[569] in Humor
HUMOR: Predicting Failure
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andrew A. Bennett)
Tue Nov 29 13:52:34 1994
To: humor@MIT.EDU
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 13:48:26 EST
From: "Andrew A. Bennett" <abennett@MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 94 12:38:15 PST
From: Connie_Kleinjans@Novell.COM (Connie Kleinjans)
Subject: HUMOR: Prediction methods for MTBF
Since not everyone on my list is a technoweenie, I should mention that
MTBF stands for Mean Time Between Failures.
From: XpnsivWino@aol.com
To: mdb-humor@cisco.com
From: ESTALKER@b205s1.ssc.af.mil (Stalker, Edward, Capt AFLMA)
Subject: Prediction methods for MTBF
Arrived in my Email today with a garbled return address. From context, it
looks like a British or Australian document?
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
SHORT COMMUNICATIONS
RELIABILITY PREDICTION USING ALTERNATIVE METHODS*
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Alternative methods may be used for predicting
reliability, when approved by the Project Manager.
This section outlines these methods and the
conditions under which they may be applied.
2. METHODS
2.1 The alternative methods covered by this section
are:
(a) Crystal ball
(b) Astrological
(c) Wet finger
(d) Miscellaneous techniques (Tarot cards, ouija
boards, etc.)
(e) Witchcraft
These will be discussed, in turn.
2.2 Crystal ball Crystal balls may be used, if
operated by qualified personnel. Qualified personnel
include gypsies and other operators approved by
NATO AQAP-1, and reliability engineers in AQAP-
1 approved companies. Crystal balls must be
calibrated against master standards in accordance
with AQAP-6.
2.3 Astrology Astrological prediction methods may
be used, but only as applied by AQAP-1 approved
astrological scientists. Use of astrological data from
daily newspapers, etc., is not acceptable, as these do
not necessarily meet approval criteria and are not
traceable.
For astrological predictions, the dates of
birth of the following must be provided:
(a) Project managers (MOD and supplier)
(b) Senior reliability engineer
(c) Chief designer
(d) Secretaries of above, if they are evaluated as
likely to affect attitudes, motivation and
performance.
(e) All the people who will make any part of the
system. ( These data are only required when
prediction accuracy of better than 0.001 percent
is required).
2.4 Wet finger This is a simple and popular method,
particularly among project managers. Since little
expertise is required, it is a low-cost method. It
features some of the disadvantages of the witchcraft
methods (see below), but the secondary effects are
less unpredictable, particularly if the personnel
making the predictions are replaced or forget what
the prediction was.
2.5 Miscellaneous methods Other methods may be
used, e.g. Tarot cards, ouija boards, tea leaves, etc.,
but only by qualified staff or consultants approved
as above. In any case, appropriate data must be
provided as required by the operator.
2.6 Witchcraft Witchcraft may be used. However,
this method of prediction is a reliability forcing
process, rather than a prediction. Great care must be
exercised to ensure that only achievable,
conservative MTBF values are forced in this way,
since death, serious injury, or madness can result if
personnel observe failures or running times which
lead to MTBFs different to the set values.
There are no defence or Military standards
for witches, so operator selection is difficult. It is
advisable to employ one or more witches on a
project, preferably as part of the reliability team, if
this method is to be used. However, care must be
exercised to ensure that they confine their powers to
the reliability requirement.
Security clearance can sometimes present further
difficulties, particularly for non- NATO
practitioners such as witch doctors, obeah men
voodoo priests, etc.
Note: Secretaries should not be asked to
perform these rites, even when appearance indicate
likely competence.
3. PREDICTION ACCURACY
3.1 These alternative methods described generally
provide much more accurate reliability predictions
than the other techniques described in this standard,
e.g. MIL-HDBK-217E. In most cases individual
failure events, not merely MTBFs, can be predicted,
if appropriate resources are applied.
* Editor's note; This document was found circulating in official corridors.
It is reproduced for information, without comment.
