100% Inspection - 80% Accurate - Quote from Juran (?)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kevin Mader

One of THE Original Covers!
Staff member
Admin
#31
SteelMaiden,

I agree that industries need to govern themselves, but not all industries adhere to ethical, moral, and legal practices. I would say that government here should assess how well the airline industry deals with security and levy fines where they aren't making the grade. It would be far less costly to audit practices than it would be to use taxpayer dollars to support an airline security division.

Kevin
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
E

energy

#32
Think about it!

Who wanted federalization of airport security! Everybody knows who!;) These people do not care one iota about your security. Never did. It's all about about votes! As far as tying this into the competency of Inspectors, well, have at it!:p

Sifting through angry people's laundry does not equate to the topic of Inspection of a company's product. Stretch as you may, justify by similarities to make your point, workers at a bench with all the tools and plenty of time to do their job do not miss defects because of some pre-ordained sanctified premise. Remember, all you who never get prompted by spell check or some other fail safe device, "To err is human-To blame it on someone else is more human" or "Don't criticize us unless you walk a mile in our penny loafers". It is so easy to to explain from the altar why the populace has failed to measure up. How about this one? "He who lives in glass houses, shouldn't get stoned" Human error, no excuse for a CAR response, is real. You do it, I do it. What do you do? Quadruple Inspection? Are you making bottle caps or sending a man to Mars? Inspectors Rule!! Amen!:eek: :smokin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration with a Mask on...
Staff member
Admin
#33
Originally posted by SteelMaiden

Am I a pessimist or does anyone else feel that putting the federal government in charge of security is going to cost us way more than revamping the private security practices? Even if the private companies brought wages into line, hired citizens that passed a background check etc., don't you think it would be cheaper for the American Taxpayer?

I don't think that having a federal employee doing inspections is going to be any more effective than a private employee (provided he is being fairly compensated.) Actually, having spent some time around govt. employees, I'd guess that with the rampant entitlement attitude, the govt. employee might be more prone to slack off knowing that it takes eons to oust someone who doesn't do their job.

Now, I don't want anyone who is a govt. employee to get offended, there are a lot of them out there that are good, concientious people. For them, I say good work and thanks. But I have met a lot through the years that just plain don't give a hoot about their job other than that retirement check they will be eligible for.

Sorry for bringing politics into it...I just think that the government gets too involved in too many things it has no knowledge about.
It's not that you're a pessimist. It's that you've bought the 'big lie' that private industry is more efficient that government. Look around. Look at Ford. Look at Enron. Look at the airlines (failing before 11 Sept).

Large companies / corporations are no more efficient than Government employees and government 'departments'. You say:

> Actually, having spent some time around govt. employees,
> I'd guess that with the rampant entitlement attitude, the
> govt. employee might be more prone to slack off knowing

Would you like me to start with the stories about the fraud, waste and abuse in big business? Ask yourself this... If tomorrow you lost your job but were quickly hired for a government position would you auto-magically become stupid and not care as people like to project onto government employees?

If you believe big business is more efficient, profitable or whatever, you haven't looked very far or worked in many companies.

> that it takes eons to oust someone who doesn't do their
> job.

Unions often serve the same functions. But before you start downing unions, make sure you know your history of labour relations and what companies did to employees (especially Ford, the coal industry and the garment industry) - especially during the 1920's and 1930's here in the US. Companies had their own private armies. People were killed / murdered. Some people really do believe in protection of workers. You may not like unions - I'm not particularly a union fan - but they do provide a balance you may not recognize.

Nor are unions more corrupt than politicos.

I will also point out that there are an awful lot of CEOs out there who are 'hard to get out' before they come close to ruining the company. Then - just like in the government (pension or whatever) the disposed CEO gets a Golden Parachute which most of us could retire on. Many Golden Parachutes are big enough that many of our kinfolks could retire with us.

> But I have met a lot through the years that just plain
> don't give a hoot about their job other than that
> retirement check they will be eligible for.

