La rop state

Like this? Share it with your network

Share
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
186
On Slideshare
186
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • http://todayinspacehistory.wordpress.com/2007/10/04/october-4-1957-the-russians-launch-sputnik/ <br /> LG SPUT IMAGE <br /> « October 3, 1962 - Sigma 7 launches into orbit, Mercury-Atlas 8 <br /> October 5, 1929 - Astronaut Richard Gordon, Jr., is born » <br /> Ads by GoogleSputnik <br /> Huge selection, great deals on <br /> Sputnik items. <br /> Yahoo.com3D Earth Screensaver <br /> Watch Realistic Animated 3D Earth <br /> On Your Desktop. Free Download! <br /> www.CrawlerTools.com/3DEarth <br /> The modern space age was birthed on October 4, 1957 when the Soviet’s launched the first man-made object to orbit the Earth, Sputnik. <br /> Wikipedia says: <br /> “Sputnik 1 was launched on October 4, 1957. The satellite was 58 cm (about 23 in) in diameter and weighed approximately 83.6 kg (about 183 lb). Each of its elliptical orbits around the Earth took about 96 minutes. Monitoring of the satellite was done by Amateur radio operators. The first long-range flight of the R-7 booster used to launch it had occurred on August 21 and was described in Aviation Week. Sputnik 1 was not visible from Earth but the casing of the R-7 booster, traveling behind it, was.” <br /> Quotes: <br /> “Both countries [Russia and the United States] knew that preeminence in space was a condition of their national security. That conviction gave both countries a powerful incentive to strive and compete. The Soviets accomplished many important firsts, and this gave us a great incentive to try harder. <br /> The space program also accomplished another vital function in that it kept us out of a hot war. It gave us a way to compete technologically, compete as a matter of national will. It may have even prevented World War III, with all the conflict and fighting focused on getting to the moon first, instead of annihilating each other. There’s no evidence of that, but as eyewitness to those events, I think that’s what happened.” <br /> - American astronaut Scott Carpenter quoted in Into that Silent Sea (p. 138). <br /> ___________________ <br /> www.globalsecurity.org/.../imint/u-2_tt.htm <br /> U-2 Product <br /> SS-6 / Sputnik Launch Pad, Baikonur <br /> TOP of LAUNCH <br /> IMAGE <br /> Sputnik on the launch pad being prepared for liftoff <br /> However, another event that occurred in the Soviet Union in 1960 is generally recognized as the single greatest disaster in the history of rocketry. The event was not directly related to manned space flight, but to the development of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). In the early days of space flight, both the US and Soviet space programs were very much intertwined with the development of ICBMs. These vehicles were designed to launch nuclear warheads over great distances, leaving no part of the world safe from the threat of nuclear destruction. However, the technologies pioneered for these weapons of war served a secondary purpose of providing the first generation of rockets for space exploration. <br /> Sputnik on the launch pad being prepared for liftoff <br /> In fact, the early flights of Sputnik and Yuri Gagarin in the USSR as well as those of Explorer I and John Glenn in the US were all conducted using modified ballistic missiles. The primary Soviet launch vehicle of the period was the R-7 rocket, modified versions of which are still used even today for most Russian space flights. The R-7 was originally developed as an ICBM under the direction of Sergei Korolev, the Soviet Union&apos;s pre-eminent rocket designer of the day. The R-7 successfully completed a number of test flights between 1957 and 1959, including launching the first two artificial satellites. While only four examples of the R-7 were ever deployed as ballistic missiles from 1960 to 1968, the same basic design has remained in use throughout the Russian space program. Modern variants of the R-7 continue to launch satellites as well as manned Soyuz flights, and the type had achieved a success rate of nearly 98% in over 1,600 launches by the year 2000. <br /> _____________ <br /> Apollo 17 <br /> http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/~astrolab/mirrors/apod/ap031109.html <br /> Apollo 17 _ 1 <br /> http://xpda.com/junkmail/junk162/GPN-2000-001876.jpg <br /> Apollo 17 _ 2 <br /> Apollo 17 launch, December 17, 1972: <br /> http://xpda.com/junkmail/junk162/junk162.htm <br /> Mars <br /> http://whyfiles.org/194spa_travel/images/mars.gif <br /> Moon <br /> http://www.rc-astro.com/php/phpthumb/cache/phpThumb_cache_rc-astro.com_srcfadbb9057f0dac8e921d1bffc3590ce0_par0ddf367c5f01d9ba090bf356b6761f52_dat1168633826.jpeg <br /> Kennedy <br /> http://www.historicaldocuments.com/JohnFKennedysLastSpeech.gif <br /> November 21, 1963 <br /> Dedication Ceremony of the New Facilities of the School of <br /> Aerospace Medicine at Brooks Air Force Base, Texas <br /> http://www.historicaldocuments.com/JohnFKennedysLastSpeech.htm <br /> SPACE TEAMS <br /> MCD <br /> KANE <br /> Toursit <br /> Russian <br /> http://science.qj.net/Microsoft-billionaire-joins-ISS-bound-Russian-space-flight/pg/49/aid/88814 <br /> U.S. software mogul Charles Simonyi became the world&apos;s fifth space tourist - &quot;space flight participant,&quot; as officials call them - to go into orbit. Simonyi, who helped developed Microsoft Word, paid US$ 25M for the opportunity to join the crew of the Russian spacecraft Soyuz TMA-10. <br /> The 58-year-old Hungary-born billionaire is making a 12-day round trip to the International Space Station (ISS). Joining him on the trip were Russian cosmonauts Fyodor Yurchikhin and Oleg Kotov of the 15th ISS crew. The spacecraft Simonyi and the Russian cosmonauts lifted off from the Bainokur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan at 11:31 P.M. local time (1:31 P.M. EDT). They are due to dock with the ISS on Monday. <br /> Simonyi will be treating the current occupants of the ISS to a gourmet meal three days after arriving at the space station. The meal will be held in honor of Cosmonauts&apos; Day, the Russian holiday commemorating Yuri Gagarin&apos;s historic 1961 space flight. Everybody else mentioned who prepared the meal so we won&apos;t. Suffice to say, she&apos;s famous, knows her way around a house, and looked good in orange. <br /> In this Associated Press photo: In this image made from NASA-TV, U.S. billionaire Charles Simonyi, front row right, flips upside down during a news conference after he, Fyodor Yurchikhin, left, and Russian cosmonaut Oleg Kotov, front center, docked at the international space station Monday, April 9, 2007. A Russian-built Soyuz capsule carrying the American billionaire who helped develop Microsoft Word docked at the international space station late Monday, to the earthbound applause of Martha Stewart and others at Mission Control. In the back row, Commander Michael Lopez-Alegria can be seen. (AP Photo/NASA TV) <br /> ___________ <br /> Tito <br /> http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/1310822.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1939057D9939C83F106174681002B4CEC415A5397277B4DC33E <br /> MIR <br /> http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/people/images/inset-LucidS-5-large.jpg <br /> http://csatweb.csatolna.hu/tagok/csa/mars/rover.jpg <br /> RICHS TECHNOLOGY CAMERA - BODY <br /> HAWKING <br /> http://gozerog.com/images/Hawking_001.jpg <br /> Public Domain. Suggested credit: NASA or National Aeronautics and Space Administration via pingnews. <br /> KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- Noted physicist Stephen Hawking (center) enjoys zero gravity during a flight aboard a modified Boeing 727 aircraft owned by Zero Gravity Corp. (Zero G). Hawking, who suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (also known as Lou Gehrig&apos;s disease) is being rotated in air by (right) Peter Diamandis, founder of the Zero G Corp., and (left) Byron Lichtenberg, former shuttle payload specialist and now president of Zero G. Kneeling below Hawking is Nicola O&apos;Brien, a nurse practitioner who is Hawking&apos;s aide. At the celebration of his 65th birthday on January 8 this year, Hawking announced his plans for a zero-gravity flight to prepare for a sub-orbital space flight in 2009 on Virgin Galactic&apos;s space service. Additional information from source: <br /> No copyright protection is asserted for this photograph. If a recognizable person appears in this photograph, use for commercial purposes may infringe a right of privacy or publicity. It may not be used to state or imply the endorsement by NASA employees of a commercial product, process or service, or used in any other manner that might mislead. Accordingly, it is requested that if this photograph is used in advertising and other commercial promotion, layout and copy be submitted to NASA prior to release. <br /> Source Physicist Stephen Hawking in Zero Gravity (NASA) <br /> Date April 27, 2007 at 22:11 <br /> Zero Gravity&apos;s price tag for the daylong tour is $2,950, which includes preflight training and a postflight party. <br /> From the Go Zero G Website: <br /> The once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fly like Superman can now be yours. Train with an expert coach, board our specially modified aircraft, G-FORCE ONE, and experience the unforgettable. <br /> Experience zero gravity the only way possible without going to space. Parabolic flight is the same method NASA has used to train its astronauts for the last 45 years and the same way Tom Hanks floated in Apollo 13. <br /> Book a seat on one of our regular flights conveniently based in Las Vegas, Nevada and at the Kennedy Space Center, near Orlando, Florida. The aircraft is also available for charter flights anywhere in the United States for groups, incentive trips, parties or team building. <br /> http://todayinspacehistory.wordpress.com/2007/10/04/october-4-1957-the-russians-launch-sputnik/ <br /> LG SPUT IMAGE <br /> « October 3, 1962 - Sigma 7 launches into orbit, Mercury-Atlas 8October 5, 1929 - Astronaut Richard Gordon, Jr., is born »October 4, 1957 - the Russian’s launch Sputnik <br /> Ads by GoogleSputnik <br /> Huge selection, great deals on <br /> Sputnik items. <br /> Yahoo.com3D Earth Screensaver <br /> Watch Realistic Animated 3D Earth <br /> On Your Desktop. Free Download! <br /> www.CrawlerTools.com/3DEarth <br /> The modern space age was birthed on October 4, 1957 when the Soviet’s launched the first man-made object to orbit the Earth, Sputnik. <br /> Wikipedia says: <br /> “Sputnik 1 was launched on October 4, 1957. The satellite was 58 cm (about 23 in) in diameter and weighed approximately 83.6 kg (about 183 lb). Each of its elliptical orbits around the Earth took about 96 minutes. Monitoring of the satellite was done by Amateur radio operators. The first long-range flight of the R-7 booster used to launch it had occurred on August 21 and was described in Aviation Week. Sputnik 1 was not visible from Earth but the casing of the R-7 booster, traveling behind it, was.” <br /> Quotes: <br /> “Both countries [Russia and the United States] knew that preeminence in space was a condition of their national security. That conviction gave both countries a powerful incentive to strive and compete. The Soviets accomplished many important firsts, and this gave us a great incentive to try harder. <br /> The space program also accomplished another vital function in that it kept us out of a hot war. It gave us a way to compete technologically, compete as a matter of national will. It may have even prevented World War III, with all the conflict and fighting focused on getting to the moon first, instead of annihilating each other. There’s no evidence of that, but as eyewitness to those events, I think that’s what happened.” <br /> - American astronaut Scott Carpenter quoted in Into that Silent Sea (p. 138). <br /> ___________________ <br /> www.globalsecurity.org/.../imint/u-2_tt.htm <br /> U-2 Product <br /> SS-6 / Sputnik Launch Pad, Baikonur <br /> TOP of LAUNCH <br /> IMAGE <br /> Sputnik on the launch pad being prepared for liftoff <br /> However, another event that occurred in the Soviet Union in 1960 is generally recognized as the single greatest disaster in the history of rocketry. The event was not directly related to manned space flight, but to the development of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). In the early days of space flight, both the US and Soviet space programs were very much intertwined with the development of ICBMs. These vehicles were designed to launch nuclear warheads over great distances, leaving no part of the world safe from the threat of nuclear destruction. However, the technologies pioneered for these weapons of war served a secondary purpose of providing the first generation of rockets for space exploration. <br /> Sputnik on the launch pad being prepared for liftoff <br /> In fact, the early flights of Sputnik and Yuri Gagarin in the USSR as well as those of Explorer I and John Glenn in the US were all conducted using modified ballistic missiles. The primary Soviet launch vehicle of the period was the R-7 rocket, modified versions of which are still used even today for most Russian space flights. The R-7 was originally developed as an ICBM under the direction of Sergei Korolev, the Soviet Union&apos;s pre-eminent rocket designer of the day. The R-7 successfully completed a number of test flights between 1957 and 1959, including launching the first two artificial satellites. While only four examples of the R-7 were ever deployed as ballistic missiles from 1960 to 1968, the same basic design has remained in use throughout the Russian space program. Modern variants of the R-7 continue to launch satellites as well as manned Soyuz flights, and the type had achieved a success rate of nearly 98% in over 1,600 launches by the year 2000. <br /> _____________ <br /> Apollo 17 <br /> http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/~astrolab/mirrors/apod/ap031109.html <br /> Apollo 17 _ 1 <br /> http://xpda.com/junkmail/junk162/GPN-2000-001876.jpg <br /> Apollo 17 _ 2 <br /> Apollo 17 launch, December 17, 1972: <br /> http://xpda.com/junkmail/junk162/junk162.htm <br /> Mars <br /> http://whyfiles.org/194spa_travel/images/mars.gif <br /> Moon <br /> http://www.rc-astro.com/php/phpthumb/cache/phpThumb_cache_rc-astro.com_srcfadbb9057f0dac8e921d1bffc3590ce0_par0ddf367c5f01d9ba090bf356b6761f52_dat1168633826.jpeg <br /> Kennedy <br /> http://www.historicaldocuments.com/JohnFKennedysLastSpeech.gif <br /> November 21, 1963 <br /> Dedication Ceremony of the New Facilities of the School of <br /> Aerospace Medicine at Brooks Air Force Base, Texas <br /> http://www.historicaldocuments.com/JohnFKennedysLastSpeech.htm <br /> SPACE TEAMS <br /> MCD <br /> KANE <br /> Toursit <br /> Russian <br /> http://science.qj.net/Microsoft-billionaire-joins-ISS-bound-Russian-space-flight/pg/49/aid/88814 <br /> U.S. software mogul Charles Simonyi became the world&apos;s fifth space tourist - &quot;space flight participant,&quot; as officials call them - to go into orbit. Simonyi, who helped developed Microsoft Word, paid US$ 25M for the opportunity to join the crew of the Russian spacecraft Soyuz TMA-10. <br /> The 58-year-old Hungary-born billionaire is making a 12-day round trip to the International Space Station (ISS). Joining him on the trip were Russian cosmonauts Fyodor Yurchikhin and Oleg Kotov of the 15th ISS crew. The spacecraft Simonyi and the Russian cosmonauts lifted off from the Bainokur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan at 11:31 P.M. local time (1:31 P.M. EDT). They are due to dock with the ISS on Monday. <br /> Simonyi will be treating the current occupants of the ISS to a gourmet meal three days after arriving at the space station. The meal will be held in honor of Cosmonauts&apos; Day, the Russian holiday commemorating Yuri Gagarin&apos;s historic 1961 space flight. Everybody else mentioned who prepared the meal so we won&apos;t. Suffice to say, she&apos;s famous, knows her way around a house, and looked good in orange. <br /> In this Associated Press photo: In this image made from NASA-TV, U.S. billionaire Charles Simonyi, front row right, flips upside down during a news conference after he, Fyodor Yurchikhin, left, and Russian cosmonaut Oleg Kotov, front center, docked at the international space station Monday, April 9, 2007. A Russian-built Soyuz capsule carrying the American billionaire who helped develop Microsoft Word docked at the international space station late Monday, to the earthbound applause of Martha Stewart and others at Mission Control. In the back row, Commander Michael Lopez-Alegria can be seen. (AP Photo/NASA TV) <br /> ___________ <br /> Tito <br /> http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/1310822.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1939057D9939C83F106174681002B4CEC415A5397277B4DC33E <br /> MIR <br /> http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/people/images/inset-LucidS-5-large.jpg <br /> http://csatweb.csatolna.hu/tagok/csa/mars/rover.jpg <br /> RICHS TECHNOLOGY CAMERA - BODY <br /> HAWKING <br /> http://gozerog.com/images/Hawking_001.jpg <br /> Public Domain. Suggested credit: NASA or National Aeronautics and Space Administration via pingnews. <br /> KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- Noted physicist Stephen Hawking (center) enjoys zero gravity during a flight aboard a modified Boeing 727 aircraft owned by Zero Gravity Corp. (Zero G). Hawking, who suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (also known as Lou Gehrig&apos;s disease) is being rotated in air by (right) Peter Diamandis, founder of the Zero G Corp., and (left) Byron Lichtenberg, former shuttle payload specialist and now president of Zero G. Kneeling below Hawking is Nicola O&apos;Brien, a nurse practitioner who is Hawking&apos;s aide. At the celebration of his 65th birthday on January 8 this year, Hawking announced his plans for a zero-gravity flight to prepare for a sub-orbital space flight in 2009 on Virgin Galactic&apos;s space service. Additional information from source: <br /> No copyright protection is asserted for this photograph. If a recognizable person appears in this photograph, use for commercial purposes may infringe a right of privacy or publicity. It may not be used to state or imply the endorsement by NASA employees of a commercial product, process or service, or used in any other manner that might mislead. Accordingly, it is requested that if this photograph is used in advertising and other commercial promotion, layout and copy be submitted to NASA prior to release. <br /> Source Physicist Stephen Hawking in Zero Gravity (NASA) <br /> Date April 27, 2007 at 22:11 <br /> Zero Gravity&apos;s price tag for the daylong tour is $2,950, which includes preflight training and a postflight party. <br /> From the Go Zero G Website: <br /> The once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fly like Superman can now be yours. Train with an expert coach, board our specially modified aircraft, G-FORCE ONE, and experience the unforgettable. <br /> Experience zero gravity the only way possible without going to space. Parabolic flight is the same method NASA has used to train its astronauts for the last 45 years and the same way Tom Hanks floated in Apollo 13. <br /> Book a seat on one of our regular flights conveniently based in Las Vegas, Nevada and at the Kennedy Space Center, near Orlando, Florida. The aircraft is also available for charter flights anywhere in the United States for groups, incentive trips, parties or team building. <br />
