-
#540
by
Propforce
on 18 Dec, 2006 06:59
-
Jim - 17/12/2006 6:05 AM
1. Boeing is the biggest manufacturer of satellites because it bought the biggest manufacturer of satellites: Hughes. and it also bought another one, Rockwell. McDonnell Douglas (Huntington Beach) had/has very little spacecraft experience (its only program finished in the early 90's). And it was evident in the X-37 program
2. Wrong, there is a hugh difference. Different environments, different mission durations, different structures. More electronics, different power system, different propulsions
3. The Boeing Shuttle work moving to Houston has been pointed out as one of the problems that led to the Columbia accident.
know more
1. Your info is outdated. The merger happened ~10 yrs ago. Since then there has been a great deal of movement in engineering staff with various programs and sites (HB/ SB/ El Segundo/ Anaheim/ West Hills, etc.). Your analysis doesn't hold water.
The X-37 program was an evident of how NASA MSFC was incapable of managing a spacecraft program (or a launch vehicle program for that matter). Look at how things are different with the X-37B, or the previous X-40 program. Enough said.
2. Wrong again. There are more similarities than differences. Certainly the specific environments & functional requirements maybe different, but the approach is the same. Just as an aircraft structural engineer is capable of transitioning between a Beoing 777 and a C-17 design & analysis (with all the differences as you stated above), a LV engineer is capable transitioning to spacecraft design and vice versa. In fact, we're getting more & more Boeing 787 and 747 work here in HB. Now argue why a LV engineer can NOT transition to work on aircraft, I dare you
I will simply reply to you that we've done it with our people & programs, despite your speculation. Enough said.
3. Boeing HB still has 300+ people dedicated to the Shuttle work. Our guys have trained their 3rd or 4th "replacement" in Houston, but these "replacements" could not possibly learn all the accumulated knowledge over the past 100 flights and they were not interested in staying in a "sunset" program, so the attrition rate is high. Boeing Houston has no choice but to continue to rely on Boeing HB to support the Shuttle program, particularly with the senior people with all the experience.
-
#541
by
Propforce
on 18 Dec, 2006 07:41
-
Gus - 17/12/2006 4:57 PM
One thing I never cared for was the "we bought you" attitude that was prevalent in the early years. Hopefully that will not repeat itself.
Well.... I am afraid that human nature as it is, this "attitude" is bound to repeat itself once the Delta people start to show up in Denver. Afterall, we will be in a Lockheed owned facility surrounded by Lockheed people & forced to learn Lockheed's procedures.
I feel bad for your techs who need to move to Alabama. Catfish can never be a legitimate form of sushi as far as I am concern.
..... I should also point out that last Monday, we all found out by going into "LM people", our HR system, that all our salary ranges were reduced by 9 to 10 percent. The official answer is that this was a glitch in the system and that it will be corrected. It is difficult for me to understand how a salary range can be affected in a straight over conversion. The immediate impact is nil, future raises will be affected by penetration into your salary range.
I see the first step toward *cost saving* has begin with the ULA already.
Job offer letters has gone out to Delta employees. They want to hear from the managers first as it will make a difference to the troops to know who they'll be working for in making their job decision. We will be required to work for a minimum period of 2 years before we're eligible to seek employment back in Boeing. But we will be paid a 6 month bonus if we do.
-
#542
by
Jim
on 18 Dec, 2006 11:44
-
" There are more similarities than differences. Certainly the specific environments & functional requirements maybe different, but the approach is the same. Just as an aircraft structural engineer is capable of transitioning between a Beoing 777 and a C-17 design & analysis (with all the differences as you stated above), a LV engineer is capable transitioning to spacecraft design and vice versa. In fact, we're getting more & more Boeing 787 and 747 work here in HB. Now argue why a LV engineer can NOT transition to work on aircraft, I dare you "
Yes, you are only right in that LV and aircraft engineering are similar but not LV and spacecraft. I am talking design and system engineering. Structures is a small part.
-
#543
by
Jim
on 18 Dec, 2006 11:53
-
Propforce - 18/12/2006 3:24 AM
Well.... I am afraid that human nature as it is, this "attitude" is bound to repeat itself once the Delta people start to show up in Denver. Afterall, we will be in a Lockheed owned facility surrounded by Lockheed people & forced to learn Lockheed's procedures.
many of your customers hope this is so. This is one of the reasons that the USAF (NRO) wasn't against ULA. They had found Boeing lacking in processes and system engineering and are hoping some LM influences will come into the Delta program
-
#544
by
Propforce
on 18 Dec, 2006 13:15
-
Jim - 18/12/2006 4:27 AM
Yes, you are only right in that LV and aircraft engineering are similar but not LV and spacecraft. I am talking design and system engineering. Structures is a small part.
