Elon Musk says rocket did not explode but instead experienced a 'fast fire' ( LOL )

CNBC ^ | 9/2/2016 | Christine Wang

[LaybackLenny]

[Enchante]

OOh, only a fast fire, what a relief, and here I was afraid there had been a slow explosion!

[Moonman62]

https://www.tesla.com/de_AT/blog/tesla-repays-department-energy-loan-nine-years-early

[roadcat]

Insurance losses exceeded premiums in 2015. Gonna be another year of losses for insurers. Link at the article:

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/01/when-a-rocket-blows-up-space-insurers-pay-for-it.html

[EQAndyBuzz]

Hold muh JP4 and watch this.

[discostu]

Non LOL about it. Those are actually two vastly different things, and when it comes to fixing the problem that difference matters.

[CodeToad]

The rocket is a goner. Splitting hairs as to why is retarded.

[TXnMA]

"I’m wondering if there’s some technical distinction between an explosion and a fast fire that has an effect on insurance coverage."

~~~~

There certainly is.

Look up the definitions of

1. "deflagration" (firearm propellant)

   and

2. "detonation" (C4 explosion)

[Darksheare]

My point is that he's a tax parasite, not a capitalist. Capitalists risk their own and investor money, not use tax breaks, subsidies and other government largesse to fund things.

[Darksheare]

And skirted labor laws...

[Darksheare]

And received money for tech it didn't offer... That's real honest. Such an innovator!

[Bob]

I know that the two are different. My question is with regard to any insurance reimbursement difference based on the distinction between them.

[Carriage Hill]

Just a “minor thermal event”.

[TXnMA]

I would expect that any knowledgable insurance co. would base premiums (reflective of risk level) on the materials involved in a manufacturing business.

Materials capable of detonation are a risk for far greater and farther-reaching damage than are materials that deflagrate. Those factors are generally well known (MSDSs, for example).

Reimbursement rates would be predicated on the above and should be part of the policy (contract). As long as the manufacturer introduced no new (detonatable) materials, I would expect remuneration to track with the policy.

~~~~~~~

CAVEAT: I'm not an insurance guru -- merely a physical chemist... '-)

[Moonman62]

Sorry to hurt your feelings, but you were wrong when you said he didn’t put his own money at risk. There is also a tremendous amount of private capital in his companies. He’s on the same playing field as other companies when it comes to working with what the government offers. He’d probably get sued by investors (you know, capitalists) for not holding up his duties as a corporate officer if he didn’t use them.

[stremba]

That’s just the engine heater doing its thing. Batteries lose power in subzero temperatures so you need an engine heater.

[Louis Foxwell]

The pics show the fast burn started at the top and worked its way down. Since it was a booster that fact alone would not be amiss. A governor on the fuel pump would seem to be in order.

[Darksheare]

I’m not the one whose feelings are hurt.
I do not worship men who are tax parasites.

[Moonman62]

You obviously don’t like Musk and have an emotional investment in criticizing him, but at least be accurate when you do.

[Darksheare]

No, the people who are emotionally invested in the tax parasite are those who leap zombie like to his defense whenever he is rightfully criticized as being a tax parasite.
I’d be impressed with him if he used his own money with investor backing instead of feeding at the government trough.
Spin it all you want, he violated labor laws, receives tax breaks and taxpayer money thus putting the risk onto us in such a way that possible failure is funded by us and he can walk away clean.

And mind numbed zombies praise him for this.