Larry Wall & Cults

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

Norton Trikol alto buildt the Titan solid rocket booster along
simular lines. I has a resonably good record.
A extra gasket was added since it was supposed to be used
for human flight. Fron a engeneering stanpoint I can't see how you
are supposed to mold solid rocket fuel fot the booster in one piece.
But then I am not a rocket scientist.
Anyhow space flight is a riscy endevor. If it wasn't the booster then it
would have been something else. One in every 50 or so launces will fail.
Saying it was as good as murder is prepostrious.
The peaple who launced knew the riscs. Sitting attom of 10000 liters of
fuel undergoing a controlled explosion will probaly never be entirely safe.

the two spoof stories in the aftermath

1) one about sectioning the boats for columbus because they had to be
built in the mountains where the trees grew and then used tar to stick
the sections together for the trip across the atlantic. lots of ships
were lost at sea for all sorts of reasons ... but hopefully none
because the ship was built in sections and tar was used to stick them
together.

2) way back when, because a wagon slipped off the trail and down the
side of the mountain and people died ... congress decreed that there
would be no more travel across the appalachian trail ... hardly
consistent with the tens of thousands of traffic deaths each year.

.... however, i think your reply is intended possibly for somebody
else's post ... not mine.

 

[Gary Schenk]

I'm not a fan of Mr Hatch, but blaming him for the shuttle disaster(s)
is somewhat over the top. Why not blame President Bush? That's the
popular thing nowadays.

IIRC, the vice-president is in charge of the space program, so shouldn't
President Bush accept some blame?

 

[Charlie Gibbs]

The Challenger seven were just as good as murdered.

I prefer "sacrificed on the altar of political expediency."

Recommended reading: "What Do _You_ Care What Other People Think?"
by Richard P. Feynman (W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. ISBN 0-393-02659-0)

 

[Alan Balmer]

IIRC, the vice-president is in charge of the space program, so shouldn't
President Bush accept some blame?

The Vice President isn't "in charge" of the space program, except for
Al Gore, who probably invented it.

The shuttles were designed and built some considerable time before
Bush became President.

Good try, though, the DNC would be proud.

 

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

I don't really know what imagination has to do with the question. I
can imagine it being carved into 1277 pieces, but won't offer that
as a meaningful argument.

Here in Arizona, we recently had a transformer delivered. On a
800,000 pound, 280 foot long rig. By highway. No barges involved.

As for the reference to Hatch, that's exactly what the OP was
writing about.

I apologize for not having the time to read and research your
comments properly, so if it seems that I'm just picking on your
logic, or lack thereof, you are correct.

my uncle moved houses ... i helped on maybe a dozen or so ... needed
special permits ... and wide load escorts ... and carefully planned
routes ... frequently for relatively controlled distances.

if you choose your road routes carefully enuf ... you can miss a lot
of the problems that you would run into moving by train. we had one
route where i was on the peak of the house and had to grab wires over
the side .... lift the wires up to clear the peak and walk the wires
back as the house moved under.

 

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

if you choose your road routes carefully enuf ... you can miss a lot
of the problems that you would run into moving by train. we had one
route where i was on the peak of the house and had to grab wires over
the side .... lift the wires up to clear the peak and walk the wires
back as the house moved under.

oh ... and people have died doing that ...

 

[Larry Elmore]

The first disaster was due to (possibly inferior) gaskets and inferior
judgment on launch day. The second was falling foam, and inferior
realization of the gravity of the problem. I'm not clear on what
either had to do with Utah.

The gaskets wouldn't have been necessary if the SRBs had been built in a
single piece instead of having to be assembled from seven sections. The
problem was that one-piece SRBs are too big for land transport, and for
political reasons (i.e., buying support), the SRBs were to be built in
Utah by Morton-Thiokol. Ergo, multi-section SRBs with gaskets "required".

--Larry

 

[Larry Elmore]

the two spoof stories in the aftermath

1) one about sectioning the boats for columbus because they had to be
built in the mountains where the trees grew and then used tar to stick
the sections together for the trip across the atlantic. lots of ships
were lost at sea for all sorts of reasons ... but hopefully none
because the ship was built in sections and tar was used to stick them
together.

No, but some Liberty ships built in WWII, welded together from pre-fab
sections, literally broke in half when the welds failed (IIRC, in very
cold water like the Barents sea). The problem was fixed by welding large
reinforcing "patches" on either side of the weak point in the hull.

--Larry

 

[Rupert Pigott]

Larry Elmore wrote:

[SNIP]

The gaskets wouldn't have been necessary if the SRBs had been built in a
single piece instead of having to be assembled from seven sections. The
problem was that one-piece SRBs are too big for land transport, and for
political reasons (i.e., buying support), the SRBs were to be built in
Utah by Morton-Thiokol. Ergo, multi-section SRBs with gaskets "required".

I would hope that Morton Thiokol's experience at building a diverse
range of rockets might have been a factor in the decision too. I
suppose they might have systematically fired every rocket scientist
they had (wouldn't put it past a PHB) to save cost though.

