You didn't specify the presence or lack of a front panel button, but if the
manufacturer includes one then they should document its use. Regardless of
the necessity of the button, if the system doesn't come alive often enough
then it doesn't matter if it has a button or not.
If the system hangs too often then there is s possibility that it may not
fully initialize and boot up into a "half" state.
They should document the button. But evaluate how well the system powers on
independently of the button. If it hangs too often then reject it as a
system, button or not.
GAS
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Nuckolls [SMTP:nuckolls@aeroelectric.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 1997 6:20 AM
Subject: How do you vote?
Not 30 minutes after I mailed a response to Mr. Rogers on the
specifics of avionics master switches and "aircraft quality parts"
in general, I've sat down and my desk to review the following
situation:
I'm evaluating test results on a product that Raytheon is
purchasing for one of our better customers . . . the US Navy.
I wrote the specification used to obtain quotations from
would-be suppliers and ultimately used to write acceptance
test procedures. I have the results of about a week's worth
of testing on the desk in front of me.
This product has a microprocessor that controls its
inner workings. Not unlike the PC upon which I write these
words, the gizmo comes up ready to go to work when I flip
the ON switch . . . most of the time. A few of the units
come up dumb. A reboot by turning the power off and back
on will sometimes wake 'em up, pressing the front panel
"RESET" button seems to always wake 'em up.
My specification did not require a front panel reset button
nor did it prohibit one. The manufacturer's instructions
do not speak to the use of the reset button . . . but most
users of computer-based gizmos understand how they are used.
This piece of equipment is one of a dozen pieces in a test set.
The older product I'm replacing has NO front panel controls and
comes to work wide-eyed, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed on power-
up.
My question to all of you is this. I COULD request that our
customer revise their operator's manual for the test set
to "push reset button on box "B" 20 seconds after test set
power up." This wouldn't be a really big deal . . they're
going to revise the manual for other reasons associated with
this upgrade program anyway. We're not even talking about
a cockpit environment here . . . but it is one piece of
many pieces on the test set. The start up procedure is
extensive. Failure of the operator to observe the "check
list" item could cause needless delay in testing a target.
How do you vote?
( ) Revise the manual and ship the product as is . . .
( ) Insist that the manufacturer conform to REASONABLE
EXPECTATIONS for performance even though it was
NOT explicit in my specification?
Results of the poll to be published in a few days. I'll add
another item to your consideration. I have a deadline approaching
that could cost us penalties for failure to make scheduled
delivery. The customer probably wouldn't object to my request
for changing the operator's manual . . .
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
| |
| Go ahead, make my day . . . . |
| Show me where I'm wrong. |
|