RE: [TML] Off-topic but incredible! Phil Pugliese 21 Apr 2016 16:44 UTC
--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 4/20/16, Peter H Brenton <xxxxxx@mit.edu> wrote:
Subject: RE: [TML] Off-topic but incredible!
To: "xxxxxx@simplelists.com" <xxxxxx@simplelists.com>
Date: Wednesday, April 20, 2016, 2:22 PM
[delurk] I believe
we make cheap products more to target the market for a
particular price point than for reasons of technological or
fashion obsolescence.
Take a company that
makes dishwashers, for example. The marketing
department determines from research that the best price to
sell the dishwashers for is $400
per unit, and the accounting department says they need a
margin of about 25%, so the target cost for the unit is $325
(25% of 320 = $80, $320 + 80 = $400). More margin
means better profit, so the engineers and designers, being
superstars, trim the materials
cost and shortcut a few component manufacturing processes
to get the cost down even further. They do this by
using 8 years as a target lifetime. That means the
impeller in the pump can be made from cheap plastic instead
of steel, the rotating sprayer is
plastic instead of stainless steel, the bearing on the
sprayer can be a simple nylon bushing since it’s pretty
light now, etc. The fact is, if they made the parts
all from high end materials, then the thing would last 40
years, but would cost $2,000 and no
one would buy it since there’s another model for $400 on
the market, and the company would go out of business (anyone
ever have a Kirby Vacuum cleaner? I still have my
Mom’s bought in about 1978).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I also have an old 'inherited' vacuum cleaner.
Problem is finding someone to repair it.
Used to be there were all these 'FixIt' shops, cubbyholed into strip malls & the like, run by old codgers who seemed to know everything about old electric motors, etc. But they're pretty much all gone now.
========================================================
Military hardware is
another matter (as exemplified by the B52s), although it can
happen that the lowest bidder cheaps out, I’d bet the
Imperium makes it’s
warships out of stern stuff precisely so that longevity is
high. The technological stagnation means that mothball
fleets or simply older vessels that have been refitted (to
replace worn out components, not especially for the tech
upgrades) are still very
effective units at a bargain price relative to a new built
from scratch vessel. Similar things apply to ground
hardware.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Interestingly enough this coincides w/ the 18th century.
Navies would keep ships laid up (in 'ordinary' I believe) for decades.
Same w/ firearms. The UK used to store large numbers of muskets for long periods of time.
I always wondered just how many ship were stored in all those IN Depot systems.
Esp since the 'Long War' (3FW & SolRimWar) was fought at TL14 & all those ships were replaced over the next century as the IN transitioned to TL15 in it's regular sqds.
===================================================
From: xxxxxx@simplelists.com
[mailto:xxxxxx@simplelists.com]
On Behalf Of Craig Berry
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 4:54 PM
To: xxxxxx@simplelists.com
Subject: Re: [TML] Off-topic but
incredible!
Our current western
industrial society tends to build cheap disposable tech,
specifically because our rate of tech progress makes things
obsolete by the time they would typically need repair. In a
society more like the Third Imperium, where
both societies and general tech levels are stable on the
scale of many centuries, you might see more emphasis being
put on rugged, maintainable equipment. Brin touches on this
in his Uplift series.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at
1:21 PM, Greg Chalik <xxxxxx@gmail.com>
wrote:
I thought quite a few times about what happens to older
TL equipment in Traveller. Obsolete may have a different
meaning on different worlds.
Also, its a myth that tinkering with old technology can
produce a better capability. In general, a design would cost
up to 200% to go through a redesign that changed its use
requirement even 10%. This option is the least viable, and
usually the last option
taken when nothing else is available.
Cheers
Greg
On 21/04/2016 5:55 AM,
"Joseph Paul" <xxxxxx@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Dale Brown wrote
:"Flight of the Old Dog", a tale of obsolescence
to the rescue featuring the 'Buff'.
ObTrav: Aggressor forces are surprised by a spirited defense
lead by supposedly obsolete vehicles from a military grave
yard that has been raided for a couple of generations by the
descendants of a lost Planetary Army that have tinkered them
into superior performance.
Think 'muscle cars with teeth' and yes they do
maneuver exercises with them and shooting competitions.
Joseph Paul
By My Hand Designs LLC
4221 N Park Ave
Indianapolis, IN 46205
317-931-0561
On 4/20/2016 1:10 PM, Phil Pugliese (via tml list)
wrote:
This email was sent from
yahoo.com which does not allow forwarding of emails via
email lists. Therefore the sender's email address (xxxxxx@yahoo.com)
has been replaced with a dummy one. The original message
follows:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now here's something from the 'Defense Industry
Daily' n/l that almost sounds impossible!
"Pratt and Whitney has maintained that they can develop
a TF33 upgrade package that will keep Boeing's B-52
bomber flying until the 2040s. The eight engine bomber has
kept the same TF33 engine since its induction in 1952, but
high fuel consumption had the USAF
looking at potential re-engine options. With oil prices
dropping dramatically, the program was dropped; but P&W
are still looking at improvements for the TF33 that will
keep it on-wing, and allow the air force to reduce their
maintenance costs."
These planes have been in service so long ('H"
models were built about '60-'64) that the authors
seem unaware that only the 'H" models had the TF33
turbofan. Earlier models had turbojets. The
'fanjets' gave the 'H' a much greater range
than the earlier versions
& were more powerful.
Still, I find it amazing that those planes could still be
flying past the age of 75 years old!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please goto
http://archives.simplelists.com
-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this
list please goto
http://archives.simplelists.com
-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please goto
http://archives.simplelists.com
--
Craig Berry (http://google.com/+CraigBerry)
"Eternity is in love with the productions of
time." - William Blake
-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please goto
http://archives.simplelists.com
-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please goto
http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=EwREIRgLK8vaUEhNlnoNdSGKwnjoID8a