FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1962
1962 - 0490.PDF
488 LETTERS . . . factors concerning the employment of academically qualified engineers. Perhaps a fact and a statistic which I personally find most disturbing reveal a very serious problem facing the aircraft industry when considering this type of labour. While not attempting to define a good production engineer, one would imagine that, in these days, when the number of university places is rising and when examination success (rather than the type of tie a person is entitled to wear) is a better qualification for entry, there is a reasonably good chance that at least a few potentially good production engineers obtain degrees. I therefore find it quite amazing to discover that one of the largest and most respected aircraft manufacturing companies in this country will not recruit, on principle, a university graduate in any department con cerned with production, whatever his degree; nor will they permit such a person to undergo training in production techniques with their company with a view to obtaining such a post. This presumably—or so one sincerely hopes— does not apply to their own apprentices who subsequently obtain their degrees. Although I am the first to agree that all the theoretical knowledge in the world does not ensure that a man can drill a hole, it seems to me that not even to allow a man to try is narrow minded in the extreme. 1 would respectfully suggest that such an archaic approach to production engineering does not portend well for the future of this particular firm. Consider now the following equally disturbing statistic. In one of the technical staff departments concerned with pre- production decisions in one of the factories of another principal manufacturer of aircraft in this country, 45 engi neers were employed at the beginning of 1961. Higher National Certificates were held by 21 of these men, a number of whom had also obtained membership of the professional institutions concerned with mathematical and production engineering. In less than 14 months, 16 of the original staff had left, or been transferred to avoid redundancy, of whom no fewer than 12 held the HNC. During this period no replacement personnel were recruited from outside the company. Although serious enough in itself, this loss of qualified staff would not have been so disastrous if the people concerned had found employment elsewhere in ihe aircraft industry. In fact not one of the 16 did so, and only two of them went into missile work. The aircraft industry is renowned for the generosity of its efforts to train its young men, both by releasing them for part-time or even full-time training at technical colleges and universities and by carefully organized training programmes within their own works. Unfortunately, after the expendi ture of a great deal of time, effort and money in encouraging men to obtain their HNC, HND, Dip Tech, BSc, GIMechE, GradlProdE, and all the rest, bringing them to the level where they can be of real value to their company, the great majority leave within a comparatively short space of time. I cannot emphasize too strongly that I am not in any way arguing for or against the employment or the relative value of academically qualified engineers in the production side of an aircraft company, but only with the words which Mr May has used. I suggest that his statement "this it will soon have" will apparently not be true until the need for qualified engineers in other industries is satisfied—"soon" is hardly the word to use here, I would contend. In the meantime the aircraft industry will continue, at great expense, to train a large number of the qualified engineers of these other industries, unless some very positive steps are taken to halt the drift. I plead ignorance as to Mr May's connections with our industry, but whatever these may be I would be extremely interested to hear his comments. London Wl PRODUCTION ENGINEER [Daryl May comments: one cannot dispute the figures for the number of HNC men who have left production engineering jobs in the industry; but I would suggest that that these will not apply to Dip Tech and HND men. I have found that present graduates in Dip Tech and HND are far more keen FLIGHT International, 29 March 1962 to enter production engineering than are those with university degrees or HNCs. The former, now graduating in increasing numbers, have a combination of technical and theoretical knowledge particularly appropriate to such a career. To meet the point that the aircraft industry is spending money to train engineers for jobs in other industries it might be necessary to take the unpleasant course of accepting an apprentice only on condition that he remained with an SB AC firm for five years after the completion of his training. One must endorse "Production Engineer's" opinion that any aircraft company refusing on principle to consider a university graduate for production work is being most unwise.] Aft-facing Seats SIR,—The letter from "Two Traffic Officers" appearing in your issue of March 15 prompts me to join in the argument regarding aft-facing seats. I agree with your correspondents that such seating pro vides a greater degree of safety in certain circumstances but I do not hold the view that the majority of passengers prefer to see which way they are going or adopt the attitude that "it cannot happen to us" without trying to add to then- chances of survival, for why else do we experience the un dignified rush for seats in the rear of the cabin ? I once had the amusing experience of seeing such a rush on to an aircraft scheduled for a commercial service; due to a tight turn-round, it was still equipped with aft-facing seats. The passengers tussled and hustled for the seats in the rear, apparently quite unaware that the back had moved to the front, which only goes to show that in most cases they do not know which way they are going! "Two Traffic Officers'" appear to have succumbed to the brain-washing by which the airlines have convinced them selves that passengers prefer to "face the engine." But, to the best of my knowledge, no opinion poll has ever been taken on this subject; and, if one were, I am sure that with die human animal having a natural protective instinct, this fallacy would be sunk without trace! Crawley, Sussex D. J. SPURGEON Boffin] Genealogy] SIR,—I have recently completed a book, to be published by Phcenix House this summer, which deals with science during the last war, and am anxious to include a brief note dealing with the origin of the word "boffin." A number of explanations have been given, but I would be most grateful to hear from any of your readers who have information on its use before—very roughly—the beginning of 1941. London W~8 RONALD W. CLARK FORTHCOMING EVENTS Mar 30 RAeS Man-powered Aircraft Group: Film Evening. Apr 2 Institution of Electrical Engineers (Electronics and Communications Section): "Progress in Aircraft Aerials," by R. A. Burberry. Apr 6 RAeS Rotorcrafl Section: "Rotor Flow Visualization" by Prof. J. Valensi. Apr 7 British Interplanetary Society: Film Show. Apr 10 RAeS Astronautics and Guided Flight Sections: "Re coverable Air-breathing Boosts for Space Vehicles," by R. J. Lane. Apr 11 Royal United Service Institution: "An introduction to Space Warfare," by M. Golovine. Apr 12 RAeS (Main lecture at Yeovil Branch): Henson and Stringfellow Memorial Lecture, "Turbines Mean Straight Up," by Robert L. Cummings Jr. Apr 12 Institution of Electrical Engineers (Utilization Section): "Brushless Generators for Aircraft—A Review of Current De velopments" by A. W. Ford. Apr 13-15 Shackleton Sales Weekend, Sywell, Northants.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
