Contents Level 3 The Paperwork: Fill & Download for Free

How did NASA engineers know that the Apollo 13 failure was due to a damaged coil in the Apollo service module … ?It’s actually a great question. How was NASA able to figure out what happened, even though the affected hardware was never recovered?NASA didn’t have the Apollo 13 Service Module available to look at, but here’s what they did have:An exhaustive history of the Apollo 13 hardware. Every time anything happens to a piece of spacecraft hardware during its manufacture and processing, there’s paperwork involved. By dredging up that paperwork, NASA was able to put together a complete history of the electrical system, including the faulty tank. The paperwork documented that the tank had been dropped, and that there had been trouble getting the oxygen out of it during a pad test — crucial events that led to the tank failing. These events were documented at the time — it’s just that nobody realized at the time that the events were problematic.They had photos of all the equipment before launch.They had a few photos of the Service Module taken by the crew after the Command Module separated from the Service Module. To the people who build this thing, there’s a lot of information here:They had tons of sensor data that was recorded before, during, and after the accident. A lot of this data didn’t make any sense as the events were unfolding, but when engineers could look at it later, it started to form a coherent picture of what had gone wrong.They had an endless supply of identical equipment to test, including tanks. And they did. Here’s just a tiny sample of the table of contents from Volume III of the Apollo 13 Spacecraft Incident Investigation oxygen tank 2 analysis report [1]:Thermodynamic analysis of Apollo 13 oxygen tank 2 pressure vessel based on hot-gas explusion modelThermodynamic restriction on energy process in the Apollo 13 cryogenic oxygen tank 2Temperature sensor analysisCalculation of Required heat flux and surface temperature to produce observed temperature transients in oxygen 2Calculation of performance loss by fuel cells 1 and 3Heater energy analysisAnalysis of two possible ignition mechanicsInvestigation of detanking procedureThis goes on for pages. I know your eyes probably glazed over while reading this list, but you get the idea.Essentially they were able to put tanks through a variety of tests until they were able to exactly reproduce the events that matched all the data they had from Apollo 13 — that is, they were able to get the tanks to fail in ways that produced the same sensor readings that they saw from Apollo 13.The accident report [2] contains many pages of findings and determinations — that is, a list of facts and what they were able to figure out from those facts. It really is fascinating reading. Among the dozens of pages of findings is the gist of what happened to oxygen tank 2 (Final Report, page 5–6): [Comments by me added in brackets.]The cause of the failure of oxygen tank no. 2 was combustion within the tank.Analysis showed that the electrical energy flowing into the tank could not account for the observed increase in pressure and temperature. [That is, something within the tank had to be burning.]The cause of the combustion was most probably the ignition of Teflon wire insulation on the fan motor wires, caused by electric arcs in this wiring.The protective thermostatic switches on the heaters in oxygen tank no. 2 failed closed during the [launch pad test]. This subjected the wiring ... to very high temperatures which have been subsequently shown to severely degrade Teflon insulation.The telemetered data [i.e. sensor data from the spacecraft] indicated electrical arcs of sufficient energy to ignite Teflon insulation, as verified by subsequent tests ...The combustion of Teflon wire insulation alone could release sufficient heat to account for the observed increase of tank pressure and local temperature and could locally overheat and fail the tank or its associated tubing. The possibility of such failure at the top of the tank was demonstrated by subsequent tests.Once they knew with a high level of confidence exactly what had happened, they could make sure that no other tanks for other missions had been subjected to similar events, and they made other changes to the spacecraft to make sure that even if the same thing somehow happened again, it wouldn’t put the crew in such a perilous situation.[1] Apollo 13 Analyses Performed for Oxygen Tank 2. Sep. 1970. NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)[2] Apollo 13 Review Board Final Report. Jun. 1970. https://history.nasa.gov/afj/ap13fj/pdf/report-of-a13-review-board-19700615-19700076776.pdf

