|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
"Scott Hedrick" wrote:
"Derek Lyons" wrote in message ... Which is weird because my yahoo box has dropped to manageable levels.... Add a spamtrap. They want money for that Sorry, that should have read 'add a spamtrap to your adress as published on usenet'. D. -- The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found at the following URLs: Text-Only Version: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html Enhanced HTML Version: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html Corrections, comments, and additions should be e-mailed to , as well as posted to sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for discussion. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Pat Flannery wrote:
Derek Lyons wrote: That's not really a good example, as the strainers were not part of the design. They were added by the builder on his own hook. I didn't know that part of the story... It's not often told... as exceeding specs is usually regarded as a Good Thing, but in this instance it wasn't. that design change sounds like something that Rickover would go completely ballistic over... It's unclear how influential he was in designing the 593's. Sources are really unclear how extensive his influence was. At any rate, Rickover worked hard to distance himself from the accident. (And quietly changed the reactor operating procedures anyhow.) what I always thought was ironic was that a device that is supposed to improve the sub's safety is at least partially responsible for sinking it. As Henry says, complexity in pursuit of safety is no virtue. There is another case something like this I can think of off the top of my head...Lockheed didn't realize that the canopy of the U-2 actually got stronger as the height increased and the air temperature dropped. This led to the aircraft's ejection seat starting up its rails, striking the canopy, and bouncing right back down into the cockpit: http://www.ejectionsite.com/u2seat.htm And folks wonder why the military tests the **** out of everything. D. -- The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found at the following URLs: Text-Only Version: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html Enhanced HTML Version: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html Corrections, comments, and additions should be e-mailed to , as well as posted to sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for discussion. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
"Derek Lyons" wrote in message ... As Henry says, complexity in pursuit of safety is no virtue. This was my original point in another thread when I brought up building codes. Florida went from the Southern Standard Building Code, a fat trade paperback, to its current mess, five 3 ring binders, the smallest of which is 2". I don't feel any safer- less so, in fact, because now there are far more ways to screw up. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
codes. Florida went from the Southern Standard Building Code, a fat trade paperback, to its current mess, five 3 ring binders, the smallest of which is 2". I don't feel any safer- less so, Well the rules were designed to help prevent home damage in severe weather. Ever see a entire town flattened but some houses survive? sometimes just small differences like tying the roof to the studs were what made the difference. the building codes are a pain but there to prevent troubles later. not only that but houses that are moree resistant to damage can help keep insurance costs down for everyone. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
"Hallerb" wrote in message ... Well the rules were designed to help prevent home damage in severe weather. Facts not in evidence. *Read them* and see. Furthermore, there is no evidence whatsoever that the existing rules were a problem What *was* a problem was poor workmanship, and more rules won't fix that. Ever see a entire town flattened but some houses survive? Several times. sometimes just small differences like tying the roof to the studs were what made the difference. That was already in the existing code- but it *doesn't* mean it was done. Having a rule does not mean it will be followed. After all, aren't their rules against cheating? But it's still done. the building codes are a pain but there to prevent troubles later. Some of them are. Some of them are the result of lobbying by maufacturers or homeowner's associations. that but houses that are moree resistant to damage can help keep insurance costs down for everyone. Which has more to do with *materials and workmanship* than with rules, although the current rulebooks are large enough that they could increase safety by tossing them on the roof to hold it down. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" writes:
Years ago a college buddy showed me a drawing he made while he was tripping on acid. That picture alone convinced me to never do acid. Funny, recently I ran into this (it happened in an US government setting, though): http://www.cowboybooks.com.au/html/acidtrip1.html Jochem -- "A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Jochem Huhmann wrote: Funny, recently I ran into this (it happened in an US government setting, though): http://www.cowboybooks.com.au/html/acidtrip1.html Those notes on the status of the artist during the trip are a riot to read; but I actually rather liked the the three pictures that proceeded the last one. But then the trip went horribly bad, and the unshown last drawing should have been a warning to us all: http://kenwestphal.com/MEDIA/caricature/Nixon.jpg Pat |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
"Jochem Huhmann" wrote ...
"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" writes: Years ago a college buddy showed me a drawing he made while he was tripping on acid. That picture alone convinced me to never do acid. Funny, recently I ran into this (it happened in an US government setting, though): http://www.cowboybooks.com.au/html/acidtrip1.html I think number 6 would sell. http://www.cowboybooks.com.au/html/acidtrip6.html |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Blay wrote: I think number 6 would sell. http://www.cowboybooks.com.au/html/acidtrip6.html 7 ain't bad either: http://www.cowboybooks.com.au/html/acidtrip7.html .... although it reminds me of George Washington kissing Lady Liberty for some reason. Or maybe it's bats ****ing.... Pat |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Just look at some Hieronymus Bosch and Salvador Dali paintings- that's about what they look like. Years ago a college buddy showed me a drawing he made while he was tripping on acid. That picture alone convinced me to never do acid. I think this is similar. On the other hand, Chagall used to do 'shrooms and then paint black velvet paintings of Isaac Stern and Jascha Heifetz. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mars Exploration Rovers Update - January 14, 2005 | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | January 14th 05 10:18 PM |
Spirit Flexes Its Arm To Use Microscope On Mars' Soil | Ron | Astronomy Misc | 16 | February 2nd 04 06:52 AM |
UFO Activities from Biblical Times (Long Text) | Kazmer Ujvarosy | UK Astronomy | 3 | December 25th 03 11:41 PM |
UFO Activities from Biblical Times (LONG TEXT) | Kazmer Ujvarosy | SETI | 2 | December 25th 03 08:33 PM |
UFO Activities from Biblical Times | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Astronomy Misc | 0 | December 25th 03 06:21 AM |