31–40 of 121 posts
We now have so much surplus labor that even this relatively skilled job only pays $16.50 an hour.
These are some massive sub-assemblies being carted all over the world...it's surprising to me that there aren't more localized efficiencies, or that this global Lego set doesn't always have more missing pieces than its worth. Rear Fuselage: Hamburg, Germany Vertical Stabilizer: Stade, Germany Forward Fuselage: Saint-Nazaire, France Wings: Broughton, Wales Engines: Middletown, Connecticuit Final Assembly: Mobile, Alab…
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/11/business/worldbusiness/11i...
These are some massive sub-assemblies being carted all over the world...it's surprising to me that there aren't more localized efficiencies, or that this global Lego set doesn't always have more missing pieces than its worth. Rear Fuselage: Hamburg, Germany Vertical Stabilizer: Stade, Germany Forward Fuselage: Saint-Nazaire, France Wings: Broughton, Wales Engines: Middletown, Connecticuit Final Assembly: Mobile, Alab…
It's like this due to political reasons, nothing to do with eficiency.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They only employ 200 or so employees, as per the article. We are talking probably $10 million in payroll a year which is a rounding error at this scale. The automation fetishism is exhausting.
Payroll is a terrible number to look at to estimate if automation is worth doing. Automation provides ancillary benefits which are often more important than simply replacing people. For example automation can provide increased consistency (perhaps reducing human error?) for some tasks it can do the work faster. Sometimes automating things allows a company to do that thing more often. There's a bunch of reasons to aut…
Looking at those pictures I wonder how assembly, from unloading cargo to final testing, could be fully automated. I came to think that until we automate automation it will be quite hard. Humans with assist of tools are flexible enough - especially on this scale.
These aircraft cost in the order of $100M and they are produced in the thousands across many years for the most successful models. And it is likely to stay this way, it's not like if someday, we'll all have our own personal Airbus.
The economies of scale don't justify a fully automatic assembly line.
The vivid color contrasts in these photos make them visually stunning, but do they serve any functional purpose?
I wonder if they're composite images, or just using some great lenses.
It's surprising to me how small the cargo-hold is. I've always imagined it to be a lot bigger, but now that I think about it (having seen it), it makes a lot of sense..
Yes, I went through the same process, obviously in hindsight it is a tube, all that can remain is the bottom half of the circle underneath the floor. Fascinating look at those part assembled planes. Interesting how a politics is just as 'real' as economics - the plane is purposefully built around the EU to spread the jobs and buy in from member nations, why not include the US in that too? With the UK leaving the EU I…
Unless Airbus finds it useful to keep factories in the UK, to sell to British airlines and the British military.
Or, because there's so much other aerospace in the UK -- Wikipedia has a huge list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerospace_industry_in_the_Unit...
Broughton in Wales is not an expensive area. It's not too far from Liverpool.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They only employ 200 or so employees, as per the article. We are talking probably $10 million in payroll a year which is a rounding error at this scale. The automation fetishism is exhausting.
Payroll is a terrible number to look at to estimate if automation is worth doing. Automation provides ancillary benefits which are often more important than simply replacing people. For example automation can provide increased consistency (perhaps reducing human error?) for some tasks it can do the work faster. Sometimes automating things allows a company to do that thing more often. There's a bunch of reasons to aut…
It's surprising to me how small the cargo-hold is. I've always imagined it to be a lot bigger, but now that I think about it (having seen it), it makes a lot of sense..
Yes, I went through the same process, obviously in hindsight it is a tube, all that can remain is the bottom half of the circle underneath the floor. Fascinating look at those part assembled planes. Interesting how a politics is just as 'real' as economics - the plane is purposefully built around the EU to spread the jobs and buy in from member nations, why not include the US in that too? With the UK leaving the EU I…
But see that's the part that got me. I subconsciously thought (without logic) that the passenger cabin part is the upper half and the cargo is just as big as the top half. Actually, the passenger side is much more than the half, and it looks like they've crammed in a lot of things in the remaining bottom portion, making the cargo hold even smaller.