I appreciate
that you do not shrink from
saying what should be said, even
when it’s politically incorrect to
do so.
Case in point: Your editorial
on the auto industry (“Don’t hold
your breath,” Oct. 25). There have
been instances of colossal stupidity
at the top of U.S. car companies.
Former Ford leader Jac Nasser, for
example, managed in one idiotic
moment of venting to antagonize
a large part of his company’s professional
work force when he said
the company’s problems could be
traced to all the “old white men”
they had. Ford’s Board should have
fired him on the spot. Instead they
let him run unchecked for several
more years before they got up the
gumption to pull the plug on him.
Was the responsibility for the hole
he got Ford in entirely his, entirely
the Board’s, or shared?
However, none of this rivals
the UAW’s incredible insistence
on inflexible work rules and an
adversarial “us versus them” attitude
toward employers. This type
of thinking totally ignores the fact
you can’t get any more golden eggs
once you’ve killed the goose. The
UAW treated the Big Three like
a milk cow, but one they never
thought needed any hay. Meanwhile,
back in Japan, and now Korea,
India, and China, most folks
can see that their employers’ best
interests usually coincide with
their own, and have been acting
accordingly.
In any case, thank you for
letting me vent, and keep saying
what you see to be the truth.
Perhaps you can make just one
person question whether ideology
and political correctness are
proper foundations for engineering
decisions.
Robert Chafin
SHINING A LIGHT ON CFLS
In reading of your plight with
compact fluorescent lamps (“Are
CFLs really a bright idea” Jan. 24),
I wondered how far north you live.
I would bet that if you had taken
the failed CFL bulb into your nice
warm house and out of the cold
garage, it would have worked fine
for many more hours if allowed
to warm up. The 4-ft fluorescent
tubes in my (unheated) garage,
which work fine all summer, don’t
come on when it is 11°F out. But
they work again when spring arrives.
Making that little bit of mercury
vaporize at 11°F is a serious
challenge.
I do agree with your objection
to light-bulb legislation. Making
incandescent effectively illegal
will just lay the groundwork for a black market with ridiculous
prices for them. Who benefits
from that? Also, my house is
filled with little frosted incandescent
bulbs trying to look like
flames. How am I going to replace
those?
Jon Kriegel
I tried taking the CFL bulb indoors
to resuscitate it, but it was
still dead as a door nail. And it
wasn’t really that cold in the garage.
Average temperatures there
were are in the 30°F range when
the bulb expired, with spurts into
the 40s. I still suspect it was the
short on/off cycles rather than the
temperature that did the damage.
Leland Teschler
I have to agree with you about
CFLs (compact florescent lights).
I have used them at work and at
home, and their lifetime is not as
long as that of an incandescent
lamp. I used to put one in a desk
lamp, but I ended up replacing
it about every two months. I
thought it was the lamp, and so
purchased a new one. I got the
same results. So I went back to
incandescents. At work, we have
had to change a number of CFLs
that were not switched off and
on, but were always left on. They
only lasted about four months.
Incandescent lamps would last
over a year.
I think testing for MTBF (mean
time before failure) is not looking
at the proper parameters.
Chuck Simpson
ABANDONDED BY MANAGEMENT
I would like to tell Leland that
his editorial (“Finally, the truth
about engineering jobs,” Dec.
8) hit the nail on the head. His
remarks have been way over
due. At the age of 60 and retiring
soon, I can speak from experience.
Corporate America
does not have the best interest
of engineers or scientists in any
of their schemes or plans. It is
all about greed. And they have a
lot of people, such as lobbyists,
backing them up.
One of the disappointments I
have is with organizations like the
National Association of Manufacturers
(NAM). It seems to me they
only take the side of lobbyists and
multinational corporations, not
the American workforce. Given
the amount of off-shoring taking
place, why would a college student
consider engineering? It is
easy to see that corporations are
not considering employees. Why
else would nations such as Vietnam
now be considered prime
locations.
Randy Juras
PE OR NOT TO PE
It is impossible for someone to
get a mechanical-engineering education
(in 4 or 5 years) that will let
them go into a company and be fully
prepared to do the tasks required.
The mechanical engineering field
is just too diverse. Our schools are
trying to produce graduates who
can work effectively in industry but
schools cannot offer all the specialized
instruction that it would take
to do that. It is just unrealistic to
expect a college grad to have the
skills for all the unique mechanical-
engineering tasks carried out in
America.
The job of designing, for example,
takes skills that can be improved
and refined by education.
But the “feel” and “vision” required
for a good designer are attributes
that are second nature to some
people and nonexistent in others.
Some people just aren’t cut out for
the job of designing things.
I have seen experienced engineers
refuse to mentor newly hired
graduates. I do not understand this
attitude. It is difficult for me to remember
how ignorant I was when
I began working in the engineering
field. Early in my career I had several
mentors who guided me and
improved my education. I have
been a mentor to many younger
engineers and have found great joy
in their successes.
Passing a professional engineer
examination demonstrates a thorough
knowledge of the fundamentals
of specific engineering tasks. It
does not prove or guarantee a persons
value as an engineer.
Glen C. Danner
NANOTUBE CORRECTION
I am writing to clarify some information
regarding the tensile
strength of carbon nanotube tethers
published in an article (“Building
a tug-of-war machine,” Jan. 10).
The article, quoted me stating
that Dr. Alan Windle at the University
of Cambridge had announced
production of 20-GPa nanotube
yarns. We now know Dr. Windle
has not announced yarns exhibiting
these strengths. Furthermore,
which was not clear when the article
was written, the ultrahigh
tensile-strength numbers that have
been reported for nanotube tethers
lately refer to strength over the
material’s gage length (which tends
to be millimeter-length segments
of fiber) as opposed to the strength
of a larger tether.
Nonetheless, we appreciate the
publicity and are delighted your
publication has taken interest in the
space elevator cause (as fantastic as it
may be). As an ambassador to these
new technologies I felt it necessary
to clarify any information which
may misrepresent the current state
of the art. Stephen Steiner, Team
DeltaX, teamdeltax.com