Totally agree that no DR process is absurd.....especially for an airline. While I was at EDS, we supported Continental and US Air, and those guys regularly tested their DR schemes. And my point was that the Generators weren't affected directly, I'm theorizing that the ATS that connects the generators to the Data Center failed. It's very common to have several generators connect to a common bus (usually a paralleling piece of switchgear) and then have that bus tie to the Data Center via an ATS. In this case, both the Utility and the Generator power go through the ATS, thus making it a single point of failure. This is a very common design in spite of the single point of failure due to cost and historical performance of ATSs.

Well, to be clear, I'm just speculating here, but I'm not implying that the GENERATORS blew up, I'm speculating that the ATS blew up. It is a very common topology to have multiple Generators connect to one main bus, and then have that bus connect to the Data Center via an ATS. In other words, yes, there is/are redundant Generator(s), but they all connect to one central bus, which then connects to the UPS Systems via the ATS and other switchgear.

The failure rate of ATSs is pretty low (when they're maintained), so it often becomes a value engineering decision during design. Yes, you could have each Generator connect via its own ATS, thus distributing the risk, but in so doing you increase your constructions costs, increase your maintenance costs, etc. The bean counters don't like that, and it becomes hard to convince them that it's worth it when you can't come up with statistical proof that a failure of the ATS is likely.

Interesting. I manage Enterprise Data Centers for a living. My expertise is the Facility Infrastructure (generators, UPS, switchgear, etc). What's being described in that post you linked to sounds very possible. I'd just about lay money down that this was a failure in an Automatic Transfer Switch. And as others have said, I pretty much guarantee that due to the corporate attitude of "facilities is just an expense center on a spreadsheet", there's been pressure to trim costs........including decreasing frequency of predictive maintenance like Infrared Thermography.

A well maintained ATS should be able to function flawlessly for many, many years (like 20 years). To have faulted so badly that it took out the whole switch (which would definitely make the primary and generator feeds inaccessible) sure sounds like deferred or non-existent maintenance to me.

I could not agree more. Like you, I also voted for Bernie, and while some of his ideas were a little extreme for me, I was generally on board with what he was trying to accomplish. Similarly, I have many friends who are evidently the "Bernie or Bust" types, and they all seem to have the same non-sequitur criticisms of her (i.e. "she's just like the rest of them", "she hates women because she defended a rapist", "she is the reason we're stuck with NAFTA", etc).

It's ridiculous the crap that people try to come up with as factual evidence as to why she'd be bad as a president, going so far as to say she'd be as bad or worse than Trump.....which is simply the most laughable thing I think I've ever heard. If anyone believes for a moment that a woman with her experience and capability is remotely close to the shit show that is Donald Trump, then you're simply not dealing in reality, and I highly suggest an appointment with a psychiatrist....like TODAY.....time is of the essence.

Of course she's not perfect. No one is saying she is. But look at the shit that gets brought up most often about her. Benghazi? Absolutely NO ONE has been able to determine that that was "her fault". Hell, a Republican congress hired a Republican military analyst to look over the facts of that case, so you can say with certainty that they all were working together to TRY to find something wrong. Guess what? He found nothing. Sorry it happened, kids, but you can't lay that on her. Oh, and while we're on it, let's keep in mind that she was not the president at the time of NAFTA. Just because her husband signed it into law does not mean that you can lay all of the issues with NAFTA at her feet.

The "Hillary defended a child molester" bit is ridiculous too. Guys, it WAS HER JOB! She was a defense attorney, and was the molester's court appointed attorney. If you're going to demonize her for doing her job, then you better do that for every single solitary defense attorney in the world.....and there's a shit ton of them.

Trump is an imbecile with absolutely no government ability, and if you look carefully, no real business acumen. His bankruptcies are well documented. He will not win, but some folks like to think he will. There's just no way we're going to throw our country into the toilet by electing a clown to thumb our nose at "the system".

I don't follow. I don't see how that contradicts my point. In fact, I see how that clearly SUPPORTS my point. You're asserting that there is some "strong correlation" between terrorism and Islam, and I'm saying that there is NOT a significant correlation there. I'm highlighting this by illustrating the various other correlations that exist relating to acts of violence like this.

Now I definitely agree with you on not being clear on what constitutes a "terror attack" or even sometimes a "hate crime" vs people just doing evil stuff.

Listen, little tough guy, you're not impressing (or schooling) anybody. Before you get all impressed with yourself at bursting my bubble, I'm a fucking atheist, you twit. I know full well there is no invisible man that lives in the sky, and have no illusions about that, m'kay?

Now as for your "two types of people" thing, you're right, you are in the second group.....they're called imbeciles. If you honestly believe that these texts have nothing to do with either religion, when you obviously have absolutely no understanding of either and are just pontificating from whatever you're dreaming up in that head of yours.

