Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7
This is a good, and based upon experience, I'd say accurate initial account of the problems on the rig. I might also note this is an accurate portrayal of how the heavy industry still in the US has been operating for the last 12 years. Maintenance is performed on items that are convenient to work on or may be taken off line for short periods of time without affecting production. Maintenance on items that directly affect production simply isn't done. Run it until it breaks, jump in and fix it or jerry rig it to run awhile longer, and roll. Safety is usually pretty good if it can be addressed at the local level without corporate getting involved. Like I've said in earlier posts, if you think you know how these things run and really believe that safety is the number 1 priority all the time you're actually clueless and don't know sh!t. You have to spend 3-4 years in the field on your tools to understand how the game is played. I'd bet I could even guess the brand names of the equipment that gave them the most trouble. Those items have bad reps in field use. Why are they used? Because they work real good in static demonstrations and in the lab. They meet the minimum requirements. They are high tech and engineers love them them so in they go.
Round up the usual suspects. The production guys ignored the warnings of the guys in the field doing the work and something went boom. Nothing new.
