Substandard Italian workmanship renders first 787s unsafe

Bob Myers writes:

And is your experience with supplier selection and qualification
as extensive as, say, your experience in piloting?

I was not responsible for selection and qualification, but I had to deal with
the results thereof for years.

On Jun 26, 9:47*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Tom P writes:
Factory workers make mistakes all the time. It's normal.

The number and magnitude of mistakes they make depend a great deal on
corporate and social culture.

I recall Akio Morita describing such a problem. Sony was building Trinitrons
in both Japan and the USA. In both countries, the tubes had to meet the same
tolerances. Nevertheless, the company found that the Japanese tubes were
always far closer to perfection than the USA tubes.

Finally, management figure it out. The Japanese always tried to get things
perfect, no matter what the accepted tolerances were, whereas the Americans
didn't care whether it was perfect or not, as long as it fell within the
tolerances.

To fix this, Sony made the tolerances far tighter for the USA tubes. Their
quality then improved significantly.

It was all about culture.

If anything, it says something about the Italian quality control who let
the parts out in the first place, and Boeing quality control who let the
parts into the assembly line.

The best way to ensure quality is to build it right the first time, not to
throw out half the inventory during quality inspections.
Don't allow yourselves be puppets controlled by the puppetmaster.
Responses feed his ego and allow him to attempt to display
superiority.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Bob Myers writes:

And is your experience with supplier selection and qualification
as extensive as, say, your experience in piloting?

I was not responsible for selection and qualification, but I had to deal
with
the results thereof for years.

Woosh.
--
JohnT

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
JohnT writes:

Lots of people would consider that Italian technology is at least as good as
anything emanating from Chicago.

Then Boeing must have picked the wrong Italian partner. And this appears to be
an issue with workmanship, not technology or design. The tails were simply not
put together correctly, implying unqualified, careless, or lazy workers.

And just how many manufacturing programs have you been involved with that
you are able to make such a determination?

Let me guess, you play Microsoft Manufacturing Simulator.

In my experience with real world production, if some of the subassemblies
are "wrong" it is usually a QA and inspection problem with the builder and
if they are almost or all "wrong" it is usually a problem with the
documentation package sent to the builder.

You can't say what the defect percentage is nor do you have any insight
what so ever in the manufacturing process.

Based on a total lack of information, your conclusion is Italian workers
are unqualified, careless, or lazy.

Yeah, right.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
Tom P writes:

Factory workers make mistakes all the time. It's normal.

The number and magnitude of mistakes they make depend a great deal on
corporate and social culture.

I recall Akio Morita describing such a problem. Sony was building Trinitrons
in both Japan and the USA. In both countries, the tubes had to meet the same
tolerances. Nevertheless, the company found that the Japanese tubes were
always far closer to perfection than the USA tubes.

Finally, management figure it out. The Japanese always tried to get things
perfect, no matter what the accepted tolerances were, whereas the Americans
didn't care whether it was perfect or not, as long as it fell within the
tolerances.

To fix this, Sony made the tolerances far tighter for the USA tubes. Their
quality then improved significantly.

All of which was stupidity on Sony's part.

All things have a tolerance and tighter tolerances increase costs.

If Sony needed tighter tolerance they should have originally specified
tighter tolerances instead of ****ing and moaning that stuff made to
their specified tolerance wasn't "good enough".

It was all about culture.

Wrong, it is all about getting the specifications to be what is really
needed in the first place.

That is basic engineering.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

All of which was stupidity on Sony's part.

Sony's Trinitron tubes were the best in the world for many years. They
commanded a higher price than other tubes, and people paid it. Professionals
bought scarcely anything else, despite the higher costs. That doesn't sound
like stupidity.

All things have a tolerance and tighter tolerances increase costs.

They also increase quality, and you get what you pay for. In Morita's day,
Sony had a worldwide reputation for quality, especially in the domain of
professional video equipment. Tight tolerances were a part of that.

If Sony needed tighter tolerance they should have originally specified
tighter tolerances instead of ****ing and moaning that stuff made to
their specified tolerance wasn't "good enough".

They didn't expect Americans to be so careless. The Japanese were
conscientious and tried to do their best. The Americans just did the minimum
necessary.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

All of which was stupidity on Sony's part.

Sony's Trinitron tubes were the best in the world for many years. They
commanded a higher price than other tubes, and people paid it. Professionals
bought scarcely anything else, despite the higher costs. That doesn't sound
like stupidity.

Mostly all true but totally irrelevant to the discussion.

All things have a tolerance and tighter tolerances increase costs.

They also increase quality, and you get what you pay for. In Morita's day,
Sony had a worldwide reputation for quality, especially in the domain of
professional video equipment. Tight tolerances were a part of that.

Also totally irrelevant to the discussion.

If Sony needed tighter tolerance they should have originally specified
tighter tolerances instead of ****ing and moaning that stuff made to
their specified tolerance wasn't "good enough".

They didn't expect Americans to be so careless. The Japanese were
conscientious and tried to do their best. The Americans just did the minimum
necessary.

No, the Americans delivered exactly what Sony ordered to the tolerances
Sony set.

Sony ordered product to a specification and Sony got product to that
specification.

The Americans were smart enough to know you don't get paid for the extra
cost to deliver something that is "better" than what the PO says.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

No, the Americans delivered exactly what Sony ordered to the tolerances
Sony set.

You inadvertently illustrate the exact problem that Morita had with the USA
factory. The Americans didn't care about striving for perfection; all they
cared about was staying inside whatever tolerances were defined.

The Americans were smart enough to know you don't get paid for the extra
cost to deliver something that is "better" than what the PO says.

The Americans lacked pride in workmanship and strong professional ethics.
Apparently all they cared about was money.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

No, the Americans delivered exactly what Sony ordered to the tolerances
Sony set.

You inadvertently illustrate the exact problem that Morita had with the USA
factory. The Americans didn't care about striving for perfection; all they
cared about was staying inside whatever tolerances were defined.

It is called a contract.

The contract defines what is to be delivered.

The Americans did that.

End of issue.

The Americans were smart enough to know you don't get paid for the extra
cost to deliver something that is "better" than what the PO says.

The Americans lacked pride in workmanship and strong professional ethics.
Apparently all they cared about was money.

Pride and strong professional ethics says deliver to the customer what the
customer ordered, which is exactly what they did.

As a business, those in charge would be out on the street if they advocated
spending extra money and reducing company profits to deliver something they
had NOT been asked to deliver.

If the customer wants tighter tolerances on something, it is up to the
customer to specify those tolerances and pay for any increase in cost resulting
from those tighter tolerances.



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

It is called a contract.

The contract defines what is to be delivered.

The Americans did that.

In the United States, law takes the place of morals. If it's legal, it's
considered moral. If it's illegal, it's considered immoral. Morality itself
has been discarded.

If the customer wants tighter tolerances on something, it is up to the
customer to specify those tolerances and pay for any increase in cost resulting
from those tighter tolerances.

The Japanese kept tighter tolerances at the same cost. They had stronger
ethics.