Re: ATR-72's and Airbuses

Date:         11 Nov 96 01:52:20 
From:         rdd@netcom.com (Robert Dorsett)
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
References:   1 2 3
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1996.2206@ohare.Chicago.COM> s_odle@earthlink.net (Scott Odle) writes:
>So you can make all the claims you want about it just being a patch, but
>that still won't make your comments or the authors claims any more factual.
>If you don't bother (and from your posts it appears you did not even think
>about trying) to substantiate his or your so-called claims before citing it
>as fact, the only thing that you accomplish is to tarnish your own
>credibility.

Hey--I don't claim to know ANYTHING about the issue.  I do claim to express
some puzzlement at the knee-jerk reactions of people who (a) haven't
read the book, and (b) for some bizarre reason seek to discourage others
from doing so.  It's a strange position to take.  If you know of a more
authoritative source that the public can use to learn about the issue,
feel free to cite it.

When/if you have any salient points to offer, feel free.  If your objective,
on the other hand, is to simply state that all of a sudden we're
supposed to get the warm fuzzies that all is fine and dandy--I think not.
Specific actions often count less, in large organizations, than the
processes which produce the mistakes to begin with. This does not denigrate
the intent of individuals participating in those actions, but is a reality
which has to be considered.  It is such processes, btw, that Fredericks
also concerns himself with.



--
Robert Dorsett                         Moderator, sci.aeronautics.simulation
rdd@netcom.com                         aero-simulation@wilbur.pr.erau.edu
                                       ftp://wilbur.pr.erau.edu/pub/av