Too many ifs & butts. IMO. Folks caved to political pressure, but
the blame doesn't just lie with the rank and file. The folks
applying the pressure from the top would have known full well what
they were doing. If they didn't they were unfit for the task, if
not negligent anyways.

Cheers,
Rupert

 

[Gary Schenk]

The Vice President isn't "in charge" of the space program, except for
Al Gore, who probably invented it.

Don't you dittoheads ever get your facts right?

http://www.jfklibrary.org/images/jfk-lbj01.jpg

http://www.americaslibrary.gov/cgi-bin/page.cgi/jb/modern/launch_1

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/163/1

The shuttles were designed and built some considerable time before
Bush became President.

True, although the first shuttle flight was in 1981, while Bush was vice-
president.

As the above references show, Bush was not head of the space council
as Reagan was not a fan. Bush was busy selling anthrax and missiles
to Iran and Iraq.

Good try, though, the DNC would be proud.

I doubt it.

 

[David Schwartz]

at the time of the 1st disaster ... the claim was that the utah bid
was the only solution that required manufactoring the boosters in
sections for transportion and the subsequent re-assembly in florida
with gaskets. the assertion was that none of the other solutions could
have had a failure because of gaskets ... because they didn't have
gaskets (having been manufactored as a single unit).

so the failure cause scenario went (compared to solutions that didn't
require gaskets and manufactoring in sections)

disaster because of inferior(?) gaskets
inferior(?) gaskets because of gaskets
gaskets because of transportion sectioning requirement
transportation sectioning requirement because the sections
were manufactored in utah

True, but totally irrelevent. Had they gone with any other design, they
could not have had a disaster due to any defect in the design they wouldn't
have chosen.

DS

 

[Brian {Hamilton Kelly}]

Are you arguing that the stability comes from the API, not from
the implementation ? If so, why has NT become more stable over
the years, since its API has not changed ?

I'd like to imagine that it's because there are fewer fuckwits using it;
BICBW....

 

[Brian {Hamilton Kelly}]

On Friday, in article
<[email protected]> (e-mail address removed)
wrote:

[Horses' arses and 4'8.5" gauge for railways and previously carts]

There was a city getting restored in Turkey that JMF and I visited;
I cannot remember its name other than it's in the New Testament
written by Paul. It was one of most fascinating places I'd ever
been other than aquariums and zoos. There are ruts in the
stone-block pavements caused by running carts to/from harbor/city.
We were told that these ruts were worn down by usage. I always
wanted to get a big stone and spend 5 min/day rubbing it to see
if the claim was true.

I one visits Paleaopaphos, the ancient capital of [the west of] Cyprus,
one can see such runnels in the stones. Moreover, the gate into the city
has two 90-deg bends in it, to prevent a frontal assault (certain
American Consulates could have learnt from that) and there are "turning
stones" on the corners of this entrance.

Such stones ensure that a wagon gets tilted up to one side if the wheel's
tyre is too close to the walls, thereby ensuring that the wheel's hub
does not strike and erode the stonework of the walls.

This ancient city wall is totally unremarked, in a field about 2km from
the modern-day village of Kouklia, which has evolved around the ancient
Sanctuary of Aphrodite. There one can still see the remnants of the
siege-mound erected by Darius (or was it Xerxes?) in ca.452 BC. One can
also see the tunnels ("mines") dug by the defenders of Paphos underneath
that siege-mound, and the caverns created when the wood that had been
placed beneath was burnt, leading to the collapse of the mound and
(eventually) the defeat of the Persians.

Even some two-and-a-half-centuries later, one can still see that the
earth was burnt by that firing, which amazes me.

 

[Larry Elmore]

Larry Elmore wrote:

[SNIP]

The gaskets wouldn't have been necessary if the SRBs had been built in
a single piece instead of having to be assembled from seven sections.
The problem was that one-piece SRBs are too big for land transport,
and for political reasons (i.e., buying support), the SRBs were to be
built in Utah by Morton-Thiokol. Ergo, multi-section SRBs with gaskets
"required".

Erk, _four_ sections, not seven. Not sure where that came from.

I would hope that Morton Thiokol's experience at building a diverse
range of rockets might have been a factor in the decision too. I
suppose they might have systematically fired every rocket scientist
they had (wouldn't put it past a PHB) to save cost though.

http://www.ae.utexas.edu/~lehmanj/ethics/srb.htm

"Competition for the SRB Contract"

"Four companies bid for the contract to design and manufacture the solid
rocket boosters (SRBs). Aerojet Solid bid the program at $655 million,
United Technologies at $710 million, Morton Thiokol at $710 million, and
Lockheed at $714 million. All the bids were relatively similar in both
price and technology. Based on cost, the NASA advisory panel recommended
that the contract be awarded to Aerojet; they believed that money could
be saved without sacrificing technical quality by choosing the lowest
bid. NASA administrator Dr. James Fletcher overruled this recommendation
and awarded the contract to Morton Thiokol in Brigham City, Utah.
Aerojet appealed the decision and after many allegations and
counter-allegations, the GAO (General Accounting Office) was instructed
by Congress to investigate the matter. The GAO found that the contract
award procedure was not improper. NASA regulations clearly stated that
the decision was to be made by the chief administrator, not the advisory
panel. However, the GAO could find no reason for selecting Morton
Thiokol over Aerojet and recommended that NASA reconsider the decision [1]."

