Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/09/17

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] See the video about the M9 at Solms? (long & boring)
From: r.s.taylor at comcast.net (Richard Taylor)
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 21:04:05 -0400
References: <BLU0-SMTP929E43B8A29EAF7FF1EB3C8CE40@phx.gbl> <4AAEB7D1.5020808@hale-pohaku.net> <36172e5a0909141550t37d49545pbbdce12e3a49bcf4@mail.gmail.com> <4AAF36FB.5000206@hale-pohaku.net> <D70A55B5-C9C3-4038-90EE-63BF57A5A189@comcast.net> <4AB0AF95.3040804@hale-pohaku.net> <1E8B86C6-F584-4F1F-A56D-02774CE1970A@comcast.net> <9EA80B3A-85EF-46F2-AEBB-F68B1D835884@comcast.net> <DD692831-98AF-4DFA-91DA-4B2C3E92A199@comcast.net>

Bill - Terrific summary of what needs to be done.  We really are on  
the same wavelength.


Regards,

Dick



On Sep 16, 2009, at 6:19 PM, William B. Abbott III wrote:

> Hi Dick,
>
> Thanks. Amen, I quite agree, and that is partially what I meant by  
> the word "managing an interface," but I resorted to short hand.
>
> I have long believed that Leica has great in-house design and  
> manufacturing capabilities but lacked effective supplier controls  
> experience. I hope that has changed.
>
> In critical areas, I think much more than awareness of suppliers'  
> activities is needed and I sense that we could talk about that for a  
> week or more.
>
> Supplier controls is what is required to insure that as far as is  
> humanly possible, no changes creep into the production line, i.e,  
> that the products of serial production are identical to those  
> development items (or the initial production items) which passed  
> tests to verify that they meet the desired development goals and  
> specs, sometimes called qualification tests, i.e, qualified for  
> production.
>
> By "managing an interface" I meant, for critical components,  
> contracting with a supplier to meet the entire design disclosure of  
> their product and to give the buyer "change control authority" over  
> all of it, i.e., all changes must be approved by the buyer. This  
> includes,
>
> - engineering product design disclosure documentation,
> - quality assurance plans and procedures
> - material specs and material sources,
> - manufacturing tooling and fixture design, processes and procedures,
> - test equipment design, maintenance and calibration, test and  
> inspection procedures,
> - material receipt, storage, shipping, packaging and handling  
> procedures and practices
> - etc.
>
> The precise meaning of "change control authority" has to be  
> negotiated in some detail for obvious reasons and can mean many  
> things. In addition, suppliers have to flow these requirements down  
> to its critical suppliers to whatever degree makes sense and the  
> buyer must routinely conduct audits to verify compliance with the  
> contract.
>
> Obviously, many items cannot be procured this way, and other  
> measures have to be taken to insure homogeneity in production, such  
> as incoming inspection, lot testing, increased supplier testing, etc.
>
> If this sounds like a mouthful, it is, and I believe that Leica  
> routinely does all of these things in regard to its own internal  
> processes and for their piece part and material suppliers, or else  
> they would not have had the success they have had. Extending that  
> awareness and control to major suppliers requires a considerable  
> management effort.
>
> A final note: The thought of finishing a development model and  
> "engineering" it for production, that is, the old way of throwing  
> the engineering design over the transom for the production  
> department to build, is anathema to me.
>
> IMHO, from day one, the product design and development testing, as  
> well as the manufacturing flow, have to start maturing in tandem, so  
> that a tested and proofed production line, including suppliers  
> lines, can be ready when the product design matures.
>
> I was very happy to see in the M9 video that the activity in view  
> "seemed" to be taking place in a full production environment, not in  
> a lab, which tells me that Leica developed the M9 and its production  
> processes in tandem, together, and not serially. If I am right, they  
> deserve a lot of credit for bringing the production on line this  
> way. I just hope they have brought their suppliers up to speed along  
> with them.
>
> All the best,
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 16, 2009, at 9:14 AM, Richard Taylor wrote:
>
>> That, unfortunately, is not sufficient.  You have to understand and  
>> verify your supplier's processes, hardware and software  
>> sufficiently well to assure errors and omissions on their part will  
>> not compromise your own product.
>>
>> Regards,
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from vick.ko at sympatico.ca (Vick Ko) ([Leica] See the video about the M9 at Solms?)
Message from dennis at hale-pohaku.net (Dennis) ([Leica] See the video about the M9 at Solms?)
Message from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] See the video about the M9 at Solms?)
Message from dennis at hale-pohaku.net (Dennis) ([Leica] See the video about the M9 at Solms? (long & boring))
Message from wbabbott3 at comcast.net (William B. Abbott III) ([Leica] See the video about the M9 at Solms? (long & boring))
Message from dennis at hale-pohaku.net (Dennis) ([Leica] See the video about the M9 at Solms? (long & boring))
Message from wbabbott3 at comcast.net (William B. Abbott III) ([Leica] See the video about the M9 at Solms? (long & boring))
Message from r.s.taylor at comcast.net (Richard Taylor) ([Leica] See the video about the M9 at Solms? (long & boring))
Message from wbabbott3 at comcast.net (William B. Abbott III) ([Leica] See the video about the M9 at Solms? (long & boring))