audioholic 5,000+ posts
not a moderator
I think you missed Steven's point. When manufacturing switches from assembly cells to an assembly line, things change. For example, as Steven mentioned, many times its much more cost effective to allow a product to continue through the line, even when its known to have a defect. Why? Because its an assembly line, there are hundreds more products on that line waiting to be processed. It does not make sense to shut down the whole line for one defect. That is why assembly lines are designed with QC inspection points along it, so a defective product can be caught and processed -at the proper time-.True, buts where do the benefits of pride in work exceed those in cost. The damaged engine did not make it to the customer, but how does installing a destroyed motor affect the employee. What does that say about his work. He put an engine in that was bad, and was told to do so. Assembly lines are the most effecient way to produce pretty much anything, but somewhere in the middle there has to pride in a job and not constant manotany. There is nothing worse then doing a job that you don't have any say in.
Another thing I've been pondering is program cars. (A car built with any available parts from any year or model.) Is that what the screw ups are??? QC points out that the car is not satisfactorya dn then sends it to the parts bin so that something can be thrown together form leftover parts.
When you crack a basket in production or bend a VC does the sub continue to be built??? If so what happens at the end of the line. Would you sell a sub that had any sort of flaw if it passed "QC." When I purchase a product from a company i trust I expect nothing but the best the company has to offer.
Many times a program car will have many problems becasue of one varience in the materials used because they are from different cars. I work at autozone and you would be amazed at how many cars don't have the parts they should have, and I believe that this is somehow related to the problems many American cars have.
As for American engineering, Im an American engineer who designs automated machinery. Ive been designing this type of machinery for over 10 years, working with 4 different American companies on them. My (our) machines compete directly with machines and machine bilders from Japan, Germany, etc. I laugh when I hear people talk about Japanese and German engineering like its magical, its not. Many times its over engineered, especially by the Japanese. I could tell you some pretty silly design stories from a Japanese machine I was able to thoroughly inspect. Let me give an example: computer controlled. Our American machines are computer controlled (obviously), but the Japanese (and one company in particular) went overboard. They designed this overly large and complex PLC (computer controller) into theior machine. In doing so, they put the computer and all its electronics on top of the machine, directly abocve the heat (was a brazing machine) and noxious funes. The machine was beautiful, looked like a million bucks, probably cost about that, and could do anything but fry you eggs in the morning. The problem? That sophiscated computer controller died in the first two months of production, due to poor design implimentation. As of last week, our company (an American company) has released a new product line that clearly blows away anything made by the Germans or the Japanese.
Moral of the story? American engineering is some of the best in the world, as good as anyone elses. Go work on a BMW, Mercedes or Toyota, then come tell us how superior German or Japanese engineering is. We all make great products, and we all make some real crappy ones. Did you realize in Europe Mercedes is a taxi type car, and cars like a Lincoln, Cadillac etc are highly revered? The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.