Barry,
Sometimes we have to put on the Scientists hat, but when the rubber
meets the road and we have to come up with a product, we have to put on
the design engineers hat and say that how much compromise is required to
meet 1) customer demands, 2) budget constraints, 3) speed to first
customer shipment, 4) adherence to the initial specifications that have
been published.
If you can meet 2 of the 4 above, you have done OK, 3 is better, but
takes more effort.
I worked both as a design engineer and as a Product Assurance Test Team
Leader whose efforts were to test the product to conform to the
specifications or fix it - an alternative was to change the
specifications, which usually did not sit well with me, but was reality.
73,
W3FPR
On 6/10/2020 7:55 PM, Barry wrote:
Don,
I worked as a design engineer and then transitioned to system
engineering/project management. In those latter days, I would receive
a requirement set from which I needed to make sense. I also had
budgetary issues that were built in, more requirements than money.
And, there might have been other conflicts. So, I know what e had to
do, maximize the number of requirements satisfied with in the set.
Yes. We engineers were pretty well trained, but when making
decisions on what had to go or be included it wasn't always a 2+2 = 4
which is precise. Mathematicians are precise and there may be only
answer to the equation, but that wasn't the world I was living in; I
could have many different solutions based on the requirements. This is
the point I was trying to make.
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[email protected]
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [email protected]