  • http://todayinspacehistory.wordpress.com/2007/10/04/october-4-1957-the-russians-launch-sputnik/ <br /> LG SPUT IMAGE <br /> « October 3, 1962 - Sigma 7 launches into orbit, Mercury-Atlas 8 <br /> October 5, 1929 - Astronaut Richard Gordon, Jr., is born » <br /> Ads by GoogleSputnik <br /> Huge selection, great deals on <br /> Sputnik items. <br /> Yahoo.com3D Earth Screensaver <br /> Watch Realistic Animated 3D Earth <br /> On Your Desktop. Free Download! <br /> www.CrawlerTools.com/3DEarth <br /> The modern space age was birthed on October 4, 1957 when the Soviet’s launched the first man-made object to orbit the Earth, Sputnik. <br /> Wikipedia says: <br /> “Sputnik 1 was launched on October 4, 1957. The satellite was 58 cm (about 23 in) in diameter and weighed approximately 83.6 kg (about 183 lb). Each of its elliptical orbits around the Earth took about 96 minutes. Monitoring of the satellite was done by Amateur radio operators. The first long-range flight of the R-7 booster used to launch it had occurred on August 21 and was described in Aviation Week. Sputnik 1 was not visible from Earth but the casing of the R-7 booster, traveling behind it, was.” <br /> Quotes: <br /> “Both countries [Russia and the United States] knew that preeminence in space was a condition of their national security. That conviction gave both countries a powerful incentive to strive and compete. The Soviets accomplished many important firsts, and this gave us a great incentive to try harder. <br /> The space program also accomplished another vital function in that it kept us out of a hot war. It gave us a way to compete technologically, compete as a matter of national will. It may have even prevented World War III, with all the conflict and fighting focused on getting to the moon first, instead of annihilating each other. There’s no evidence of that, but as eyewitness to those events, I think that’s what happened.” <br /> - American astronaut Scott Carpenter quoted in Into that Silent Sea (p. 138). <br /> ___________________ <br /> www.globalsecurity.org/.../imint/u-2_tt.htm <br /> U-2 Product <br /> SS-6 / Sputnik Launch Pad, Baikonur <br /> TOP of LAUNCH <br /> IMAGE <br /> Sputnik on the launch pad being prepared for liftoff <br /> However, another event that occurred in the Soviet Union in 1960 is generally recognized as the single greatest disaster in the history of rocketry. The event was not directly related to manned space flight, but to the development of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). In the early days of space flight, both the US and Soviet space programs were very much intertwined with the development of ICBMs. These vehicles were designed to launch nuclear warheads over great distances, leaving no part of the world safe from the threat of nuclear destruction. However, the technologies pioneered for these weapons of war served a secondary purpose of providing the first generation of rockets for space exploration. <br /> Sputnik on the launch pad being prepared for liftoff <br /> In fact, the early flights of Sputnik and Yuri Gagarin in the USSR as well as those of Explorer I and John Glenn in the US were all conducted using modified ballistic missiles. The primary Soviet launch vehicle of the period was the R-7 rocket, modified versions of which are still used even today for most Russian space flights. The R-7 was originally developed as an ICBM under the direction of Sergei Korolev, the Soviet Union&apos;s pre-eminent rocket designer of the day. The R-7 successfully completed a number of test flights between 1957 and 1959, including launching the first two artificial satellites. While only four examples of the R-7 were ever deployed as ballistic missiles from 1960 to 1968, the same basic design has remained in use throughout the Russian space program. Modern variants of the R-7 continue to launch satellites as well as manned Soyuz flights, and the type had achieved a success rate of nearly 98% in over 1,600 launches by the year 2000. <br /> _____________ <br /> Apollo 17 <br /> http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/~astrolab/mirrors/apod/ap031109.html <br /> Apollo 17 _ 1 <br /> http://xpda.com/junkmail/junk162/GPN-2000-001876.jpg <br /> Apollo 17 _ 2 <br /> Apollo 17 launch, December 17, 1972: <br /> http://xpda.com/junkmail/junk162/junk162.htm <br /> Mars <br /> http://whyfiles.org/194spa_travel/images/mars.gif <br /> Moon <br /> http://www.rc-astro.com/php/phpthumb/cache/phpThumb_cache_rc-astro.com_srcfadbb9057f0dac8e921d1bffc3590ce0_par0ddf367c5f01d9ba090bf356b6761f52_dat1168633826.jpeg <br /> Kennedy <br /> http://www.historicaldocuments.com/JohnFKennedysLastSpeech.gif <br /> November 21, 1963 <br /> Dedication Ceremony of the New Facilities of the School of <br /> Aerospace Medicine at Brooks Air Force Base, Texas <br /> http://www.historicaldocuments.com/JohnFKennedysLastSpeech.htm <br /> SPACE TEAMS <br /> MCD <br /> KANE <br /> Toursit <br /> Russian <br /> http://science.qj.net/Microsoft-billionaire-joins-ISS-bound-Russian-space-flight/pg/49/aid/88814 <br /> U.S. software mogul Charles Simonyi became the world&apos;s fifth space tourist - &quot;space flight participant,&quot; as officials call them - to go into orbit. Simonyi, who helped developed Microsoft Word, paid US$ 25M for the opportunity to join the crew of the Russian spacecraft Soyuz TMA-10. <br /> The 58-year-old Hungary-born billionaire is making a 12-day round trip to the International Space Station (ISS). Joining him on the trip were Russian cosmonauts Fyodor Yurchikhin and Oleg Kotov of the 15th ISS crew. The spacecraft Simonyi and the Russian cosmonauts lifted off from the Bainokur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan at 11:31 P.M. local time (1:31 P.M. EDT). They are due to dock with the ISS on Monday. <br /> Simonyi will be treating the current occupants of the ISS to a gourmet meal three days after arriving at the space station. The meal will be held in honor of Cosmonauts&apos; Day, the Russian holiday commemorating Yuri Gagarin&apos;s historic 1961 space flight. Everybody else mentioned who prepared the meal so we won&apos;t. Suffice to say, she&apos;s famous, knows her way around a house, and looked good in orange. <br /> In this Associated Press photo: In this image made from NASA-TV, U.S. billionaire Charles Simonyi, front row right, flips upside down during a news conference after he, Fyodor Yurchikhin, left, and Russian cosmonaut Oleg Kotov, front center, docked at the international space station Monday, April 9, 2007. A Russian-built Soyuz capsule carrying the American billionaire who helped develop Microsoft Word docked at the international space station late Monday, to the earthbound applause of Martha Stewart and others at Mission Control. In the back row, Commander Michael Lopez-Alegria can be seen. (AP Photo/NASA TV) <br /> ___________ <br /> Tito <br /> http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/1310822.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1939057D9939C83F106174681002B4CEC415A5397277B4DC33E <br /> MIR <br /> http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/people/images/inset-LucidS-5-large.jpg <br /> http://csatweb.csatolna.hu/tagok/csa/mars/rover.jpg <br /> RICHS TECHNOLOGY CAMERA - BODY <br /> HAWKING <br /> http://gozerog.com/images/Hawking_001.jpg <br /> Public Domain. Suggested credit: NASA or National Aeronautics and Space Administration via pingnews. <br /> KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- Noted physicist Stephen Hawking (center) enjoys zero gravity during a flight aboard a modified Boeing 727 aircraft owned by Zero Gravity Corp. (Zero G). Hawking, who suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (also known as Lou Gehrig&apos;s disease) is being rotated in air by (right) Peter Diamandis, founder of the Zero G Corp., and (left) Byron Lichtenberg, former shuttle payload specialist and now president of Zero G. Kneeling below Hawking is Nicola O&apos;Brien, a nurse practitioner who is Hawking&apos;s aide. At the celebration of his 65th birthday on January 8 this year, Hawking announced his plans for a zero-gravity flight to prepare for a sub-orbital space flight in 2009 on Virgin Galactic&apos;s space service. Additional information from source: <br /> No copyright protection is asserted for this photograph. If a recognizable person appears in this photograph, use for commercial purposes may infringe a right of privacy or publicity. It may not be used to state or imply the endorsement by NASA employees of a commercial product, process or service, or used in any other manner that might mislead. Accordingly, it is requested that if this photograph is used in advertising and other commercial promotion, layout and copy be submitted to NASA prior to release. <br /> Source Physicist Stephen Hawking in Zero Gravity (NASA) <br /> Date April 27, 2007 at 22:11 <br /> Zero Gravity&apos;s price tag for the daylong tour is $2,950, which includes preflight training and a postflight party. <br /> From the Go Zero G Website: <br /> The once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fly like Superman can now be yours. Train with an expert coach, board our specially modified aircraft, G-FORCE ONE, and experience the unforgettable. <br /> Experience zero gravity the only way possible without going to space. Parabolic flight is the same method NASA has used to train its astronauts for the last 45 years and the same way Tom Hanks floated in Apollo 13. <br /> Book a seat on one of our regular flights conveniently based in Las Vegas, Nevada and at the Kennedy Space Center, near Orlando, Florida. The aircraft is also available for charter flights anywhere in the United States for groups, incentive trips, parties or team building. <br /> http://todayinspacehistory.wordpress.com/2007/10/04/october-4-1957-the-russians-launch-sputnik/ <br /> LG SPUT IMAGE <br /> « October 3, 1962 - Sigma 7 launches into orbit, Mercury-Atlas 8October 5, 1929 - Astronaut Richard Gordon, Jr., is born »October 4, 1957 - the Russian’s launch Sputnik <br /> Ads by GoogleSputnik <br /> Huge selection, great deals on <br /> Sputnik items. <br /> Yahoo.com3D Earth Screensaver <br /> Watch Realistic Animated 3D Earth <br /> On Your Desktop. Free Download! <br /> www.CrawlerTools.com/3DEarth <br /> The modern space age was birthed on October 4, 1957 when the Soviet’s launched the first man-made object to orbit the Earth, Sputnik. <br /> Wikipedia says: <br /> “Sputnik 1 was launched on October 4, 1957. The satellite was 58 cm (about 23 in) in diameter and weighed approximately 83.6 kg (about 183 lb). Each of its elliptical orbits around the Earth took about 96 minutes. Monitoring of the satellite was done by Amateur radio operators. The first long-range flight of the R-7 booster used to launch it had occurred on August 21 and was described in Aviation Week. Sputnik 1 was not visible from Earth but the casing of the R-7 booster, traveling behind it, was.” <br /> Quotes: <br /> “Both countries [Russia and the United States] knew that preeminence in space was a condition of their national security. That conviction gave both countries a powerful incentive to strive and compete. The Soviets accomplished many important firsts, and this gave us a great incentive to try harder. <br /> The space program also accomplished another vital function in that it kept us out of a hot war. It gave us a way to compete technologically, compete as a matter of national will. It may have even prevented World War III, with all the conflict and fighting focused on getting to the moon first, instead of annihilating each other. There’s no evidence of that, but as eyewitness to those events, I think that’s what happened.” <br /> - American astronaut Scott Carpenter quoted in Into that Silent Sea (p. 138). <br /> ___________________ <br /> www.globalsecurity.org/.../imint/u-2_tt.htm <br /> U-2 Product <br /> SS-6 / Sputnik Launch Pad, Baikonur <br /> TOP of LAUNCH <br /> IMAGE <br /> Sputnik on the launch pad being prepared for liftoff <br /> However, another event that occurred in the Soviet Union in 1960 is generally recognized as the single greatest disaster in the history of rocketry. The event was not directly related to manned space flight, but to the development of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). In the early days of space flight, both the US and Soviet space programs were very much intertwined with the development of ICBMs. These vehicles were designed to launch nuclear warheads over great distances, leaving no part of the world safe from the threat of nuclear destruction. However, the technologies pioneered for these weapons of war served a secondary purpose of providing the first generation of rockets for space exploration. <br /> Sputnik on the launch pad being prepared for liftoff <br /> In fact, the early flights of Sputnik and Yuri Gagarin in the USSR as well as those of Explorer I and John Glenn in the US were all conducted using modified ballistic missiles. The primary Soviet launch vehicle of the period was the R-7 rocket, modified versions of which are still used even today for most Russian space flights. The R-7 was originally developed as an ICBM under the direction of Sergei Korolev, the Soviet Union&apos;s pre-eminent rocket designer of the day. The R-7 successfully completed a number of test flights between 1957 and 1959, including launching the first two artificial satellites. While only four examples of the R-7 were ever deployed as ballistic missiles from 1960 to 1968, the same basic design has remained in use throughout the Russian space program. Modern variants of the R-7 continue to launch satellites as well as manned Soyuz flights, and the type had achieved a success rate of nearly 98% in over 1,600 launches by the year 2000. <br /> _____________ <br /> Apollo 17 <br /> http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/~astrolab/mirrors/apod/ap031109.html <br /> Apollo 17 _ 1 <br /> http://xpda.com/junkmail/junk162/GPN-2000-001876.jpg <br /> Apollo 17 _ 2 <br /> Apollo 17 launch, December 17, 1972: <br /> http://xpda.com/junkmail/junk162/junk162.htm <br /> Mars <br /> http://whyfiles.org/194spa_travel/images/mars.gif <br /> Moon <br /> http://www.rc-astro.com/php/phpthumb/cache/phpThumb_cache_rc-astro.com_srcfadbb9057f0dac8e921d1bffc3590ce0_par0ddf367c5f01d9ba090bf356b6761f52_dat1168633826.jpeg <br /> Kennedy <br /> http://www.historicaldocuments.com/JohnFKennedysLastSpeech.gif <br /> November 21, 1963 <br /> Dedication Ceremony of the New Facilities of the School of <br /> Aerospace Medicine at Brooks Air Force Base, Texas <br /> http://www.historicaldocuments.com/JohnFKennedysLastSpeech.htm <br /> SPACE TEAMS <br /> MCD <br /> KANE <br /> Toursit <br /> Russian <br /> http://science.qj.net/Microsoft-billionaire-joins-ISS-bound-Russian-space-flight/pg/49/aid/88814 <br /> U.S. software mogul Charles Simonyi became the world&apos;s fifth space tourist - &quot;space flight participant,&quot; as officials call them - to go into orbit. Simonyi, who helped developed Microsoft Word, paid US$ 25M for the opportunity to join the crew of the Russian spacecraft Soyuz TMA-10. <br /> The 58-year-old Hungary-born billionaire is making a 12-day round trip to the International Space Station (ISS). Joining him on the trip were Russian cosmonauts Fyodor Yurchikhin and Oleg Kotov of the 15th ISS crew. The spacecraft Simonyi and the Russian cosmonauts lifted off from the Bainokur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan at 11:31 P.M. local time (1:31 P.M. EDT). They are due to dock with the ISS on Monday. <br /> Simonyi will be treating the current occupants of the ISS to a gourmet meal three days after arriving at the space station. The meal will be held in honor of Cosmonauts&apos; Day, the Russian holiday commemorating Yuri Gagarin&apos;s historic 1961 space flight. Everybody else mentioned who prepared the meal so we won&apos;t. Suffice to say, she&apos;s famous, knows her way around a house, and looked good in orange. <br /> In this Associated Press photo: In this image made from NASA-TV, U.S. billionaire Charles Simonyi, front row right, flips upside down during a news conference after he, Fyodor Yurchikhin, left, and Russian cosmonaut Oleg Kotov, front center, docked at the international space station Monday, April 9, 2007. A Russian-built Soyuz capsule carrying the American billionaire who helped develop Microsoft Word docked at the international space station late Monday, to the earthbound applause of Martha Stewart and others at Mission Control. In the back row, Commander Michael Lopez-Alegria can be seen. (AP Photo/NASA TV) <br /> ___________ <br /> Tito <br /> http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/1310822.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1939057D9939C83F106174681002B4CEC415A5397277B4DC33E <br /> MIR <br /> http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/people/images/inset-LucidS-5-large.jpg <br /> http://csatweb.csatolna.hu/tagok/csa/mars/rover.jpg <br /> RICHS TECHNOLOGY CAMERA - BODY <br /> HAWKING <br /> http://gozerog.com/images/Hawking_001.jpg <br /> Public Domain. Suggested credit: NASA or National Aeronautics and Space Administration via pingnews. <br /> KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- Noted physicist Stephen Hawking (center) enjoys zero gravity during a flight aboard a modified Boeing 727 aircraft owned by Zero Gravity Corp. (Zero G). Hawking, who suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (also known as Lou Gehrig&apos;s disease) is being rotated in air by (right) Peter Diamandis, founder of the Zero G Corp., and (left) Byron Lichtenberg, former shuttle payload specialist and now president of Zero G. Kneeling below Hawking is Nicola O&apos;Brien, a nurse practitioner who is Hawking&apos;s aide. At the celebration of his 65th birthday on January 8 this year, Hawking announced his plans for a zero-gravity flight to prepare for a sub-orbital space flight in 2009 on Virgin Galactic&apos;s space service. Additional information from source: <br /> No copyright protection is asserted for this photograph. If a recognizable person appears in this photograph, use for commercial purposes may infringe a right of privacy or publicity. It may not be used to state or imply the endorsement by NASA employees of a commercial product, process or service, or used in any other manner that might mislead. Accordingly, it is requested that if this photograph is used in advertising and other commercial promotion, layout and copy be submitted to NASA prior to release. <br /> Source Physicist Stephen Hawking in Zero Gravity (NASA) <br /> Date April 27, 2007 at 22:11 <br /> Zero Gravity&apos;s price tag for the daylong tour is $2,950, which includes preflight training and a postflight party. <br /> From the Go Zero G Website: <br /> The once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fly like Superman can now be yours. Train with an expert coach, board our specially modified aircraft, G-FORCE ONE, and experience the unforgettable. <br /> Experience zero gravity the only way possible without going to space. Parabolic flight is the same method NASA has used to train its astronauts for the last 45 years and the same way Tom Hanks floated in Apollo 13. <br /> Book a seat on one of our regular flights conveniently based in Las Vegas, Nevada and at the Kennedy Space Center, near Orlando, Florida. The aircraft is also available for charter flights anywhere in the United States for groups, incentive trips, parties or team building. <br />
  • Cybernetics is a theory of the communication and control of regulatory feedback. The term cybernetics stems from the Greek kybernetes (meaning steersman, governor, pilot, or rudder). Cybernetics is the discipline that studies communication and control in living beings and in the machines built by humans. <br /> A more philosophical definition, suggested in 1958 by Louis Couffignal, one of the pioneers of cybernetics in the 1930s, considers cybernetics as &quot;the art of assuring efficiency of action&quot; (see external links for reference). <br /> Taylorism <br /> F. W. Taylor & Scientific Management <br /> Mr. Bill&apos;s Preface: In October 1995, there was an extended and at times intense discussion in the Quality E-Mail forum on &quot;Scientific Management&quot; and Frederick W. Taylor. At one point Vincenzo Sandrone submitted a post on the subject that the forum moderator deemed appropriate to the discussion, but to long to be posted to the list. What he did was post a notice to the list that the paper was available from Mr. Sandrone via private E-Mail. What follows is that paper posted on this site with permission of the author. The paper will form part of an undergraduate thesis entitled &quot;Total Quality Engineering - A Holistic Approach to Engineering Management&quot; to be submitted in 1996 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a BE in Manufacturing Engineering at the University of Technology, Sydney, NSW, Australia. <br /> Mr. Sandrone&apos;s source for quotes is: <br /> Taylor Frederick W., 1964, Scientific Management - Comprising Shop Management, The principles of Scientific Management and Testimony before the Special House Committee, Harper and Row All the quotes are from &apos;Scientific Management&apos; this needs to be highlighted as the edition restarted page numbers for each separate section. That is, page numbers are not unique. Please address any comments or critique to Mr. Sandrone. <br /> Regards, Mr. Bill <br /> ================================================================== With all the discussion of Taylorism on the list and arguments that both sides did not have the facts, I have decided I may be able to provide some information. I have included a copy of the section on Taylorism from my in process Undergraduate Thesis. I hope that it may help put some facts into the discussion. Looking over the section I have realized that it contained the highest density of direct quotes in my thesis. I feel this was my subconscious way of fighting the, what I considered, misinformation that I had received about Taylorism. Unfortunately I could not find a &quot;definition&quot; of science as applied in Scientific method. However, I would like to make two points: 1) Taylor did not call his original paper &quot;Scientific management&quot; and by the time he published it the name had stuck and his publisher changed the name. (I cannot recall the name of his original paper.) 2) He sort of defines &quot;Scientific Management&quot; by saying what it is not - It is not &quot;Rule of Thumb&quot; when you consider that piece work based on arbitrary quotas ( and heavily biased to the employer) was normal practice. The use of work study/measurement to determine a fair quota was a step forward for both management and the workers. Vincenzo Sandrone QA Engineer GEC Marconi Systems Meadowbank (Sydney), Australia vxsand@gecms.com.au ============================================================== Taylorism Under Taylor&apos;s management system, factories are managed through scientific methods rather than by use of the empirical &quot;rule of thumb&quot; so widely prevalent in the days of the late nineteenth century when F. W. Taylor devised his system and published &quot;Scientific Management&quot; in 1911. The main elements of the Scientific Management are [1] : &quot;Time studies Functional or specialized supervision Standardization of tools and implements Standardization of work methods Separate Planning function Management by exception principle The use of &quot;slide-rules and similar time-saving devices&quot; Instruction cards for workmen Task allocation and large bonus for successful performance The use of the &apos;differential rate&apos; Mnemonic systems for classifying products and implements A routing system A modern costing system etc. etc. &quot; Taylor called these elements &quot;merely the elements or details of the mechanisms of management&quot; He saw them as extensions of the four principles of management.[2] 1. The development of a true science 2. The scientific selection of the workman 3. The scientific education and development of the workman 4. Intimate and friendly cooperation between the management and the men. Taylor warned [3] of the risks managers make in attempting to make change in what would presently be called, the culture, of the organization. He stated the importance of management commitment and the need for gradual implementation and education. He described &quot;the really great problem&quot; involved in the change &quot;consists of the complete revolution in the mental attitude and the habits of all those engaged in the management, as well of the workmen.&quot; [4] Taylor taught that there was one and only one method of work that maximized efficiency. &quot;And this one best method and best implementation can only be discovered or developed through scientific study and analysis... This involves the gradual substitution of science for &apos;rule of thumb&apos; throughout the mechanical arts.&quot; [5] &quot;Scientific management requires first, a careful investigation of each of the many modifications of the same implement, developed under rule of thumb; and second, after time and motion study has been made of the speed attainable with each of these implements, that the good points of several of them shall be unified in a single standard implementation, which will enable the workman to work faster and with greater easy than he could before. This one implement, then is the adopted as standard in place of the many different kinds before in use and it remains standard for all workmen to use until superseded by an implement which has been shown, through motion and time study, to be still better.