I see this every day in companies. Do you really believe this is exclusive to government? I could go on - but you get the idea.

The biggest difference is that government is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people (which we all know is not the case in this day and age - nor was it in the 1920's and early 1930's) while 'private industry' is interested in their profit (as opposed to the people and population). Take a look at how far GE is going to keep from having to clean up the toxic mess they made in the Hudson(?) and other rivers.

Unions came about precisely because 'private' industry left unchecked (the government not doing it's job) typically cares most about their profits and ends up abusing the employees.

> I just think that the government gets too involved in too
> many things it has no knowledge about.

Private industry never does this????<hr>In so far as the inspection aspect, I don't believe it will make much if any difference at all whether it's government or private run. This is a case of tools as well as understanding a problem that was not perceived to exist prior to 9/11. Prior to that, anyone could carry on a pocket knife, box cutter, etc. The legislation is to calm the populace - and not a reaction to a failure of the screening system. It didn't fail its intended purpose.

In 1973 the ALPA (Air Line Pilots Association) practically demanded fortified cockpits including reinforced doors. They even proposed small gun ports (like on armored cars). They said in 1973 - this is what to protect in so far as hijacking goes. Guess who deep sixed the idea as far fetched and stupid? Ummm, the government? Nope - the airline companies. Of course now.... almost 30 years later.... cockpits are being reinforced.

That said, the 'screening issue' is a smokescreen. There was no failure of the screening (inspection) system with respect to 9/11.
 

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration with a Mask on...
Staff member
Admin
#34
Re: Think about it!

Originally posted by energy

Who wanted federalization of airport security! Everybody knows who!
Get real. It is a shame for you to say something like this.

Let me get this straight. The Dems (your "...everybody knows who...") want votes. They get votes from the people (except in Florida). From your comment legislators should say "...screw the people and what they want - we'll do what we think is best for them. And cheaper is always better...." You know very well this is silly. It's pretty apparent that the people in this country will feel safer with government involved whether it is truely the case (security and safety will be 'improved') or not.

It is also apparent the 'Repubs' want votes as well. They went along with it when they could have stopped the bill. Seems to me the Repubs want votes every bit as badly as the Dems.

> These people do not care one iota about your security.
> Never did. It's all about about votes!

Let me see here... I want your vote but don't care about you as a person. Oh, what shall I do? Did it occur to you that at least some politicians do care about their constituents and what they want? Even some Dem politicos?

Apparently you and Rush believe the only people in the US who care about other people are the Repubs. That's a pretty shabby accusation. It's totally unfounded and you know it. It makes good spin, but it's BS.

How you cast the quest for votes in a negative light is telling - I thought that was the idea of our government --> a democracy where votes count and that votes represent the will of the people. If I follow your logic, then we should rid ourselves of this stupid system where votes are (according to you) a bad thing. Geezzz - politicians looking for votes. Imagine the stupidity of that - only the Dems would do that! Let's dump elections and go strictly by political appointment or by dictatorship. We can bring back torture and put the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution on hold while we're at it. We don't need no stinkin' elections with all those stupid votes.<hr>This said - back to inspection - the topic. Let's all drop the political aspect of this thread. There are plenty of political sites where you folks can throw political darts.
 
E

energy

#35
Just a little bit

Outside of a little preface about the driving force to federalize the airport workers, it was about Inspection. I forgot how touchy I can be.
mea Culpa:( :smokin:
 
D

D.Scott

#36
Now I'm really lost!!!

Do I multiply the Democrats by the number of votes or add the Republicans to my flight number to determine if my luggage will get lost?

You guys need to meet someday for lunch. When it happens, please invite me too. I'll pick up the check.

Dave
 
M

Michael T

#37
Originally posted by D.Scott
YUP !! :ko:

Thanks for trying though.

Here is my scenario - The bad part gets past the first inspector, OK nobody's perfect. The part gets past the second inspector too, I get a little skeptical. The part gets past a third inspector as well? Somebody is not paying attention - period. We are going to spend a few quality moments together.

