JF Mezei wrote on Tue, 30 Oct 2018
16:22:01 -0400:

On 2018-10-28 22:21, Fred J. McCall wrote:

How do you know that a certain amount of bending wasn't considered
tolerable?


How do you know that it was?


I don't pretend to know.


Of course you do.


My point is that you reach hard conclusions
based on superficial media reports and refuse to consider that there are
many ways for that pin to be bent and nany ways where the rocket was
cleared for launch. You don't know if this was a frequent problem or
whether this was the first time this happened ever. You don't know
whether there was a documented fix or whether the crews thought of it
themselves.


Of course it means that. Look at their history.


Just because they quickly decide this was a one-off and proceed with
more launches does not mean that they don't go deeper to find out how
this happened. Just because the results don't get pubhlished by some
commission 3 years later in a hige bible doesn't mean that they don't
get to the bottom of it.


Of course it means that.


And just because top management are not forced to implement permanent
fixes doesn't mean that they don't know of the problem.


Of course it means they don't know. "Don't launch bent rockets".


My answer is much more likely than yours

Unless you are infolved in the investigation, you are not qualified to
provide an answer and declare any other to be invalid. They are all
speculative.


You're an idiot. Why didn't the guy who drilled the hole in the Soyuz
spacecraft report it?


I was merely ponting out that your answer is not the only possible one
and that the folks involved inside the company would likely be looking
at many possibilities as they go down the fault tree in terms of work
that was done, what was checked, waht was approved for flight.


You seem to think that the Russians operate like Americans. They
don't.


It could very well be that your answer ends up being the correct one.
But at this stage it can't be declared "correct".





given the culture of the organization,

You speculate on the culture of the organisation.


Speculate? No. I observe the historical facts. You should try that
some time.


The question isn't
whether there is a culture problem, the question is to find out why, in
this case, the existing culture cleared the rocket for launch. And it
isn't as simple as you might think , and I provided the example of what
if bent pins were documented as acceptable with a documented fix of
lubricant?


And I proved the example of monkeys flying out your butt.


all the bootless speculation you care to.

Pointing out other possibilities. You reach hard conclusions without
having access to actual evidence.


Poppycock.


God, I hope you never wind up in a safety critical job!

Safety clritical job needs to evaluate as many failure modes as
possible, not just focus on one you think is the answer.


You're willing to fly 'bent' rockets. I am not.


--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to
live in the real world."
-- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden