Quote:
Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent
Where do you get arrogance out of it? Lol
Negligence sure. Obviously it could have been maintained more rigorously, but I don't understand where you get the latter from.
|
- Focusing on hiring young people because they have fresh ideas not stuck in old ways (disregarding that experience is needed to design things)
- Ignoring warnings of those with experience with deep sea submersibles in regards to capability and safety, including an employee with proof it was not safe
- Refusing to do any sort of controlled testing, especially when a new material is used in an application it hasn't seen before
- Rejecting a request from the Manned Underwater Vehicles committee of the Marine Technology Society that he have a 3rd party review and certify the Titan. His excuse?
"industry regulations were stifling innovation"
- Or this.... "bringing an outside entity up to speed on every innovation
before it is put into real-world testing is anathema to rapid innovation," while touting the vessel's "real-time hull health monitoring" system for being able to determine "if the hull is compromised well before situations become life-threatening."
- Or this... "You know, at some point, safety just is pure waste," said Rush. "I mean, if you just want to be safe, don't get out of bed. Don't get in your car. Don't do anything. At some point, you're going to take some risk, and it really is a risk/reward question.
I think I can do this just as safely by breaking the rules."
To me, he sounds similar to a billionaire we all know. Except Musk at least recognized some need for testing certain things before putting peoples lives at risk.
He got caught full on with the "disruption" method of "innovation" that seems to be popular. Ignoring rules, regulations and recommendations written in blood or other reasons, is NOT innovation, it's arrogance and negligence. I see this crap mentality in other design fields and it scares me.
Just the fact alone he didn't do pressure cyclic testing on the carbon fiber shell is baffling to me. Wouldn't you want to know at how many cycles you will expect to see degradation of the laminations, cracking or even failure? No, instead he tested with human lives (and in my opinion a waiver doesn't get that point across) thinking "I can do this just as safely by breaking the rules." Just look at the testing that any composite component for an airplane goes through....