Then again, in our business it isn't too far from elephants in a pasture of donkeys. Anything critical, we use vision systems.

Dave :bigwave:
Gotta chime in here... :bigwave:

If the part gets past a third inspector, I would strongly suggest looking at the tools the inspectors have to work with, or the process by which they have been trained to inspect parts.

If the process and the tools are adequate to detect the non-conformance - start looking around the environment for the cause of the problem.

Here's a little story about just such a thing. When my wife and I were living in Miami, FL - she decided that an Iguana would be a fun pet to have (BIG mistake - impulse purchase). We bought a cage and a heat rock and figured that Miami being tropical, the iguana would do just fine on our back porch. Well... a week later, we had a very very sick iguana and couldn't figure out what was wrong. We had the right temperature, we had the right water, food, etc., etc., etc. The vet suggested just sitting on the back porch and "absorbing" the environment... What was it that was causing the iguana to become ill? After about 10 minutes out there, we had it. Our apartment was on a main thoroughfare with fairly heavy traffic. We had gotten used to the traffic so we didn't pay any attention to it. However, the noise and car exhause was more than poor Iggy could handle. So, to make a long story short, $600+ dollars later, Iggy was fine and had taken up residence inside. :smokin:

I think spending a few quality moments just "absorbing" the environment where your people work would be time better spent.... ;) However, if it comes to light that the people are just goofing off... I have a few choice quality words to share with them... (Ooops... my Navy is starting to show again) :biglaugh:

Cheers!!!
 
E

energy

#38
Re: Now I'm really lost!!!

Originally posted by D.Scott

You guys need to meet someday for lunch. When it happens, please invite me too. I'll pick up the check.
Dave
Dave,

Actually, “us guys” have had an opportunity to talk for a substantial amount of time one Saturday afternoon. We discussed contentious moments and misinterpreted posts due to the e-mail method of communication. The “Smilies” have been a big help. Had I used these “smilies” in some of my posts, I’d have more times at bat. We’re both passionate in our beliefs and pretty much agree to disagree. The fact that I’m still here (I can be expunged with a flip of a switch) should give you an idea of the degree of tolerance. Thanks for invite to dinner, though. Maybe some beaver fat Armadillo with squirrel brains stuffing accompanied by a glass of road kill crow squeezings. It don’t get any better than that!

Admin: Sorry I let the cat out of the bag.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration with a Mask on...
Staff member
Admin
#39
Re: Just a little bit

Originally posted by energy

Outside of a little preface about the driving force to federalize the airport workers, it was about Inspection. I forgot how touchy I can be.
mea Culpa:( :smokin:
Yes - I AM a testy little shit from time to time, aren't I! Yeah - energy and I do go a bout now and again. We tolerate each other I think with respect to politics. We've spoken and I think we pretty well get along. We just disagree politically.

As an aside, I'm a former pilot - well, I still have my license but haven't flown for close to 20 years now. In the 1970's I in part worked my way through college doing charter flights and some mail runs now and again. I know airport security evolution to some degree from my experiences. Back in the 1970's there were security gates at most airports for us pilots. What we didn't like is that every airport had the same combination on the lock - to (supposedly) make it easier for us pilots. Airport security has always been more show than effective. That's why when I look at airport screening - I don't care who does it. It's more a matter of technology than diligent personnel. I personally feel safe on airplanes - even now. Statistically speaking, you're safer up there than you are driving or even rambling around your own house.
 

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration with a Mask on...
Staff member
Admin
#40
Re: Now I'm really lost!!!