&quot; [6] An important barrier to use of scientific management was the limited education of the lower level of supervision and of the work force. A large part of the factory population was composed of recent immigrants who lacked literacy in English. In Taylor&apos;s view, supervisors and workers with such low levels of education were not qualified to plan how work should be done. Taylor&apos;s solution was to separate planning from execution. &quot;In almost all the mechanic arts the science which underlies each act of each workman is so great and amounts to so much that the workman who is best suited to actually doing the work is incapable of fully understanding this science..&quot; [7] To apply his solution, Taylor created planning departments, staffed them with engineers, and gave them the responsibility to: Develop scientific methods for doing work. Establish goals for productivity. Establish systems of rewards for meeting the goals. Train the personnel in how to use the methods and thereby meet the goals. Perhaps the key idea of Scientific management and the one which has drawn the most criticism was the concept of task allocation. Task allocation [8] is the concept that breaking task into smaller and smaller tasks allows the determination of the optimum solution to the task. &quot;The man in the planning room, whose specialty is planning ahead, invariably finds that the work can be done more economically by subdivision of the labour; each act of each mechanic, for example, should be preceded by various preparatory acts done by other men.&quot; [9] The main argument against Taylor is this reductionist approach to work dehumanizes the worker. The allocation of work &quot;specifying not only what is to be done but how it is to done and the exact time allowed for doing it&quot; [10] is seen as leaving no scope for the individual worker to excel or think. This argument is mainly due to later writing rather than Taylor&apos;s work as Taylor stated &quot;The task is always so regulated that the man who is well suited to his job will thrive while working at this rate during a long term of years and grow happier and more prosperous, instead of being overworked.&quot; [11] Taylor&apos;s concept of motivation left something to be desired when compared to later ideas. He methods of motivation started and finished at monetary incentives. While critical of the then prevailing distinction of &quot;us &quot;and &quot;them&quot; between the workforce and employers he tried to find a common ground between the working and managing classes. &quot;Scientific Management has for its foundation the firm conviction that the true interests of the two are one and the same; that prosperity for the employer cannot exist a long term of years unless it is accompanied by prosperity for the employee [sic], and vice versa ..&quot; [12] However, this emphasis on monetary rewards was only part of the story. Rivalry between the Bethlehem and Pittsburgh Steel plants led to the offer from Pittsburgh of 4.9 cents per ton against Bethlehem&apos;s rate of 3.2 cents per day to the ore loaders. The ore loaders were spoken to individually and their value to the company reinforced and offers to re-hire them at any time were made. The majority of the ore loaders took up the Pittsburgh offers. Most had returned after less than six weeks. [13] The rates at Pittsburgh were determined by gang rates. Peer pressure from the Pittsburgh employees to not work hard meant that the Bethlehem workers actually received less pay than at Bethlehem. Two of the Bethlehem workers requested to be placed in a separate gang, this was rejected by management for the extra work required by management to keep separate record for each worker. Taylor places the blame squarely on management and their inability &quot;to do their share of the work in cooperating with the workmen.&quot; [14] Taylor&apos;s attitudes towards workers were laden with negative bias &quot;in the majority of cases this man deliberately plans to do as little as he safely can.&quot; [15] The methods that Taylor adopted were directed solely towards the uneducated. &quot;When he tells you to pick up a pig and walk, you pick it up and walk, and when he tells you to sit down and rest, you sit down. You do that right through the day. And what&apos;s more, no back talk&quot;. This type of behaviour towards workers appears barbaric in the extreme to the modern reader, however, Taylor used the example of Schmidt at the Bethlehem Steel Company to test his theories. Taylor admits &quot;This seems rather rough talk. And indeed it would be if applied to an educated mechanic, or even an intelligent labourer.&quot; [17] The fact that Taylor took the effort to firstly know the workers name and to cite it is some indication that he empathized with the workforce. This study improved the workrate of Schmidt from 12.5 tons to 47.5 tons per day showing the worth of Scientific Management. The greatest abuse of Scientific Management has come from applying the techniques without the philosophy behind them. It is obvious from Taylor&apos;s own observations that the above discussion would be misplaced in other workers. Taylor acknowledged the potential for abuse in his methods. &quot;The knowledge obtained from accurate time study, for example, is a powerful implement, and can be used, in one case to promote harmony between workmen and the management, by gradually educating, training, and leading the workmen into new and better methods of doing the work, or in the other case, it may be used more or less as a club to drive the workmen into doing a larger day&apos;s work for approximately the same pay that they received in the past.&quot; [17] Scientific Study and standardization were important parts of the Scientific Management. One example, was the study undertaken to determine the optimum shovel load for workers. The figure of 21 pounds [18] was arrived at by the study. To ensure that this shovel load was adhered to, a series of different shovels were purchased for different types of material. Each shovel was designed to ensure that only 21 pounds could be lifted. This stopped the situation where &quot;each shoveller owned his own shovel, that he would frequently go from shoveling ore, with a load of about 30 pounds per shovel, to handling rice coal, with a load on the same shovel of less than 4 pounds. In the one case, he was so overloaded that it was impossible for him to do a full day&apos;s work, and in the other case he was so ridiculously under-loaded that it was manifestly impossible to even approximate a day&apos;s work.&quot; [19] Taylor spent a considerable amount of his books in describing &quot;soldiering&quot; the act of &apos;loafing&apos; both at an individual level and &quot;systematic soldiering&quot;. He described the main reasons that workers were not performing their work at the optimum. Though worded in a patronizing way the essence of the descriptions are still valid. [20] The belief that increased output would lead to less workers. Inefficiencies within the management control system such as poorly designed incentive schemes and hourly pay rates not linked to productivity Poor design of the performance of the work by rule-of-thumb The fear of redundancies within the workforce was a valid argument during the previous style of management. Taylor not only countered this argument by using economic arguments of increased demand due to decreased pricing but put forward the idea of sharing the gains with the workforce. Taylor saw the weaknesses of piece work in the workers reactions to gradual decreases in the piece rate as the worker produced more pieces by working harder and/or smarter. The worker then is determined to have no more reduction in rate by &quot;soldiering&quot;. This deception leads to an antagonistic view of management and a general deterioration of the worker/management relationship. Taylor also was a strong advocate of worker development. It follows that the most important object of both the workman and the establishment should be the training and development of each individual in the establishment, so that he can do ( at his fastest pace and with the maximum of efficiency) the highest class of work for which his natural abilities for him.&quot; [21] Taylor&apos;s ideas on management and workers speaks of justice for both parties. &quot;It (the public) will no longer tolerate the type of employer who has his eyes only on dividends alone, who refuses to do his share of the work and who merely cracks the whip over the heads of his workmen and attempts to drive them harder work for low pay. No more will it tolerate tyranny on the part of labour which demands one increase after another in pay and shorter hours while at the same time it becomes less instead of more efficient.&quot;[22] Taylor&apos;s system was widely adopted in the United States and the world. Although the Taylor system originated in the factory production departments, the concept of separating planning from execution was universal in nature and, hence, had potential application to other areas: production support services offices operations service industries. Management&apos;s new responsibilities were extended to include: [23] Replacing the old rule-of-thumb with scientific management Scientifically select and train, teach and develop the workman &quot;Heartily cooperate with the men so as to insure[sic] all the work being done in accordance with the principles of the science which has been developed&quot; Take over the work for which they are &quot;better fitted&quot; than the workmen. Relationship between Taylorism and TQM Taylor&apos;s more general summary of the principles of Scientific Management are better suited for inclusion into the TQM methodology, than the narrow definitions. &quot;It is no single element , but rather the this whole combination, that constitutes Scientific Management, which may be summarized as: Science, not rule of thumb Harmony, not discord Cooperation, not individualism Maximum output in place of restricted output The development of each man to his greatest efficiency and prosperity&quot; [24] Much has happened, since Taylor developed his method of Scientific Management, to make obsolete the premises on which he based his concepts: Lack of education is no longer reason enough to separate the planning function The balance of power between managers and the work force has changed. Where in Taylor&apos;s time it was heavily weighted against the workers. Unionism (or the threat of it) has profoundly changed that balance. Changes in the climate of social thinking. Revolts against the &quot;dehumanizing&quot; of work. A basic tenet of Scientific management was that employees were not highly educated and thus were unable to perform any but the simplest tasks. Modern thought is that all employees have intimate knowledge of job conditions and are therefore able to make useful contributions. Rather than dehumanizing the work and breaking the work down into smaller and smaller units to maximize efficiency without giving thought to the job satisfaction of the working. Encouragement of work based teams in which all workers may contribute. Such contributions increase worker morale, provide a sense of ownership, and improve management-worker relations generally. References 1. Scientific Management, pg 129-130 2. Scientific Management, pg 130 3. Scientific Management, pg 131 4. Scientific Management, pg 131 5. Scientific Management, pg 25 6. Scientific Management, pg 119 7. Scientific Management, pp 25-25 8. Scientific Management, pg 39 9. Scientific Management, pg 38 10. Scientific Management, pg 39 11. Scientific Management, pg 39 12. Scientific Management, pg 10 13. Scientific Management, pg 75 14. Scientific Management, pg 77 15. Scientific Management, pg 13 16. Scientific Management, pg 46 17. Scientific Management, pp 133-134 18. Scientific Management, pg 66 19. Scientific Management, pg 67 20. Scientific Management, pg 23 21. Scientific Management, pg 12 22. Scientific Management, pg 139 23. Scientific Management, pg 36 24. Scientific Management, pg 140 Vincenzo Sandrone QA Engineer GEC Marconi Systems Meadowbank (Sydney), Australia vxsand@gecms.com.au An [email_address] Internet publication. December 10, 1995 <br />
  • The goal of the Smart Dust project is to build a self-contained, millimeter-scale sensing and communication platform for a massively distributed sensor network.  This device will be around the size of a grain of sand and will contain sensors, computational ability, bi-directional wireless communications, and a power supply, while being inexpensive enough to deploy by the hundreds.  The science and engineering goal of the project is to build a complete, complex system in a tiny volume using state-of-the art technologies (as opposed to futuristic technologies), which will require evolutionary and revolutionary advances in integration, miniaturization, and energy management.  We forsee many applications for this technology: <br /> Weather/seismological monitoring on Mars <br /> Internal spacecraft monitoring <br /> Land/space comm. networks <br /> Chemical/biological sensors <br /> Weapons stockpile monitoring <br /> Defense-related sensor networks <br /> Inventory Control <br /> Product quality monitoring <br /> Smart office spaces <br /> Sports - sailing, balls <br /> For more information, see the main Smart Dust page at http://robotics.eecs.berkeley.edu/~pister/SmartDust and read our publications (see navigation button above). <br /> Brief description of the operation of the mote: <br /> The Smart Dust mote is run by a microcontroller that not only determines the tasks performed by the mote, but controls power to the various components of the system to conserve energy. Periodically the microcontroller gets a reading from one of the sensors, which measure one of a number of physical or chemical stimuli such as temperature, ambient light, vibration, acceleration, or air pressure, processes the data, and stores it in memory. It also occasionally turns on the optical receiver to see if anyone is trying to communicate with it. This communication may include new programs or messages from other motes. In response to a message or upon its own initiative the microcontroller will use the corner cube retroreflector or laser to transmit sensor data or a message to a base station or another mote. <br /> Longer description of the operation of the mote: <br /> The primary constraint in the design of the Smart Dust motes is volume, which in turn puts a severe constraint on energy since we do not have much room for batteries or large solar cells. Thus, the motes must operate efficiently and conserve energy whenever possible. Most of the time, the majority of the mote is powered off with only a clock and a few timers running. When a timer expires, it powers up a part of the mote to carry out a job, then powers off. A few of the timers control the sensors that measure one of a number of physical or chemical stimuli such as temperature, ambient light, vibration, acceleration, or air pressure. When one of these timers expires, it powers up the corresponding sensor, takes a sample, and converts it to a digital word. If the data is interesting, it may either be stored directly in the SRAM or the microcontroller is powered up to perform more complex operations with it. When this task is complete, everything is again powered down and the timer begins counting again. <br /> Another timer controls the receiver. When that timer expires, the receiver powers up and looks for an incoming packet. If it doesn&apos;t see one after a certain length of time, it is powered down again. The mote can receive several types of packets, including ones that are new program code that is stored in the program memory. This allows the user to change the behavior of the mote remotely. Packets may also include messages from the base station or other motes. When one of these is received, the microcontroller is powered up and used to interpret the contents of the message. The message may tell the mote to do something in particular, or it may be a message that is just being passed from one mote to another on its way to a particular destination. In response to a message or to another timer expiring, the microcontroller will assemble a packet containing sensor data or a message and transmit it using either the corner cube retroreflector or the laser diode, depending on which it has. The corner cube retroreflector transmits information just by moving a mirror and thus changing the reflection of a laser beam from the base station. This technique is substantially more energy efficient than actually generating some radiation. With the laser diode and a set of beam scanning mirrors, we can transmit data in any direction desired, allowing the mote to communicate with other Smart Dust motes. <br />
  • The current deployment of wireless instruments for SHM is very limited; however, the market potential is very large. The civil infrastructure of the US includes nearly 80 billion square feet of commercial and government facilities and buildings, and more than 100 billion square feet of dams and bridges. Most of these assets are exposed and sparsely monitored for rapid and reliable assessment of vulnerabilities and detection of damage (Sensametrics, 2003, p. 1). <br /> Rehabilitation, renewal, replacement and maintenance of this infrastructure is estimated to require expenditures of at least one trillion dollars nationwide (Elgamal, et al, n.d., p. 1). Sensametrics has calculated the aggregate market potential to be $50 billion” (Technology Ventures Corporation, n.d., p. 1). <br />
  • Wireless M2M sensor networks and process control systems are expected to be areas of significant growth. Demand for Radio Frequency (RF) Modules used for industrial monitoring and control was approximately 1.9 million units in 2004 and is expected to climb to 165 million units in 2010 (Legg, 2004, p.1). <br /> Market research firm Frost & Sullivan has projected the industrial wireless sensors market to move from $24 million in 2001 to over $100 million in annual sales in 2008 (Donoho, 2002, p. 1). Further, “the market for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems are projected to grow from $3.1 billion in 2004 to over $4 billion by 2007. As most M2M networks lack adequate security, the SCADA security software market is expected to grow by 50% annually through 2007” (Kuykendall, 2004, p. 1). <br />
  • More than 25 million AMR units installed on gas (21 percent), water (11 percent), and electric utility (16 percent) meters. 9 million units shipped in 2002 with a total meter market of 200 million units yet to be changed out to AMR (Jackson, 2004, p. 1). <br /> A California study indicates that peak-rate usage can be shaved by 20 percent if utilities used Automated Meter Reading (ARM) for accurate pricing information--each megawatt of reduction can equate to $400,000 in savings per year (Jackson, 2004, p. 1) saving California utilities and consumers at least $5 billion a year. <br />
  • http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/coch.htm <br /> What is a cochlear implant? <br /> Credit: NIH Medical ArtsEar with Cochlear implant. View larger image.A cochlear implant is a small, complex electronic device that can help to provide a sense of sound to a person who is profoundly deaf or severely hard-of-hearing. The implant consists of an external portion that sits behind the ear and a second portion that is surgically placed under the skin (see figure). An implant has the following parts: <br /> A microphone, which picks up sound from the environment. <br /> A speech processor, which selects and arranges sounds picked up by the microphone. <br /> A transmitter and receiver/stimulator, which receive signals from the speech processor and convert them into electric impulses. <br /> An electrode array, which is a group of electrodes that collects the impulses from the stimulator and sends them to different regions of the auditory nerve. <br /> An implant does not restore normal hearing. Instead, it can give a deaf person a useful representation of sounds in the environment and help him or her to understand speech. <br /> Top <br /> How does a cochlear implant work? <br /> A cochlear implant is very different from a hearing aid. Hearing aids amplify sounds so they may be detected by damaged ears. Cochlear implants bypass damaged portions of the ear and directly stimulate the auditory nerve. Signals generated by the implant are sent by way of the auditory nerve to the brain, which recognizes the signals as sound. Hearing through a cochlear implant is different from normal hearing and takes time to learn or relearn. However, it allows many people to recognize warning signals, understand other sounds in the environment, and enjoy a conversation in person or by telephone. <br /> Top <br /> Who gets cochlear implants? <br /> Credit: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) <br /> Children and adults who are deaf or severely hard-of-hearing can be fitted for cochlear implants. According to the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) 2005 data, nearly 100,000 people worldwide have received implants. In the United States, roughly 22,000 adults and nearly 15,000 children have received them. <br /> Adults who have lost all or most of their hearing later in life often can benefit from cochlear implants. They often can associate the sounds made through an implant with sounds they remember. This may help them to understand speech without visual cues or systems such as lipreading or sign language. <br /> Cochlear implants, coupled with intensive postimplantation therapy, can help young children to acquire speech, language, developmental, and social skills. Most children who receive implants are between two and six years old. Early implantation provides exposure to sounds that can be helpful during the critical period when children learn speech and language skills. In 2000, the FDA lowered the age of eligibility to 12 months for one type of cochlear implant. <br /> Top <br /> How does someone receive a cochlear implant? <br /> Use of a cochlear implant requires both a surgical procedure and significant therapy to learn or relearn the sense of hearing. Not everyone performs at the same level with this device. The decision to receive an implant should involve discussions with medical specialists, including an experienced cochlear-implant surgeon. The process can be expensive. For example, a person’s health insurance may cover the expense, but not always. Some individuals may choose not to have a cochlear implant for a variety of personal reasons. Surgical implantations are almost always safe, although complications are a risk factor, just as with any kind of surgery. An additional consideration is learning to interpret the sounds created by an implant. This process takes time and practice. Speech-language pathologists and audiologists are frequently involved in this learning process. Prior to implantation, all of these factors need to be considered. <br /> Top <br /> What does the future hold for cochlear implants? <br /> With advancements in technology and continued follow-up studies with people who already have received implants, researchers are evaluating how cochlear implants might be used for other types of hearing loss. <br /> NIDCD is supporting research to improve upon the benefits provided by cochlear implants. It may be possible to use a shortened electrode array, inserted into a portion of the cochlea, for individuals whose hearing loss is limited to the higher frequencies. Other studies are exploring ways to make a cochlear implant convey the sounds of speech more clearly. Researchers also are looking at the potential benefits of pairing a cochlear implant in one ear with either another cochlear implant or a hearing aid in the other ear. <br />
