Randall Clague wrote:
> <rant>
>
> To rephrase: a safety inspection is not a formality designed to assure
> that everything is shipshape. A safety inspection, properly
> performed, is a technical procedure performed by a hostile SOB who is
> looking for an excuse to ground you. If he fails, you get to fly, and
> you're safe. If he succeeds, you don't get to fly, and you're still
> safe.
>
> </rant>
Not a rant, a very excellent description of how SI's should be carried
out and by whom (you, for example). While I work in software QA and
it's my job to say "this software isn't ready to ship" I'm not sure I
could/would be so critical about a spaceship I wanted to fly/ride.
I'd like to think I would, but I'm not sure. And you've always been
very good at pointing out things I've overlooked (and I greatly
appreciate that skill - even when delivered with Marine tact). My
guess is the first flights will have several pairs of extremely
critical eyes on everything.
It's interesting, for example, how much more interested in safety John
C became when his wife announced she would be the first pilot. Would
you let your loved one play on it - alone - seems like a good
yardstick for "is it ready yet?" inspections.
Michael
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Wallis KF6SPF (408) 396-9037 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
ERPS-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
