The Failure of the deHavillands Comet and the Rise of Boeing “The view of fracture [Paul] Paris brought to Boeing was dramatically different from the one that had guided construction of the Comet. Cracks were the centerpiece of the investigation. They could not be eliminated.They were everywhere, permeating the structure, too small to be seen. The structure could not be made perfect, it was inherently ﬂawed, and the goal of engineering design was not to certify the airframe free of cracks but to make it tolerate them.” http://stillness.ph.utexas.edu/~marder/BrokenEducation2011.pdfFriday, November 30, 12While it may seem that this philosophy of the internet is inappropriate for the highly engineered systems of the Industrial Internet, I’ll remind you of the failure of the deHavillands Comet in 1954 and the rise of Boeing as the dominant providerof commercial aircraft. Over the course of three years, three Comets fell out of the sky for initially unexplained reasons. It eventually became clear that the problem was metal fatigue. deHavilland tried to eliminate all cracks, Boeing learned tolive with them.