  • Lab-in-a-Pill – Revolutionising Bowel Cancer Screening <br /> Sector: Medical Devices <br /> Technology <br /> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> In the western world, colorectal cancer is now the third most frequent cancer and the second most common cause of cancer deaths. In the US nearly 150,000 new cases are being diagnosed each year and more than 56,000 people died from the disease in 2002. In the UK, where a national screening campaign will be implemented across the 20m population over 50, around 15,000 people die from the disease each year. <br /> Current screening techniques are notoriously inaccurate, leading to many false positives which saturate resources available for follow-up diagnosis. But scientists at Glasgow University have pioneered a new sensor technology, Lab-in-a-Pill, that could have major impact on the cost and effectiveness of bowel cancer treatment. <br /> At the core of Lab-in-a-Pill is a miniaturised sensor, processing and communications module all enclosed in a chemical-resistant capsule which currently measures around 3cm x 1cm in prototype form. <br /> The Lab-in-a-Pill module, which would be sent to all individuals being screened, incorporates a multi-sensor array which includes a blood test. The pill is able to detect blood as it travels through the bowel, transmitting the real time measurements to a small external module worn under a patch attached to the body. <br /> After one, or more pills have been swallowed over the required screening period, the patch is returned for the measured data to be assessed at the screening centre. So the pills themselves do not have to be recovered making the screening process much more acceptable. And because it measures the location of bleeding Lab-in-a-Pill can identify, more effectively, those individuals who are most at risk. <br /> The Lab-in-a-Pill concept, currently undergoing in-vitro trials, overcomes the critical difficulties with the current screening scheme which is based on individuals collecting stool samples. Major benefits include: <br /> • improved compliance and screening response rate with elimination of sample collection <br /> • reduced false positives and improved sensitivity through measurement at the source of bleeding <br /> So Lab-in-a-Pill reduces the pressure on valuable national resources by eliminating the need for central screening laboratories and ensuring only at-risk patients are referred for colonoscopy. <br /> IP Status <br /> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> The intellectual property associated with this technology belongs to the University of Glasgow. <br /> The University of Glasgow is always keen to hear from potential collaborative partners and welcomes interest from genuine parties. If you would like further information about this technology or this area of research please complete the following form and we will get back to you via telephone or email within two working days. <br /> Enquiry Form <br /> http://www.innovativelicences.com/index.cfm/page/licensesandtechnologies/technologyid/48 <br />
  • Lab-in-a-Pill – Revolutionising Bowel Cancer Screening <br /> Sector: Medical Devices <br /> Technology <br /> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> In the western world, colorectal cancer is now the third most frequent cancer and the second most common cause of cancer deaths. In the US nearly 150,000 new cases are being diagnosed each year and more than 56,000 people died from the disease in 2002. In the UK, where a national screening campaign will be implemented across the 20m population over 50, around 15,000 people die from the disease each year. <br /> Current screening techniques are notoriously inaccurate, leading to many false positives which saturate resources available for follow-up diagnosis. But scientists at Glasgow University have pioneered a new sensor technology, Lab-in-a-Pill, that could have major impact on the cost and effectiveness of bowel cancer treatment. <br /> At the core of Lab-in-a-Pill is a miniaturised sensor, processing and communications module all enclosed in a chemical-resistant capsule which currently measures around 3cm x 1cm in prototype form. <br /> The Lab-in-a-Pill module, which would be sent to all individuals being screened, incorporates a multi-sensor array which includes a blood test. The pill is able to detect blood as it travels through the bowel, transmitting the real time measurements to a small external module worn under a patch attached to the body. <br /> After one, or more pills have been swallowed over the required screening period, the patch is returned for the measured data to be assessed at the screening centre. So the pills themselves do not have to be recovered making the screening process much more acceptable. And because it measures the location of bleeding Lab-in-a-Pill can identify, more effectively, those individuals who are most at risk. <br /> The Lab-in-a-Pill concept, currently undergoing in-vitro trials, overcomes the critical difficulties with the current screening scheme which is based on individuals collecting stool samples. Major benefits include: <br /> • improved compliance and screening response rate with elimination of sample collection <br /> • reduced false positives and improved sensitivity through measurement at the source of bleeding <br /> So Lab-in-a-Pill reduces the pressure on valuable national resources by eliminating the need for central screening laboratories and ensuring only at-risk patients are referred for colonoscopy. <br /> IP Status <br /> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> The intellectual property associated with this technology belongs to the University of Glasgow. <br /> The University of Glasgow is always keen to hear from potential collaborative partners and welcomes interest from genuine parties. If you would like further information about this technology or this area of research please complete the following form and we will get back to you via telephone or email within two working days. <br /> Enquiry Form <br /> http://www.innovativelicences.com/index.cfm/page/licensesandtechnologies/technologyid/48 <br />
  • Cybernetics is a theory of the communication and control of regulatory feedback. The term cybernetics stems from the Greek kybernetes (meaning steersman, governor, pilot, or rudder). Cybernetics is the discipline that studies communication and control in living beings and in the machines built by humans. <br /> A more philosophical definition, suggested in 1958 by Louis Couffignal, one of the pioneers of cybernetics in the 1930s, considers cybernetics as &quot;the art of assuring efficiency of action&quot; (see external links for reference). <br /> Taylorism <br /> F. W. Taylor & Scientific Management <br /> Mr. Bill&apos;s Preface: In October 1995, there was an extended and at times intense discussion in the Quality E-Mail forum on &quot;Scientific Management&quot; and Frederick W. Taylor. At one point Vincenzo Sandrone submitted a post on the subject that the forum moderator deemed appropriate to the discussion, but to long to be posted to the list. What he did was post a notice to the list that the paper was available from Mr. Sandrone via private E-Mail. What follows is that paper posted on this site with permission of the author. The paper will form part of an undergraduate thesis entitled &quot;Total Quality Engineering - A Holistic Approach to Engineering Management&quot; to be submitted in 1996 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a BE in Manufacturing Engineering at the University of Technology, Sydney, NSW, Australia. <br /> Mr. Sandrone&apos;s source for quotes is: <br /> Taylor Frederick W., 1964, Scientific Management - Comprising Shop Management, The principles of Scientific Management and Testimony before the Special House Committee, Harper and Row All the quotes are from &apos;Scientific Management&apos; this needs to be highlighted as the edition restarted page numbers for each separate section. That is, page numbers are not unique. Please address any comments or critique to Mr. Sandrone. <br /> Regards, Mr. Bill <br /> ================================================================== With all the discussion of Taylorism on the list and arguments that both sides did not have the facts, I have decided I may be able to provide some information. I have included a copy of the section on Taylorism from my in process Undergraduate Thesis. I hope that it may help put some facts into the discussion. Looking over the section I have realized that it contained the highest density of direct quotes in my thesis. I feel this was my subconscious way of fighting the, what I considered, misinformation that I had received about Taylorism. Unfortunately I could not find a &quot;definition&quot; of science as applied in Scientific method. However, I would like to make two points: 1) Taylor did not call his original paper &quot;Scientific management&quot; and by the time he published it the name had stuck and his publisher changed the name. (I cannot recall the name of his original paper.) 2) He sort of defines &quot;Scientific Management&quot; by saying what it is not - It is not &quot;Rule of Thumb&quot; when you consider that piece work based on arbitrary quotas ( and heavily biased to the employer) was normal practice. The use of work study/measurement to determine a fair quota was a step forward for both management and the workers. Vincenzo Sandrone QA Engineer GEC Marconi Systems Meadowbank (Sydney), Australia vxsand@gecms.com.au ============================================================== Taylorism Under Taylor&apos;s management system, factories are managed through scientific methods rather than by use of the empirical &quot;rule of thumb&quot; so widely prevalent in the days of the late nineteenth century when F. W. Taylor devised his system and published &quot;Scientific Management&quot; in 1911. The main elements of the Scientific Management are [1] : &quot;Time studies Functional or specialized supervision Standardization of tools and implements Standardization of work methods Separate Planning function Management by exception principle The use of &quot;slide-rules and similar time-saving devices&quot; Instruction cards for workmen Task allocation and large bonus for successful performance The use of the &apos;differential rate&apos; Mnemonic systems for classifying products and implements A routing system A modern costing system etc. etc. &quot; Taylor called these elements &quot;merely the elements or details of the mechanisms of management&quot; He saw them as extensions of the four principles of management.[2] 1. The development of a true science 2. The scientific selection of the workman 3. The scientific education and development of the workman 4. Intimate and friendly cooperation between the management and the men. Taylor warned [3] of the risks managers make in attempting to make change in what would presently be called, the culture, of the organization. He stated the importance of management commitment and the need for gradual implementation and education. He described &quot;the really great problem&quot; involved in the change &quot;consists of the complete revolution in the mental attitude and the habits of all those engaged in the management, as well of the workmen.&quot; [4] Taylor taught that there was one and only one method of work that maximized efficiency. &quot;And this one best method and best implementation can only be discovered or developed through scientific study and analysis... This involves the gradual substitution of science for &apos;rule of thumb&apos; throughout the mechanical arts.&quot; [5] &quot;Scientific management requires first, a careful investigation of each of the many modifications of the same implement, developed under rule of thumb; and second, after time and motion study has been made of the speed attainable with each of these implements, that the good points of several of them shall be unified in a single standard implementation, which will enable the workman to work faster and with greater easy than he could before. This one implement, then is the adopted as standard in place of the many different kinds before in use and it remains standard for all workmen to use until superseded by an implement which has been shown, through motion and time study, to be still better.&quot; [6] An important barrier to use of scientific management was the limited education of the lower level of supervision and of the work force. A large part of the factory population was composed of recent immigrants who lacked literacy in English. In Taylor&apos;s view, supervisors and workers with such low levels of education were not qualified to plan how work should be done. Taylor&apos;s solution was to separate planning from execution. &quot;In almost all the mechanic arts the science which underlies each act of each workman is so great and amounts to so much that the workman who is best suited to actually doing the work is incapable of fully understanding this science..&quot; [7] To apply his solution, Taylor created planning departments, staffed them with engineers, and gave them the responsibility to: Develop scientific methods for doing work. Establish goals for productivity. Establish systems of rewards for meeting the goals. Train the personnel in how to use the methods and thereby meet the goals. Perhaps the key idea of Scientific management and the one which has drawn the most criticism was the concept of task allocation. Task allocation [8] is the concept that breaking task into smaller and smaller tasks allows the determination of the optimum solution to the task. &quot;The man in the planning room, whose specialty is planning ahead, invariably finds that the work can be done more economically by subdivision of the labour; each act of each mechanic, for example, should be preceded by various preparatory acts done by other men.&quot; [9] The main argument against Taylor is this reductionist approach to work dehumanizes the worker. The allocation of work &quot;specifying not only what is to be done but how it is to done and the exact time allowed for doing it&quot; [10] is seen as leaving no scope for the individual worker to excel or think. This argument is mainly due to later writing rather than Taylor&apos;s work as Taylor stated &quot;The task is always so regulated that the man who is well suited to his job will thrive while working at this rate during a long term of years and grow happier and more prosperous, instead of being overworked.&quot; [11] Taylor&apos;s concept of motivation left something to be desired when compared to later ideas. He methods of motivation started and finished at monetary incentives. While critical of the then prevailing distinction of &quot;us &quot;and &quot;them&quot; between the workforce and employers he tried to find a common ground between the working and managing classes. &quot;Scientific Management has for its foundation the firm conviction that the true interests of the two are one and the same; that prosperity for the employer cannot exist a long term of years unless it is accompanied by prosperity for the employee [sic], and vice versa ..&quot; [12] However, this emphasis on monetary rewards was only part of the story. Rivalry between the Bethlehem and Pittsburgh Steel plants led to the offer from Pittsburgh of 4.9 cents per ton against Bethlehem&apos;s rate of 3.2 cents per day to the ore loaders. The ore loaders were spoken to individually and their value to the company reinforced and offers to re-hire them at any time were made. The majority of the ore loaders took up the Pittsburgh offers. Most had returned after less than six weeks. [13] The rates at Pittsburgh were determined by gang rates. Peer pressure from the Pittsburgh employees to not work hard meant that the Bethlehem workers actually received less pay than at Bethlehem. Two of the Bethlehem workers requested to be placed in a separate gang, this was rejected by management for the extra work required by management to keep separate record for each worker. Taylor places the blame squarely on management and their inability &quot;to do their share of the work in cooperating with the workmen.&quot; [14] Taylor&apos;s attitudes towards workers were laden with negative bias &quot;in the majority of cases this man deliberately plans to do as little as he safely can.&quot; [15] The methods that Taylor adopted were directed solely towards the uneducated. &quot;When he tells you to pick up a pig and walk, you pick it up and walk, and when he tells you to sit down and rest, you sit down. You do that right through the day. And what&apos;s more, no back talk&quot;. This type of behaviour towards workers appears barbaric in the extreme to the modern reader, however, Taylor used the example of Schmidt at the Bethlehem Steel Company to test his theories. Taylor admits &quot;This seems rather rough talk. And indeed it would be if applied to an educated mechanic, or even an intelligent labourer.&quot; [17] The fact that Taylor took the effort to firstly know the workers name and to cite it is some indication that he empathized with the workforce. This study improved the workrate of Schmidt from 12.5 tons to 47.5 tons per day showing the worth of Scientific Management. The greatest abuse of Scientific Management has come from applying the techniques without the philosophy behind them. It is obvious from Taylor&apos;s own observations that the above discussion would be misplaced in other workers. Taylor acknowledged the potential for abuse in his methods. &quot;The knowledge obtained from accurate time study, for example, is a powerful implement, and can be used, in one case to promote harmony between workmen and the management, by gradually educating, training, and leading the workmen into new and better methods of doing the work, or in the other case, it may be used more or less as a club to drive the workmen into doing a larger day&apos;s work for approximately the same pay that they received in the past.&quot; [17] Scientific Study and standardization were important parts of the Scientific Management. One example, was the study undertaken to determine the optimum shovel load for workers. The figure of 21 pounds [18] was arrived at by the study. To ensure that this shovel load was adhered to, a series of different shovels were purchased for different types of material. Each shovel was designed to ensure that only 21 pounds could be lifted. This stopped the situation where &quot;each shoveller owned his own shovel, that he would frequently go from shoveling ore, with a load of about 30 pounds per shovel, to handling rice coal, with a load on the same shovel of less than 4 pounds. In the one case, he was so overloaded that it was impossible for him to do a full day&apos;s work, and in the other case he was so ridiculously under-loaded that it was manifestly impossible to even approximate a day&apos;s work.&quot; [19] Taylor spent a considerable amount of his books in describing &quot;soldiering&quot; the act of &apos;loafing&apos; both at an individual level and &quot;systematic soldiering&quot;. He described the main reasons that workers were not performing their work at the optimum. Though worded in a patronizing way the essence of the descriptions are still valid. [20] The belief that increased output would lead to less workers. Inefficiencies within the management control system such as poorly designed incentive schemes and hourly pay rates not linked to productivity Poor design of the performance of the work by rule-of-thumb The fear of redundancies within the workforce was a valid argument during the previous style of management. Taylor not only countered this argument by using economic arguments of increased demand due to decreased pricing but put forward the idea of sharing the gains with the workforce. Taylor saw the weaknesses of piece work in the workers reactions to gradual decreases in the piece rate as the worker produced more pieces by working harder and/or smarter. The worker then is determined to have no more reduction in rate by &quot;soldiering&quot;. This deception leads to an antagonistic view of management and a general deterioration of the worker/management relationship. Taylor also was a strong advocate of worker development. It follows that the most important object of both the workman and the establishment should be the training and development of each individual in the establishment, so that he can do ( at his fastest pace and with the maximum of efficiency) the highest class of work for which his natural abilities for him.&quot; [21] Taylor&apos;s ideas on management and workers speaks of justice for both parties. &quot;It (the public) will no longer tolerate the type of employer who has his eyes only on dividends alone, who refuses to do his share of the work and who merely cracks the whip over the heads of his workmen and attempts to drive them harder work for low pay. No more will it tolerate tyranny on the part of labour which demands one increase after another in pay and shorter hours while at the same time it becomes less instead of more efficient.&quot;[22] Taylor&apos;s system was widely adopted in the United States and the world. Although the Taylor system originated in the factory production departments, the concept of separating planning from execution was universal in nature and, hence, had potential application to other areas: production support services offices operations service industries. Management&apos;s new responsibilities were extended to include: [23] Replacing the old rule-of-thumb with scientific management Scientifically select and train, teach and develop the workman &quot;Heartily cooperate with the men so as to insure[sic] all the work being done in accordance with the principles of the science which has been developed&quot; Take over the work for which they are &quot;better fitted&quot; than the workmen. Relationship between Taylorism and TQM Taylor&apos;s more general summary of the principles of Scientific Management are better suited for inclusion into the TQM methodology, than the narrow definitions. &quot;It is no single element , but rather the this whole combination, that constitutes Scientific Management, which may be summarized as: Science, not rule of thumb Harmony, not discord Cooperation, not individualism Maximum output in place of restricted output The development of each man to his greatest efficiency and prosperity&quot; [24] Much has happened, since Taylor developed his method of Scientific Management, to make obsolete the premises on which he based his concepts: Lack of education is no longer reason enough to separate the planning function The balance of power between managers and the work force has changed. Where in Taylor&apos;s time it was heavily weighted against the workers. Unionism (or the threat of it) has profoundly changed that balance. Changes in the climate of social thinking. Revolts against the &quot;dehumanizing&quot; of work. A basic tenet of Scientific management was that employees were not highly educated and thus were unable to perform any but the simplest tasks. Modern thought is that all employees have intimate knowledge of job conditions and are therefore able to make useful contributions. Rather than dehumanizing the work and breaking the work down into smaller and smaller units to maximize efficiency without giving thought to the job satisfaction of the working. Encouragement of work based teams in which all workers may contribute. Such contributions increase worker morale, provide a sense of ownership, and improve management-worker relations generally. References 1. Scientific Management, pg 129-130 2. Scientific Management, pg 130 3. Scientific Management, pg 131 4. Scientific Management, pg 131 5. Scientific Management, pg 25 6. Scientific Management, pg 119 7. Scientific Management, pp 25-25 8. Scientific Management, pg 39 9. Scientific Management, pg 38 10. Scientific Management, pg 39 11. Scientific Management, pg 39 12. Scientific Management, pg 10 13. Scientific Management, pg 75 14. Scientific Management, pg 77 15. Scientific Management, pg 13 16. Scientific Management, pg 46 17. Scientific Management, pp 133-134 18. Scientific Management, pg 66 19. Scientific Management, pg 67 20. Scientific Management, pg 23 21. Scientific Management, pg 12 22. Scientific Management, pg 139 23. Scientific Management, pg 36 24. Scientific Management, pg 140 Vincenzo Sandrone QA Engineer GEC Marconi Systems Meadowbank (Sydney), Australia vxsand@gecms.com.au An [email_address] Internet publication. December 10, 1995 <br />