Okay, time to break down the paperwork that precedes the high flying displays of athleticism and jaw dropping talent witnessed by fans around the globe on a nightly basis during the NBA season.The NBA’s total yearly revenue has been around $6 billion for the last 2 years. Players, per the collective bargaining agreement are entitled to 51% of basketball related income, so about $3 billion are going to the players. Additionally, there are 491 players in the league.So, 3,000,000,000/491, everyone gets about $6.1 million in salary, right?Well, kind of. The current average salary in the NBA is $6.4 million, but this is a tad misleading. Obviously, some players get paid more than others, and rightfully so. A Lebron James clearly deserves more money than a Lance Stephenson. Both provide value in their own respect, but undoubtedly on different levels. Regardless, after all is said and done, everyone gets a piece of the pie. Their pieces, however, vary in size.Next, we need to understand how we decide the exact amount of money that one player makes in comparison to his teammate.*Enter the NBA Salary cap* The salary cap is the limit to the total amount of money that teams are allowed to pay their players. It is a regulatory tool to ensure that teams are on a financially level playing field and one cannot spend their way to an elite, championship roster. In the most general sense, it is calculated as a percentage of the leagues revenue and the percentage is determined by players, owners, and others during the leagues collective bargaining agreement (CBA).For instance, the salary cap for NBA teams in 2017–2018 was $99 million dollars. So a team can break up that $99 million across a 12-15 man roster. It is important, however, to remember that this is a yearly limit and that contracts often exceed one year, making it increasingly important for General Managers to be able to plan and budget for the future.However, players can still take pay cuts and play wherever they want for below market value to try and win a championship by playing with other great players. Currently, there is no great policy in the NBA to protect against these occurrences.There are various other implications and details regarding contracts, there structures, and clauses/loopholes involved. However, this is the basic outline of how NBA contracts operate and why salaries are set at the levels they are. Hopefully this was helpful.Want my best NBA content? Follow my blog “All Thing’s Basketball” to be the first to get hot takes, player analysis, and other awesome content with over 150,000+ views!

Yes, it has.But not exactly in the manner that it has been portrayed.Priyanka Snell’s answer below offers a high level summary of the two largest sources of H-1B abuse.However, this popular narrative, conveniently leaves out a lot of relevant details, in my opinion.Let’s talk about #1:Indian companies such as Infosys and TCS (and even American companies like Cognizant) who specifically used it for many years as a means to import less expensive labor from India to work “onsite”.Infosys and TCS started off as IT service companies, based in India.Cognizant is similar, but based out of New Jersey.Taken together, these companies represent, the lion’s share of H-1B workers in the United States[1].In the late 2000s, when the US kicked off its tech revolution as it were, the appetite for skilled labor exploded.The thing to note, is that these companies largely function to provide manpower to larger companies, for the roles they needed filled. Absent clients providing these demands, none of these companies would have been able to orchestrate the truly staggering amounts of visa applications and ultimately, Green Card filings that ensued.And to be sure, these clients were veritable tech giants, with adequate clout in the corridors of power, to allow for the sort of immigrant influx that would service their bottom-lines and their ravenous ambitions of growth.And this is a fact that gets conveniently lost in many discussions around H-1B abuse.Yes, the H-1B visas were/are abused, but not solely by random Indian IT service companies alone.Anyone believing that a non-US company, which merely provides staffing and consulting services would have the clout, by themselves, to pull off something like this….Is either hopelessly biased, or indescribably gullible.I get it, it’s easy to hate on Indian IT companies, and fall for simplistic explanations that cast aspersions on those who are already seen to “belong”.But even a weak attempt at a more balanced, realistic assessment would reveal right away, that the scale of the H-1B abuse and flooding of applications that occurred, along with the quiet complicity of the US government, was the result of a complex nexus, including some of the biggest tech players in the US.Moving onto #2:Shady staffing companies and consultancies looking to make money by promoting substandard candidates to clients with inflated resumes and taking a “cut” from the money the client pays.Having worked in a quite niche industry myself, I can tell you that the US tech-o-sphere considers itself quite the meritocracy.I for one, worked outside the tech bubble, but given that a vast majority of H-1B workers, happen to work in the tech sector, a domain that is known for the smarts, doesn’t