Grrrrrr said:

When the instructions or process becomes more important than the end product you're in a heap of cacky. Quite a shock when you see some areas of the Public Sector and even more so when they cannot see how stupid it is ... or do see it but carry on regardless.

Click to expand...

I remember a friend working on torpedoes (not budgie smugglers) and a particular item was held in place by a saddle strap and a center bolt. The manual said the bolt had to be tightened to 80 ft/lb, every time he did that the component shattered. The correct torque was 8 lb/ft but "them in charge" said until the manual was changed carry on using the higher torque.

Grrrrrr said:

When the instructions or process becomes more important than the end product

Click to expand...

Tell me about it! [Cue rant!]

Amongst other things, I produce operating manuals for machine tools that have to be CE certified for use in the EU - note - not just the tools, but the manuals also have to be compliant with the regulations.
I've been doing these for years and you no sooner get them compliant (in 5 languages), than the bureaucrats dream up ever more ludicrous, make-work justification for their continued employment, devising nit-picking nonsense rules.
Recent examples include one standard (that turned out to be military) which required evidence that the unit would operate after a nuclear 'incident'.
We politely asked how they would suggest testing for that eventuality. Strangely, that requirement was dropped.

Another was 'Do not use the tool if the switch does not turn it on and off'.

There was also half a page on testing whether the labelling would rub off, including a VERY specific detailed chemical description of the type of alcohol solvent you should use to test the marking/labels for rub-off/curling resistance.

It's bureaucracy for its own sake - "Ve haff ways of making you comply"

Even if we vote overwhelmingly to leave the EU, it'll be like Hotel California - "you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave . . ."

Sorry - rant over - for the moment.

Alastair

Just before the blue oval closed down my section of the British company they appointed a new CEO to get the company out of the financial sh*t it was in. Guys name was Mullady and - you've guessed it - he came to the company from Boeing full of great plans to turn the company around. Pretty much none of which survived him learning that the way you build cars is nothing like the way you build big airliners. Any ways - one of the jokes that started doing the rounds to wind him up was the one about the chicken and the windscreen.
Boeing want to test their latest design airliners cockpit glazing for bird strikes and were unsure how to do it. Then some one read an article saying that BAe used a chicken fired from a compressed air cannon to test the Airbus and others.
Boeing duly build such a test rig and fire the first chicken. WHAM - it goes straight through the screen. So they try again and the result is the same. A half a dozen chickens and windscreens later they decide they have to bite the bullet and e-mail the person named in the article at Bae asking what they were doing wrong.
Back came the reply "Defrost the chickens first"

Well, new carbide tipped drill went through it like a knife through butter. Took longer getting the drill and extension out than drilling 4 holes. Only a few quid off the Bay. Result!