[quote=RUEY220;2912725]I didn't mean to strike a chord and appear i have anything against engineers. With all due respect, I know engineers are much needed as well as doctors and biochemists, but they do make mistakes to. My reason in bringing up the examples I did was because there was the unpreventable and the unforseens in life. [quote]
RUEY, this is really good. I thought this thread was dead but I'm browsing and I like your outlook. I know you don't hate engineers, and frankly, I could care less. We recognize that we can't possibly account for every event so we tag a factor of safety of some kind and cross our fingers hoping that the owner's manual is comprehensible and that
the owner would actually read it!! Quote:
Originally Posted by RUEY220  I look at Biochemists like engineers but they focus on drugs and medicine. If you are to compare in parrallel controlled lab tests and experiments between car manufacturers, and drug manufacturers, who do you think has more budget and more research? I would say it is the drug companies, but yet why do drugs with side effects still make it to the market? Because the lab test are not 100%, and they overlook things or they make mistakes. |
Partially correct! Again, it's a matter of profit and all you have to do is look at the tobacco industry - they knew what they were doing was bad but they kept on doing it until they got caught. The evidence is clear that the decision to deceive the world on the dangers of tobacco didn't come from the lab folks! Management has to make sure the company makes profit, most times at the expense of citizens. Just look at what's being dumped unto the so called
developing countries! Stuff that will not pass EPA/FAD/whatever here in the US! The lab folks aren't making those critical decisions. Management is, and I don't blame them because one single purpose of any business is to make money using whatever legal routes are available (we hope), and sometimes, in the process, considering the human impact of whatever decisions they may. Why do you think we are paying so much for gas today? The lab folks haven't changed a thing, as far as I know! So who makes that decision to go from $100/barrel to $130?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUEY220 Again I'm not out to put down engineers and blame it on them 100% but my response was only to a sarcastic remark that MB engineers didn't think of this or that? |
Oh, don't even get me started. MB engineers didn't think of a lot of stuff. But is that really true for a company globally known for near perfect engineering? Releasing a new vehicle platform with problems is not a issue - nearly all new products will have some bugs to be worked out. However, letting those problems persist through the life cycle of the product line, even into the 164 product is completely unacceptable, and from my interactions with MBUSA about W163 issues, they didn't leave any room for blaming the engineers! Just picture a F16 or F14 or F15 (and these are from the lowest bidders, BTW) having continuous lifetime issues. It's technically intolerable, but apparently MB management didn't see it that way because consumers were buying and money was coming in!
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUEY220 ...You can't always assume they covered everything or as you mention there are other reasons for why things happen. I happened to point out the possible reasons on the engineering side which I see your point is not fair. |
It's impossible for engineering to cover everything otherwise companies would only have engineering departments and as you know, that will not work. Now that I have an idea of what it takes to run a business, I really believe that engineers aren't trained in the business of running a business. And why should they be? At some point we have to rely on users to RTFM and if they don't, well, too bad!
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUEY220 In response to your comments pointing toward management calling the final shots, it's also not fair for you to do so because I'm from that side of exec management and I know how it is when workers blame the upper management for mistakes and failures. It is up to us to correct what happens below, but again not everything is in our control. |
The only time upper management doesn't have control is when engineering data clearly shows that large amounts of money would be lost with a given product. And again, this is not a criticism
because corporations have to make money to survive. Infact, if upper management didn't do what they do, the engineer would be out of work!
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUEY220 ...If a lead engineer tells CTO his team covered everything, how can everyone be so sure? By the time everyone finds out a mistake was made it is too late... |
If a lead engineer tells you that, fire the lead engineer, period!
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUEY220 ...If you're simply blaming the bean counting at MB, do you think they would suddenly recall vehicles, spend even more money on changing design, when it could have been fixed from the get go?... |
Well, they did it during the entire production cycle of the W163 and even into the 164. In fact, MB management even accepted blame for this. Do you really believe that a company like MB can't technically resolve reoccurring electronic issues over a 7-year period of one of their products when the competitors have no problems resolving such issues? As upper management, you'd give that engineer a solid F- for not coming up with a solution to reoccurring ABS/ETS/BAS/...XYZ problems..."Lexus has it nailed down, why not us..." is how I envision the conversation would start.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUEY220 ...You are right, they are in the business to make money, but how sure are you that the managers at Firestone said ok, lets produce tires that have sidewalls that pop. Hopefully a few people gets killed in a car accident and we can settle those lawsuits. Business leaders fear lawsuits the most because they are never ending and as you said people are sue happy like in the case of Mcdonalds. A lawsuit is something you cannot calculate its risks because they're never ending. Why do you think compliance such as workplace sensitivity, safety audits are necessary? |
I don't believe the managers at F'Stone looked at it that way. They have been manufacturing tires for a long time and there probably wasn't any reason for them to doubt the new design. In this case, I really believe it was a combination engineering/management failure to cover the basics - SUVs were hot but no one at Ford bothered to observe driver behavior on cheap SUVs. This which led to "consumer failure," to not observe tire pressure instructions, etc, etc. Meanwhile, MB was building a more xpensive SUV that basically covered the "idiot" consumer from the tire problem. The McDonalds case is purely consumer selfishness which the design team thought could never happen - now we know better, and that's why legal should be part of the design team.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUEY220 The bottom line is that everyone works as a team and they're responsible as a team for whatever happens. People who don't realize this fail to run a solid operation and focus more on the blame game than anything else. I think the difference between my points and yours is that I'm describing things from a global perspective and not the engineering department's point of view. |
Agree, but that's the theory. In practice, the team thing always boils down to
one person making that crucial decision. And guess what? They're human and sometimes the result is either a Challenger, a Discovery, an EXXON Valdez, an Iraq War or a darn ML that constantly ranks at the bottom of the pile! All we as engineers can do is present credible data to management based on written specs! Management can read!!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUEY220 ... This post was way off topic already, but I just had to rebutt with the other point of view. Back to the K&N filters, I still can't understand however, how you're so against K&N filters. |
Yes, we're way off topic. But guess what? I off on a 2-week management training seminar and I plan to bing this up during our discussions. Back to the K&N filters, like upper management always does, you pick and chose. I never said I was against the K&N filters. I actually had them on a Nissan Pathfinder I once owned and on my just sold Nissan 300ZX turbo. I had no problems with the filters on those cars. However, in both cases I was looking for filter element longevity
NOT performance. Both vehicles went 100K+ each with a single K&N filter and I never felt any substantial performance gains.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUEY220 1) It last the lifetime of the car with cleaning
2) It has a better sound
3) It flows better (period)
Downside:
1) Your engine might last 200k miles with stock filter vs 198k miles with K&N. |
Agree on all points, but geeezzzzz, did you have to rub in the 2K difference to make your point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Linear Mode