*Sigh* I think you really need to ask those who does this type of work for a living on this subject. LV and spacecraft has MORE similarities than LV and aircraft.
-
#545
by
Propforce
on 18 Dec, 2006 13:19
-
Jim - 18/12/2006 4:36 AM
many of your customers hope this is so. This is one of the reasons that the USAF (NRO) wasn't against ULA. They had found Boeing lacking in processes and system engineering and are hoping some LM influences will come into the Delta program
Many of my customers are very happy with us, perhaps with the exception of a single NASA mission integrator who's clearly bias
But then again, he's not our customer anyway
-
#546
by
Jim
on 18 Dec, 2006 13:32
-
Propforce - 18/12/2006 9:02 AM
Jim - 18/12/2006 4:36 AM
many of your customers hope this is so. This is one of the reasons that the USAF (NRO) wasn't against ULA. They had found Boeing lacking in processes and system engineering and are hoping some LM influences will come into the Delta program
Many of my customers are very happy with us, perhaps with the exception of a single NASA mission integrator who's clearly bias
But then again, he's not our customer anyway
You don't work mission integration so you wouldn't know your customers. Did you attend the AIAA mission integration conference?
It isn't a bias if it is the truth. I have worked 4 Delta missions and 2 Atlas
-
#547
by
Jim
on 18 Dec, 2006 13:43
-
Propforce - 18/12/2006 8:58 AM
Jim - 18/12/2006 4:27 AM
Yes, you are only right in that LV and aircraft engineering are similar but not LV and spacecraft. I am talking design and system engineering. Structures is a small part.
*Sigh* I think you really need to ask those who does this type of work for a living on this subject. LV and spacecraft has MORE similarities than LV and aircraft.
An LV flight is too short to experience all the environments a spacecraft sees. The amount of time an upperstage is in space is insignicant wrt to a spacecraft life. If the upperstage never did a 2nd burn, wouldn't have anything in common with a spacecraft. The time the LV spends in the atmosphere has a larger affect on the environments.
-
#548
by
spacedreams
on 18 Dec, 2006 16:21
-
How many of the Delta 4 designers came from the Space Station design group? It seems like every time there is a question about any of the Huntington Beach ISS components we have to hunt down a designer who has moved on to Delta. Are there any other big programs that people moved to at that plant?
-
#549
by
Propforce
on 19 Dec, 2006 01:04
-
There were lots of engineers, including designers, that came from the ISS during the initial Delta IV phase and during the EMD phase. The ISS was ramping down at the time.
There are many programs here in HB, including spacecraft programs. Also, Boeing Anaheim plans to move its 3,000+ staff to HB in the next several years, so this place will continue to thrive.
-
#550
by
Propforce
on 19 Dec, 2006 01:08
-
Jim - 18/12/2006 6:15 AM
You don't work mission integration so you wouldn't know your customers. Did you attend the AIAA mission integration conference? It isn't a bias if it is the truth. I have worked 4 Delta missions and 2 Atlas
Yes, I have intelligently navigated my career so I don't end up as a pencil pusher. I design and build things, so I consider it a blessing.
-
#551
by
Propforce
on 19 Dec, 2006 01:50
-
Propforce - 18/12/2006 12:24 AM
..... We will be required to work for a minimum period of 2 years before we're eligible to seek employment back in Boeing. But we will be paid a 6 month bonus if we do.
Damn, just found out the executives will be getting a one-year bonus if they stay for 2 years. ^&*(%^ class system !!