  • Cybernetics is a theory of the communication and control of regulatory feedback. The term cybernetics stems from the Greek kybernetes (meaning steersman, governor, pilot, or rudder). Cybernetics is the discipline that studies communication and control in living beings and in the machines built by humans. <br /> A more philosophical definition, suggested in 1958 by Louis Couffignal, one of the pioneers of cybernetics in the 1930s, considers cybernetics as &quot;the art of assuring efficiency of action&quot; (see external links for reference). <br /> Taylorism <br /> F. W. Taylor & Scientific Management <br /> Mr. Bill&apos;s Preface: In October 1995, there was an extended and at times intense discussion in the Quality E-Mail forum on &quot;Scientific Management&quot; and Frederick W. Taylor. At one point Vincenzo Sandrone submitted a post on the subject that the forum moderator deemed appropriate to the discussion, but to long to be posted to the list. What he did was post a notice to the list that the paper was available from Mr. Sandrone via private E-Mail. What follows is that paper posted on this site with permission of the author. The paper will form part of an undergraduate thesis entitled &quot;Total Quality Engineering - A Holistic Approach to Engineering Management&quot; to be submitted in 1996 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a BE in Manufacturing Engineering at the University of Technology, Sydney, NSW, Australia. <br /> Mr. Sandrone&apos;s source for quotes is: <br /> Taylor Frederick W., 1964, Scientific Management - Comprising Shop Management, The principles of Scientific Management and Testimony before the Special House Committee, Harper and Row All the quotes are from &apos;Scientific Management&apos; this needs to be highlighted as the edition restarted page numbers for each separate section. That is, page numbers are not unique. Please address any comments or critique to Mr. Sandrone. <br /> Regards, Mr. Bill <br /> ================================================================== With all the discussion of Taylorism on the list and arguments that both sides did not have the facts, I have decided I may be able to provide some information. I have included a copy of the section on Taylorism from my in process Undergraduate Thesis. I hope that it may help put some facts into the discussion. Looking over the section I have realized that it contained the highest density of direct quotes in my thesis. I feel this was my subconscious way of fighting the, what I considered, misinformation that I had received about Taylorism. Unfortunately I could not find a &quot;definition&quot; of science as applied in Scientific method. However, I would like to make two points: 1) Taylor did not call his original paper &quot;Scientific management&quot; and by the time he published it the name had stuck and his publisher changed the name. (I cannot recall the name of his original paper.) 2) He sort of defines &quot;Scientific Management&quot; by saying what it is not - It is not &quot;Rule of Thumb&quot; when you consider that piece work based on arbitrary quotas ( and heavily biased to the employer) was normal practice. The use of work study/measurement to determine a fair quota was a step forward for both management and the workers. Vincenzo Sandrone QA Engineer GEC Marconi Systems Meadowbank (Sydney), Australia vxsand@gecms.com.au ============================================================== Taylorism Under Taylor&apos;s management system, factories are managed through scientific methods rather than by use of the empirical &quot;rule of thumb&quot; so widely prevalent in the days of the late nineteenth century when F. W. Taylor devised his system and published &quot;Scientific Management&quot; in 1911. The main elements of the Scientific Management are [1] : &quot;Time studies Functional or specialized supervision Standardization of tools and implements Standardization of work methods Separate Planning function Management by exception principle The use of &quot;slide-rules and similar time-saving devices&quot; Instruction cards for workmen Task allocation and large bonus for successful performance The use of the &apos;differential rate&apos; Mnemonic systems for classifying products and implements A routing system A modern costing system etc. etc. &quot; Taylor called these elements &quot;merely the elements or details of the mechanisms of management&quot; He saw them as extensions of the four principles of management.[2] 1. The development of a true science 2. The scientific selection of the workman 3. The scientific education and development of the workman 4. Intimate and friendly cooperation between the management and the men. Taylor warned [3] of the risks managers make in attempting to make change in what would presently be called, the culture, of the organization. He stated the importance of management commitment and the need for gradual implementation and education. He described &quot;the really great problem&quot; involved in the change &quot;consists of the complete revolution in the mental attitude and the habits of all those engaged in the management, as well of the workmen.&quot; [4] Taylor taught that there was one and only one method of work that maximized efficiency. &quot;And this one best method and best implementation can only be discovered or developed through scientific study and analysis... This involves the gradual substitution of science for &apos;rule of thumb&apos; throughout the mechanical arts.&quot; [5] &quot;Scientific management requires first, a careful investigation of each of the many modifications of the same implement, developed under rule of thumb; and second, after time and motion study has been made of the speed attainable with each of these implements, that the good points of several of them shall be unified in a single standard implementation, which will enable the workman to work faster and with greater easy than he could before. This one implement, then is the adopted as standard in place of the many different kinds before in use and it remains standard for all workmen to use until superseded by an implement which has been shown, through motion and time study, to be still better.&quot; [6] An important barrier to use of scientific management was the limited education of the lower level of supervision and of the work force. A large part of the factory population was composed of recent immigrants who lacked literacy in English. In Taylor&apos;s view, supervisors and workers with such low levels of education were not qualified to plan how work should be done. Taylor&apos;s solution was to separate planning from execution. &quot;In almost all the mechanic arts the science which underlies each act of each workman is so great and amounts to so much that the workman who is best suited to actually doing the work is incapable of fully understanding this science..&quot; [7] To apply his solution, Taylor created planning departments, staffed them with engineers, and gave them the responsibility to: Develop scientific methods for doing work. Establish goals for productivity. Establish systems of rewards for meeting the goals. Train the personnel in how to use the methods and thereby meet the goals. Perhaps the key idea of Scientific management and the one which has drawn the most criticism was the concept of task allocation. Task allocation [8] is the concept that breaking task into smaller and smaller tasks allows the determination of the optimum solution to the task. &quot;The man in the planning room, whose specialty is planning ahead, invariably finds that the work can be done more economically by subdivision of the labour; each act of each mechanic, for example, should be preceded by various preparatory acts done by other men.&quot; [9] The main argument against Taylor is this reductionist approach to work dehumanizes the worker. The allocation of work &quot;specifying not only what is to be done but how it is to done and the exact time allowed for doing it&quot; [10] is seen as leaving no scope for the individual worker to excel or think. This argument is mainly due to later writing rather than Taylor&apos;s work as Taylor stated &quot;The task is always so regulated that the man who is well suited to his job will thrive while working at this rate during a long term of years and grow happier and more prosperous, instead of being overworked.&quot; [11] Taylor&apos;s concept of motivation left something to be desired when compared to later ideas. He methods of motivation started and finished at monetary incentives. While critical of the then prevailing distinction of &quot;us &quot;and &quot;them&quot; between the workforce and employers he tried to find a common ground between the working and managing classes. &quot;Scientific Management has for its foundation the firm conviction that the true interests of the two are one and the same; that prosperity for the employer cannot exist a long term of years unless it is accompanied by prosperity for the employee [sic], and vice versa ..&quot; [12] However, this emphasis on monetary rewards was only part of the story. Rivalry between the Bethlehem and Pittsburgh Steel plants led to the offer from Pittsburgh of 4.9 cents per ton against Bethlehem&apos;s rate of 3.2 cents per day to the ore loaders. The ore loaders were spoken to individually and their value to the company reinforced and offers to re-hire them at any time were made. The majority of the ore loaders took up the Pittsburgh offers. Most had returned after less than six weeks. [13] The rates at Pittsburgh were determined by gang rates. Peer pressure from the Pittsburgh employees to not work hard meant that the Bethlehem workers actually received less pay than at Bethlehem. Two of the Bethlehem workers requested to be placed in a separate gang, this was rejected by management for the extra work required by management to keep separate record for each worker. Taylor places the blame squarely on management and their inability &quot;to do their share of the work in cooperating with the workmen.&quot; [14] Taylor&apos;s attitudes towards workers were laden with negative bias &quot;in the majority of cases this man deliberately plans to do as little as he safely can.&quot; [15] The methods that Taylor adopted were directed solely towards the uneducated. &quot;When he tells you to pick up a pig and walk, you pick it up and walk, and when he tells you to sit down and rest, you sit down. You do that right through the day. And what&apos;s more, no back talk&quot;. This type of behaviour towards workers appears barbaric in the extreme to the modern reader, however, Taylor used the example of Schmidt at the Bethlehem Steel Company to test his theories. Taylor admits &quot;This seems rather rough talk. And indeed it would be if applied to an educated mechanic, or even an intelligent labourer.&quot; [17] The fact that Taylor took the effort to firstly know the workers name and to cite it is some indication that he empathized with the workforce. This study improved the workrate of Schmidt from 12.5 tons to 47.5 tons per day showing the worth of Scientific Management. The greatest abuse of Scientific Management has come from applying the techniques without the philosophy behind them. It is obvious from Taylor&apos;s own observations that the above discussion would be misplaced in other workers. Taylor acknowledged the potential for abuse in his methods. &quot;The knowledge obtained from accurate time study, for example, is a powerful implement, and can be used, in one case to promote harmony between workmen and the management, by gradually educating, training, and leading the workmen into new and better methods of doing the work, or in the other case, it may be used more or less as a club to drive the workmen into doing a larger day&apos;s work for approximately the same pay that they received in the past.&quot; [17] Scientific Study and standardization were important parts of the Scientific Management. One example, was the study undertaken to determine the optimum shovel load for workers. The figure of 21 pounds [18] was arrived at by the study. To ensure that this shovel load was adhered to, a series of different shovels were purchased for different types of material. Each shovel was designed to ensure that only 21 pounds could be lifted. This stopped the situation where &quot;each shoveller owned his own shovel, that he would frequently go from shoveling ore, with a load of about 30 pounds per shovel, to handling rice coal, with a load on the same shovel of less than 4 pounds. In the one case, he was so overloaded that it was impossible for him to do a full day&apos;s work, and in the other case he was so ridiculously under-loaded that it was manifestly impossible to even approximate a day&apos;s work.&quot; [19] Taylor spent a considerable amount of his books in describing &quot;soldiering&quot; the act of &apos;loafing&apos; both at an individual level and &quot;systematic soldiering&quot;. He described the main reasons that workers were not performing their work at the optimum. Though worded in a patronizing way the essence of the descriptions are still valid. [20] The belief that increased output would lead to less workers. Inefficiencies within the management control system such as poorly designed incentive schemes and hourly pay rates not linked to productivity Poor design of the performance of the work by rule-of-thumb The fear of redundancies within the workforce was a valid argument during the previous style of management. Taylor not only countered this argument by using economic arguments of increased demand due to decreased pricing but put forward the idea of sharing the gains with the workforce. Taylor saw the weaknesses of piece work in the workers reactions to gradual decreases in the piece rate as the worker produced more pieces by working harder and/or smarter. The worker then is determined to have no more reduction in rate by &quot;soldiering&quot;. This deception leads to an antagonistic view of management and a general deterioration of the worker/management relationship. Taylor also was a strong advocate of worker development. It follows that the most important object of both the workman and the establishment should be the training and development of each individual in the establishment, so that he can do ( at his fastest pace and with the maximum of efficiency) the highest class of work for which his natural abilities for him.&quot; [21] Taylor&apos;s ideas on management and workers speaks of justice for both parties. &quot;It (the public) will no longer tolerate the type of employer who has his eyes only on dividends alone, who refuses to do his share of the work and who merely cracks the whip over the heads of his workmen and attempts to drive them harder work for low pay. No more will it tolerate tyranny on the part of labour which demands one increase after another in pay and shorter hours while at the same time it becomes less instead of more efficient.&quot;[22] Taylor&apos;s system was widely adopted in the United States and the world. Although the Taylor system originated in the factory production departments, the concept of separating planning from execution was universal in nature and, hence, had potential application to other areas: production support services offices operations service industries. Management&apos;s new responsibilities were extended to include: [23] Replacing the old rule-of-thumb with scientific management Scientifically select and train, teach and develop the workman &quot;Heartily cooperate with the men so as to insure[sic] all the work being done in accordance with the principles of the science which has been developed&quot; Take over the work for which they are &quot;better fitted&quot; than the workmen. Relationship between Taylorism and TQM Taylor&apos;s more general summary of the principles of Scientific Management are better suited for inclusion into the TQM methodology, than the narrow definitions. &quot;It is no single element , but rather the this whole combination, that constitutes Scientific Management, which may be summarized as: Science, not rule of thumb Harmony, not discord Cooperation, not individualism Maximum output in place of restricted output The development of each man to his greatest efficiency and prosperity&quot; [24] Much has happened, since Taylor developed his method of Scientific Management, to make obsolete the premises on which he based his concepts: Lack of education is no longer reason enough to separate the planning function The balance of power between managers and the work force has changed. Where in Taylor&apos;s time it was heavily weighted against the workers. Unionism (or the threat of it) has profoundly changed that balance. Changes in the climate of social thinking. Revolts against the &quot;dehumanizing&quot; of work. A basic tenet of Scientific management was that employees were not highly educated and thus were unable to perform any but the simplest tasks. Modern thought is that all employees have intimate knowledge of job conditions and are therefore able to make useful contributions. Rather than dehumanizing the work and breaking the work down into smaller and smaller units to maximize efficiency without giving thought to the job satisfaction of the working. Encouragement of work based teams in which all workers may contribute. Such contributions increase worker morale, provide a sense of ownership, and improve management-worker relations generally. References 1. Scientific Management, pg 129-130 2. Scientific Management, pg 130 3. Scientific Management, pg 131 4. Scientific Management, pg 131 5. Scientific Management, pg 25 6. Scientific Management, pg 119 7. Scientific Management, pp 25-25 8. Scientific Management, pg 39 9. Scientific Management, pg 38 10. Scientific Management, pg 39 11. Scientific Management, pg 39 12. Scientific Management, pg 10 13. Scientific Management, pg 75 14. Scientific Management, pg 77 15. Scientific Management, pg 13 16. Scientific Management, pg 46 17. Scientific Management, pp 133-134 18. Scientific Management, pg 66 19. Scientific Management, pg 67 20. Scientific Management, pg 23 21. Scientific Management, pg 12 22. Scientific Management, pg 139 23. Scientific Management, pg 36 24. Scientific Management, pg 140 Vincenzo Sandrone QA Engineer GEC Marconi Systems Meadowbank (Sydney), Australia vxsand@gecms.com.au An mr_bill@grfn.org Internet publication. December 10, 1995 <br />
  • ., all integrated through the design process. The key to success in mechatronics is: modeling, analysis, experimentation & hardware-implementation skills. <br />
  • ., all integrated through the design process. The key to success in mechatronics is: modeling, analysis, experimentation & hardware-implementation skills. <br />
  • ., all integrated through the design process. The key to success in mechatronics is: modeling, analysis, experimentation & hardware-implementation skills. <br />
  • Cybernetics is a theory of the communication and control of regulatory feedback. The term cybernetics stems from the Greek kybernetes (meaning steersman, governor, pilot, or rudder). Cybernetics is the discipline that studies communication and control in living beings and in the machines built by humans. <br /> A more philosophical definition, suggested in 1958 by Louis Couffignal, one of the pioneers of cybernetics in the 1930s, considers cybernetics as &quot;the art of assuring efficiency of action&quot; (see external links for reference). <br />
  • Workforce Knowledge and Skill Mergers <br /> 1. Skilled (Blue)-Professional (White) <br /> 2. Mecha-Computers-Electronics <br /> 3. Engineering-Technical-Scientific <br /> K-12 Mergers <br /> 1. CTE-Gen acad-Arts <br /> 2. Applied, theoretical, contextual <br /> 3. K-12-CTC-University-Industry <br /> 4. Technical-Engineering-Scientific <br /> TSTC Strategic Mergers <br /> IT-Mecha-Graphics and all programsa almost <br />
  • Workforce Knowledge and Skill Mergers <br /> 1. Skilled (Blue)-Professional (White) <br /> 2. Mecha-Computers-Electronics <br /> 3. Engineering-Technical-Scientific <br /> K-12 Mergers <br /> 1. CTE-Gen acad-Arts <br /> 2. Applied, theoretical, contextual <br /> 3. K-12-CTC-University-Industry <br /> 4. Technical-Engineering-Scientific <br /> TSTC Strategic Mergers <br /> IT-Mecha-Graphics and all programsa almost <br />
