Prev: Another Big Hubble Error for Space Expantion
Next: Solar Scientists Agree That the Sun's Recent Behavior Is Odd,but the Explanation Remains Elusive
From: Bret Cahill on 30 May 2010 13:34
There is just no way BP execs can testify that they could not ask
their engineers to insert a pressure gage or two mounted on a sub to
determine the flow rate.

To several sig figs.

BP execs needs to be doing time for that whopper alone.


Bret Cahill

From: Gordon Burditt on 31 May 2010 23:37
>There is just no way BP execs can testify that they could not ask
>their engineers to insert a pressure gage or two mounted on a sub to
>determine the flow rate.
>
>To several sig figs.

The engineers have a problem to work on. They don't need interruptions
to prepare data for press releases.

>BP execs needs to be doing time for that whopper alone.

Since when is there a law against lying *to the press*?

If the execs also told that whopper to the government regulators,
let's get the leak fixed first, then put them in the slammer.

I'd prefer that BP concentrate on stopping the leak, not measuring
it, and not issuing press releases about it. If, after fixing the
leak, they don't have any budget until fiscal year 5050 to issue a
press release informing the world that the leak has been stopped,
I'm not really worried about it, as long as the leak is actually
stopped. I'm sure Obama will be glad to announce that the leak is
fixed, even if nobody believes him.

I've worked on too many software projects where, due to the discovery
of some serious bug at the last minute, reporting on the status of
the problem to several levels of management became more important
than actually investigating the cause of the bug and finding a fix
for it.

From: Bret Cahill on 1 Jun 2010 00:20
> I question the ability to get a transducer
> "ten feet instream" to such a massive flow;

Small transducer + big pipe = small drag force.

They could also use a pitot tube, even at the opening.


Bret Cahill


From: Bret Cahill on 1 Jun 2010 09:12
On May 31, 8:37 pm, gor...(a)hammy.burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) wrote:
> >There is just no way BP execs can testify that they could not ask
> >their engineers to insert a pressure gage or two mounted on a sub to
> >determine the flow rate.
>
> >To several sig figs.
>
> The engineers have a problem to work on.  They don't need interruptions
> to prepare data for press releases.
>
> >BP execs needs to be doing time for that whopper alone.
>
> Since when is there a law against lying *to the press*?
>
> If the execs also told that whopper to the government regulators,
> let's get the leak fixed first, then put them in the slammer.
>
> I'd prefer that BP concentrate on stopping the leak, not measuring
> it,

You can't solve a problem without knowing what it is.

Any attempt to stuff anything into the pipe depends on knowing the
flow rate.

That's why the mud didn't work.

They were deluding themselves about the flow rate.

Determining the flow rate is fast and easy and should have been done
first.

Instead they started freaking out making everything 100 times worse.


Bret Cahill

From: tg on 1 Jun 2010 09:51
On Jun 1, 9:12 am, Bret Cahill <BretCah...(a)peoplepc.com> wrote:
> On May 31, 8:37 pm, gor...(a)hammy.burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) wrote:
>
>
>
> > >There is just no way BP execs can testify that they could not ask
> > >their engineers to insert a pressure gage or two mounted on a sub to
> > >determine the flow rate.
>
> > >To several sig figs.
>
> > The engineers have a problem to work on.  They don't need interruptions
> > to prepare data for press releases.
>
> > >BP execs needs to be doing time for that whopper alone.
>
> > Since when is there a law against lying *to the press*?
>
> > If the execs also told that whopper to the government regulators,
> > let's get the leak fixed first, then put them in the slammer.
>
> > I'd prefer that BP concentrate on stopping the leak, not measuring
> > it,
>
> You can't solve a problem without knowing what it is.
>
> Any attempt to stuff anything into the pipe depends on knowing the
> flow rate.
>
> That's why the mud didn't work.
>
> They were deluding themselves about the flow rate.
>
> Determining the flow rate is fast and easy and should have been done
> first.
>
> Instead they started freaking out making everything 100 times worse.
>
> Bret Cahill

Not really the problem Bret. As I've been saying for a month now, the
problem is with the integrity of the structure---which means the
relationship of the well to the casing, as well as the blowout
preventer. After listening to the dodgy language they've been using
for a while now, I think they have concluded that if they actually
stopped the flow at the upper riser, the whole thing would tear apart
from the pressure.

-tg
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Another Big Hubble Error for Space Expantion
Next: Solar Scientists Agree That the Sun's Recent Behavior Is Odd,but the Explanation Remains Elusive