Quote from: Vultur on 08/09/2024 07:45 pmIf it's broader than aerospace, is it partially a generational shift thing? (The more numerous baby boom generation being mostly retired now, etc)When the economy is good, companies struggle to find workers, which makes it a) high cost to the company to fire an ineffective worker (because it's cheaper to retrain than to find and hire a replacement), and b) low cost to the worker to get fired (because everyone is hiring so it's easy to find another job). This makes the penalty for shoddy workmanship almost non-existent.As a Gen Xer, I'd love to blame the young'uns for this, but I think it's more of a zero-interest-rate phenomenon, which affects workers across all generations.
If it's broader than aerospace, is it partially a generational shift thing? (The more numerous baby boom generation being mostly retired now, etc)
This might deserve it's own thread. And I don't know that I have an actual point, just a lot of observations that could lead to a point. Boeing having unskilled labor isn't just a Boeing problem. Another program I work on (that I'm not comfortable outing), is 1) Firm Fixed Price, 2) way behind schedule, 3) engineering talent is leaving the program. It's easy to just blame management, but I also think many other things are happening at the same time. NASA moving to FFP contracts puts tremendous pressure on companies to reduce costs, which translates into lower resources (pay, oversight, etc). Add to that, that new commercial space companies rarely subcontract work (everyone is following SpaceX and Blue in bringing everything that they can in house), and it's hard to be an aerospace engineer these days (unless you live in Seattle, Denver, or LA).It's also easy to point to SpaceX and argue that they are very good at FFP, but as others have mentioned, they are a unicorn. SpaceX doesn't have to make a profit, they get don't get funding at the whim of outside investors, talented engineers seek THEM out to work 60-80 hrs a week for 40 hrs a week salary. SpaceX is a truly incredible company with incredible people. That is not the same bar to hold everyone else to.
Nonetheless, according to both DCMA and NASA Safety and Mission Assurance officials, the unusually high number of stamp warranty CARs reflects the seriousness of the nonconformity, and changing certified work order data without retention of historical information could increase the risk to the flight vehicle...Moreover, quality control deficiencies, if not identified and corrected, could increase safety risk to the integrated spacecraft...
For example, in September 2021, a Level II CAR noted that foreign object debris was identified inside the SLS Core. Stage 2 liquid hydrogen fuel tank. DCMA found contamination of metal shavings, Teflon, and other debris... on the forward dome panels inside of the tank. Foreign object debris can damage hardware and potentially injure flight crew when entrapped within crewed flight articles...For example, Boeing officials incorrectly approved hardware processing under unacceptable environmental conditions, accepted and presented damaged seals to NASA for inspection, and used outdated versions of work orders. DCMA also found that Boeing personnel made numerous administrative errors through changes to certified work order data without proper documentation and retention of historical information necessary to trace the changes...
Likely because, like a lot of management buzzword stuff, it's one thing to require it and another thing to figure out what it actually means,