-
#552
by
Jim
on 19 Dec, 2006 01:53
-
Propforce - 18/12/2006 8:51 PM
Jim - 18/12/2006 6:15 AM
You don't work mission integration so you wouldn't know your customers. Did you attend the AIAA mission integration conference? It isn't a bias if it is the truth. I have worked 4 Delta missions and 2 Atlas
Yes, I have intelligently navigated my career so I don't end up as a pencil pusher. I design and build things, so I consider it a blessing.
that is a matter of debate I have intelligently navigated my career so I get to see the big picture and don't worry about minor details as design and pushing a mouse in a CAD program. I guess you have avoided any real responsibility and limited yourself to lower tier jobs and you won't be making any money then neither.
you post above, just dispproved, "intelligently' navigated
-
#553
by
Gus
on 19 Dec, 2006 04:56
-
Jim - 18/12/2006 6:36 PM
Propforce - 18/12/2006 8:51 PM
Jim - 18/12/2006 6:15 AM
You don't work mission integration so you wouldn't know your customers. Did you attend the AIAA mission integration conference? It isn't a bias if it is the truth. I have worked 4 Delta missions and 2 Atlas
Yes, I have intelligently navigated my career so I don't end up as a pencil pusher. I design and build things, so I consider it a blessing.
that is a matter of debate I have intelligently navigated my career so I get to see the big picture and don't worry about minor details as design and pushing a mouse in a CAD program. I guess you have avoided any real responsibility and limited yourself to lower tier jobs and you won't be making any money then neither.
you post above, just dispproved, "intelligently' navigated
That is quite an arrogant statement. The devil is always in the details and I have been around way too many people who can recite the system that they are responsible for but can't release a drawing because they don't know how to model it in Pro-E, SDRC IDEAS, CATIA etc.. I would say we have too many "big picture" people looking for a meeting to attend. Whenever we have a SRR, PDR, CDR etc... the NASA folks just come right out of the woodwork. Getting drawings released, procedures implemented, and product built is where the rubber hits the road and where the real responsibility lies. Not worrying about minor details is what causes failures. You are perfectly suited to work at NASA.
Your post above dishonors the fine folks who work in the trenches and make our space programs what they are.
-
#554
by
Gus
on 19 Dec, 2006 05:18
-
Jim - 18/12/2006 6:26 AM
Propforce - 18/12/2006 8:58 AM
Jim - 18/12/2006 4:27 AM
Yes, you are only right in that LV and aircraft engineering are similar but not LV and spacecraft. I am talking design and system engineering. Structures is a small part.
*Sigh* I think you really need to ask those who does this type of work for a living on this subject. LV and spacecraft has MORE similarities than LV and aircraft.
An LV flight is too short to experience all the environments a spacecraft sees. The amount of time an upperstage is in space is insignicant wrt to a spacecraft life. If the upperstage never did a 2nd burn, wouldn't have anything in common with a spacecraft. The time the LV spends in the atmosphere has a larger affect on the environments.
If you had to envelope the environments that a spacecraft sees, the major concerns are during ascent on the booster stage. RD-180 throttles down to hold 5.5gs because that is what spacecraft in this class are designed to. MA-5 Booster jettison occurred at 5.5gs for the same reasons. Add transient loads and vibe levels during ascent and you start realizing that a spacecraft in orbit is in a relatively benign environment save for thermal issues. Reliabilty factors governing duration are a matter of qual levels. Give an engineer a problem and define the constraints and the methodology will be the same. Make sure that the work is reviewed by the proper gray-beards and you can transition folks to different types of products and be successful. If not, how would we ever get college hires to work and replace retirees?
-
#555
by
Dexter
on 19 Dec, 2006 06:33
-
Jim - 18/12/2006 8:36 PM
Propforce - 18/12/2006 8:51 PM
Jim - 18/12/2006 6:15 AM
You don't work mission integration so you wouldn't know your customers. Did you attend the AIAA mission integration conference? It isn't a bias if it is the truth. I have worked 4 Delta missions and 2 Atlas
Yes, I have intelligently navigated my career so I don't end up as a pencil pusher. I design and build things, so I consider it a blessing.
that is a matter of debate I have intelligently navigated my career so I get to see the big picture and don't worry about minor details as design and pushing a mouse in a CAD program. I guess you have avoided any real responsibility and limited yourself to lower tier jobs and you won't be making any money then neither.
you post above, just dispproved, "intelligently' navigated
So what you are saying is that people who actually do work don't make money and the people who see the big picture and don't concern themselves with minor details make the big bucks.
No wonder space programs are not viable. Too many chiefs and not enough indians.
You just validated the perceived problem with NASA.
PS - Isn't pencil pushing old speak for Powerpoint chart maker?
