[ineedasername]

Given that it's a rocket, "nearly land" could mean it kept going in some way, towards space or simply not yet touched down.

So when I read the HN title and thought "what do they mean by nearly landed?" I then saw the article and realized "oh, it crashed".

I'm not sure where the balance should be... "Crash" has a negative connotation, but "nearly lands" is a pretty soft euphemism.

[ineedasername]

To add to my comment-- I think the CNN headline got it better without the softening euphemism by pointing out it was a success: "A SpaceX Mars rocket prototype just exploded. It was still a success"

[natch]

I don’t think it exploded. It broke up by hitting the ground (not by exploding) which caused fuel and oxygen to leak out, which then ignited in a large fireball. But maybe this is splitting hairs. It sure looked like an explosion.

[ineedasername]

oxygen to leak out, which then ignited in a large fireball.

That sounds a lot like a thermoberic bomb :)

[natch]

Landing safely was an unexpected outcome, so it’s remarkable (thus making it into the headline) that it came close to doing so. The right wording is highly context dependent. Here the “nearly landed” phrasing appropriately acknowledges the realistic expectations for the launch by those most in the know, the SpaceX team.

“Crash” would be totally appropriate in a different context with different expectations. But it would make less sense in this case.