A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Science Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Naval Reactor success ...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 18th 03, 07:27 AM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Naval Reactor success ...

stmx3 wrote:
I bring up the issue because I've seen QA work on subs and at NASA and I
place more trust in submarine QA, by ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE (if you could
quantify trust).


Were you in boats?

My own initial answer was "integrity"...but that was off the cuff. I
think "pride" in a job well done comes in to play, but mostly I believe
it's "training". Of the NASA QA I have experience with, there members
can be called to any particular job site to sign off a procedural step.
They may have no idea why that step is being performed or how it
affects the system, but if the technician torques a nut to 7.5 ft. lbs
+/- .01 ft. lbs. in accordance with the procedure, then that's enough
for the QA stamp. In the NAVY, the QAI implicitly understands the work
being performed and can tell that, yeah...although the nut was torqued
properly, it was the wrong material or it was in the wrong position, etc.

Any thoughts?


Training, integrity, and pride play large parts, certainly. OTOH
there was also can be significant penalties if one screws up either
the job itself, or the QA task. On the gripping hand, the folks
performing the work, or the QA know their lives are at stake if
something is screwed up.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.

  #22  
Old September 19th 03, 08:29 PM
stmx3
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Naval Reactor success ...

Derek Lyons wrote:

Were you in boats?


Yup. Aaaooogah Aaaoooogah. The underwater spaceship.


My own initial answer was "integrity"...but that was off the cuff. I
think "pride" in a job well done comes in to play, but mostly I believe
it's "training". Of the NASA QA I have experience with, there members
can be called to any particular job site to sign off a procedural step.
They may have no idea why that step is being performed or how it
affects the system, but if the technician torques a nut to 7.5 ft. lbs
+/- .01 ft. lbs. in accordance with the procedure, then that's enough
for the QA stamp. In the NAVY, the QAI implicitly understands the work
being performed and can tell that, yeah...although the nut was torqued
properly, it was the wrong material or it was in the wrong position, etc.

Any thoughts?



Training, integrity, and pride play large parts, certainly. OTOH
there was also can be significant penalties if one screws up either
the job itself, or the QA task. On the gripping hand, the folks
performing the work, or the QA know their lives are at stake if
something is screwed up.

D.


Sounds like an argument to have astronaut QAI's and QAS's. Come to
think of it, ISS construction should be a 3-person EVA, with the 3rd
person acting as QA. Ooh...and maybe a 4th person to perform a random
audit. Ooh ooh...and do they have an EVA analog to diver's tags?

Ahh, I could go on. Maybe another time.

  #23  
Old September 19th 03, 09:24 PM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Naval Reactor success ...

stmx3 wrote:

Derek Lyons wrote:

Were you in boats?


Yup. Aaaooogah Aaaoooogah. The underwater spaceship.


What was your rate? Where'd ya serve?

Sounds like an argument to have astronaut QAI's and QAS's. Come to
think of it, ISS construction should be a 3-person EVA, with the 3rd
person acting as QA. Ooh...and maybe a 4th person to perform a random
audit. Ooh ooh...and do they have an EVA analog to diver's tags?


I don't think that extreme is needed. But certainly on the ground
there needs to be real penalties for f***ing up.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.