-
#556
by
Dexter
on 19 Dec, 2006 06:43
-
Gus - 19/12/2006 12:01 AM
Jim - 18/12/2006 6:26 AM
Propforce - 18/12/2006 8:58 AM
Jim - 18/12/2006 4:27 AM
Yes, you are only right in that LV and aircraft engineering are similar but not LV and spacecraft. I am talking design and system engineering. Structures is a small part.
*Sigh* I think you really need to ask those who does this type of work for a living on this subject. LV and spacecraft has MORE similarities than LV and aircraft.
An LV flight is too short to experience all the environments a spacecraft sees. The amount of time an upperstage is in space is insignicant wrt to a spacecraft life. If the upperstage never did a 2nd burn, wouldn't have anything in common with a spacecraft. The time the LV spends in the atmosphere has a larger affect on the environments.
If you had to envelope the environments that a spacecraft sees, the major concerns are during ascent on the booster stage. RD-180 throttles down to hold 5.5gs because that is what spacecraft in this class are designed to. MA-5 Booster jettison occurred at 5.5gs for the same reasons. Add transient loads and vibe levels during ascent and you start realizing that a spacecraft in orbit is in a relatively benign environment save for thermal issues. Reliabilty factors governing duration are a matter of qual levels. Give an engineer a problem and define the constraints and the methodology will be the same. Make sure that the work is reviewed by the proper gray-beards and you can transition folks to different types of products and be successful. If not, how would we ever get college hires to work and replace retirees?
This sounds like HB engineers could go and work for Northrop Grumman in LA instead of moving to Denver.
-
#557
by
Jim
on 19 Dec, 2006 10:47
-
Gus - 19/12/2006 12:39 AM
Jim - 18/12/2006 6:36 PM
Propforce - 18/12/2006 8:51 PM
Jim - 18/12/2006 6:15 AM
You don't work mission integration so you wouldn't know your customers. Did you attend the AIAA mission integration conference? It isn't a bias if it is the truth. I have worked 4 Delta missions and 2 Atlas
Yes, I have intelligently navigated my career so I don't end up as a pencil pusher. I design and build things, so I consider it a blessing.
that is a matter of debate I have intelligently navigated my career so I get to see the big picture and don't worry about minor details as design and pushing a mouse in a CAD program. I guess you have avoided any real responsibility and limited yourself to lower tier jobs and you won't be making any money then neither.
you post above, just dispproved, "intelligently' navigated
That is quite an arrogant statement. The devil is always in the details and I have been around way too many people who can recite the system that they are responsible for but can't release a drawing because they don't know how to model it in Pro-E, SDRC IDEAS, CATIA etc.. I would say we have too many "big picture" people looking for a meeting to attend. Whenever we have a SRR, PDR, CDR etc... the NASA folks just come right out of the woodwork. Getting drawings released, procedures implemented, and product built is where the rubber hits the road and where the real responsibility lies. Not worrying about minor details is what causes failures. You are perfectly suited to work at NASA.
Your post above dishonors the fine folks who work in the trenches and make our space programs what they are.
You are right. I apologize.
But someone has to be the pencil pusher and what is wrong with defending that. One of the things I do is write statements of work, which without, there would be no work for the designers
-
#558
by
Propforce
on 21 Dec, 2006 21:09
-
Okay, tis Christmas and I am on my last day at work this year. Ironically I have a Lockheed Atlas V calendar (beautiful pictures BTW) and it shows those poor folks at Lockheed have to work tomorrow (... wiping tears now...).
I won't have many chances to post and poke fun at Jim over the holidays, so I will wish everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
Best of luck with the folks in Denver as I see on TV that you folks are "snowed in" again. We are having a "winter" here in HB as well, a chilly 60 degree but sunny weather.
Be safe and spend the quality time with the love ones.
Prop-
-
#559
by
quark
on 28 Dec, 2006 01:29
-
Propforce - 21/12/2006 2:52 PM
Okay, tis Christmas and I am on my last day at work this year. Ironically I have a Lockheed Atlas V calendar (beautiful pictures BTW) and it shows those poor folks at Lockheed have to work tomorrow (... wiping tears now...).
I won't have many chances to post and poke fun at Jim over the holidays, so I will wish everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
Best of luck with the folks in Denver as I see on TV that you folks are "snowed in" again. We are having a "winter" here in HB as well, a chilly 60 degree but sunny weather.
Be safe and spend the quality time with the love ones.
Prop-
Snow is beautiful, especially at holliday time.
