On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2016-11-23, at 10:33, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: > >> When I get flak about the churn of staying current with maintenance, I climb >> my soapbox. Look, I say, I've calculated that on balance it's cheaper to >> drive your car as long as it runs rather than take in for periodic >> maintenance, which is both time consuming and out-of-pocket costly. Most >> likely it will fail somewhere down the road ;-) but getting it fixed then >> will be cheaper and quicker overall. >> >> Well, I say, if you wouldn't think of managing your car that way, why would >> you think it makes sense for a computer system? >> > A fortiori, don't apply that reasoning to spacecraft. Perhaps not even to > airliners. > > -- gil
Alaska Airlines did. Cut lubrication schedule, cancelled replacement of worn out parts. Until https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Airlines_Flight_261 -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
