“Elon’s concept that SpaceX is on this mission to go to Mars as fast as possible and save humanity permeates every part of the company. The company justifies casting aside anything that could stand in the way of accomplishing that goal, including worker safety.”

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/spacex-musk-safety/

 

SpaceX has 12,000 employees 2000 at Starbase I recall. With all manner of contractors and delivery companies arriving and departing daily. Lots of cranes and novel hardware. Any huge construction undertaking like this would have associated injuries. I don't see evidence that the rate of injuries is greater than any other huge undertaking like this. There were numerous deaths and injuries' during the Apollo program I recall. A terrible thing of course, but not unusual for a mammoth technological endeavor that's not been done before. 96 deaths' and a multitude of injures building the Hoover dam. Death and injuries building the Channel Tunnel. Construction is a dangerous business. 

Think you linked the wrong article. I found the one you intended to link to. The author has written anti Musk articles before. Neuralink was one of her other efforts.

They are claiming worker safety has been disregarded. To be honest it sounds like a hit piece, they even brought up in the article how he had a novelty flame thrower. 🙄 That's old news, the novelty flame thrower was ages ago and as far as I know nothing to do with worker safety.

If it's objectively true, and safety standards are lower than they should be, then clearly that's wrong but I don't trust those that write these articles to be honest. If you want hits on your website, your articles to be read, then anti-musk stuff is the way to do it.  

 

 

Edited November 10, 20232 yr by martin-w

I linked to the Reuters article by their reporter, Marisa Taylor. Which article do you think I intended to link to? 

Injury rates shown are per 100 workers, so size shouldn't be a factor, and are compared to space industry standards.

“SpaceX facilities failed to submit injury data annually, as required by regulators, for most years since 2016. When they did report, three major sites’ injury rates far exceeded industry averages.”

“The 2022 injury rate at the company’s manufacturing-and-launch facility near Brownsville, Texas, was 4.8 injuries or illnesses per 100 workers – six times higher than the space-industry average of 0.8. Its rocket-testing facility in McGregor, Texas, where LeBlanc died, had a rate of 2.7, more than three times the average. The rate at its Hawthorne, California, manufacturing facility was more than double the average at 1.8 injuries per 100 workers. The company’s facility in Redmond, Washington, had a rate of 0.8, the same as the industry average.”

They are probably tripping over bar stools and tables after celebrating yet another successful launch.

1 hour ago, dmwalker said:

I linked to the Reuters article by their reporter, Marisa Taylor. Which article do you think I intended to link to?

 

That's weird, the link led me to a different article. It works now though. 

 

1 hour ago, dmwalker said:

Injury rates shown are per 100 workers, so size shouldn't be a factor, and are compared to space industry standards.

 

Oh right. I guess it depends on the individual project though. Injury rate may be higher than industry standard due to the nature of what they are doing at Starbase. I would image that development of an entirely new technology and massive construction in one confined area, and the biggest rocket ever built is somewhat more hazardous than normal space industry endeavors. 

If they are allowing standards to drop lower than required then clearly that's very dodgy. 

One thing is clear, and that's that nobody is "rushing to Mars"  Clearly they know nothing about what's going on and its a silly assumption. The Moon is the objective, for NASA, for NASA's timeframe. 

I can't see any other articles claiming this, has it been verified by other sources? 

Edited November 10, 20232 yr by martin-w

22 minutes ago, martin-w said:

I can't see any other articles claiming this, has it been verified by other sources? 

They are all referring back to the Reuters article. I did find this quote from a Guardian article from 2016:

"SpaceX founder Elon Musk has outlined his highly ambitious vision for manned missions to Mars, which he said could begin as soon as 2022 – three years sooner than his previous estimates."

I suppose some could interpret this as rushing.

Well no, clearly 2022 is one of Elons 7 year old dodgy estimates.

If there's any rushing going on its to meet NASA's requirement for Lunar Starship. I mean, the NASA timeline is for a crazy close 2025 landing. 🤔

Edited November 10, 20232 yr by martin-w