Philip, One major quibble about BK's remarks on status of aerospace engineering in India. The very same graduates of those programs are the leading lights in aerospace in US in both industry, teaching and Wall street.
Aerospace America puts IIT especially the one in Madras in one of the top aero institutes in the world in undergradaute teaching.
Even here they are consulted. Not just IITM.
Kanson, Looking in detail there is 15% commonality and not 85% as the perception. So why did the chief think only about the initial assessment? Wasnt he updated regularly?
Ramana saheb, There are regular meeting apprising of the situation and actions to take. Everyone is in the loop. But Naval Chief mostly don't go through the nitty-gritty. His role is more of a ringmaster. So his action is to see whether something happened or not. These things are part of the business and the only difference is that now he voiced that in public. Somebody made money by selling that as news. And we, ordinary people, burden ourselves on such news. I have to concede that he is polite compared to ex Air chief.
There are always theories on how to go about a project. I stress on theories becoz they are just theories which has not been put into effect. Otherwise if successful we will be following those. So these theories are bandied about on both success and failure of any projects by even members withing the development team who don't agree with what happened. So if there is success, there is going to be someone who is going to say, I told you so. And similarly there is going to be others who will say the same words when there is failure. These are part & parcel of any projects any where. Success has many fathers - a known saying.
Regarding 15% details, everyone can express their opinion in binary. But Proj Mgm team can't work based on binary answers. I can comment on how huge the work needed is or disagree that it needs more wrok, but i don't exactly know how much of work needed to finish that. But Proj Mgm team need details to work on the resources needed, timelines, series of actions to take etc. So in case of such uncertainties you fix on a point what is known as best possible and make projection based on that. So these 15%, 20% figures are based on that. To borrow a line, there are known unknowns and unknown unknowns. What kind of accurate projection one can give on unknown unknowns. So these comments like, "this project was sold or misguided on wrong commitments and everybody knows its not going to happen" falls into this category.
To bring out a live example, in Capt Maolankar speech at AI-II, he talks abot LEVCON and flatter approach speed curve Vs weight that was promised by designers but expressed that he doesn't believe in that. So what shall we do in this case? We take such opinions and burden ourselves to think its not worth the effort to make or criticize the team for not putting enough efforts to convince everyone beforehand? Or carry on with what we have, with what we know to learn and overcome any mistakes that comes by? You tell us which is the path these developers should take?
The whole comments surrounding this project is like this - half baked. Becoz no ones which one works correctly. Everyone struts around saying what they think is right. Since these kinds of projects which huge uncertainties always slips the timelines, everyone are very eager to pat their back saying, I told you so, as if thinking that they had some remarkable foresight. But when comes to fixing the project timelines/resources need, it is the same story.