Jump to content
|Topic||Stats||Last action by|
|SourceForge grabs GIMP for Windows’ account, wraps installer in bundle-pushing adware||
|It’s about time: Google vows to fix the worst thing about its Chrome browser||
|Apple drops discoveryd in latest OS X beta following months of network issues||
|Paris: Phone porn fears after pupils fondle girls||
|Windows 10 Technical Preview||
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 ?