Re: The 6-million-dollar documentation mistake

Subject: Re: The 6-million-dollar documentation mistake
From: Geoff Lane <geoff -at- gjctech -dot- co -dot- uk>
To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 14:39:15 +0000

On Friday, March 24, 2006, Edwin Skau wrote;

> I don't think this is as much a tribute to the importance of documentation
> as passing the buck to poor documentation. It is an effective way of
> sweeping the blame under the carpet, or lynching an unidentifiable someone.

> I don't know if absence of a documented procedure is a good excuse for not
> removing landing gear pins. I'm not sure if you'd excuse your mechanic or
> plumber of shoddy work because the procedures were inaccurate, or "well,
> that's how the manual says it is done..."

That said, don't most procedures in aviation have to be verified
before use? If that's so, surely any blame must pass to the person who
missed the pins during the verification process? After all, anyone can
make a mistake - which is the whole point of procedure verification
and procedure acceptance groups!

Just a thought ...



WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word features support for every major Help
format plus PDF, HTML and more. Flexible, precise, and efficient content
delivery. Try it today!.

Doc-To-Help includes a one-click RoboHelp project converter. It's that easy. Watch the demo at

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- infoinfocus -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit

To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

The 6-million-dollar documentation mistake: From: Paul Pehrson
Re: The 6-million-dollar documentation mistake: From: Edwin Skau

Previous by Author: Re: Probs Opening CHM Files
Next by Author: Re: Online Manuals of Style
Previous by Thread: Re: The 6-million-dollar documentation mistake
Next by Thread: RE: The 6-million-dollar documentation mistake

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads