Originally Posted by
mike734
Article behind the "WSJ" Paywall. I don't think I want to give Murdoch any more money today.
Yeah the WSJ is a small step above FOX in "objectivity", but I continue to subscribe for some reason. Before Rupert tried to make it all sexy it used to be a quality source of information.
Originally Posted by
mike734
Thanks, seems like there's quite a bit of Visionary vs. Realist going on over there. Four dead so far. The article also talks about the same concerns voiced by a former editor for CNN who went public right after the accident with her concerns about how completely inadequate the motors are for "space" flight.
The whole piece is a bit dramatic but gives a good feel for tensions that go on, and provides a bit of insight why some astroturfers would be so defensive. In reality this sounds like every single place I've ever worked professionally, with often clueless management types asking for the impossible. Having articles like this WSJ piece is probably a good thing for everybody involved. It lets the lay person understand the difficulties involved in these massive engineering feats and keeps people honest.
"Well, if the unthinkable happens, our company can always beg from kind souls on the web - that should drive down our premiums and make us look less heartless. Plus, after they donate we tell them that their opinions are worthless. Those internet suckers will probably believe us.
Pilot error? Hmm, let's revisit that liability release form he signed when hired. High five!"