Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mmm.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!mmm!mrgofor From: mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR) Newsgroups: net.columbia,net.space Subject: Re: Morton-Thiokol Engineering Claims Message-ID: <591@mmm.UUCP> Date: Mon, 10-Mar-86 10:23:41 EST Article-I.D.: mmm.591 Posted: Mon Mar 10 10:23:41 1986 Date-Received: Fri, 14-Mar-86 03:44:02 EST References: <1301@decwrl.DEC.COM> <758@ism780c.UUCP> <6442@utzoo.UUCP> Reply-To: mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR) Organization: none Lines: 62 Xref: watmath net.columbia:2629 net.space:6403 Summary: In article <6442@utzoo.UUCP> henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes: >> This seems unfair to the MT engineers... >> If it didn't explode, they would probably lose their jobs. > >The way they've been presenting it so far, they said "don't launch", argued >with management, management said "launch", at which point the engineers >quietly gave in. They decided that it was not worth risking their jobs in >an attempt to avert [what they now claim was obviously] a major risk of >loss of a shuttle. > >If any of them are licensed Professional Engineers, I trust their state >licensing boards will take notice of this gross dereliction of duty. > As Sally Ride pointed out, the engineers *did* hang tough, and fought the launch as far as they could within the framework of the organization. The original poster suggested that they should have gone directly to the media and voiced their opinions publicly, and I still believe that is an unfair risk to ask the engineers to take. Remember, these guys are *rocket* engineers. If they got their butts fired for insubordination and every other charge that their management would certainly come up with, where are they going to go to find work in their field? There aren't a whole lot of jobs out there, especially for hot-headed troublemakers who can't work within the system. Imagine the best-case scenario: they went to the media, and such an outcry was raised that the launch was postponed for a couple days and finally launched without problems. What do you think those management types (who are *still* arguing that the decision to launch was sound - even though it quite obviously was not) would do to the renegade engineers? That's right - their careers would be over. It's not just losing a job - it's losing their entire careers so they would have to start over in another field. I think that's too much to expect of the engineers. I think they behaved honorably - it was those handful of management types who blew it, and it's *their* asses that should get toasted, the engineers were the *good* guys. >"A commander in chief cannot take as an excuse for his mistakes in warfare >an order given by his minister or his sovereign, when the person giving >the order is absent from the field of operations and is imperfectly aware >or wholly unaware of the latest state of affairs. It follows that any >commander in chief who undertakes to carry out a plan which he considers >defective is at fault; he must put forward his reasons, insist on the plan >being changed, and finally TENDER HIS RESIGNATION rather than be the >instrument of his army's downfall." - Napoleon [emphasis added] >-- > Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology > {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry Napolean is not a particularly good role model in moral affairs. Besides, note the words "commander in chief" in your quote. I'll agree with the concept as stated. In this case, however, it was the commanders-in-chief who undertook to carry out a plan which they did not consider effective. The engineers were not commanders - they were soldiers. I doubt that Napolean would consider soldiers to have the same obligations to weigh the soundness of the campaign - that's the generals' job, and that's why they get paid the big bucks. It's also why they get their butts kicked when the other army wins. -- --MKR If Man were meant to use the metric system, Jesus would have had 10 disciples.