23 Oct '17 14:08>
Originally posted by @eladarSure, the first one, say a new jet with more efficient engines based on engine research and wing research, such that NASA does, a lot of science in the background but when a plane is built using the science generated by NASA and others, the engines have a design, bill of materials and wing to spec 400XR. Rev D. then those parts are CNC'd out, punched out, welded, and so forth and they do that 1200 times. The science has been done and all they have to do now is deal with knowns and parts lists done by designers.
Not if he denies that watching a plane fly is seeing science put into practice.
So plane # 2 of that series has no new science in it, only old science and the scientists involved go on to further refine the parts and such so new science and technology goes on in the background for some newer plane but the scientists don't have to pay much attention to the 1200 planes already built unless one explodes in flight because of a design fault, which has happened but that is usually the responsibility of engineers who see that say, some wire goes through a fuel tank (that actually happened) and they thought it was safe but lead to an explosion under the right circumstances. The scientists had little to do with the failure analysis and they just redesigned the wire flow so it will never happen again. But there was no science involved, only engineering details.