Injury Rates at SpaceX Soar Above Industry Norms
Injury Rates at SpaceX Soar Above Industry Norms
At SpaceX's manufacturing facility in Brownsville, Texas, the injury rate is more than seven times the industry average.
You're viewing a single thread.
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.
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.
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
"Rate" doesn't necessarily mean per capita. It could easily mean an averaged total over time.
However, the linked Reuters source does clarify that the referenced "rate" is injury per 100 employees. So your intuition was correct.
Still, it's shitty journalism to leave that ambiguity. The Reuters article that it cites is far better.
This is from the article, is it not clear enough?
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.
Hmm, I didn't see that when I first was looking for that exact information. Either I'm blind, or they made an edit
Very possible they made an edit. I've seen some terribly written headlines posted that were copy pasted from the article but with a better one after you visit it. Sometimes I wonder if it's on purpose. Get the benefits of a shitty click bait headline on social media without the shame of having it on your site when users get there. For article content it could be that they rush the article out to get the SEO boost of being first, then actually finish the article after.
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.
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.
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.
If space projects can't be done faster without pushing kids into the orphan crushing machine, then it shouldn't be done faster.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
It's well known within the industry that SpaceX forces their employees to work excessive hours and in unsafe conditions. This is not a hit piece, and it's weird for you say that at all.
Pretty much all of Elon Musks companies have the same issue with overworked, underpaid employees.
The spacex fanbois don’t take to anti-elmo sentiments well.
SAD!
I'd say "forces" is a bit strong wording. Most people at SpaceX genuinely love the mission and will work longer hours because it's almost a passion.
We're pretty well-compensated too.
You work longer hours until you're burned out. I've done it before. I also work for NASA and rarely work overtime, and the missions I support are doing just fine. It's not about being passionate, although I used to think the same thing. I would have done anything to further our missions in space. But guess what, you're being taken advantage of, whether you realize it or not.
Totally valid, SpaceX doesn't do a great job of trying to manage burnout. On the other hand, I personally work 40-50 hours a week to avoid burnout and have suffered no ill effects from doing so.
You don't HAVE to work long hours here.
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?
He's an Elon fanboi, in their world any amount of human suffering is fine as long as the profits keep coming in.
He’s an Elon fanboi
I love the rockets, but have been very disappointed with his recent antics.
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?
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 ;)
Your account smells suspiciously of bootlicking.
I was about to check their history but just looking at the name is a dead giveaway.
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.
Comparatively, the industry average remains significantly lower at 0.8 injuries per 100 workers
I wonder if this number contains only work injuries, or also other work related accidents such as murdered whistleblowers etc?
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.
Ajajaja number go down after hard part, is like video game ajajaja I can afford you some missing fingers ajajaja
How many injuries per Elon boot licks is that?
About 12 I think
I think you may have your numerator and denominator mixed up, have you been on Twitter lately?
Well it’s 12 per lick and there’s a lot of licking going on. Twitter is something birds do when relaxed.
How about injuries per billion dollar CEO worth? Or injuries per roadster in orbit (Spoiler alert: SpaceX is really bad in this category)?
Lol the injuries are not due to rocket launches, they are due to manufacturing. So your metric has absolutely no meaning whatsoever.
It seems like the metrics are for their whole operations, as the article highlights booster recoveries with most injuries.
That said, the tons to orbit are meaningless when we're talking about injuries per capita
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?
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.
I'm surprised you can respond to anything here while you so frantically slurp up Elon's cock. That's impressive coordination.
This idiot thinks space junk is more important than human lives.