An excellent response from:
Title: Sir, I Object!
By: Fritz Byle, Posted: April 29, 2011 2:02 PM
What James A. Smith, Ph.D. (ABD), IPC CIT is describing is the lazy man's
way of doing things. The standard document is not at all intended to
describe how to rework sloppy work. It is intended to help you recognize how
to do it right. How else would an assembler know when the work is done
correctly, which is really the goal!
It reminds me of a saying I sometimes used when talking about quality in the
assembly process: Some people are very proud of the work their rework
department is doing.
After making that remark I could see from the faces in the audience who had
an "excellent rework department" (sour faces) and who did not (smiling
faces).
Keep that DPMO low and make those connections look like those in the 610
document,
Ahne.
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David D. Hillman
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 09:29
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] NTC Re: [TN] "The Curse of IPC-A-610 and IPC-J-STD-001" -
opinion piece by James Smith
Hi Graham - two comments: (1) I sent a email to the Assembly editorial
staff informing them that they had just lost a reader due to their lack of
"statement accuracy confirmation"; (2) the number of inaccuracies and
misinformation contained in the blog is so horrendous that it is beyond
words. Lots of very hard working folks on the IPC committees do their very
best to use data driven information for the specifications - Dr. Smith's
article is a disservice to their efforts. There is nothing wrong with
folks having different opinions and disagreements - but Dr. Smith's blog
goes across a line.
Dave Hillman
Rockwell Collins
[log in to unmask]
Graham Collins <[log in to unmask]>
Sent by: TechNet <[log in to unmask]>
04/29/2011 11:15 AM
Please respond to
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>; Please respond to
[log in to unmask]
To
<[log in to unmask]>
cc
Subject
[TN] "The Curse of IPC-A-610 and IPC-J-STD-001" - opinion piece by James
Smith
Anyone else read this?
http://www.assemblymag.com/Articles/Blog/BNP_GUID_9-5-2006_A_10000000000
001038283
All I can say is "wow". Well, I could go on for hours, but... wow.
Not quite how I see these specs! Working on military stuff I can attest
that changing from MIL-STD-2000 to the IPC specs was a significant
improvement in reality, reliability, and productivity, but that's not
how he sees it.
regards,
Graham Collins
Halifax Production Engineering
L-3 communications Electronic Systems
(902) 873-2000 ext. 6215
This message and any attachments are solely for the use of the
individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
information that is privileged or confidential or controlled technical
data that is subject to the laws of Canada or the United States. If you
are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, use or distribution of
the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received
this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail
and immediately delete this message and any attachments.
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 16.0
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
For additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 16.0
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
For additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 16.0
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
For additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
|
