Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 3 months later...

16 hours ago, Mark Maras said:

 Great article. Thanks.

 Alan, we're waiting.

We could discuss it, but if you already think it's a "great article" I might struggle to convince you to take some of its claims with a large pinch of salt...

Thing is, I have a huge amount of respect for Pete Brock and many of the people who worked with him. These days, people seem to take any questioning of details and the presentation of a different viewpoint as some kind of attack. The 'Twitter Effect', perhaps. Or maybe the 'Katayama Effect'...? 

  • Like 1

 @HS30-H

 No convincing needed. I actually enjoy and look forward to your corrections. There have been too many alternative facts told as truth over the years and I, like others, have taken them as the Gospel and spread the misinformation. It's good to have someone with the knowledge and wants to deal in truth. BTW, I would like to hear the claims that I should take with a large pinch of salt. Keep up the good work and thanks.

 Mark

Just now, Mark Maras said:

 @HS30-H

 No convincing needed. I actually enjoy and look forward to your corrections. There have been too many alternative facts told as truth over the years and I, like others, have taken them as the Gospel and spread the misinformation. It's good to have someone with the knowledge and wants to deal in truth. BTW, I would like to hear the claims that I should take with a large pinch of salt. Keep up the good work and thanks.

With the caveat that "the truth" can depend on your point of view...

The article has a lot of the usual shibboleths (Katayama "banished", Katayama lobbying for the 510 and S30 as though they wouldn't have happened without him "needing" them etc etc) but in the other thread where the article was mentioned - can't remember what thread it was now - I was particularly interested in the L24 crank harmonic/breakage story.

Brock's article makes it sound as though the BRE team were directly responsible for discovering, diagnosing and curing the L24's initial crankshaft problems, when in fact Nissan's engineers in Japan were fully aware of the problem and were working on a remedy (eventually a re-designed crank forging) well before BRE had even received their first 240Z. 

These days the lines of communication are so much more direct that it's hard to imagine the same scenario.   

  • Like 1
On 11/22/2018 at 7:41 AM, HS30-H said:

With the caveat that "the truth" can depend on your point of view...

The article has a lot of the usual shibboleths (Katayama "banished", Katayama lobbying for the 510 and S30 as though they wouldn't have happened without him "needing" them etc etc) but in the other thread where the article was mentioned - can't remember what thread it was now - I was particularly interested in the L24 crank harmonic/breakage story.

Brock's article makes it sound as though the BRE team were directly responsible for discovering, diagnosing and curing the L24's initial crankshaft problems, when in fact Nissan's engineers in Japan were fully aware of the problem and were working on a remedy (eventually a re-designed crank forging) well before BRE had even received their first 240Z. 

These days the lines of communication are so much more direct that it's hard to imagine the same scenario.   

Reality and truth are brothers, but they’re not twins... Brock can believe he solved a problem, while the engineers solved the problem. Reality is. Truth relies on perspective.

 First, my take on the article was Pete possibly thought that he discovered the flaw and helped the engineers solve it. Not that he solved it.

Anyway, to get to the point and use your example above, "Brock believed he solved the problem". You stated that "Truth relies on perspective" but Pete's statement was his opinion based on his perspective. That didn't make it the truth. This reminds me of the old Indian tale of the blind men trying to describe an elephant by touching it. One described a leg, another, a tail, another, an ear and so on. Each one had his own perspective and opinion and they were all wrong.

1 hour ago, conedodger said:

Reality and truth are brothers, but they’re not twins... Brock can believe he solved a problem, while the engineers solved the problem. Reality is. Truth relies on perspective.

Truth is independent of perspective. Everything else is opinion, there is only one truth.

  • Like 2
2 hours ago, Patcon said:

Truth is independent of perspective. Everything else is opinion, there is only one truth.

Well, you’re wrong. 

 

A lady hears a disturbance and sees and sees a man run out of a shop. Later, she tells the police that the man was Asian, he had spiked hair and a dragon tattoo on his neck. The police listen but don’t write anything down because the owner of the shop had told them the perpetrator ran out the back. Not the front. Turns out, the Asian man was a customer. Was the lady telling the truth? Of course she was. She believes in what she saw from her perspective. She’d pass a lie detector test too. There are as many truths as there are perspectives. Sometimes they even align with reality. What you are describing is reality. There is only one reality. As I said, reality and truth are brothers, but they aren’t twins...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   2 Members, 1 Anonymous, 1,433 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Guidelines. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.