| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
November 23rd 04, 01:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
N2EY wrote:
In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: What courses, exactly James, did you have in your freshman year in E-school which taught/preached how to do a "rigorous analysis of all facets of the problem at hand . . . a list of problems impeding the design goal is developed, and solutions are proposed for each until all have been . . " and come out of it with working pile of hardware? Ya missed the point. Unless you can cite your soup-to-nuts "engineered" pile of freshman hardware I didn't miss the point. Boilerplate verbiage like: "In engineering, this requires a rigorous analysis of all facets of the problem at hand - a list of problems impeding the design goal is developed, and solutions are proposed for each until all have been satisfactorily resolved" is the ES 101 stuff. Actually doing it is very different. For example - just what *are* all the facets of a given problem?. I have no idea what "ES 101" is or was. One of those intro engineering courses. Lays out basic concepts and methods. . . . as if . . maybe two-three years outta E-school you were allowed to take a poke at an assignment like that. More like a year. Sometimes right out of the chute, sometimes never and perhaps with a glaring exception or two never in a freshman year out in commercial reality. Plus there's a big difference between giving the kid a project to do (every aspect of which will be checked by someone more experienced) and really being in charge of something. Freshemen do get projects. . . Because that's what we get paid to do. Perhaps wrongly, more likely not, we don't have a helluva lotta time for approaching projects like ballooning to 100,000 feet with science fair project mentalities. Interpret as you will. The trick is that the volunteer folks don't have the paycheck incentive. Just the reverse - such a project costs them money! So the motivation has to be elsewhere. You're taking it off onto a couple irrelevent tangents. No, completely relevant. There isn't much real "engineering" in the hard numeric design sense attached to doing what KB3EIA proposes. It's like adding a room onto a house - you wouldn't do a complete stress analysis of every stud and joist, nor a fluid dynamic analysis of the plumbing just so you could have a half-bath on the ground floor. Bingo! The topic is how various folk who come from different educational, training and employment backgrounds approach the technical aspects of pulling off non-commercial stunts like sending homebrewed electronics packages to 100,000 feet with a balloon. OK. Seasoned technical types degreed and otherwise learn out in the college of hard knocks how to plan and execute projects in highly systematic manners because when money is involved the project better be pulled off properly or yer outta work. Which is not the same factor here. In business if ya signed the contract to deliver X on date Y, you better do it or bad things will happen. In this balloon thing, a delay of weeks or months is no big deal if the result is success rather than failure. That's the incentive. Beyond that we is what we is and we don't change our stripes when we get involved in the planning of off-hours volunteer efforts or our hobbies. Maybe *you* don't. People need to differentiate between work and play. Those who can't get grumpy! ;^) Wherein come the clashes with the non-technical types we get involved with on joint efforts. Pick any mid-to-large scale Field Day planning session around here for a perfect example. You might wanna look up how the CP folks did... Send the non-technical types to me. I don't differentiate between them and what is apparently the first class Hams. Perhaps they will learn, and eventually become technical types. My main job in this whole project has been to SELL people on the concept of something that is not particularly new, but has been made more interesting by a fusion of Ham radio, GPS, Packet radio, and Schools, or perhaps more accurately, youth in general. I **TODJA** to stick to being the cheerleader and delegate the tech stuff to the technoids dammit but NO, you got all ****y huffy about it instead! ****y huffy is par for the course here, isn't it? . . . yeah . . . which of course is the whole bottom bottom line . . sigh bwaahaahaa Leo is VE, a VE6 if I'm not mistaken. How does anyone know for sure? He's been anonymous since day one here. He let his cat out of the bag at some point in past but it got past you. He's a VE but I had him in the wrong province. Didn't get past me. Leo sez he's a VE3. But no call, no last name, no positive ID, no website, no outside confirmation. Maybe he is, maybe he ain't. Not that there's anyhting wrong with that! He could just as easily be another of Len's online personalities. No way, changing writing styles like changing fingerprints, can't be done. Nonsense. Ghostwriters do it all the time. Len's done the pseudonym thing here more than once - that we know of. Leo absolutely is not Sweetums. Or vice versa. Maybe. Maybe not. I'm not losing any sleep over it. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Threaded Mode