  • http://todayinspacehistory.wordpress.com/2007/10/04/october-4-1957-the-russians-launch-sputnik/ <br /> LG SPUT IMAGE <br /> « October 3, 1962 - Sigma 7 launches into orbit, Mercury-Atlas 8 <br /> October 5, 1929 - Astronaut Richard Gordon, Jr., is born » <br /> Ads by GoogleSputnik <br /> Huge selection, great deals on <br /> Sputnik items. <br /> Yahoo.com3D Earth Screensaver <br /> Watch Realistic Animated 3D Earth <br /> On Your Desktop. Free Download! <br /> www.CrawlerTools.com/3DEarth <br /> The modern space age was birthed on October 4, 1957 when the Soviet’s launched the first man-made object to orbit the Earth, Sputnik. <br /> Wikipedia says: <br /> “Sputnik 1 was launched on October 4, 1957. The satellite was 58 cm (about 23 in) in diameter and weighed approximately 83.6 kg (about 183 lb). Each of its elliptical orbits around the Earth took about 96 minutes. Monitoring of the satellite was done by Amateur radio operators. The first long-range flight of the R-7 booster used to launch it had occurred on August 21 and was described in Aviation Week. Sputnik 1 was not visible from Earth but the casing of the R-7 booster, traveling behind it, was.” <br /> Quotes: <br /> “Both countries [Russia and the United States] knew that preeminence in space was a condition of their national security. That conviction gave both countries a powerful incentive to strive and compete. The Soviets accomplished many important firsts, and this gave us a great incentive to try harder. <br /> The space program also accomplished another vital function in that it kept us out of a hot war. It gave us a way to compete technologically, compete as a matter of national will. It may have even prevented World War III, with all the conflict and fighting focused on getting to the moon first, instead of annihilating each other. There’s no evidence of that, but as eyewitness to those events, I think that’s what happened.” <br /> - American astronaut Scott Carpenter quoted in Into that Silent Sea (p. 138). <br /> ___________________ <br /> www.globalsecurity.org/.../imint/u-2_tt.htm <br /> U-2 Product <br /> SS-6 / Sputnik Launch Pad, Baikonur <br /> TOP of LAUNCH <br /> IMAGE <br /> Sputnik on the launch pad being prepared for liftoff <br /> However, another event that occurred in the Soviet Union in 1960 is generally recognized as the single greatest disaster in the history of rocketry. The event was not directly related to manned space flight, but to the development of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). In the early days of space flight, both the US and Soviet space programs were very much intertwined with the development of ICBMs. These vehicles were designed to launch nuclear warheads over great distances, leaving no part of the world safe from the threat of nuclear destruction. However, the technologies pioneered for these weapons of war served a secondary purpose of providing the first generation of rockets for space exploration. <br /> Sputnik on the launch pad being prepared for liftoff <br /> In fact, the early flights of Sputnik and Yuri Gagarin in the USSR as well as those of Explorer I and John Glenn in the US were all conducted using modified ballistic missiles. The primary Soviet launch vehicle of the period was the R-7 rocket, modified versions of which are still used even today for most Russian space flights. The R-7 was originally developed as an ICBM under the direction of Sergei Korolev, the Soviet Union&apos;s pre-eminent rocket designer of the day. The R-7 successfully completed a number of test flights between 1957 and 1959, including launching the first two artificial satellites. While only four examples of the R-7 were ever deployed as ballistic missiles from 1960 to 1968, the same basic design has remained in use throughout the Russian space program. Modern variants of the R-7 continue to launch satellites as well as manned Soyuz flights, and the type had achieved a success rate of nearly 98% in over 1,600 launches by the year 2000. <br /> _____________ <br /> Apollo 17 <br /> http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/~astrolab/mirrors/apod/ap031109.html <br /> Apollo 17 _ 1 <br /> http://xpda.com/junkmail/junk162/GPN-2000-001876.jpg <br /> Apollo 17 _ 2 <br /> Apollo 17 launch, December 17, 1972: <br /> http://xpda.com/junkmail/junk162/junk162.htm <br /> Mars <br /> http://whyfiles.org/194spa_travel/images/mars.gif <br /> Moon <br /> http://www.rc-astro.com/php/phpthumb/cache/phpThumb_cache_rc-astro.com_srcfadbb9057f0dac8e921d1bffc3590ce0_par0ddf367c5f01d9ba090bf356b6761f52_dat1168633826.jpeg <br /> Kennedy <br /> http://www.historicaldocuments.com/JohnFKennedysLastSpeech.gif <br /> November 21, 1963 <br /> Dedication Ceremony of the New Facilities of the School of <br /> Aerospace Medicine at Brooks Air Force Base, Texas <br /> http://www.historicaldocuments.com/JohnFKennedysLastSpeech.htm <br /> SPACE TEAMS <br /> MCD <br /> KANE <br /> Toursit <br /> Russian <br /> http://science.qj.net/Microsoft-billionaire-joins-ISS-bound-Russian-space-flight/pg/49/aid/88814 <br /> U.S. software mogul Charles Simonyi became the world&apos;s fifth space tourist - &quot;space flight participant,&quot; as officials call them - to go into orbit. Simonyi, who helped developed Microsoft Word, paid US$ 25M for the opportunity to join the crew of the Russian spacecraft Soyuz TMA-10. <br /> The 58-year-old Hungary-born billionaire is making a 12-day round trip to the International Space Station (ISS). Joining him on the trip were Russian cosmonauts Fyodor Yurchikhin and Oleg Kotov of the 15th ISS crew. The spacecraft Simonyi and the Russian cosmonauts lifted off from the Bainokur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan at 11:31 P.M. local time (1:31 P.M. EDT). They are due to dock with the ISS on Monday. <br /> Simonyi will be treating the current occupants of the ISS to a gourmet meal three days after arriving at the space station. The meal will be held in honor of Cosmonauts&apos; Day, the Russian holiday commemorating Yuri Gagarin&apos;s historic 1961 space flight. Everybody else mentioned who prepared the meal so we won&apos;t. Suffice to say, she&apos;s famous, knows her way around a house, and looked good in orange. <br /> In this Associated Press photo: In this image made from NASA-TV, U.S. billionaire Charles Simonyi, front row right, flips upside down during a news conference after he, Fyodor Yurchikhin, left, and Russian cosmonaut Oleg Kotov, front center, docked at the international space station Monday, April 9, 2007. A Russian-built Soyuz capsule carrying the American billionaire who helped develop Microsoft Word docked at the international space station late Monday, to the earthbound applause of Martha Stewart and others at Mission Control. In the back row, Commander Michael Lopez-Alegria can be seen. (AP Photo/NASA TV) <br /> ___________ <br /> Tito <br /> http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/1310822.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1939057D9939C83F106174681002B4CEC415A5397277B4DC33E <br /> MIR <br /> http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/people/images/inset-LucidS-5-large.jpg <br /> http://csatweb.csatolna.hu/tagok/csa/mars/rover.jpg <br /> RICHS TECHNOLOGY CAMERA - BODY <br /> HAWKING <br /> http://gozerog.com/images/Hawking_001.jpg <br /> Public Domain. Suggested credit: NASA or National Aeronautics and Space Administration via pingnews. <br /> KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- Noted physicist Stephen Hawking (center) enjoys zero gravity during a flight aboard a modified Boeing 727 aircraft owned by Zero Gravity Corp. (Zero G). Hawking, who suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (also known as Lou Gehrig&apos;s disease) is being rotated in air by (right) Peter Diamandis, founder of the Zero G Corp., and (left) Byron Lichtenberg, former shuttle payload specialist and now president of Zero G. Kneeling below Hawking is Nicola O&apos;Brien, a nurse practitioner who is Hawking&apos;s aide. At the celebration of his 65th birthday on January 8 this year, Hawking announced his plans for a zero-gravity flight to prepare for a sub-orbital space flight in 2009 on Virgin Galactic&apos;s space service. Additional information from source: <br /> No copyright protection is asserted for this photograph. If a recognizable person appears in this photograph, use for commercial purposes may infringe a right of privacy or publicity. It may not be used to state or imply the endorsement by NASA employees of a commercial product, process or service, or used in any other manner that might mislead. Accordingly, it is requested that if this photograph is used in advertising and other commercial promotion, layout and copy be submitted to NASA prior to release. <br /> Source Physicist Stephen Hawking in Zero Gravity (NASA) <br /> Date April 27, 2007 at 22:11 <br /> Zero Gravity&apos;s price tag for the daylong tour is $2,950, which includes preflight training and a postflight party. <br /> From the Go Zero G Website: <br /> The once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fly like Superman can now be yours. Train with an expert coach, board our specially modified aircraft, G-FORCE ONE, and experience the unforgettable. <br /> Experience zero gravity the only way possible without going to space. Parabolic flight is the same method NASA has used to train its astronauts for the last 45 years and the same way Tom Hanks floated in Apollo 13. <br /> Book a seat on one of our regular flights conveniently based in Las Vegas, Nevada and at the Kennedy Space Center, near Orlando, Florida. The aircraft is also available for charter flights anywhere in the United States for groups, incentive trips, parties or team building. <br /> http://todayinspacehistory.wordpress.com/2007/10/04/october-4-1957-the-russians-launch-sputnik/ <br /> LG SPUT IMAGE <br /> « October 3, 1962 - Sigma 7 launches into orbit, Mercury-Atlas 8October 5, 1929 - Astronaut Richard Gordon, Jr., is born »October 4, 1957 - the Russian’s launch Sputnik <br /> Ads by GoogleSputnik <br /> Huge selection, great deals on <br /> Sputnik items. <br /> Yahoo.com3D Earth Screensaver <br /> Watch Realistic Animated 3D Earth <br /> On Your Desktop. Free Download! <br /> www.CrawlerTools.com/3DEarth <br /> The modern space age was birthed on October 4, 1957 when the Soviet’s launched the first man-made object to orbit the Earth, Sputnik. <br /> Wikipedia says: <br /> “Sputnik 1 was launched on October 4, 1957. The satellite was 58 cm (about 23 in) in diameter and weighed approximately 83.6 kg (about 183 lb). Each of its elliptical orbits around the Earth took about 96 minutes. Monitoring of the satellite was done by Amateur radio operators. The first long-range flight of the R-7 booster used to launch it had occurred on August 21 and was described in Aviation Week. Sputnik 1 was not visible from Earth but the casing of the R-7 booster, traveling behind it, was.” <br /> Quotes: <br /> “Both countries [Russia and the United States] knew that preeminence in space was a condition of their national security. That conviction gave both countries a powerful incentive to strive and compete. The Soviets accomplished many important firsts, and this gave us a great incentive to try harder. <br /> The space program also accomplished another vital function in that it kept us out of a hot war. It gave us a way to compete technologically, compete as a matter of national will. It may have even prevented World War III, with all the conflict and fighting focused on getting to the moon first, instead of annihilating each other. There’s no evidence of that, but as eyewitness to those events, I think that’s what happened.” <br /> - American astronaut Scott Carpenter quoted in Into that Silent Sea (p. 138). <br /> ___________________ <br /> www.globalsecurity.org/.../imint/u-2_tt.htm <br /> U-2 Product <br /> SS-6 / Sputnik Launch Pad, Baikonur <br /> TOP of LAUNCH <br /> IMAGE <br /> Sputnik on the launch pad being prepared for liftoff <br /> However, another event that occurred in the Soviet Union in 1960 is generally recognized as the single greatest disaster in the history of rocketry. The event was not directly related to manned space flight, but to the development of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). In the early days of space flight, both the US and Soviet space programs were very much intertwined with the development of ICBMs. These vehicles were designed to launch nuclear warheads over great distances, leaving no part of the world safe from the threat of nuclear destruction. However, the technologies pioneered for these weapons of war served a secondary purpose of providing the first generation of rockets for space exploration. <br /> Sputnik on the launch pad being prepared for liftoff <br /> In fact, the early flights of Sputnik and Yuri Gagarin in the USSR as well as those of Explorer I and John Glenn in the US were all conducted using modified ballistic missiles. The primary Soviet launch vehicle of the period was the R-7 rocket, modified versions of which are still used even today for most Russian space flights. The R-7 was originally developed as an ICBM under the direction of Sergei Korolev, the Soviet Union&apos;s pre-eminent rocket designer of the day. The R-7 successfully completed a number of test flights between 1957 and 1959, including launching the first two artificial satellites. While only four examples of the R-7 were ever deployed as ballistic missiles from 1960 to 1968, the same basic design has remained in use throughout the Russian space program. Modern variants of the R-7 continue to launch satellites as well as manned Soyuz flights, and the type had achieved a success rate of nearly 98% in over 1,600 launches by the year 2000. <br /> _____________ <br /> Apollo 17 <br /> http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/~astrolab/mirrors/apod/ap031109.html <br /> Apollo 17 _ 1 <br /> http://xpda.com/junkmail/junk162/GPN-2000-001876.jpg <br /> Apollo 17 _ 2 <br /> Apollo 17 launch, December 17, 1972: <br /> http://xpda.com/junkmail/junk162/junk162.htm <br /> Mars <br /> http://whyfiles.org/194spa_travel/images/mars.gif <br /> Moon <br /> http://www.rc-astro.com/php/phpthumb/cache/phpThumb_cache_rc-astro.com_srcfadbb9057f0dac8e921d1bffc3590ce0_par0ddf367c5f01d9ba090bf356b6761f52_dat1168633826.jpeg <br /> Kennedy <br /> http://www.historicaldocuments.com/JohnFKennedysLastSpeech.gif <br /> November 21, 1963 <br /> Dedication Ceremony of the New Facilities of the School of <br /> Aerospace Medicine at Brooks Air Force Base, Texas <br /> http://www.historicaldocuments.com/JohnFKennedysLastSpeech.htm <br /> SPACE TEAMS <br /> MCD <br /> KANE <br /> Toursit <br /> Russian <br /> http://science.qj.net/Microsoft-billionaire-joins-ISS-bound-Russian-space-flight/pg/49/aid/88814 <br /> U.S. software mogul Charles Simonyi became the world&apos;s fifth space tourist - &quot;space flight participant,&quot; as officials call them - to go into orbit. Simonyi, who helped developed Microsoft Word, paid US$ 25M for the opportunity to join the crew of the Russian spacecraft Soyuz TMA-10. <br /> The 58-year-old Hungary-born billionaire is making a 12-day round trip to the International Space Station (ISS). Joining him on the trip were Russian cosmonauts Fyodor Yurchikhin and Oleg Kotov of the 15th ISS crew. The spacecraft Simonyi and the Russian cosmonauts lifted off from the Bainokur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan at 11:31 P.M. local time (1:31 P.M. EDT). They are due to dock with the ISS on Monday. <br /> Simonyi will be treating the current occupants of the ISS to a gourmet meal three days after arriving at the space station. The meal will be held in honor of Cosmonauts&apos; Day, the Russian holiday commemorating Yuri Gagarin&apos;s historic 1961 space flight. Everybody else mentioned who prepared the meal so we won&apos;t. Suffice to say, she&apos;s famous, knows her way around a house, and looked good in orange. <br /> In this Associated Press photo: In this image made from NASA-TV, U.S. billionaire Charles Simonyi, front row right, flips upside down during a news conference after he, Fyodor Yurchikhin, left, and Russian cosmonaut Oleg Kotov, front center, docked at the international space station Monday, April 9, 2007. A Russian-built Soyuz capsule carrying the American billionaire who helped develop Microsoft Word docked at the international space station late Monday, to the earthbound applause of Martha Stewart and others at Mission Control. In the back row, Commander Michael Lopez-Alegria can be seen. (AP Photo/NASA TV) <br /> ___________ <br /> Tito <br /> http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/1310822.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1939057D9939C83F106174681002B4CEC415A5397277B4DC33E <br /> MIR <br /> http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/people/images/inset-LucidS-5-large.jpg <br /> http://csatweb.csatolna.hu/tagok/csa/mars/rover.jpg <br /> RICHS TECHNOLOGY CAMERA - BODY <br /> HAWKING <br /> http://gozerog.com/images/Hawking_001.jpg <br /> Public Domain. Suggested credit: NASA or National Aeronautics and Space Administration via pingnews. <br /> KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- Noted physicist Stephen Hawking (center) enjoys zero gravity during a flight aboard a modified Boeing 727 aircraft owned by Zero Gravity Corp. (Zero G). Hawking, who suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (also known as Lou Gehrig&apos;s disease) is being rotated in air by (right) Peter Diamandis, founder of the Zero G Corp., and (left) Byron Lichtenberg, former shuttle payload specialist and now president of Zero G. Kneeling below Hawking is Nicola O&apos;Brien, a nurse practitioner who is Hawking&apos;s aide. At the celebration of his 65th birthday on January 8 this year, Hawking announced his plans for a zero-gravity flight to prepare for a sub-orbital space flight in 2009 on Virgin Galactic&apos;s space service. Additional information from source: <br /> No copyright protection is asserted for this photograph. If a recognizable person appears in this photograph, use for commercial purposes may infringe a right of privacy or publicity. It may not be used to state or imply the endorsement by NASA employees of a commercial product, process or service, or used in any other manner that might mislead. Accordingly, it is requested that if this photograph is used in advertising and other commercial promotion, layout and copy be submitted to NASA prior to release. <br /> Source Physicist Stephen Hawking in Zero Gravity (NASA) <br /> Date April 27, 2007 at 22:11 <br /> Zero Gravity&apos;s price tag for the daylong tour is $2,950, which includes preflight training and a postflight party. <br /> From the Go Zero G Website: <br /> The once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fly like Superman can now be yours. Train with an expert coach, board our specially modified aircraft, G-FORCE ONE, and experience the unforgettable. <br /> Experience zero gravity the only way possible without going to space. Parabolic flight is the same method NASA has used to train its astronauts for the last 45 years and the same way Tom Hanks floated in Apollo 13. <br /> Book a seat on one of our regular flights conveniently based in Las Vegas, Nevada and at the Kennedy Space Center, near Orlando, Florida. The aircraft is also available for charter flights anywhere in the United States for groups, incentive trips, parties or team building. <br />
