A little humor to start the week…

If you’re an engineer that is… 🙂

ENGINEER IDENTIFICATION TEST

You walk into a room and notice that a picture is hanging crooked.  You…

  1. Straighten it.
  2. Ignore it.
  3. Buy a CAD system and spend the next six months designing a solar-powered, self-adjusting picture frame while often stating aloud your belief that the inventor of the nail was a total moron.

The correct answer is “C” but partial credit can be given to anybody who writes “It depends” in the margin of the test or simply blames the whole stupid thing on “Marketing.”

SOCIAL SKILLS

Engineers have different objectives when it comes to social interaction.  “Normal” people expect to accomplish several unrealistic things from social interaction:

*Stimulating and thought-provoking conversation

*Important social contacts

*A feeling of connectedness with other humans

In contrast to “normal” people, engineers have rational objectives for social interactions:

*Get it over with as soon as possible.

*Avoid getting invited to something unpleasant.

*Demonstrate mental superiority and mastery of all subjects.

FASCINATION WITH GADGETS

To the engineer, all matter in the universe can be placed into one of two categories:

(1) things that need to be fixed, and

  • things that will need to be fixed after you’ve had a few minutes to play with them.

Engineers like to solve problems.  If there are no problems handily available, they will create their own problems.  Normal people don’t understand this concept; they believe that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.  Engineers believe that if it ain’t broke, it doesn’t have enough features yet.

No engineer looks at a television remote control without wondering what it would take to turn it into a stun gun.  No engineer can take a shower without wondering if some sort of Teflon coating would make showering unnecessary.  To the engineer, the world is a toy box full of sub-optimized and feature-poor toys.

FASHION AND APPEARANCE

Clothes are the lowest priority for an engineer, assuming the basic thresholds for temperature and decency have been satisfied.  If no appendages are freezing or sticking together, and if no genitalia are in plain view, then the objective of clothing has been met; anything else is a waste.

DATING AND SOCIAL LIFE

Dating is never easy for engineers.  A normal person will employ various indirect and duplicitous methods to create a false impression of attractive-ness. Engineers are incapable of placing appearance above function.

Fortunately, engineers have an ace in the hole.  They are widely recognized as superior marriage material: intelligent, dependable, employed, honest, and handy around the house.  While it’s true that many normal people would prefer not to date an engineer, most normal people harbor an intense desire to mate with them, thus producing engineerlike children who will have high-paying jobs long before losing their virginity.

Male engineers reach their peak of sexual attractiveness later than normal men, becoming irresistible erotic dynamos in their mid-thirties to late-forties.  Just look at these examples of sexually irresistible men in technical professions:

*  Bill Gates.

*  MacGyver.

*  Etcetera.

Female engineers become irresistible at the age of consent and remain that way until about thirty minutes after their clinical death.  Longer if it’s a warm day.

HONESTY

Engineers are always honest in matters of technology and human relationships.  That’s why it’s a good idea to keep engineers away from customers, romantic interests, and other people who can’t handle the truth.  Engineers sometimes bend the truth to avoid work.  They say things that sound like lies but technically are not because nobody could be expected to believe them.  The complete list of engineer lies is listed below.

“I won’t change anything without asking you first.”

“I’ll return your hard-to-find cable tomorrow.”

“I have to have new equipment to do my job.”

“I’m not jealous of your new computer.”

FRUGALITY

Engineers are notoriously frugal.  This is not because of cheapness or mean spirit; it is simply because every spending situation is simply a problem in optimization, that is, “How can I escape this situation while retaining the greatest amount of cash?”

POWERS OF CONCENTRATION

If there is one trait that best defines an engineer it is the ability to concentrate on one subject to the complete exclusion of everything else in the environment.  This sometimes causes engineers to be pronounced dead prematurely.  Some funeral homes in high-tech areas have started checking resumes before processing the bodies.  Anybody with a degree in electrical engineering or experience in computer programming is propped up in the lounge for a few days just to see if he or she snaps out of it.

RISK

Engineers hate risk.  They try to eliminate it whenever they can.  This is understandable, given that when an engineer makes one little mistake the media will treat it like it’s a big deal or something.

EXAMPLES OF BAD PRESS FOR ENGINEERS

*   Hindenberg.

*   Space Shuttle Challenger.

*   SPANet(tm)

*   Hubble space telescope.

*   Apollo 13.

*   Titanic.

*   Ford Pinto.

*   Corvair.

The risk/reward calculation for engineers looks something like this:

RISK:   Public humiliation and the death of thousands of innocent people.

