Can you explain? My comment was in the context of Columbia.
“An investigation board determined that a large piece of foam fell from the shuttle's external tank and breached the spacecraft wing.”[1]
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt with your definition of “we”. But your tone seems to point directly to the types of biases I referred to. It’s worthwhile to research the history of the industry as an whole.[2] Prior to the disaster, do you know NASAs response? “Foam shedding happens all the time…it’s ‘in family’ and not a problem.” It was still out of spec for a good reason. The term from the investigation report is “normalization of deviance”.
It seems even as technology progresses, we’ll still be anchored by faults in human psychology.
I think it was an attempt to illustrate the biases that play in and cause safety regulation to be written in blood. Either an attempt at a quote from within NASA, or actually one (I am insufficiently familiar with the entire background of the broken tile to say).
Can you explain? My comment was in the context of Columbia.
“An investigation board determined that a large piece of foam fell from the shuttle's external tank and breached the spacecraft wing.”[1]
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt with your definition of “we”. But your tone seems to point directly to the types of biases I referred to. It’s worthwhile to research the history of the industry as an whole.[2] Prior to the disaster, do you know NASAs response? “Foam shedding happens all the time…it’s ‘in family’ and not a problem.” It was still out of spec for a good reason. The term from the investigation report is “normalization of deviance”.
It seems even as technology progresses, we’ll still be anchored by faults in human psychology.
[1] https://www.space.com/amp/19436-columbia-disaster.html
[2]https://www.nasa.gov/columbia/home/CAIB_Vol1.html