Oren wrote:
On Sat, 22 May 2010 12:04:34 -0700, Smitty Two
wrote:

In article ,
dpb wrote:

This beating up on BP is simply populist Monday-morning qb'ing for the
consumption of the press and populace.
Huh? As far as I'm concerned, they ****ed up. They should not have been
doing something that entailed risk, without a plan for dealing with any
problem that might arise. It's really just that damn simple.

You cannot write a contingency plan for every situation. Can't expect
a plan to cover every set of circumstances. Didn't NASA save the
Apollo with a improvised brainstorm?

CAN'T write a contingency plan for every situation? Hell, how about
"What do we do when the pipe breaks one mile down?" I hope I live long
enough to witness the hearings where the oil guys are asked "Did you
ever discuss what corrective action would be taken if you opened a
gusher on the bottom of the ocean a mile down?"

BP HAD a contingency plan and fought to NOT follow it whilst the rig was
still on top of the water. They violated their own safety procedure to
save time and money. Apollo? Apollo didn't have the potential for
ruining an ocean, and the flyboys did what they did because they were
risk-takers.