Originally posted by D.Scott

Do I multiply the Democrats by the number of votes or add the Republicans to my flight number to determine if my luggage will get lost?
Neither - the airline companies pre-arrange that by their own methods... :lick:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S 100% Final Inspection Requirements of Active Medical Devices (MDD or IEC Standards?) EU Medical Device Regulations 4
E Is there a specific regulatory requirement for 100% inspection of IFUs? Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 4
N Switch to 100% inspection when lot fails sampling? Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 9
G Is Controlled Shipping requirement Sampling Based or 100% Inspection? Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 3
N 100% Inspection in Retail Warehouse which Ships Products to Customers Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3
K 100% Inspection or do the usual IQ, OQ, PQ Validation - Medical Molding Design and Development of Products and Processes 3
G Am I silly to do a 100% inspection? Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 15
M 100% Inspection - 85% Effective Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 10
M Vision System - Camera vs. Sensor to perform 100% EOL Inspection Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 2
S AQL .65 Level III - Take a particular component off 100% Inspection AQL - Acceptable Quality Level 4
A Injection Mold 100% Visual Inspection - Short Shots and Debris not being found Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 22
M SPC vs. 100% Inspection - Is SPC still value-added when 100% inspection is in place? FMEA and Control Plans 40
S Applying ANSI/ASQ Z1.4 given known lot size and 100% visual inspection AQL - Acceptable Quality Level 2
S Is there an Accept/Reject Criteria for 100% Inspection? Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 9
E 100% continuous inspection question Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 14
R Transfering Cpk specification to 100% inspection specifications Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 24
S Condition of 100% inspection in organization. Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 7
G Is 100% Inspection a Control or does a Process need another type of control? FMEA and Control Plans 9
Q Who is responsible for 100% Inspection (QC) activities? Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 16
1 U Charts, Defects and 100% Inspection Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 8
C Acceptance Sampling is Better Than 100% Inspection Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 10
J Visual Inspection Not 100% Effective - How to Improve Visual Inspection Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 51
J Customer Complaint Corrective Action Response - 100% Vision Inspection Customer Complaints 9
M 100% Measurement Shift to Sample Inspection? PCB Substrates Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3
L Customer Requires Cpk 1.33 with 100% Inspection Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 18
R 100% Visual Inspection - Would you Remove or Reduce the Visual Inspection? Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 9
G Inspection 100% - Process continuos (Continuous Process) Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 7
S 100% Inspection Control Chart By Dr. Feigenbaum - SMT (Surface Mounting Technology) Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
S Tips for convincing general labour that 100% inspection not required Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 18
S P-Chart Question - Need Guidance - 100% inspection of all product parts required? Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 11
T Prototype Inspection - 100% Inspection on All Parts or just a Sample? Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 5
A How effective is 100% inspection Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 25
R 8.2.3.1 Monitoring and measurement - Containment of product and 100% inspection Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 1
J Final Inspections - Does 100% inspection really work Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 5
CarolX Accuracy of 100% Visual Inspection - Proofs Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
Ninja Windows 10 100 % disk use after update Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 33
A 21 CFR part 11 - section 11.100 - Electronic Signature Certification Other US Medical Device Regulations 6
Stoic Manual soldering processes - 100% verifiable, or always requiring validation? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 15
E Correct way to certify hydrostatic testing when it is not 100% (and Sample Size) Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 6
A What to do when 100 % verification is not 100 % Manufacturing and Related Processes 5
Nicole Desouza ISO / AS Certification - Small business with less than 100 employees ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
M EU – Chemical Safety Report – CSR – REACH Authorisation decisions – Triton X-100 – Ortho-clinical-Use1 REACH and RoHS Conversations 0
D Measuring fine tubing (< 0.100") "Wall by weight" General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 11
Marc Anniversary of the First Trans-Atlantic Flight 100 years ago - June 2019 Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 2
Y IEC 62304 Section 4.3(a) - 100% probability of failure IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 3
BHobbs_Busche All Measurements taken with a Variable Gage have to be Recorded 100% IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 14
Pmarszal Clarification for 21 CFR Part 11.100 - General Requirements Other US Medical Device Regulations 14
B Is Gage R&R required on a 100% Dimensional Layout? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 6
K IEC 61010-2-100 Labeling question - IVD equipment Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 1
D Long length measurement of 18" up to 100" with an accuracy of .005 min General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 8

Similar threads

Top Bottom