Good article,

Redesign the requirements so that the test results give the answer they
want? One team's goal post is at the 50 yard line, the other team's goal
post is across the street from the stadium.

Smacks of the Columbia Boeing Study, write the conclusions first, it
doesn't matter what the data says, most people only read the conclusion
anyway. At least they're making the data look right now.

Exactly what sigma level should be used to indicate safe return for a
study that indicates that the debris fully penetrated the RCC panel? At
least it seems they figured out that there isn't one.

They've spent the money, spent the time, made some changes, a few
weeks or months squirming around some paper work isn't going to change
anything. If there aren't any real issues, like this thing is going to
break if you launch, stop squirming around and launch the thing, it's
embarrassing US enough already, no need to drag it out.

I agree with Dr. Griffin comments in the article.

--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @