turntable nightmare
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
...
"Karl Uppiano" wrote in message
news:SUMch.693$4p2.315@trndny07...
I did not make the original example/assertion. I merely responded that I
did
not think the space shuttle was an example of poor engineering.
Of course it was. Normally such things are fixed in due course, except
when
insufficient funds are available, (or are used to pay astronomical
management wages instead :-)
Yes it was. No it wasn't. Ok, whatever.
Engineers
have to work within the constraints that they are given. That involves
trade-offs, compromise, prioritization,
Of course.
in many cases, meaning the selection
of the best option from a list of poor options. Good engineering in no
way
implies perfection or safety.
Good is a subjective term of course, but engineers do not claim something
is
good when it can be expected to fail it's design function.
(even/especially
*IF* the money is insufficient to design and manufacture a more suitable
component)
I believe the space shuttle was operated outside of its design parameters,
especially in the case of the o-ring failure. The foam shedding problem is
harder to track, but some sources still insist that the problem was caused
by the requirement that NASA use inferior, but environmentally friendlier,
non-CFC foam. The correct engineering answer is, use the tried & tested CFC
foam. I'm sure that exceptions could be made for that, just as they are for
other life-critical applications. Do we blame this one on poor engineering
or political correctness?
I think the fact that we had many successful missions and relatively few
failures (albeit spectacular and widely publicized) in a very dangerous
field with aging equipment, is a testament to the good (note: I didn't
say
perfect) engineering that went into the space shuttle program. Sending
teachers and congressmen into space was a mistake because it led people
to
the conclusion that space travel is now safe and commonplace. It isn't.
True, but the congressman only went because he could, and was an ex
astronaut.
And what's the difference between a teacher being killed and an astronaut
anyway? They all went through similar training, and all knew the risks
involved.
It is bad when anyone dies. But putting the teacher and congressmen on board
was a symbolic gesture that sent the wrong message, IMHO.
Now, if a turntable injures or kills its owner, I would say that would be
the result of poor engineering.
Or more likely caused by poor maintenance, or user modification.
Ok fine, if they read and observed the lawyer tags, and the turntable
injures or kills its owner...
But playing records amounts to dragging a
rock through a ditch. The technology is over 100 years old, and should be
extremely well understood by now. The only engineering that goes into it
consists of extremely minor refinements and most probably esthetic and
marketing enhancements.
In fact new technological advancements are being made all the time, which
can/could be applied IF there is sufficient demand to justify it.
It is applied anyway in some cases though, which leads to the current
$100,000 TT "marvels" :-)
Yes, but turntable enhancements are hardly on the order of magnitude in
terms of complexity and risk to put a space shuttle in orbit. There just
aren't that many options to rotating a record at a constant speed with
minimal vibration. Especially, ones that aren't just miles past the point of
diminishing returns. I've read about laser transcription of the stored
audio, but that's pretty much what we've done for the last 30 years with
optical storage. The analog nature of the recorded sound doesn't add that
much of a twist to it.
|