it seem just a tad odd, that despite the existence of shady staffing companies being an open secret, that the trend continues?Ok, let’s assume that the managers (and co-workers) were none the wiser…Given that some of these jobs that immigrant workers are hired for, happen to be intensely competitive and require excellent technical proficiency, it is surprising to me that people with inflated resumes manage to sustain these fairly demanding jobs that they are hired for.Surely, if workers are so very “substandard”, the managers would be dissatisfied and get rid of them, no?All of this seems to indicate an ecosystem, that is permitting these agencies to thrive, within larger industries.This is, of course, conjecture on my part and I’m absolutely certain that there are substantial bad actors in this realm, but I do believe the skepticism of consulting and staffing firms is a bit overdone.I can’t speak for the tech/ software/ IT industry, but in my neck of the woods, that is the medical device and pharma space, maintaining agility in the workers that a company has, is the new norm.A person working as a contractor in my field, is not a so much a testament to the lack of ability, as it is evidence of a changing paradigm in how hiring gets done these days.Contractors are preferred, because it allows firms many advantages:The ability to quickly and cheaply downsize teams in the event of failures. Laying off full-time employees involves substantial severance packages, potential lawsuits and elaborate protocol, while contractors are far less of a hassle to deal with, if projects hit a rough patch.The ability to rapidly hire temporary, hands-on-deck for labor intensive, limited period projects, like responding to FDA warning letters, major audit findings that need extensive re-work etc.The advantage of being able to “test drive” an individual as a contractor, before putting in the work and substantial resources required to hire the worker full-time.The ability to carry on with downright ridiculous hiring practices, like requiring 2–3 years’ experience for entry level positions.In total, it seems to me that larger companies, forming the client base that hire contractual skilled workers on H-1B, are likely to have actively participated in any systematic effort to abuse the H-1B visa.Simple explanations, always have the greatest allure.Simple explanations that play on existing biases, have greater, even politically consequential allure.Yes, the H-1B visa undoubtedly needs fixing.The program requires an overhaul which re-examines what constitutes a speciality occupation, what educational attainment and skill level are considered “high-skill” in today’s economy and what loopholes and pressures permitted the throwing open of the H-1B floodgates and rampant abuse previously seen.But, to place the blame solely on “bad corporate actors from overseas” would be to make the tired, lazy mistake of the bad-apple argument.Abuse of this scale, does not occur due to the isolated actions of a constellation of firms, preferably located in a country and culture that’s easy to vilify.Systemic problems, require systemic solutions, which go beyond casting the stone across the pond.Every single one of the hundreds of thousands of “undeserving” H-1B employees had reams of their paperwork approved, not once, not twice, but through multiple petitions, by the US government.They were examined and permitted entry into the country, each time they left the US.They were assessed, examined and approved for visas, at US consulates abroad, multiple times, under the auspices of multiple administrations, spanning both political parties.Indeed, many of them were ultimately found deserving of US Permanent Residency, which is the sole domain of the government.The tea-time conversations of H-1B abuse may seek to dump the trash in the neighbors yard, but this is a problem that has been brought to bear on the US, despite the supposedly vigilant eyes of US immigration.And people in the US should ask their government, just why that happened.Note: To be clear, personally, I have every reason to be extremely pissed off about these IT service companies myself.As a MS degree holder from a prominent, public university in the US, I was not picked for an H-1B visa, multiple times, and the overwhelming number of applications from these companies were partly the reason.However, as I explain in the answer, my emotions about it notwithstanding, it is really quite a spurious argument to make, that IT companies just swooped in and took over the system, leaving the mighty US government helpless in their wake.Jan 28, 2020: Thank you for your interest in this answer. Please check out We The Legal for articles, news and an upcoming podcast on the topic of Legal immigration, which explores life is really like for legal immigrants in the US. You can also subscribe to our newsletter, for updates on new content by clicking the menu on the top right corner.Footnotes[1] The 25 companies with the most H-1B workers