Where Does Your Strategy Come From?

Hubble telescope, not the best example to cite when discussing testing. Wasn't that the one that cost over $3billion to repair after the mirror and the lens used to test the mirror were both ground on the single vendors same miscalibrated grinding rig. I bet that put a dent in somebody's retirement fund.

I Googled buggy whips. I don't know much about buggies but the S&M market is sure thriving.

As far as Hubble and single vendor testing is concerned I say that it is epitome of why single vendor testing should be used. The testing itself worked perfectly and is the core reason that Hubble has turned into such a success. The error was not a mis-calibration but a misunderstanding of how the lack of gravity would distort the primary mirror. But by having the testing data of the mirror's shape on Earth and examining the images returned they were able to fabricate exactly the corrective lens required. Had there been multiple vendors with different tests there may not have been as precise a set of data to fabricate the corrective optics while the pissing contest over who's data and fabrication methodology was correct.

Being able to resolve the problem afterwards is an interesting justification for single vendor build and test, but not one that most engineers would support. The crux is that the problem should not have occurred in the first place. Would outside experts involved in independent testing have spotted the problem? We will never know, but we are after all talking about a 1mm error in a mirror that was supposed to be ground to microns.

I am frequently involved in design of processes using novel and sometimes untried methods of production. I am not infallible, I welcome the input of outsiders to examine and critique my work. Implementing a test regime requires a deep understanding of the objectives, the proposed solution and the consequences of failure, who better to point out where I have a blind-spot.

Strategy, what strategy?