But I digress, that isn't really the point here, is it? The point of this whole thread was the folks who are trying to link this type of terrorist violence to a religion (thus all the talk about religion and texts). I'm illustrating that the religions have nothing to do with it, and I'm countering arguments by other morons who like to cite the "violent" passages in the Koran by showing them that the Bible is no better. They don't seem to like that. And you don't seem to like the fact that I can prove my point. So let me get your position straight here. So if the KKK had more press lately, and had committed more mass atrocities more recently, then the argument works, but since they haven't been getting a lot of air time lately, it's not the same thing. Is that it? The Westboro assholes aren't big enough, and they haven't detonated any bombs yet, so they're good, even though they specifically exist to incite hatred and bigotry, it's not a big deal, and not at all proof that Christians do bad shit, is that it?

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and assume that you probably have a reason in mind that I can't point to Hitler (also a Christian)....probably too long ago, huh? Never mind the 6,000,000 dead.....that's old news, huh? How about this guy , or maybe these folks ? No? Are we allowed to count these guys ?

Probably not. I'm sure you have a reason that you've dreamed up that they're totally different and therefore, they don't count.

I love how guys like you believe you're super informed and intelligent, but it never occurs to you that when you spend 16 years raining fucking bombs down on a country, eventually, the poor, uneducated, starving people in that country might rise up and right back, in whatever rag-tag militia that they can cobble together.....nah, you just focus on the fact that they're called Muslims, and therefore, Muslims=bad. The reality is, your a fucking hack, dude. You know squat, and talk all the shit you want, but you KNOW I'm right here. You're off base, I tried to be nice, but you wanted to be a condescending prick about it.

Seriously, read a little bit sometimes. Stop dreaming up your own delusions, and for goodness sake, stop listening to Rush and Drumpf.

Wow. The ignorance astounds.

Well, enjoy wasting your vote. Trump doesn't have a chance in the general election, and it would be impossible to do what he is proposing to do anyway.

Enjoy your life hating others based on silly misconceptions. When you're older, you'll probably realize how dopey you've been.

Not sure what statistics you're looking at, but if you were to take your own advice, you'd see I'm right

Man, you're obtuse. It must be difficult not understanding things. You talked about the KKK as a comparison, obviously an American organization. So, I pointed out plainly how your argument is flawed because you're comparing the riches country in the world with the strongest military in the world with these small, disorganized (and now destroyed) Middle Eastern countries.

But just to humor you, because you seem to like arguing, don't you think that those same war-torn people, starving to death, living in constant fear might be able to be manipulated to believe that since the US and the EU are allies, that perhaps they might exhibit some violence on Brussels? Is it really such a stretch to believe that these same downtrodden, manipulated kids are led to believe that they really are doing "god's work" by these ISIS lunatics, and therefore they had to avenge the capture of one of their great assassins?

Seriously, dude, this isn't that hard to figure out. You rain down bombs on poor countries for 16 years, and eventually people in that country get tired of it and act out in irrational (if not desperate) ways.

Well, if at the same time, some country whose military was about 1,000 times more powerful than our own had destroyed most of the country and toppled our government, and therefore there was no definitive police or army to keep the peace.....I'd bet the KKK could do exactly the same thing. You have to compare apples to apples here. People are making it out like it's a Muslim issue, forgetting the fact that we've spent the last 16 years bombing the fucking shit out of these countries. That tends to piss people off, a lot. You get a lot of pissed off people who are poorly educated and put them in touch with some enterprising asshole who tells them some fairytale about how they can achieve greatness and escape the misery of everyday life by joining in some "holy war", and you've got a recipe for some major shit.

There you go!! Finally, someone on my wavelength. Cheers, my fellow skeptic!

That's ridiculous. First of all, if the leadership is mentally ill, that would be sufficient. However, the point I'm making is that the actions that happened here have nothing to do with religion, regardless of the fact that people would like to characterize it that way. If we are going to characterize it that way, then every act that's done in the name of religion must also be characterized the same way, which given the history, Christians don't want, because they're the worst of them all. I was responding to the joker above you who's trying to build in excuses as to why those Christian terrorists don't count, and he's using mental illness as the cop out......as if the idea of someone blowing up an airport isn't indicative of mental instability.

It's a silly double standard that the right in the US has managed to get people to believe because it's easier for them to believe that than to actually think.

Of course it's the same thing. Do you think the actions of these guys in Belgium are indicative of sound mental health? It's EXACTLY the same thing, but people are trying to obfuscate that by suggesting that it's a religious thing.

I intended that as satire, because clearly you can't ban logic and reason. *disclaimer, I myself am an atheist.

Thank you for helping me make my point. We are saying the same thing, which is, you can't associate these types of actions with a religion because a) these lunatics are not representative of said religion, regardless of what religion that is and b) there are so many different interpretations of each religion, it's impossible to group them as a whole.

Unfortunately, you go on to completely contradict yourself by talking about your understanding of Christians in America to be such that they wouldn't do such things. Guessing you're unfamiliar with the KKK or the Westboro Baptist Church, huh? What about Eric Rudolph, remember him? He was a Christian, and he bombed a huge crowd there's plenty more. Yes, I cited a source with a particularly "on the nose" domain name, sorry it was too much for you. If you had been brave enough to click, you'd see that it's actually a well organized site with good navigation illustrating the hundreds if not thousands of incitements to violence in the Bible. Perhaps this link is more to your liking?