  • Cybernetics is a theory of the communication and control of regulatory feedback. The term cybernetics stems from the Greek kybernetes (meaning steersman, governor, pilot, or rudder). Cybernetics is the discipline that studies communication and control in living beings and in the machines built by humans. <br /> A more philosophical definition, suggested in 1958 by Louis Couffignal, one of the pioneers of cybernetics in the 1930s, considers cybernetics as &quot;the art of assuring efficiency of action&quot; (see external links for reference). <br /> Taylorism <br /> F. W. Taylor & Scientific Management <br /> Mr. Bill&apos;s Preface: In October 1995, there was an extended and at times intense discussion in the Quality E-Mail forum on &quot;Scientific Management&quot; and Frederick W. Taylor. At one point Vincenzo Sandrone submitted a post on the subject that the forum moderator deemed appropriate to the discussion, but to long to be posted to the list. What he did was post a notice to the list that the paper was available from Mr. Sandrone via private E-Mail. What follows is that paper posted on this site with permission of the author. The paper will form part of an undergraduate thesis entitled &quot;Total Quality Engineering - A Holistic Approach to Engineering Management&quot; to be submitted in 1996 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a BE in Manufacturing Engineering at the University of Technology, Sydney, NSW, Australia. <br /> Mr. Sandrone&apos;s source for quotes is: <br /> Taylor Frederick W., 1964, Scientific Management - Comprising Shop Management, The principles of Scientific Management and Testimony before the Special House Committee, Harper and Row All the quotes are from &apos;Scientific Management&apos; this needs to be highlighted as the edition restarted page numbers for each separate section. That is, page numbers are not unique. Please address any comments or critique to Mr. Sandrone. <br /> Regards, Mr. Bill <br /> ================================================================== With all the discussion of Taylorism on the list and arguments that both sides did not have the facts, I have decided I may be able to provide some information. I have included a copy of the section on Taylorism from my in process Undergraduate Thesis. I hope that it may help put some facts into the discussion. Looking over the section I have realized that it contained the highest density of direct quotes in my thesis. I feel this was my subconscious way of fighting the, what I considered, misinformation that I had received about Taylorism. Unfortunately I could not find a &quot;definition&quot; of science as applied in Scientific method. However, I would like to make two points: 1) Taylor did not call his original paper &quot;Scientific management&quot; and by the time he published it the name had stuck and his publisher changed the name. (I cannot recall the name of his original paper.) 2) He sort of defines &quot;Scientific Management&quot; by saying what it is not - It is not &quot;Rule of Thumb&quot; when you consider that piece work based on arbitrary quotas ( and heavily biased to the employer) was normal practice. The use of work study/measurement to determine a fair quota was a step forward for both management and the workers. Vincenzo Sandrone QA Engineer GEC Marconi Systems Meadowbank (Sydney), Australia vxsand@gecms.com.au ============================================================== Taylorism Under Taylor&apos;s management system, factories are managed through scientific methods rather than by use of the empirical &quot;rule of thumb&quot; so widely prevalent in the days of the late nineteenth century when F. W. Taylor devised his system and published &quot;Scientific Management&quot; in 1911. The main elements of the Scientific Management are [1] : &quot;Time studies Functional or specialized supervision Standardization of tools and implements Standardization of work methods Separate Planning function Management by exception principle The use of &quot;slide-rules and similar time-saving devices&quot; Instruction cards for workmen Task allocation and large bonus for successful performance The use of the &apos;differential rate&apos; Mnemonic systems for classifying products and implements A routing system A modern costing system etc. etc. &quot; Taylor called these elements &quot;merely the elements or details of the mechanisms of management&quot; He saw them as extensions of the four principles of management.[2] 1. The development of a true science 2. The scientific selection of the workman 3. The scientific education and development of the workman 4. Intimate and friendly cooperation between the management and the men. Taylor warned [3] of the risks managers make in attempting to make change in what would presently be called, the culture, of the organization. He stated the importance of management commitment and the need for gradual implementation and education. He described &quot;the really great problem&quot; involved in the change &quot;consists of the complete revolution in the mental attitude and the habits of all those engaged in the management, as well of the workmen.&quot; [4] Taylor taught that there was one and only one method of work that maximized efficiency. &quot;And this one best method and best implementation can only be discovered or developed through scientific study and analysis... This involves the gradual substitution of science for &apos;rule of thumb&apos; throughout the mechanical arts.&quot; [5] &quot;Scientific management requires first, a careful investigation of each of the many modifications of the same implement, developed under rule of thumb; and second, after time and motion study has been made of the speed attainable with each of these implements, that the good points of several of them shall be unified in a single standard implementation, which will enable the workman to work faster and with greater easy than he could before. This one implement, then is the adopted as standard in place of the many different kinds before in use and it remains standard for all workmen to use until superseded by an implement which has been shown, through motion and time study, to be still better.&quot; [6] An important barrier to use of scientific management was the limited education of the lower level of supervision and of the work force. A large part of the factory population was composed of recent immigrants who lacked literacy in English. In Taylor&apos;s view, supervisors and workers with such low levels of education were not qualified to plan how work should be done. Taylor&apos;s solution was to separate planning from execution. &quot;In almost all the mechanic arts the science which underlies each act of each workman is so great and amounts to so much that the workman who is best suited to actually doing the work is incapable of fully understanding this science..&quot; [7] To apply his solution, Taylor created planning departments, staffed them with engineers, and gave them the responsibility to: Develop scientific methods for doing work. Establish goals for productivity. Establish systems of rewards for meeting the goals. Train the personnel in how to use the methods and thereby meet the goals. Perhaps the key idea of Scientific management and the one which has drawn the most criticism was the concept of task allocation. Task allocation [8] is the concept that breaking task into smaller and smaller tasks allows the determination of the optimum solution to the task. &quot;The man in the planning room, whose specialty is planning ahead, invariably finds that the work can be done more economically by subdivision of the labour; each act of each mechanic, for example, should be preceded by various preparatory acts done by other men.&quot; [9] The main argument against Taylor is this reductionist approach to work dehumanizes the worker. The allocation of work &quot;specifying not only what is to be done but how it is to done and the exact time allowed for doing it&quot; [10] is seen as leaving no scope for the individual worker to excel or think. This argument is mainly due to later writing rather than Taylor&apos;s work as Taylor stated &quot;The task is always so regulated that the man who is well suited to his job will thrive while working at this rate during a long term of years and grow happier and more prosperous, instead of being overworked.&quot; [11] Taylor&apos;s concept of motivation left something to be desired when compared to later ideas. He methods of motivation started and finished at monetary incentives. While critical of the then prevailing distinction of &quot;us &quot;and &quot;them&quot; between the workforce and employers he tried to find a common ground between the working and managing classes. &quot;Scientific Management has for its foundation the firm conviction that the true interests of the two are one and the same; that prosperity for the employer cannot exist a long term of years unless it is accompanied by prosperity for the employee [sic], and vice versa ..&quot; [12] However, this emphasis on monetary rewards was only part of the story. Rivalry between the Bethlehem and Pittsburgh Steel plants led to the offer from Pittsburgh of 4.9 cents per ton against Bethlehem&apos;s rate of 3.2 cents per day to the ore loaders. The ore loaders were spoken to individually and their value to the company reinforced and offers to re-hire them at any time were made. The majority of the ore loaders took up the Pittsburgh offers. Most had returned after less than six weeks. [13] The rates at Pittsburgh were determined by gang rates. Peer pressure from the Pittsburgh employees to not work hard meant that the Bethlehem workers actually received less pay than at Bethlehem. Two of the Bethlehem workers requested to be placed in a separate gang, this was rejected by management for the extra work required by management to keep separate record for each worker. Taylor places the blame squarely on management and their inability &quot;to do their share of the work in cooperating with the workmen.&quot; [14] Taylor&apos;s attitudes towards workers were laden with negative bias &quot;in the majority of cases this man deliberately plans to do as little as he safely can.&quot; [15] The methods that Taylor adopted were directed solely towards the uneducated. &quot;When he tells you to pick up a pig and walk, you pick it up and walk, and when he tells you to sit down and rest, you sit down. You do that right through the day. And what&apos;s more, no back talk&quot;. This type of behaviour towards workers appears barbaric in the extreme to the modern reader, however, Taylor used the example of Schmidt at the Bethlehem Steel Company to test his theories. Taylor admits &quot;This seems rather rough talk. And indeed it would be if applied to an educated mechanic, or even an intelligent labourer.&quot; [17] The fact that Taylor took the effort to firstly know the workers name and to cite it is some indication that he empathized with the workforce. This study improved the workrate of Schmidt from 12.5 tons to 47.5 tons per day showing the worth of Scientific Management. The greatest abuse of Scientific Management has come from applying the techniques without the philosophy behind them. It is obvious from Taylor&apos;s own observations that the above discussion would be misplaced in other workers. Taylor acknowledged the potential for abuse in his methods. &quot;The knowledge obtained from accurate time study, for example, is a powerful implement, and can be used, in one case to promote harmony between workmen and the management, by gradually educating, training, and leading the workmen into new and better methods of doing the work, or in the other case, it may be used more or less as a club to drive the workmen into doing a larger day&apos;s work for approximately the same pay that they received in the past.&quot; [17] Scientific Study and standardization were important parts of the Scientific Management. One example, was the study undertaken to determine the optimum shovel load for workers. The figure of 21 pounds [18] was arrived at by the study. To ensure that this shovel load was adhered to, a series of different shovels were purchased for different types of material. Each shovel was designed to ensure that only 21 pounds could be lifted. This stopped the situation where &quot;each shoveller owned his own shovel, that he would frequently go from shoveling ore, with a load of about 30 pounds per shovel, to handling rice coal, with a load on the same shovel of less than 4 pounds. In the one case, he was so overloaded that it was impossible for him to do a full day&apos;s work, and in the other case he was so ridiculously under-loaded that it was manifestly impossible to even approximate a day&apos;s work.&quot; [19] Taylor spent a considerable amount of his books in describing &quot;soldiering&quot; the act of &apos;loafing&apos; both at an individual level and &quot;systematic soldiering&quot;. He described the main reasons that workers were not performing their work at the optimum. Though worded in a patronizing way the essence of the descriptions are still valid. [20] The belief that increased output would lead to less workers. Inefficiencies within the management control system such as poorly designed incentive schemes and hourly pay rates not linked to productivity Poor design of the performance of the work by rule-of-thumb The fear of redundancies within the workforce was a valid argument during the previous style of management. Taylor not only countered this argument by using economic arguments of increased demand due to decreased pricing but put forward the idea of sharing the gains with the workforce. Taylor saw the weaknesses of piece work in the workers reactions to gradual decreases in the piece rate as the worker produced more pieces by working harder and/or smarter. The worker then is determined to have no more reduction in rate by &quot;soldiering&quot;. This deception leads to an antagonistic view of management and a general deterioration of the worker/management relationship. Taylor also was a strong advocate of worker development. It follows that the most important object of both the workman and the establishment should be the training and development of each individual in the establishment, so that he can do ( at his fastest pace and with the maximum of efficiency) the highest class of work for which his natural abilities for him.&quot; [21] Taylor&apos;s ideas on management and workers speaks of justice for both parties. &quot;It (the public) will no longer tolerate the type of employer who has his eyes only on dividends alone, who refuses to do his share of the work and who merely cracks the whip over the heads of his workmen and attempts to drive them harder work for low pay. No more will it tolerate tyranny on the part of labour which demands one increase after another in pay and shorter hours while at the same time it becomes less instead of more efficient.&quot;[22] Taylor&apos;s system was widely adopted in the United States and the world. Although the Taylor system originated in the factory production departments, the concept of separating planning from execution was universal in nature and, hence, had potential application to other areas: production support services offices operations service industries. Management&apos;s new responsibilities were extended to include: [23] Replacing the old rule-of-thumb with scientific management Scientifically select and train, teach and develop the workman &quot;Heartily cooperate with the men so as to insure[sic] all the work being done in accordance with the principles of the science which has been developed&quot; Take over the work for which they are &quot;better fitted&quot; than the workmen. Relationship between Taylorism and TQM Taylor&apos;s more general summary of the principles of Scientific Management are better suited for inclusion into the TQM methodology, than the narrow definitions. &quot;It is no single element , but rather the this whole combination, that constitutes Scientific Management, which may be summarized as: Science, not rule of thumb Harmony, not discord Cooperation, not individualism Maximum output in place of restricted output The development of each man to his greatest efficiency and prosperity&quot; [24] Much has happened, since Taylor developed his method of Scientific Management, to make obsolete the premises on which he based his concepts: Lack of education is no longer reason enough to separate the planning function The balance of power between managers and the work force has changed. Where in Taylor&apos;s time it was heavily weighted against the workers. Unionism (or the threat of it) has profoundly changed that balance. Changes in the climate of social thinking. Revolts against the &quot;dehumanizing&quot; of work. A basic tenet of Scientific management was that employees were not highly educated and thus were unable to perform any but the simplest tasks. Modern thought is that all employees have intimate knowledge of job conditions and are therefore able to make useful contributions. Rather than dehumanizing the work and breaking the work down into smaller and smaller units to maximize efficiency without giving thought to the job satisfaction of the working. Encouragement of work based teams in which all workers may contribute. Such contributions increase worker morale, provide a sense of ownership, and improve management-worker relations generally. References 1. Scientific Management, pg 129-130 2. Scientific Management, pg 130 3. Scientific Management, pg 131 4. Scientific Management, pg 131 5. Scientific Management, pg 25 6. Scientific Management, pg 119 7. Scientific Management, pp 25-25 8. Scientific Management, pg 39 9. Scientific Management, pg 38 10. Scientific Management, pg 39 11. Scientific Management, pg 39 12. Scientific Management, pg 10 13. Scientific Management, pg 75 14. Scientific Management, pg 77 15. Scientific Management, pg 13 16. Scientific Management, pg 46 17. Scientific Management, pp 133-134 18. Scientific Management, pg 66 19. Scientific Management, pg 67 20. Scientific Management, pg 23 21. Scientific Management, pg 12 22. Scientific Management, pg 139 23. Scientific Management, pg 36 24. Scientific Management, pg 140 Vincenzo Sandrone QA Engineer GEC Marconi Systems Meadowbank (Sydney), Australia vxsand@gecms.com.au An mr_bill@grfn.org Internet publication. December 10, 1995 <br />
  • Cybernetics is a theory of the communication and control of regulatory feedback. The term cybernetics stems from the Greek kybernetes (meaning steersman, governor, pilot, or rudder). Cybernetics is the discipline that studies communication and control in living beings and in the machines built by humans. <br /> A more philosophical definition, suggested in 1958 by Louis Couffignal, one of the pioneers of cybernetics in the 1930s, considers cybernetics as &quot;the art of assuring efficiency of action&quot; (see external links for reference). <br /> Taylorism <br /> F. W. Taylor & Scientific Management <br /> Mr. Bill&apos;s Preface: In October 1995, there was an extended and at times intense discussion in the Quality E-Mail forum on &quot;Scientific Management&quot; and Frederick W. Taylor. At one point Vincenzo Sandrone submitted a post on the subject that the forum moderator deemed appropriate to the discussion, but to long to be posted to the list. What he did was post a notice to the list that the paper was available from Mr. Sandrone via private E-Mail. What follows is that paper posted on this site with permission of the author. The paper will form part of an undergraduate thesis entitled &quot;Total Quality Engineering - A Holistic Approach to Engineering Management&quot; to be submitted in 1996 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a BE in Manufacturing Engineering at the University of Technology, Sydney, NSW, Australia. <br /> Mr. Sandrone&apos;s source for quotes is: <br /> Taylor Frederick W., 1964, Scientific Management - Comprising Shop Management, The principles of Scientific Management and Testimony before the Special House Committee, Harper and Row All the quotes are from &apos;Scientific Management&apos; this needs to be highlighted as the edition restarted page numbers for each separate section. That is, page numbers are not unique. Please address any comments or critique to Mr. Sandrone. <br /> Regards, Mr. Bill <br /> ================================================================== With all the discussion of Taylorism on the list and arguments that both sides did not have the facts, I have decided I may be able to provide some information. I have included a copy of the section on Taylorism from my in process Undergraduate Thesis. I hope that it may help put some facts into the discussion. Looking over the section I have realized that it contained the highest density of direct quotes in my thesis. I feel this was my subconscious way of fighting the, what I considered, misinformation that I had received about Taylorism. Unfortunately I could not find a &quot;definition&quot; of science as applied in Scientific method. However, I would like to make two points: 1) Taylor did not call his original paper &quot;Scientific management&quot; and by the time he published it the name had stuck and his publisher changed the name. (I cannot recall the name of his original paper.) 2) He sort of defines &quot;Scientific Management&quot; by saying what it is not - It is not &quot;Rule of Thumb&quot; when you consider that piece work based on arbitrary quotas ( and heavily biased to the employer) was normal practice. The use of work study/measurement to determine a fair quota was a step forward for both management and the workers. Vincenzo Sandrone QA Engineer GEC Marconi Systems Meadowbank (Sydney), Australia vxsand@gecms.com.au ============================================================== Taylorism Under Taylor&apos;s management system, factories are managed through scientific methods rather than by use of the empirical &quot;rule of thumb&quot; so widely prevalent in the days of the late nineteenth century when F. W. Taylor devised his system and published &quot;Scientific Management&quot; in 1911. The main elements of the Scientific Management are [1] : &quot;Time studies Functional or specialized supervision Standardization of tools and implements Standardization of work methods Separate Planning function Management by exception principle The use of &quot;slide-rules and similar time-saving devices&quot; Instruction cards for workmen Task allocation and large bonus for successful performance The use of the &apos;differential rate&apos; Mnemonic systems for classifying products and implements A routing system A modern costing system etc. etc. &quot; Taylor called these elements &quot;merely the elements or details of the mechanisms of management&quot; He saw them as extensions of the four principles of management.[2] 1. The development of a true science 2. The scientific selection of the workman 3. The scientific education and development of the workman 4. Intimate and friendly cooperation between the management and the men. Taylor warned [3] of the risks managers make in attempting to make change in what would presently be called, the culture, of the organization. He stated the importance of management commitment and the need for gradual implementation and education. He described &quot;the really great problem&quot; involved in the change &quot;consists of the complete revolution in the mental attitude and the habits of all those engaged in the management, as well of the workmen.&quot; [4] Taylor taught that there was one and only one method of work that maximized efficiency. &quot;And this one best method and best implementation can only be discovered or developed through scientific study and analysis... This involves the gradual substitution of science for &apos;rule of thumb&apos; throughout the mechanical arts.&quot; [5] &quot;Scientific management requires first, a careful investigation of each of the many modifications of the same implement, developed under rule of thumb; and second, after time and motion study has been made of the speed attainable with each of these implements, that the good points of several of them shall be unified in a single standard implementation, which will enable the workman to work faster and with greater easy than he could before. This one implement, then is the adopted as standard in place of the many different kinds before in use and it remains standard for all workmen to use until superseded by an implement which has been shown, through motion and time study, to be still better.&quot; [6] An important barrier to use of scientific management was the limited education of the lower level of supervision and of the work force. A large part of the factory population was composed of recent immigrants who lacked literacy in English. In Taylor&apos;s view, supervisors and workers with such low levels of education were not qualified to plan how work should be done. Taylor&apos;s solution was to separate planning from execution. &quot;In almost all the mechanic arts the science which underlies each act of each workman is so great and amounts to so much that the workman who is best suited to actually doing the work is incapable of fully understanding this science..&quot; [7] To apply his solution, Taylor created planning departments, staffed them with engineers, and gave them the responsibility to: Develop scientific methods for doing work. Establish goals for productivity. Establish systems of rewards for meeting the goals. Train the personnel in how to use the methods and thereby meet the goals. Perhaps the key idea of Scientific management and the one which has drawn the most criticism was the concept of task allocation. Task allocation [8] is the concept that breaking task into smaller and smaller tasks allows the determination of the optimum solution to the task. &quot;The man in the planning room, whose specialty is planning ahead, invariably finds that the work can be done more economically by subdivision of the labour; each act of each mechanic, for example, should be preceded by various preparatory acts done by other men.