Should a Technician do engineering?

Well, you can't tell him "You don't know shit!"

It was during the French revolution, a lawyer, a doctor and an engineer were all sentenced to death by the guillotine. First up was the lawyer. His head on the block, the blade released ... only to stick halfway down. According to the prevailing law, he had to be set free. Next up, the doctor, same outcome. Finally it's the engineer's turn. Head on the block, he looks up ... "Wait! I see the problem!"

Sure I do, it's shown at 1:20 minutes:

Right up there with split ground planes :-)

You just revealed yourself as a total idiot. Nice going.

It's Goerge Bush's fault, right?

A Technologist should have and exercise some measure of quantitative analytical skills, even if based on a mathematical foundation of algebra and trig. The degree of using those skills should increase in each step of the rank ladder.

Additionally, to reach the Principal level--only once removed from the "distinguished" (about 5th percentile) pinnacle, one should exhibit a very high degree of ability to work independently. That means to conceptualize and pursue the solution to a problem independently, not merely to perform only the task which was requested without immediate hounding--these are two different sorts of working independently.

Finally, one should have an attitude of being willing to go above and beyond the call of duty. To propose innovative (or even simple) ideas for potential improvements to lab systems on a regular basis. Then inquire if such would be helpful, and if so, actually do some work toward that end to demonstrate the viability of the idea without being formally commanded. Also, to continually seek to learn and demonstrate new and/or refined skills.

If one does these things, even with no degree, then I have no problem with their having the "Principal" status. But if they don't, then they should be a junior (lowest ranking) Tech., or be a Technician.

We have a new guy with a full 4-yr engineering degree, doing mechanical engineering (a lot of SolidWorks thermal and stress FEA--but I see him regularly cracking textbooks to study up on the underlying math), who has the "senior" rank, whereas another person has no degree and meets none of the above criteria, at principal rank, who even had his hand held to edit every word of his performance reports each year.

I feel a bit bad for this guy. I'll be helping to encourage him to argue for his own advancement--be a squeaky wheel.

I'm grateful that the EM course I took emphasized transmission lines. For engineers who don't plan to specialize in RF, perhaps something focusing on the mathematical basics, fairly rigorous transmission lines, and then with a heavy practical look at topics relating to real world EM for the 90% of engineers--signal propagation/integrity, grounding and shielding, etc.

a say

with

Try dealing this person before you say that. You just might change your mind due to the new information you acquire.

?-)

Technologists to

will be no

will have

good

Opposed or not, it is the current law here (in California) where you live and work.

See: =20

scroll down to Chapter 7, code sections 6700 to 6799.

Deal with it.

?-)

I don't think so. The trend has been going on for decades. Obummer just epitomizes that particular craziness.

?-)

Technologists to

will be no

will have

good

The license is not about industrial goods, consumer products or the like. It is about publicly accessible infrastructure like office and commercial buildings, roads, bridges, and such. Where is considered important to have things like I35 in Minneapolis or Verazzano narrows not happen yet again.

no

have

Tacoma Narrows. A sister bridge to the Whitestone, which was under construction when the swaying problem in Tacoma was first noticed, and so was beefed up accordingly.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Now I am completely not understanding what you want to say. What's "dealing" here?

Anyhow, it is against my Christian beliefs to "blacklist" any human being and I also try to treat everyone respectfully. Realizing that I will never be perfect in this.

have

Did you read 6747?

have

And license laws did not prevent this from happening. That's my point, they do not "safeguard the public" as they claim. A more sad example: Our railroad infrastructure is for the most part, AFAIK, blessed by licensed engineers. To me safeguarding the public means remaining abreast of technical developments that make things more safe and to use that knowledge for the benefit of the public. It has been known since decades that the Indusi train collision avoidance system could have prevented the deaths of many Americans. My grandpa was a train engineer in Germany and he explained that system to me when I was a kid, and I understood it. It's _standard_ there. Yet we don't have it and I supposed licensed engineers have signed off on that sub-par infractructure. Which leads to this:

The solution that engineers either did not educate themselves about or failed to insist on is this:

Heck, even Romania has it. Now how would you explain that?

Say Joerg,

Ever watch "Holmes on Homes" (or one of the spin-off shows like "Holmes Inspection")? If so, I'd be curious as to your thoughts on the guy (Mike Holmes) and what he does.... E.g., does he go overboard, exaggerating just how bad some contractors are? Could changes to building codes improve the situation, or would it just make things worse? What might be a good way to get homes built more correctly without creating some huge bureaucratic nightmare?

--Joel

Haven't seen it, we don't have sat or cable. I think licenses and other rules make sense where there are no other barriers of entry. In the US we do not have the apprentice -> journeyman -> master careerpath that they have in many European countries. So there needs to be something else in place. A license is no guarantee for competence though because it does not require a comparable eductions. So the risk of screw-ups is naturally higher. But it does at least allow you to check some of the ID given and also to see whether there are complaints. That is how one roofing contractor didn't make the cut when I did the license check.

With engineers it's very different. A university is the authority to decide who gets to be an engineer and who doesn't, and then issues a degree which can be verified along with the credibility of the university itself. It should not be up to bureaucrats to second-guess that. Tehy don't have the foggiest what matters in a job like yours or mine.

have a say

with

your

Just for grins, interview him as if was applying for a job. That should be sufficient information.

?-)

Technologists to

will be no

will have

good

as

know

selfs

separate

cars

building

live

I had not read it for several years until you just asked. Yes there are = a lot of industrial and consumer product exemptions, the communications industry is not a surprise to me. Back when i first got my PE i studied the whole thing.

The regulation and the enabling legislation are about publicly accessible infrastructure primarily, as mentioned elsewhere.

?-)