Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Piffer Thread on Political Rantings and Ravings -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (4509)	11/19/2001 10:19:48 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14610

>>well, the patch worked fine on this Airbus. It was found to be intact.<< Actually no...didn't one of the previous articles (LA Times) say something about the "repair" could be stronger than the original configuration. I'm assuming this could be a danger in that the 'stronger' repair could create an imbalance in the structure that would ultimately weaken it. <edit> here it is.. latimes.com <snip> Peter Goelz, former managing director of the NTSB, said it's possible that the 1988 repair could have shifted unusual loads onto some of the other attachments and fittings. "Sometimes if you repair something, you can make it too strong," Goelz said. "And that can have unintended consequences