Jump to content

Orbital Sciences Cygnus launch scrubbed because of a boat

SpaceXray

By SpaceXray
in Science & Spaceflight

 Share

Recommended Posts

Streetwind

Streetwind

Posted
Posted
They should've launched anyway, I mean who cares if there is a 10% chance the debris will fall straight on that boat.

Remember, this is America, where you can sue for millions in damages if you spill hot coffee over yourself because the cup wasn't labeled "contents hot".

Nobody responsible wants the mess that you get when you knowingly drop a rocket stage on a civilian. Whether or not it was the civilian's fault is completely irrelevant in court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
magnemoe

magnemoe

Posted
Posted
Remember, this is America, where you can sue for millions in damages if you spill hot coffee over yourself because the cup wasn't labeled "contents hot".

Nobody responsible wants the mess that you get when you knowingly drop a rocket stage on a civilian. Whether or not it was the civilian's fault is completely irrelevant in court.

On the other hand if the area was patrolled well enough so he could not get in by accident they can bill him with the cost of delaying the launch :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kryten

Kryten

Posted
Posted
Remember, this is America, where you can sue for millions in damages if you spill hot coffee over yourself because the cup wasn't labeled "contents hot".

I don't see how American lawsuit culture matters in this case, given that that would be at least manslaughter and very possibly murder. Not a matter for civil courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kulebron

Kulebron

Posted
Posted

I think Streetwind meant liability avoidance, or simply "cover your ass" culture. You cancel a launch, to not get sued for _launching when there was a theoretical chance_ of hitting that civilian. I'm not sure where the reasonable margin is here: pushing forward at any cost eventually leads to disasters.

I totally understand the annoyance with this liability avoidance. We can buy a crappy plastic child playground with terrible lumisincent colors, because it's certified, and can't make one of wood on our own, because certification is hard as and costs like a space launch. Not that you can't build and install it, you can, but if a child scratches his knees to blood on your playground, it's your fault, and on the crappy colored one it's his own fault, all because of a certificate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dkmdlb

Dkmdlb

Posted
Posted
Remember, this is America, where you can sue for millions in damages if you spill hot coffee over yourself because the cup wasn't labeled "contents hot".

I know you are probably just using this as a euphemism, but just to be sure, and for anyone else who cares, a lot of people have a pretty serious misunderstanding about the famous McDonalds hot coffee case. Consider this:

Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenger seat of her grandson's car when she was severely burned by McDonalds' coffee in February 1992. Liebeck, 79 at the time, ordered coffee that was served in a styrofoam cup at the drivethrough window of a local McDonalds.

After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.) Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap.

The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused.

During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard.

Source

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Streetwind

Streetwind

Posted
Posted
I think Streetwind meant liability avoidance, or simply "cover your ass" culture. You cancel a launch, to not get sued for _launching when there was a theoretical chance_ of hitting that civilian. I'm not sure where the reasonable margin is here: pushing forward at any cost eventually leads to disasters.

Thank you for putting it much better than I was able to :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Umlüx

Umlüx

Posted
Posted

and why is it mcdonalds fault if people are clumsy? why didn't she sue the sweatpants manufacturer too because they are not hot-coffee proof? :P

a fragile cup full of hot beverage between her legs.. years ago (MANY years it seems) mankind had something called common sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kryten

Kryten

Posted
Posted
and why is it mcdonalds fault if people are clumsy? why didn't she sue the sweatpants manufacturer too because they are not hot-coffee proof? :P

a fragile cup full of hot beverage between her legs.. years ago (MANY years it seems) mankind had something called common sense.

It was hot enough it'd severely burn anybody that tried to actually drink it, and indeed that's what happened to a lot of people with similar claims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Umlüx

Umlüx

Posted
Posted
It was hot enough it'd severely burn anybody that tried to actually drink it, and indeed that's what happened to a lot of people with similar claims.

as i said.. common sense.. i make fresh brewed coffee every morning and i am not dumb enough to just simply pour the whole thing into my mouth.

those are the same people, hurting their tonge with a fork and sueing the restaurant..

but thats very off topic now. i am sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...