Re: Friday Light: Don't Let Engineers Write Docs

Subject: Re: Friday Light: Don't Let Engineers Write Docs
From: "William Sherman" <bsherman77 -at- embarqmail -dot- com>
To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:48:34 -0400


I've told my supervisor a few times that the junk we get from engineering would never be allowed in the aircraft industry. Many of them would last until they delivered their first item - drawing, spec, whatever. Unfortunately, many industries are just getting more and more sloppy in how they run things. I remember in the aircraft world I started in, every drawing number could be translated into a wealth of information - aircraft, model, year, system, subsystem, and so on. Look at the number and know where and on what it was located.

At my current job, the numbers are sequential. The only identifier is the prefix of two letters usually references the plant location for the engineering group who made the drawing, only because someone gave them a set of numbers to use so they didn't double up on the same number. But ECRs, ECNs, spreading the news on parts changes, and such are often ignored or if followed, woefully late. And they tunnel vision into only the model they are working on, often changing a part and keeping the same number, oblivious to what that does to other models that use that part.

Friday, I got a message that the pressures in a machine that was designed three years ago, has been in the field over a year, and has had documents for 2-1/2 years, are probably wrong and need to be changed.

Most of the reason is management, and management having sprung from lower management or management schools have no concept like when managers came up the ladder from the production line into the office and finally into management.

Who would tolerate this in the aircraft industry?

Well, six years ago, I was on a contract at Boeing. the level of quality in manuals was far below what was delivered 30 years ago, unfortunately. Review, engineering input, time on equipment to verify, and all were like an after thought, if at all. But we can sure make them look pretty!



----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack DeLand" <jackdeland -at- comcast -dot- net>
To: <brian -dot- henderson -at- mitchell1 -dot- com>; <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 4:40 PM
Subject: RE: Friday Light: Don't Let Engineers Write Docs


Distributing clearly defective documentation like this should be actionable IMHO. Who would tolerate this in the aircraft industry?

Sent from Outlook Mobile



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development | http://techwhirl.com

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com


Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives


References:
Friday Light: Don't Let Engineers Write Docs: From: Brian.Henderson
Re: Friday Light: Don't Let Engineers Write Docs: From: Peter Neilson
Re: Friday Light: Don't Let Engineers Write Docs: From: Gene Kim-Eng
RE: Friday Light: Don't Let Engineers Write Docs: From: Brian.Henderson
RE: Friday Light: Don't Let Engineers Write Docs: From: Jack DeLand

Previous by Author: LinkedIn - Facebook for Professionals? or is it really "Myspace"
Previous by Thread: Re: Friday Light: Don't Let Engineers Write Docs
Next by Thread: Re: Friday Light: Don't Let Engineers Write Docs


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads