Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Elsewhere who wrote (129440)	8/3/2005 9:56:35 AM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) of 793939

Well do you believe what talking heads in the German press speculate as they give zero technical details on suitability. "The heat protection remains the weak point." Actually the shedding of foam remains the weak point and I see nothing in the technical info presented that shows any benefit for this new material. And once again I see nothing to suggest this new material meets the design requirement for the thermo-mechanical requirements of the shuttle. It seems to me a retrofit of a new material would cost billions per shuttle. So the statement in the article about saving millions seems quite foolish. It would cost billions and would not solve the problems of foam impacts. I would expect even German engineers to understand the expensive complexity and thus have no opinions to express on the politics of bashing NASA. The talking heads of Germany, well they will seek to inform their brothers naive. I wonder if the German engineers had little to say because all the really first string German engineers work for NASA. But I doubt the members of the German press have a clue about any of the engineers who work for anyone.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next