&quot; [9] The main argument against Taylor is this reductionist approach to work dehumanizes the worker. The allocation of work &quot;specifying not only what is to be done but how it is to done and the exact time allowed for doing it&quot; [10] is seen as leaving no scope for the individual worker to excel or think. This argument is mainly due to later writing rather than Taylor&apos;s work as Taylor stated &quot;The task is always so regulated that the man who is well suited to his job will thrive while working at this rate during a long term of years and grow happier and more prosperous, instead of being overworked.&quot; [11] Taylor&apos;s concept of motivation left something to be desired when compared to later ideas. He methods of motivation started and finished at monetary incentives. While critical of the then prevailing distinction of &quot;us &quot;and &quot;them&quot; between the workforce and employers he tried to find a common ground between the working and managing classes. &quot;Scientific Management has for its foundation the firm conviction that the true interests of the two are one and the same; that prosperity for the employer cannot exist a long term of years unless it is accompanied by prosperity for the employee [sic], and vice versa ..&quot; [12] However, this emphasis on monetary rewards was only part of the story. Rivalry between the Bethlehem and Pittsburgh Steel plants led to the offer from Pittsburgh of 4.9 cents per ton against Bethlehem&apos;s rate of 3.2 cents per day to the ore loaders. The ore loaders were spoken to individually and their value to the company reinforced and offers to re-hire them at any time were made. The majority of the ore loaders took up the Pittsburgh offers. Most had returned after less than six weeks. [13] The rates at Pittsburgh were determined by gang rates. Peer pressure from the Pittsburgh employees to not work hard meant that the Bethlehem workers actually received less pay than at Bethlehem. Two of the Bethlehem workers requested to be placed in a separate gang, this was rejected by management for the extra work required by management to keep separate record for each worker. Taylor places the blame squarely on management and their inability &quot;to do their share of the work in cooperating with the workmen.&quot; [14] Taylor&apos;s attitudes towards workers were laden with negative bias &quot;in the majority of cases this man deliberately plans to do as little as he safely can.&quot; [15] The methods that Taylor adopted were directed solely towards the uneducated. &quot;When he tells you to pick up a pig and walk, you pick it up and walk, and when he tells you to sit down and rest, you sit down. You do that right through the day. And what&apos;s more, no back talk&quot;. This type of behaviour towards workers appears barbaric in the extreme to the modern reader, however, Taylor used the example of Schmidt at the Bethlehem Steel Company to test his theories. Taylor admits &quot;This seems rather rough talk. And indeed it would be if applied to an educated mechanic, or even an intelligent labourer.&quot; [17] The fact that Taylor took the effort to firstly know the workers name and to cite it is some indication that he empathized with the workforce. This study improved the workrate of Schmidt from 12.5 tons to 47.5 tons per day showing the worth of Scientific Management. The greatest abuse of Scientific Management has come from applying the techniques without the philosophy behind them. It is obvious from Taylor&apos;s own observations that the above discussion would be misplaced in other workers. Taylor acknowledged the potential for abuse in his methods. &quot;The knowledge obtained from accurate time study, for example, is a powerful implement, and can be used, in one case to promote harmony between workmen and the management, by gradually educating, training, and leading the workmen into new and better methods of doing the work, or in the other case, it may be used more or less as a club to drive the workmen into doing a larger day&apos;s work for approximately the same pay that they received in the past.&quot; [17] Scientific Study and standardization were important parts of the Scientific Management. One example, was the study undertaken to determine the optimum shovel load for workers. The figure of 21 pounds [18] was arrived at by the study. To ensure that this shovel load was adhered to, a series of different shovels were purchased for different types of material. Each shovel was designed to ensure that only 21 pounds could be lifted. This stopped the situation where &quot;each shoveller owned his own shovel, that he would frequently go from shoveling ore, with a load of about 30 pounds per shovel, to handling rice coal, with a load on the same shovel of less than 4 pounds. In the one case, he was so overloaded that it was impossible for him to do a full day&apos;s work, and in the other case he was so ridiculously under-loaded that it was manifestly impossible to even approximate a day&apos;s work.&quot; [19] Taylor spent a considerable amount of his books in describing &quot;soldiering&quot; the act of &apos;loafing&apos; both at an individual level and &quot;systematic soldiering&quot;. He described the main reasons that workers were not performing their work at the optimum. Though worded in a patronizing way the essence of the descriptions are still valid. [20] The belief that increased output would lead to less workers. Inefficiencies within the management control system such as poorly designed incentive schemes and hourly pay rates not linked to productivity Poor design of the performance of the work by rule-of-thumb The fear of redundancies within the workforce was a valid argument during the previous style of management. Taylor not only countered this argument by using economic arguments of increased demand due to decreased pricing but put forward the idea of sharing the gains with the workforce. Taylor saw the weaknesses of piece work in the workers reactions to gradual decreases in the piece rate as the worker produced more pieces by working harder and/or smarter. The worker then is determined to have no more reduction in rate by &quot;soldiering&quot;. This deception leads to an antagonistic view of management and a general deterioration of the worker/management relationship. Taylor also was a strong advocate of worker development. It follows that the most important object of both the workman and the establishment should be the training and development of each individual in the establishment, so that he can do ( at his fastest pace and with the maximum of efficiency) the highest class of work for which his natural abilities for him.&quot; [21] Taylor&apos;s ideas on management and workers speaks of justice for both parties. &quot;It (the public) will no longer tolerate the type of employer who has his eyes only on dividends alone, who refuses to do his share of the work and who merely cracks the whip over the heads of his workmen and attempts to drive them harder work for low pay. No more will it tolerate tyranny on the part of labour which demands one increase after another in pay and shorter hours while at the same time it becomes less instead of more efficient.&quot;[22] Taylor&apos;s system was widely adopted in the United States and the world. Although the Taylor system originated in the factory production departments, the concept of separating planning from execution was universal in nature and, hence, had potential application to other areas: production support services offices operations service industries. Management&apos;s new responsibilities were extended to include: [23] Replacing the old rule-of-thumb with scientific management Scientifically select and train, teach and develop the workman &quot;Heartily cooperate with the men so as to insure[sic] all the work being done in accordance with the principles of the science which has been developed&quot; Take over the work for which they are &quot;better fitted&quot; than the workmen. Relationship between Taylorism and TQM Taylor&apos;s more general summary of the principles of Scientific Management are better suited for inclusion into the TQM methodology, than the narrow definitions. &quot;It is no single element , but rather the this whole combination, that constitutes Scientific Management, which may be summarized as: Science, not rule of thumb Harmony, not discord Cooperation, not individualism Maximum output in place of restricted output The development of each man to his greatest efficiency and prosperity&quot; [24] Much has happened, since Taylor developed his method of Scientific Management, to make obsolete the premises on which he based his concepts: Lack of education is no longer reason enough to separate the planning function The balance of power between managers and the work force has changed. Where in Taylor&apos;s time it was heavily weighted against the workers. Unionism (or the threat of it) has profoundly changed that balance. Changes in the climate of social thinking. Revolts against the &quot;dehumanizing&quot; of work. A basic tenet of Scientific management was that employees were not highly educated and thus were unable to perform any but the simplest tasks. Modern thought is that all employees have intimate knowledge of job conditions and are therefore able to make useful contributions. Rather than dehumanizing the work and breaking the work down into smaller and smaller units to maximize efficiency without giving thought to the job satisfaction of the working. Encouragement of work based teams in which all workers may contribute. Such contributions increase worker morale, provide a sense of ownership, and improve management-worker relations generally. References 1. Scientific Management, pg 129-130 2. Scientific Management, pg 130 3. Scientific Management, pg 131 4. Scientific Management, pg 131 5. Scientific Management, pg 25 6. Scientific Management, pg 119 7. Scientific Management, pp 25-25 8. Scientific Management, pg 39 9. Scientific Management, pg 38 10. Scientific Management, pg 39 11. Scientific Management, pg 39 12. Scientific Management, pg 10 13. Scientific Management, pg 75 14. Scientific Management, pg 77 15. Scientific Management, pg 13 16. Scientific Management, pg 46 17. Scientific Management, pp 133-134 18. Scientific Management, pg 66 19. Scientific Management, pg 67 20. Scientific Management, pg 23 21. Scientific Management, pg 12 22. Scientific Management, pg 139 23. Scientific Management, pg 36 24. Scientific Management, pg 140 Vincenzo Sandrone QA Engineer GEC Marconi Systems Meadowbank (Sydney), Australia vxsand@gecms.com.au An mr_bill@grfn.org Internet publication. December 10, 1995 <br />

Transcript

  • 1. The Future is Here - California
  • 2. October 4, 1957
  • 3. October 4, 1957
  • 4. GlobalS&T Demography Our Sputnik
  • 5. “If the U.S. is to maintain its economic leadership and compete in the new global economy, the nation must prepare today’s K-12 students better to be tomorrow’s productive workers and citizens.” http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/documents/2006/0502/testimony.pdf
  • 6. Butler County Economic Development “In the world of economic development, people talk about the importance of location, location, location… but without the labor force location means nothing.” --David Alfaro, Director Butler County Economic Develoipment Butler Community College April 7 to 11, 2008
  • 7. “We can’t be in our silos like we have been in the past.” --D Smith, Visioneering Wichita
  • 8. “The 3 Rs are stressed so much that there is no time for T & I credit.” –Robert Becker, Principal, In Tolerance, MI
  • 9. “…newer programs like Pre- engineering, Biomedical Sciences, Manufacturing Engineering Technologies, and Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness are attracting more and more students.” Maryland Classroom: CTE: Educating Tomorrow’s Workforce Today, April 2008
  • 10. “I do not think Maui is any different than the mainland…post industrialization has placed greater demands on math and education.” –Rose Yamada, elder
  • 11. Industrial Age Post Industrial Age Notion of Information Age
  • 12. The Future is Here: Emerging Technologies, Jobs and Strategies
  • 13. www.kurzweilai.net/.../ SIN_headshot_highres.html “We're doubling the rate of progress every decade, we'll see a century of progress--at today's rate--in only 25 calendar years.” Kurzweil, KurzweilAI.net, March 7, 2001
  • 14. http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_598.html
  • 15. http://www-bsac.eecs.berkeley.edu/archive/users/warneke-brett/SmartDust/ Berkeley’s Golem Dust 11.7 mm3 total circumscribed volume ~4.8 mm3 total displaced volume Berkeley’s Deputy Dust 6.6 mm3 total circumscribed volume 4th Gen 11.7 mm3 6.6 mm3
  • 16. Home Technology
  • 17. Construction Patent thin-nickel-strip magneto-strictive sensor (MsS™). Applicable to airplanes, ships, plants, pipelines and bridges. US 80 billion square feet of commercial and government facilities and buildings, and more than 100 billion square feet of dams and bridges (Sensametrics, 2003). One trillion dollar market (Elgamal). http://www.swri.org/3pubs/ttoday/fall03/Future.htm SwRI MsS™ http://www.swri.edu/3pubs/IRD2002/14-9285.htm
  • 18. Security and Process Control SCADA $3.1 B (2004) to over $4 B (2007). SCADA security software to grow by 50% annually through 2007 (Kuykendall, 2004). RF Modules 1.9 MM units (2004) to climb to 165 MM units (2010) (Legg, 2004). Industrial wireless sensors $24 MM (2001) over $100 MM (2008) (Donoho, 2002). NovusEDGE Armida DevicePoint
  • 19. Utilities A California study indicates that peak-rate usage can be shaved by 20 percent if utilities used Automated Meter Reading (ARM) for accurate pricing information--each megawatt of reduction can equate to $400,000 in savings per year (Jackson, 2004, p. 1) saving California utilities and consumers at least $5 billion a year. http://www.utilitiesproject.com/documents.asp?grID=85&d_ID=2402 More than 25 million AMR units installed on gas (21 percent), water (11 percent), and electric utility (16 percent) meters. 200 million units yet to be changed out to AMR (Jackson, 2004).
  • 20. If you have an automobile made in the past 10 years, your car has more computing power than rockets used to put man on the moon. TSTC West TX, Sweetwater, 10.31.2006
  • 21. http://www.xpcarteam.com/ XP Vehicle Systems Features: Over 2500 mile range using our patented XPack Multi-Core(TM) power plant, energy is delivered to you when you need it, inflatable frame technology, extensive ability to customize and mitigate obsolescence (EVERYTHING is upgradeable), you assemble or dealer assemble, direct ships to you, some models can change bodies, some models fold after assemble for storage or parking.
  • 22. PRIUS+ team: we built the first PRIUS+ conversion Sept 11-22, 2004, starting with a low-cost lead-acid battery pack. Pictured are (L-R) Ron Gremban, Felix Kramer, Marc Geller, Kevin Lyons, Andrew Lawton. See About CalCars for names of those who helped but are not pictured.
  • 23. Unfortunate for some.
  • 24. 1,000 MPG eq. Fuel Cell Car
  • 25. Los Altos Academy of Engineering, La Puente Valley ROP, California
  • 26. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7643818/ Adidas 1 Running Shoe
  • 27. http://www.adidas.com/campaigns/ • 1,000th of a second sensor measures gap between heel and a magnet • 20-MHz microcontroller measures changes in compression • Motor spins at 4000 rpm turns a screw loosens cable • Environmentally and operator adaptive shoe sole Wearable Robot
  • 28. MIT Tech Review, 2005 Sensors Physical Chemical Biological http://www.rieti.go.jp/en/events/bbl/03102801.pdf , page 16 Actuators Physical Chemical Biological PhiloMetron™
  • 29. http://bleex.me.berkeley.edu/CV/Berkeley-Exo-HR.jpg 100-pound exoskeleton and a 70- pound backpack while feeling as if he were lugging a mere 5 pounds
  • 30. http://www.terremoto.ca/images/exoskeleton.jpg Hal 3 may some day replace the wheel chair for many people..
  • 31. http://www.startrekdesktopwallpaper.com/new_wallpaper/Star_Trek_Voyager_SevenOfNine_JerryRyan_desktopwallpaper_800.jpg
  • 32. https://www.carle.com/Hospital/about/images/Ear%20Diagram3.jpg Cochlear Ear Implant
  • 33. Physicians are using VNS from last 10 years to treat epilepsy to slash seizures till upto 40 percent. October 2005 study revealed that after using this VNS technique by severely depressed patients ninety-one percent retained their recovery in nine months. http://www.medgear.org/page/4/
  • 34. http://www.skidmore.edu/~dvella/fantvoy.jpg
  • 35. http://www.rsc.org/ej/LC/2006/b507312j/b507312j-f2.gif http://www.rsc.org/ejga/LC/2006/b507312j-ga.gif Lab-in-a-Pill
  • 36. Wesley Medical Center, Butler Community College April 7 to 11, 2008
  • 37. http://www.rsc.org/ej/LC/2006/b507312j/b507312j-f2.gif http://www.rsc.org/ejga/LC/2006/b507312j-ga.gif Lab-in-a-Pill
  • 38. An artificial red cell – the respirocyte [41]. Designer Robert A. Freitas Jr. ©1999 Forrest Bishop. http://www.imminst.org/freitas.html Nano- Mechatronics
  • 39. What are the implications?
  • 40. Industrial Age Post Industrial Age Notion of Information Age
  • 41. Industrial Age Cybernetic Age Notion of Information Age
  • 42. STEM Mergers
  • 43. Mechatronics The synergistic combination of mechanical engineering, electronics, control systems and computers. Mechanical, Aerospace, and Nuclear Engineering Departments at RPI All Contents Copyright(C) 2001 Mechatronics Lab at RPI
  • 44. Adapted from NSFNEURO NANO BIOINFO 21st Century Architecture
  • 45. NEURO NANO BIOINFO Adapted from NSF 21st Century Architecture
  • 46. STEM Mergers
  • 47. Job Mergers
  • 48. Technology, Jobs & Workers
  • 49. Samuel Palmisano (CEO, IBM): Business Week: 10.11.2004 100 million jobs are going to be created in a lot of these cross-disciplinary fields Council on Competitiveness: National Innovation Initiative
  • 50. Nanotechnology Fuel Cells Homeland Security ADM, Hybrid, MEMS, Computer Forensics Wireless: M2M Mechatronics Home Technology IntegrationBiotechnology Digital Games Demand for Multi-Disciplinary Learners & Workers
  • 51. forecasting.tstc.edu
  • 52. “Turbine Techs earn $28-$40K a year… Many techs earning $40K - $80K a year with OT.” – Bryan Gregory, Jr. 11.1.2006, TSTC West TX, Sweetwater
  • 53. “In most industries you have electricians, mechanics and IT, in wind, you are expected to do everything.” -- Bryan Gregory, Jr. 11.1.2006, TSTC West TX, Sweetwater
  • 54. Mechatronics The synergistic combination of mechanical engineering, electronics, control systems and computers. Mechanical, Aerospace, and Nuclear Engineering Departments at RPI All Contents Copyright(C) 2001 Mechatronics Lab at RPI
  • 55. Medium to High Pay Jobs Knowledge Jobs Skill Jobs Next Gen Jobs
  • 56. Mechatronics Jobs
  • 57. Butler Community College April 7 to 11, 2008
  • 58. “It used to be the sledgehammer mechanic. These days, the technology has advanced so much that our most important tool is our brain. It is more of a thinking man’s game now.” Jeff Nelson Service Manager CAT Skill Mergers
  • 59. “Tolerances are getting tighter and tighter…” –Patrick Peronnet
  • 60. “Manufacturing is increasingly more automated— electronics, motors, controls, robots and scheduling.” --ATS, PeoriaTSTC West TX
  • 61. www.af.mil/news/airman/0104/launch1b.html “Production Engineers [from TSTC] start at $43K- $57K per year at United Launch Alliance.” – Edward Rodriguez, Sr. Manufacturing Engineering Manager, ULA
  • 62. “Aviation Technicians qualify for two pay raises per year of $1.00 per hour topping out at $54K per year.” –Harvey Hall, American Eagle, Abilene
  • 63. “Entry-level machinists make $36K-$37K. They top out at $60K but they can earn overtime and up to $7,500 per year for college reimbursement too.” –Chuck Marbut, Bell Helicopter
  • 64. Butler Community College April 7 to 11, 2008 Frontier El Dorado Refining Company Operator $40K - $60K Instrumentation $40K - $60K Machinist $40K - $60K --Bill Kloeblen, Manager Human Resources
  • 65. CHEM- BIO
  • 66. “….we had to upgrade our basic mechanic skills to include programmable logic controllers and electrical systems.” --Dr. Ron Lentsch, Allergan 4/2007, TSTC Waco
  • 67. Entry-Level R&D Tech $40,000-to-$50,000 4.16.2007, TSTC Waco
  • 68. Specialized Knowledge & Skills Systems Knowledge & Skills Next Gen Jobs
  • 69. Break Out Session II and III
  • 70. What are the implications?
  • 71. STEM Mergers
  • 72. Job Mergers
  • 73. Medium to High Pay Jobs Knowledge Jobs Skill Jobs Next Gen Jobs
  • 74. Academic Mergers
  • 75. Med-to-High Skill and Professional Jobs General Academics Career & Tech Education Next Gen Ed
  • 76. Strategies & Models
  • 77. Governor Rick Perry Texas Competitiveness Council and Industry Cluster Initiative
  • 78. “Growing evidence shows that pathways hold promise for reducing high school dropout rates, increasing academic achievement and learning, and increasing students’ earning power when they graduate. Equally compelling, studies show that students enrolled in pathways perform as well as their traditionally educated counterparts on key measures” (Hoachlander, et al, p. 3, 2008).
  • 79. “Those who complete both a strong academic curriculum and a vocational program of study (dual concentrators) may have better outcomes than those who pursue one or the other (Silverberg, Warner, Fong, & Goodwin, 2004; Plank, 2001; Stone & Aliaga, 2003)” (National Alliance for Secondary Education and Transition, 2005, Career Preparatory Experiences, ¶ 3).
  • 80. Liberal Arts STEM CTE TEAMS
  • 81. Next Generation
  • 82. Technology Engineering Arts (Liberal & Fine) Mathematics Science
  • 83. Maryland Comprehensive Liberal Arts, STEM and CTE Model
  • 84. Maryland Classroom: CTE: Educating Tomorrow’s Workforce Today, April 2008
  • 85. Maryland Classroom: CTE: Educating Tomorrow’s Workforce Today, April 2008
  • 86. Maryland Classroom: CTE: Educating Tomorrow’s Workforce Today, April 2008
  • 87. TEAMS Model Schools • High degree of faculty interaction • Integrated curricula • Sequenced courses HS, CTC and University • Transdisciplinary culture
  • 88. Contextual Theoretical Applied TEAMS
  • 89. Transdisciplinary Theoretical + Applied + Real WorldProblems
  • 90. Los Altos Academy of Engineering, La Puente Valley ROP, California
  • 91. Break Out Session II and III
  • 92. The Future is Here: Emerging Technologies, Jobs and Strategies
  • 93. October 4, 1957
  • 94. GlobalS&T Demography Our Sputnik
  • 95. Industrial Age Cybernetic Age Notion of Information Age
  • 96. Industrial Age Cybernetic Age Notion of Information Age The Age of CTE & ROPs
  • 97. jim@ventureRAMP.com