AIM and other manuals for 71

[Alan S.]

Re: AIM and other manuals for 71

Greg,
I'm looking forward to more 70-72 questions, answers and comments. I'm glad you're here!
Regards,
Alan 71 #6589

[Jack H.]

Re: I agree with John!`

Yes, it's 'OK' to have your car judged in its current state! You already know some of what the judges will report, but I'll bet you learn a LOT more from the process...

Instead of focusing on a Regional Meet, why not look for a Chapter meet not that far from home to start with? Understand, that the NCRS policy is to 'drive em' and we put our money where our mouths are by giving mileage driven credits (extra points UP TO 10% of your basic Flight score for risking the wear/tear of actually driving/operating the car to/from a judging meet). So, while others tow 'baby' in their enclosed car haulers, you can actually drive 'er to the meet and get Attaboy extra credit for the effort!

On the car being in 'driver' condition and not fully factory fresh, remember only about 4% of the NCRS Flight Scoring system comes from cleanliness. The lion's share of the judgement process deals with component originality and condition....

BUT, do the judges a favor and clean the interior, engine compartment and undercarriage to a 'reasonable' degree. Remember, the judges are also NCRS 'members' and they'll be tasked to crawl underneath, inspect this/that, and nobody likes to fight excess grease/dirt/oil!

[Tom R.]

Re: I agree with John!`

Just to add what Art describes...I worked at a large manufacturing plant (telecommunications) back in the late 60's early 70's with a large pool of engineers so I understand it from that perspective.

Electrical engineers did the design work (electrical specs) while another pool of engineers (us) did the packaging or the equivalent to the AIM. We told plant workers how to assemble telephone racks. So, we sketched assembly drawings, found parts and did the detail work to meet the engineering specs for the system. Our stuff got turned over to the drafting department where they finalized the AIM. We signed off on those drawings once completed. The electrical engineers did not give a crap what it looked like their concern was functionality.

I'm sure its all quite different today.

[Jack H.]

Not universally true...

about electrical design engineers not giving a 'hoot' about production issues.

When I was branch engineering manager for a product line at Texas Instruments, design engineering fell under me along with production engineering. It was our division's policy that design engineers spend time (TDY = temporary duty) in the production plant(s), working the line and supporting production engineering during new product production start-up.

That policy came from the top down (division manager) and was there to curtail design vs. production engineering 'snobbery', force design engineers to see/understand the net impact of their work and gain respect for those who have to work the 'trenches' every day generating the company's revenue. Also, engineering managers from a certain level up, were given an annual travel budget.

This 'forced' them to get out of the labs, visit the 'real world', rub shoulders with salemen, customers, and service folks. Each engineering manager filed an annual report regarding how the travel budget had been spent, what problems or 'opportunities' were realized as a result. And he/she who didn't spend the time/$$$ getting out was penalized at review time!

Bottom line, not all companies (including large electronic firms) are functionally 'insulated' in terms of design/production separation. In fact, last summer Will Cooksie (former Corvette plant mgr) turned up to meet/greet the general public at the 24 Heurs du Mans endurance race in France!

Some might call this a 'boondoogle' but my prior experience at TI tells me such moves are GOOD for the long term health of large organizations.... BTW, his talk + Q&A session was SO POPULAR with those present that Will's schedule was 'juggled' to carve an extra hour out for him to return later in the day to continue/complete the Q&A session.

[Tom R.]

Re: Not universally true...

John:

My point was "did not give a crap what it looked like their concern was functionality" and equally production issues.