It was my point, and i thought it was clear enough that it was just a comparison of projectile to target, and the damage a tiny object can cause; I should have added more words, maybe. Most at NASA thought that the foam couldn't have damaged the spacecraft, and they were wrong.
If a drone penetrates the wing, we don't really know if it can make it to the fuel tank when it hits at 500...
If your point is "small problems can lead to catastrophic consequences in complicated machines" then it's not helpful, because we have more specific information for planes that overrides such a generic statement.
> The above poster is saying that even small problems can lead to catastrophic consequences in complicated machines.
That's a very generic statement. Are you sure that was their real point? Not something more specific to air strikes?