Every Engineering Program Should Include A Course Flow Chart

B

Bret Cahill

Guest
A few weeks ago a neighbor couldn't start his car after not using it
for a week. The battery was dead. I checked and sure enough, there
was a 100 mA drain on the battery. I immediately pointed to the fuse
for the most useless item in the entire vehicle. The dome light.

Hole in one. I told him it wasn't worth fixing a dome light wiring
short in an infrequently used vehicle. Just plug in the fuse when
driving if he really needed a dome light or remove it permanently.

A vehicle isn't much good with a dead battery.

Along with the media gush hyping culture wars when the economy is
broke, this has been the other pet peeve of mine.

Whenever a frivolous extra can bring down the entire system, engineers
need to provide an over ride so the more important function will still
work.

With the internet even non technical types could identify the problem
and then the proper over ride which would save the economy countless
billions in lost time and expensive repairs for frivolous extras you
might not even want in the first place.

Why this rant now?

Using sea water to cool a nuclear reactor ain't a Plan B.

It ain't a Plan H.

It's not planning at all -- the same type of fantasy as hoping utopia
will break out.

The instant the first A-bomb went off and someone said, "hey, we can
use this to heat a boiler" the response should have been:

"OK, just make sure to include a terabyte sized cost benefit risk
analysis flow chart for every possible disaster . . ."


Bret Cahill
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top