A question about Camellia

[Robert J. Hansen]

Doug Barton wrote:
> The AF's conclusion seems obvious, however it ignores a critical
> factor of the Navy's use case.

The story is apocryphal, so it doesn't make much sense to talk about the
motives of the people involved -- it's fiction.  But even were it true,
I'd be hard-pressed to agree that it shows ignorance on the part of the
AF engineers.  It shows the AF engineers and the Navy engineers looked
at the same data and drew two completely different conclusions -- and
both of them were right.