[TowerTalk] Re: What was his name

[Chuck Lewis]

>> There is a school of
> > thought that's similar to MMM's theory..........it's called value
> > engineering.  What it says is given almost free reign, a good engineer
> > will always over design a product -- greatly adding to cost by
> > supplying things the customer truly doesn't need/want.  Good value
> > engineering starts with determining what the customer really
> > wants...and what priority it has...then designing exactly what is
> > needed to satisfy the customer....and not a thing more!

> >While there is certainly a tendency for many
engineers/marketeers/companies to keep adding capabilities to a system
during
> >design (creeping featurism), good product developers know when to "shoot
the engineer".  This is a far cry from the discussion of
> >Muntz and his ignoring of prudent design techniques like using bypass
capacitors, shielding, ferrite beads, etc.  Leaving these out > >creates a
very unreliable designs.


Yes. Nowhere else in this thread have I seen a reference to a set of design
requirements. This is where the balance of cost, capabilities, features,
schedule, reliability, weight (important in aerospace, etc.) and all the
other design parameters are argued, refined, evolved and agreed to. You
don't have to shoot the engineer; you only have to hold him or her to the
requirements, assuming they're valid. You do that by following the
development closely and by testing to the requirements (duh...). Muntz might
have had a set of requirements (including "maximize short term profit") that
he met beautifully. We can't criticize a design (TV, tower or antenna)
without knowing what the requirements were! We've seen this recently in
various threads where antennas were compared without regard to whether gain
or F/B, for example, were paramount.

A good design engineer will design to the requirements; a good systems
engineer will develop a balanced set of requirements. If the designer is
adding unnecessary bells and whistles, he either lacked a set of
requirements or was not held to them.
We can follow these principles even as appliance operators by taking time to
decide up front what is most important to us in our station design and
developing a set of requirements which balance performance, cost,
convenience, family considerations, and any others we wish to add to the
mix. Then the choice of stuff to build the station from will not always
reflect the latest, best, or most spiffy; but will more closely meet the
most effective mix to meet the requirements. Whether it's gain vs. F/B,
daytime operations vs. opening and closing the bands, contesting vs.
ragchewing, vs. DXing, or "how much can I get for $1500 bucks", a little
planning and discipline ahead of the credit card stage is important.

Chuck, N4NM
(Who is hoping nobody asks to see his "requirements")






--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com