Interesting.  I&#x27;m curious, do you find the technical content to be the &#x27;thickening agent&#x27; or the style?<p>I work in a related field, and am vaguely familiar with both the general makeup of this type of rocket and this accident in general.  I also tend to write longer, more complex sentences.<p>I did not find it to be particularly &#x27;thick&#x27;, and I&#x27;m curious whether it&#x27;s because I&#x27;m more familiar with the technical details and so avoided the glossy-eyed stare from that aspect or from the fact that a few dozen words in a sentence doesn&#x27;t faze me.<p>The former would mean this shouldn&#x27;t bother anyone practiced in the arts of spaceflight (such as the VP of engineering), but the latter would have been a problem.<p>Edit: stupid homophones.