SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: maceng2 who wrote (19963)2/1/2008 9:54:18 AM
From: HPilot  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 36918
 
The facts that the facts and risks are known to someone and higher ups chose not to believe him, does not mean it's not an accident. Its like when a racer is about to finish a race and he hears the pit crew tell him there is a problem with his tire, if he has an accident from a blow out because he decided to chance the tire lasting the race, his knowledge does not make it something other than an accident.



To: maceng2 who wrote (19963)2/1/2008 1:26:06 PM
From: Thomas A Watson  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 36918
 
LOL, do you really wish to stand by that analysis? If it were not so cold that day, if the blowby had been at a different point and caused no structural failure. The factors are very much like the second accident where tiles finally did fatal damage for the re-entry phase.

"All the facts and risks were known" is always a stupid statement after the fact.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News