Charleston wrote
in message news:2ll8b.52996$cj1.17976@fed1read06...
"John Maxson" wrote:

I take it that your issue is that both the right hand (JSC's
Kranz, et al) and the left hand (MSFC's Lee, et al) were
in a position to offer the PC a more plausible explanation
for some of the early differences in Pc.

It's beginning to look this was not your issue. Apparently
you were only prepared to argue that Lee "lied to the PC,"
based on his misuse of statistics in arriving at 51-L R-SRB
performance. It looks like you were counting on the MOD's
document to reinforce you on this.

I believe you have figured out the statistical chicanery on the
SRB thrust data pulled off by NASA.

Originally you were going to show us that Lee misused statistics
to lie to the PC. I want to get you and my opposition here to
examine and judge how NASA Headquarters could allow two
of its Centers to have *different* "hot" SRBs, each identified
by its own set of telemetry and real-time or expert witnesses.

Until you (and the three you loaned my book to) get me your
answer to this Lee/Kranz inconsistency, I'm taking it that you've
thrown in the towel. One 51-L SRB was hotter (either during
the first twenty seconds, or from then through the throttle
bucket). Which one was "hot" (and during which period)?

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)