Jump to content
|Topic||Stats||Last action by|
|Ubuntu 14.10 'Utopic Unicorn' released||
|11 yo Boy (Legally) Hunts and Kills Rare Deer, His Prize? A Facebook Flame War.||
|Neowin's Minecraft Server||
|how to Limit LAN access to DMZ on asa 9.1||
|Error: "Attackers might be trying to steal your information from 192.168.1.106"||
Posted 10 July 2013 - 12:50
Posted 10 July 2013 - 17:57
Posted 10 July 2013 - 23:11
Sounds like a scapegoat to me. Find a young technician that nobody likes blame it on him. All good, move on.
Posted 11 July 2013 - 02:06
Posted 11 July 2013 - 02:44
Well the cost was probably astronomical! I noticed the top stage "ejected" with a parachute, hopefully there isn't too much damage to the payload then.
not to mention the extra force added with gravity and the rockets boosters still pushing the thing back down to earth. Me thinks a total loss of ship and payload
Posted 19 August 2013 - 00:13
Officials recovered two of the yaw sensors in the rocket's debris field, finding evidence they were forcibly installed 180 degrees from their proper position.
Posted 19 August 2013 - 00:25
"well, these sensors are supposed to fit, maybe with a little push - brings hammer."
- the young tech.
Posted 19 August 2013 - 01:11
Investigators instructed the manufacturer of the yaw sensors to change their design to prevent their improper installation on future rockets
Sounds like they were already designed that way if he needed to "forcibly install" it.
Posted 19 August 2013 - 01:24
Forcing anything to install properly just sounds like a bad idea when you're dealing with rockets. :-o
Posted 19 August 2013 - 08:55
paid sabotage ?
^ I wouldn't discount it...
It's basically a dumb-proof design. You really have to use a hammer to put it there upside down.
Posted 19 August 2013 - 11:13
More likely explanation (Occam's Razor): built on a Monday after a vodka fueled weekend.
paid sabotage ?