REWARD: A certificate of appreciation in a handsome plastic frame.  Being practical people, engineers evaluate this balance of risks and rewards and decide that risk is not a good thing.  The best way to avoid risk is by advising that any activity is technically impossible for reasons that are far too complicated to explain.  If that approach is not sufficient to halt the project, then the engineer will fall back to a second line of defense:

“It’s technically possible but it will cost too much.”

EGO

Ego-wise, two things are important to engineers:

*   How smart they are.

*   How many cool devices they own.

The fastest way to get an engineer to solve a problem is to declare that the problem is unsolvable.  No engineer can walk away from an unsolvable problem until it’s solved.  No illness or distraction is sufficient to get the engineer off the case.  These types of challenges quickly become personal—a battle between the engineer and the laws of nature.

Engineers will go without food and hygiene for days to solve a problem.  (Other times just because they forgot.)  And when they succeed in solving the problem they will experience an ego rush that is better than sex— and I’m including the kind of sex where other people are involved.

Nothing is more threatening to the engineer than the suggestion that somebody has more technical skill.  Normal people sometimes use that knowledge as a lever to extract more work from the engineer.  When an engineer says that something can’t be done (a code phrase that means it’s not fun to do), some clever normal people have learned to glance at the engineer with a look of compassion and pity and say something along these lines:  “I’ll ask Bob to figure it out.  He knows how to solve difficult technical problems.”

 

At that point it is a good idea for the normal person to not stand between the engineer and the problem.  The engineer will set upon the problem like a starved Chihuahua on a pork chop.

To explain, CATIA is a CAD design tool we use where I work (pronounced caateya)

THE BALLAD OF CATIA FRED

(Sung to the tune of “The Beverly Hillbillies”)

Come Listen to muh story ’bout a man named Fred,

A poor college student with computers in his head.

An’ then one day he was lookin’ for ideas,

His professor said, “Hey! There’s money in CATIA’s.”

(…keyboards, that is…digitizers…mainframes…)

 

Well the first thing you know ol’ Fred’s an engineer.

The kinfolk said, “Get the heck away from here!”

They said, “Washingtony is the place you oughta see!”

So he bought a bag o’ donuts and he joined the Lazy B.

(Boeing, that is…big planes…little paychecks…)

 

On his first day at work they stuck him in a cube,

Fed him some more donuts and sat him at the tube.

Said, “Your drawin’s late, but we know just what to do:

Instead of forty hours, gonna work ya fifty-two.”

(…overtime, that is…black coffee…Lucky Strikes…)

 

Well the months went by an’ things was lookin’ bad.

Some schedules they dun slipped and the managers was mad.

They called another meetin’ an’ decided on a fix:

The answer was so clear: “We’ll work him sixty-six!”

(…tired, that is…no-doz…espresso, donuts…)

 

Then the months turned to years an’ his hair was gettin’ gray,

But Fred kept a tubin’ while his life just slipped away.

He was waitin’ for the lottery to help him out the door,

Then he ate another donut and his body hit the floor.

(…dead, that is…heart attack…logged off…)

Not saying that I know a few folks that fit this… Nope, not at all…

Comments

A little humor to start the week… — 26 Comments

  1. LOL. I can relate to much of that as we have a few engineers in the family.

    The worst case I have ever seen was a Lt. in VP-56. He was a computer software engineer. He slowly lost the ability to relate to other human beings. He would only talk to the machines. One day, a doctor and a couple of orderlies showed up at the squadron and escorted him out of the building to a waiting ambulance. That was the last we ever saw of him.

    Ray

  2. I am not an engineer, but many of the traits struck disturbingly close to home.

    And I will add.

    “Using thousands of dollars of precision machine tools and an hour of time to make a plastic adapter for a garden hose is time well spent.”

    • Please imagine that I finished typing “John in Philly” instead of just the first “J”. Sigh

  3. I’m surprised the Tacoma Narrows Bridge isn’t listed in the examples list since they show it to everyone who even thinks about becoming an engineer.

  4. Well, now I know I AM NO ENGINEER. I don’t even know what CATIA or CAD’s are. I’m just a simple accountant who likes beer and NASCAR… use to like the Falcons.

  5. Those traits strike very close to home for a couple friends of mine. “Solutions in search of a problem” seems to be a family motto, for them.

  6. Ray- Was that in the early 80s???

    John- LOL, point(s) to you! 🙂

    Tim- Oh hell yes! Damn good point!

    NRW- Oh yeah, Adams nails it, as usual!

    Judy- LOL, I know nozzink…

    CP- Yeah, right… 😀

    Rev- Yep, got a few in my family too!