"Political Compromises in the Contract"

"The nature of the political connections between the Space Program and
prominent figures of the state of Utah has long been debated. Utah
Senators Jake Garn and Frank Moss have been active supporters of the
Space Program, particularly when it benefits Utah-based industries.
There is nothing wrong with this; Representatives of Congress are
expected to be interested in furthering the activities of their
constituents. The real cloud of suspicion hung over former Morton
Thiokol employees who worked for NASA at the time of the contract award,
and the head of NASA itself, Dr. James Fletcher [4]."

"Dr. Fletcher served as the President of the University of Utah from
1964 through 1971. His connections with the state and its industries
were numerous and far reaching, but he denied that these connections had
any influence on his decision to award the SRB contract to Morton
Thiokol. However, many people who observed the contract award process
remained unconvinced. Fletcher's inability to provide solid reasons for
the selection of Morton Thiokol over Aerojet did nothing to ease the
controversy surrounding the decision; his reasons were vague and
referred to minor points in the advisory committee's study. NASA's
refusal to discuss whether former Morton Thiokol employees had been part
of the advisory committee simply fueled speculation of wrong-doing.
Whether Morton Thiokol used political influence to secure the SRB
contract has never been determined, but lack of clear answers caused
many to conclude that the contract may have been awarded improperly[1]."

Too many ifs & butts. IMO. Folks caved to political pressure, but
the blame doesn't just lie with the rank and file. The folks
applying the pressure from the top would have known full well what
they were doing. If they didn't they were unfit for the task, if
not negligent anyways.

Oh, it appears to me the problem was almost entirely with the PHBs both
at NASA and at Morton-Thiokol. Engineers at Morton-Thiokol knew there
was a problem long before the accident, as did people at NASA.

--Larry

 

[Larry Elmore]

Don't you dittoheads ever get your facts right?

http://www.jfklibrary.org/images/jfk-lbj01.jpg

http://www.americaslibrary.gov/cgi-bin/page.cgi/jb/modern/launch_1

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/163/1




True, although the first shuttle flight was in 1981, while Bush was vice-
president.

As the above references show, Bush was not head of the space council
as Reagan was not a fan. Bush was busy selling anthrax and missiles
to Iran and Iraq.




I doubt it.

Well, I would hope not. You're even contradicting yourself in the same
post, while at the same time admitting that your references don't
support you. Must've skipped those classes in logic, huh?

--Larry

 

[CBFalconer]

.... snip ...

I'm not a fan of Mr Hatch, but blaming him for the shuttle
disaster(s) is somewhat over the top. Why not blame President
Bush? That's the popular thing nowadays.

Alright, if you insist. But is it really necessary? We can find
adequate charges without reaching very hard.

 

[Steve O'Hara-Smith]

There are many streets and paths in the UK still in everyday use where this
is the case!

There are stone stairs in my old school and in many college buildings
that have deep curves worn into them by feet over a century or three.

 

[Rupert Pigott]

Rupert Pigott wrote:
[SNIP]

http://www.ae.utexas.edu/~lehmanj/ethics/srb.htm

"Competition for the SRB Contract"

"Four companies bid for the contract to design and manufacture the solid
rocket boosters (SRBs). Aerojet Solid bid the program at $655 million,
United Technologies at $710 million, Morton Thiokol at $710 million, and
Lockheed at $714 million. All the bids were relatively similar in both
price and technology. Based on cost, the NASA advisory panel recommended
that the contract be awarded to Aerojet; they believed that money could
be saved without sacrificing technical quality by choosing the lowest
bid. NASA administrator Dr. James Fletcher overruled this recommendation

[SNIP]

Even if hypothetically superior Aerojet boosters were used I would
bet a life's salary that mismanagement would nail them in the end...

Consider this : If the tables were turned and an Aerojet booster
exploded in the sky I'll bet the armchair QBs would be asking why
were Aerojet chosen over Morton-Thiokol who had more experience of
building large solid-fuel rockets.


Cheers,
Rupert

 

[Stan Barr]

No, but some Liberty ships built in WWII, welded together from pre-fab
sections, literally broke in half when the welds failed (IIRC, in very
cold water like the Barents sea).

Yep, the welding changed the structure of the steel and an unfortunately
placed hatch coaming created a high stress point. The cold made the
weld brittle and it cracked.

The problem was fixed by welding large
reinforcing "patches" on either side of the weak point in the hull.

That was a temporary solution, they later designed a re-inforced hatch
setup IIRC.

The ship was basically an 1880s British design not originally intended
to be welded up out of pre-fabricated bits

--
Cheers,
Stan Barr stanb .at. dial .dot. pipex .dot. com
(Remove any digits from the addresses when mailing me.)

The future was never like this!

 

[jmfbahciv]

oh ... and people have died doing that ...

That was my next question . How did you manage?

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.