3 ms·
Even if Boeing thinks that the chance of a catastrophic failure is infinitesimally small, they probably still can't ignore what a failure would mean for their a
by rob74 2y ago
Even if Boeing thinks that the chance of a catastrophic failure is infinitesimally small, they probably still can't ignore what a failure would mean for their already bad reputation. So returning the capsule without a crew is probably the safer option overall: if it's ok, it can still be certified; in the unlikely chance of a failure, NASA and Boeing can at least say that they were cautious and didn't succumb to the same wishful thinking that led to the Columbia disaster - and the damage for Boeing in the public opinion would be far smaller than if human lives were lost.
- cubefox 2y agoYou are ignoring the probabilities though. Risk is probability*potential damage amount, so the lower the probability of damage, the lower the risk. This can result in a low risk even if the potential amount of potential damage is high (when the probability is sufficiently small).
- HPsquared 2y agoAll predictions have a margin of error. Both "known unknowns" and "unknown unknowns". Given they don't really understand the cause, we're nearer the "unknown unknowns" area.
- Symmetry 2y agoIt's better to analyze this in terms of the incentive of the particular project managers at Boeing making this decision, since Boeing itself isn't a person making decisions. They might rationally conclude that it might go well and get them promoted but if it goes badly the worst they're looking at is early retirement.