  7. Well, since the possible answers were listed 1) 2) & 3) and the ‘correct’ answer was listed as ‘C’ – I can only conclude that answer was derived at after a rather hefty government grant and subsequent long term contract…………..

  8. NFO, that was in 1979, I think. I can’t remember his last name, but his first name was Dave. I worked with him in the operations department. I was the logs and records PO.

  9. So Dad had to go to the hospital for prostate surgery a few years ago…had to have a foley catheter while there…got home and BITCHED to me big-time about what torture devices they are…said I just used and installed them, had nothing to do with the design. He wrote a 3 page letter with recommendations for changes to the CEO of the hospital about how they should buy a different brand of catheters, and then one to the firm that made the catheters the hospital bought…He was also well known for the “lab stare” at the dinner table…in other words, he is present, but NOT listening to anything/one in the room. Lol. The lesson was to be sure ya had a response from him before telling all about your day at school. 🙂

  10. Once worked for an engineer who spent two weeks deciding the cost/benefit or a diesel VW Rabbit or a gas powered VW Rabbit. While he was preoccupied we made amazing progress on the projects he was neglecting.

  11. Just remember: Never trust an engineer who won’t get his hands dirty. If he’s not willing to get dirty, then all he has is nook-learning, with no practical experience.

    • Retired Spook,

      I was lucky that my college had an internship program at the local nuclear facility to train tecnicians during two summers. I learned what I call “Plant Sense” which served me well throughout my career. You’d be surprised (or maybe not) to see the number of systems designed by very smart engineers that can’t be maintained, tested properly. or even started up (you had to “trick f*#k” the system to make it think was running so it cold be put in service).

  12. Gomez- LOL, probably! 🙂

    drjim- That you are… 😀

    Ray- I was over in VP-30 as an AW instructor then. I ‘kinda’ remember something happening… LONG time ago!

    Suz- Ouch! I can imagine he was ‘less’ that happy… But funny too!

    WSF- Heh, yep that works too!

    RS- GREAT point!

    ERJ- 😀

  13. CATIA lurks about yet; I was designing automotive parts and a customer pretty much forced us to buy a seat – comparable in cost to 20 seats of SolidWorks or more. This was in 2014 and the interface had that crazy ‘stuck in 1992’ feel to it. Barely better graphics than ‘Missile Command.’
    Heard all the old jokes about it; the best was ‘Close And Try It Again.” That and Siemens NX (used to be Unigraphics) are good for models having a ba-jillion parts, like airplanes or even a passenger car (800,000 parts if you count *all* the fasteners and *all* surface mount components on *all* PC boards.)
    Runs today with the same feel as running on those old coal-fired 8-bit mainframe machines…
    @ Retired Spook you are 100% on-target; I have seen enough of the Ivy-league-ers who can’t pick up the right end of a wrench – or a micrometer.

  14. The pinto and corvair were great….until the accountants fucked with the design to save money (except for the belt on the corvair).
    Marketing and Accounting screw up many great designs.

  15. You don’t have to have Catia to engineer.
    It might help. It might hinder.
    I once rededicated a weld cell pretty much guessing where everything would go, and what the reach of each robot was, and how to lengthen the pallet cart.
    I lucked out and it worked.
    Of course I had to stand there and tell everybody where to put stuff because I couldn’t lay it out on a print.
    Just didn’t have access to the tools I needed.
    Later I learned the joys of Robot Studio.

  16. Guy- NOW you’re scaring me… 🙂

    B- Too true!!!

    Ed- Interesting… Some things one MUST do themselves! 😀

  17. Some people see the glass as half empty.
    Some see it as half full.
    An engineer sees a 50% redundancy of glass.

  18. When I explain RISK to the younguns I ask them how they would explain their decision on the witness stand in court.

    A major oil company is now using the term “Minimum Engineering” to explain cost cutting measures. I shudder to think how that will sound. I told my guy to use the phrase “functional solution” instead.

    Finally, dad was a Chief Machinist Mate. He thought I should understand the inner workings of mechanical stuff. I got a ’53 Chevy so I could take apart the engine and understand what was happening when I stepped on the gas. The lesson stuck. When I decided I wanted a career in subsea engineering, I learned how to dive so that I could know what a diver had to deal with. Someday I’ll blog the story of my decompression sickness from testing decompression tables.

    • Yeah, I always thought “safety factor” was a poor choice of terms. I liked “Percentage of Over-design” instead. It means the same thing but sounds much different to the little, old ladies in the jury.

  19. Mike- Good one! 🙂

    PE- Yep, it’s ALL about levels of risk… Like it or not! That has to be an interesting story. Decomp sickness sucks!