alt text:

We’re right under the flight path for the scheduled orbital launch, but don’t worry–it’s too cold out for the rockets to operate safely, so I’m sure they’ll postpone.

34 points
*

Explanation: https://explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2950:_Situation

tl;dr references

These are all infamous disasters now used as case studies for how NOT to do things

  • Ocean liner: Titanic
  • Airship: Hindenburg
  • Reactor: Chernobyl
  • Bridge: Tacoma Narrows
  • Rocket (alt text): Challenger

More details at the link

permalink
report
reply
23 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

D’oh! I always get those two mixed up… Too many "Space Shuttle C_____ Disaster"s…

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

There should have been a submarine that is also Titanic, somewhere underneath

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That won’t be till decades later

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The other events are already decades apart, aren’t they?

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*

Surprisingly, if you google “hydrogen airship revival”, you will find that there are many companies trying to build airships.

Since the non-flammable helium has less lifting capacity and is non-renewable and expensive, they are trying to use hydrogen safely. Good luck…

permalink
report
reply
18 points

Armchair pseudo-scientific thinking like this was why Mythbusters became so popular. They even devoted at least one episode to this very myth. Spoiler, hydrogen wasn’t what made that particular lead ballon unsafe.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I didn’t particularly like that episode because they didn’t do another control test and just called it a day

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

The problem wasn’t hydrogen, it was the thermite the hull was made out of. Helium blimps blew up the same way soon after

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I think you accidentally put helium twice in your second paragraph. Just wanted to let you know in case you want to fix it for readability.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Fixed. Appreciated.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You bet :)

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

I don’t think airship travel is viable due to inability to properly steer them outside of very specific conditions, regardless of the filling. I would love to be proven wrong if it were somehow economic for shipping, but I have no high expectations.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Happy cake day 🍰

permalink
report
reply
-6 points

Unpopular Counter-point: a large number of engineers are also morons.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

it’s normally upper managers sand baging. Everytime we have a new product they don’t involve anyone later stages in pipeline and keep the engineering team in a sealed space lab IN Mars. Then release the product half baked because the eng team quit or got dissolved to work on other more important projects. Then demand the sustainability team to develop it. So now it’s in limbo for 2 years but noo we must go to market now. Now it’s all trash but marketing cleans it’s image. Never fails to happen. Worst is new management come and say new product v2 but we are doing it all from scratch and ignore previous team mistakes. Like why?

permalink
report
parent
reply

xkcd

!xkcd@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for a webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language.

Community stats

  • 1.5K

    Monthly active users

  • 244

    Posts

  • 5.6K

    Comments

Community moderators