Re: Shuttle Safety [was: Re...

In article <1153680701.477716.224120@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
columbiaaccidentinvestigation@xxxxxxxxx (columbiaaccidentinvestigation)
wrote:

"Experience has shown why Quantitative Risk Assesment is needed: To
improve safety in design, operation, maintenance, and upgrade
(throughout) life cycle, To help ensure mission success; To improve
performance; and To reduce design, operation and maintenance costs, To
support management decisions"

Nothing there talks about making safety the number one priority.


Now once again your question of how to fund safety upgrades is the
exact concern I share myself, and the asap shares as well.

What do you mean by this?

If safety is to be the number one priority, which you think it is, your
first concern will to quantify how you can judge safety upgrades - only
after that can you think about funding them.

I ask you again: if $1bn extra will gain a 0.01% decrease in the risk of
death do you always wait for it?

What if it is $10bn or $100bn?

You are way away from considering funding upgrades until you can
quantify the cost and if you can't rank priorities you will never be
able to quantify the cost.

On the other hand, I don't have a "concern" over funding safety
upgrades, because I think the approach should be entirely the reverse of
yours. I would work out my mission objectives. Then I would find out how
much the American public was willing to give me to fund those
objectives. The risk to lives would then come out as a result of
this calculation. If the risk was acceptable to those whose lives were
at risk, we'd fly. If they weren't we'd see if the taxpayer was willing
to pay more or give up some of the objectives. We'd go around the loop
until the risks were down to an acceptable level. But that doesn't make
safety the first priority, it makes it one of a number of inputs.

Now remind me, how does your approach work? If $1bn extra could gain a
0.01% decrease in the risk of death do you stop flying until you get
your extra £1bn?

Malcolm B
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Shuttle Safety [was: Re...
    ... Gathering estimates will start funding estimation ... current risk analysis, the current risk analysis does not reflect ... The purpose of setting a priority of safety first does in fact break ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: Shuttle Safety [was: Re...
    ... possible compromises in the safety margins the ... current risk analysis, the current risk analysis does not reflect ... and that is an understanding of the orbiter ... The purpose of setting a priority of safety first does in fact break ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: Shuttle Safety [was: Re...
    ... My conclusion and writings to make safety the highest priority in our ... X which you could spend which will reduce the chance of risk slightly. ... safety is always hedged around by these constraints. ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: Saturn V
    ... for vehicle or mission failure depends on the combined risks for the ... The practice of risk analysis is not ... Managing and understanding risks for better safety has a long history ...
    (sci.space.history)
  • Re: Kettling
    ... asked what the Police have learned about crowd control sine then, ... on 26th April "johnmids2006" in respect of kettling wrote "I ... like that without running the risk of a disaster - and yes, ... worked with building safety issues. ...
    (uk.legal)