In my stint in aerospace, the way manufacturing issues were dealt with usually annoyed me. If the issue was major enough, a committee would scrutinize it with a “root cause and corrective action”. Whether it was a mis-drilled hole or something bigger, the outcome was pretty much the same. There would be calls to: add more quality assurance inspections in the manufacturing process, or design some fixturing to make the process mindlessly repeatable, or redesign the part to make it easier to build. Not often was the outcome just that a technician screwed the pooch and needed to do better next time. (Is it possible that I’m only remembering the instances that meant more work for the engineering team? Maybe, but I can’t let trifling facts get in the way of my point.)
Very on point. It is certainly a difficult balance to achieve. When a business strives for efficiency, automation seems the obvious choice. But low rate production relies heavily on craftsmanship, and while it feels counterintuitive, it might be more efficient to focus on increasing the know how. Good post Surjan!
great article ! really liked your writing .
Very on point. It is certainly a difficult balance to achieve. When a business strives for efficiency, automation seems the obvious choice. But low rate production relies heavily on craftsmanship, and while it feels counterintuitive, it might be more efficient to focus on increasing the know how. Good post Surjan!
Speaking of hand knowledge, Surjan, where is this post’s Barbie?! :P