put it in the best light in terms of 9/11's this is zero 9/11's of casualties. Not how I'd judge it.

The Plainly Difficult channel on YouTube reserves 1 and 2 for incidents that don't cause loss of human life.

Loss of human life in a static fire is criminal. Why would anyone be that close? There was no loss of life in this static fire failure.

kqr 4mo ago
I can think of a few reasons: - Test commences prematurely when people are still around - Test is aborted partway through but then spontaneously resumes when people have started coming back - Error in design or failure of hold-down structure turns static fire into dynamic fire, moving fire to where people are These are unlikely, of course, but they are the things we have to seriously think about and try to design out of the system in order to create safe systems.
tmtvl 4mo ago
No one should ever be that close, but it's a worst case scenario within the realm of possibility (people do get themselves into danger sometimes, for example by wandering onto a railroad track when there's a train approaching). I don't think it's unreasonable to reserve the 10 on the 1-10 scale for 'loss of human life'.
- robocat 4mo ago
  The train driver saw a man on the track ahead holding a cell phone to one ear and cupping his hand to the other ear to block the noise. https://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2002-24.html https://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2002-24.html
krisoft 4mo ago
> Loss of human life in a static fire is criminal. True. And yet it is not without precedent. Scaled Composites had an explosion while performing a cold flow test of SpaceShipTwo’s engine which killed 3. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2007-jul-27-me-explode27-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2007-jul-27-me-explo...
russdill 4mo ago
I mean, there was that one static fire recently where the rocket broken loose and started flying. This was not for from a populated area. Ok, maybe that was pretty criminally negligent.

logicallee 4mo ago

yeah if you want to put it in the best light in terms of 9/11's this is zero 9/11's of casualties. Not how I'd judge it.