Tweet
Anybody who says that the chances of impact are one in a trillion is either stupid or lying.
-
12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio Regum -
Have you ever done one of these, KH? Have you ever even seen one?I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
If they wanted to exaggerate the safety they should have said one in a million. At least that would be reasonable (though on the low side in my opinion)
One in a trillion is the chance that it'll land somewhere on the physics building at hopkins.12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio RegumComment
-
Do you even know how many zeroes there are in a trillion?Originally posted by DanS
Have you ever done one of these, KH? Have you ever even seen one?12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio RegumComment
-
So I take it then that your analysis is indeed straight from your ass, whereas the Air Force took their one-in-a-trillion from their risk analysis, a sample of which you have never seen nor participated in preparing?I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
No, they took their analysis straight from their ass. I'm pointing out how obvious this is.
You, on the other hand, obviously have no feel for the approximate numbers involved.12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio RegumComment
-
They've been doing these analyses for every launch for 50 years. While that doesn't automatically make the analysis for this launch valid, I would ask you what precise problems you have with it.
I have heard of people working through these risk analyses for the uninvolved public. They tend to be rather extreme and therefore have earned a reputation in the business for being draconian.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
One in a trillion is absurd hyperbole, DanS.Comment
-
How do you know that?I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
I don't .Originally posted by DanS
How do you know that?
But so far we have the fact that very rationale multibillion dollar corporations are contemplating an action that will cost them money. We also have the fact of a glib sounding "one in a trillion" quote from an official that would presumably know.
Oh and I have seen risk analysis (not for space launches but for business decisions)You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto LuongoComment
-
From this articleOriginally posted by Flubber
Rhetoric aside , my understanding is that the evacuation is being ordered by the companies involved . . The Hibernia platform is operated by ExxonMobil, a US corporation not gioven to irrational actions that hurt the bottom line.
The reality is that none of us on here has seen details . Some are assuming that the space guys "one in a trillion" qote is accurate while others, including myself have been assuming that the oil companies would not be considering evacuation if that was the real probability.
I just know that if the planned impact zone is within a mile, that seems awful close. If thats the zone " where it could possibly hit if everything goes wrong" then we have a different situation. But if thats the situation, why are the the oil companies so fussed?
Its a big big ocean out there and much of it is empty but theres a relatively small patch out there thats relatively busy. Aside from the Hibernia platform, there is the Terra Nova development and work being done on the Whiterose development all within less than 50 km of Hibernia. Each if these developments have exclusion zones where there don't even let shipping pass through, so caution is the norm when we are talking offshore oil development. The question is whether the oil companies are going overboard here
it sounds to me as if the govt and oil companies had a reaction similar to that seen in this thread to the possibility of booster rockets falling willy nilly over the ocean. Now they're being briefed by the Air Force and we'll see what happens.
I'd say it's premature to warn that the sky is falling, but it's a fun thread none the less.(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.Comment
-
The company needs to keep the local government and its employees happy. The rationality of their actions should be evaluated in this context. Hell, it's impossible to know whether the Newfoundland top guy has other motives in pitching a fit. Under such a scenario, the oil companies would still be obliged to follow his lead (or his commands), no matter the actual risk.But so far we have the fact that very rationale multibillion dollar corporations are contemplating an action that will cost them money.Last edited by DanS; April 10, 2005, 14:49.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
I have no idea, but the oil companies were prepared to "go to war" with the Pentagon over this.Originally posted by notyoueither
How large is the impact zone? That's the detail I am wondering about. 10 mile radius? 100 mile radius?If you look around and think everyone else is an *******, you're the *******.Comment
-
It's a trillion. 10^12.Originally posted by DanS
How do you know that?Comment
-
Odd -- my information is that the companies are taking the lead on this.Originally posted by DanS
The company needs to keep the local government and its employees happy. The rationality of their actions should be evaluated in this context. Hell, it's impossible to know whether the Newfoundland top guy has other motives in pitching a fit. Under such a scenario, the oil companies would still be obliged to follow his lead (or his commands), no matter the actual risk.You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto LuongoComment
Comment