I’m reminded of that old John Candy movie as European air travelers to and from Europe recently struggled to get to their destinations by whatever means they could, thanks to airline problems with Iceland’s volcanic ash. An acquaintance, in the U.S. for a conference, returned to Germany through Mexico to Madrid and then by train to Frankfurt. It was a case of adaptability and flexibility, traits of which I find we typically are in short supply.
I just returned from a trip to Long Island where I used an auto ferry for part of the trip. For those of you familiar with Interstate 95 in Connecticut, you know that the stretch from New Haven south can be a nightmare, so taking the ferry to and from Port Jefferson is a relaxing and stress-free way to cut more than 100 miles of heavily trafficked roads off the trip.
The point is that I adapted to a potentially messy situation on the Interstate and, by rearranging my plans, I built flexibility into the schedule that enabled me to pull this off. In all fairness, the ferry trips added another $25 to the trip cost, $100 for the ferries less the $75 I saved for mileage.
As this is being written I am assuming that a trip to Germany next week, where I will present at the AKL Technology Business Day in Aachen, will happen. However, it is a little more problematical, as I do not have a fall-back plan if the ash from Iceland's volcano returns to plague the skies again.
The subject of adapting to change and having the flexibility to make it happen is pertinent to our industry. The past few weeks have seen a plethora of news items on manufacturing in the U.S. adapting to the recession's recovery by making improvements in productivity. I have spoken to numerous managers from the equipment supplier industry who mention the commitment their customers have made to “lean” and “green” manufacturing, promulgated by the cuts they made as the recession deepened.
Quite often I heard the word flexibility mentioned as they told me of the draconian cuts that were effected and how they found they could survive with less. This experience, born in one of our most disastrous economic climates, may be an aberration, and as things begin to ease, the temptation to a looser approach, emulating the old ways, may return. Some would argue that they see hints of this in the staffing-up that is apparent at some of the leading suppliers. However, I would counter by pointing out that cuts made last year were deep into the marrow of the bone and that one can only push employee efficiency so far before you lose talent to competitors.
My message is the one I have harped on for some time now: lasers for industrial material processing are for the most part productivity enhancers, and in many cases automated to the point where productivity per man-hour is not lessened. I don’t have numbers to support this, but my instincts, based on long observation of this industry sector, tell me laser technology will ride out the recovery in good shape.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Sunday, April 18, 2010
What goes around comes around
Attendees at last weeks SALA event were given reinforcement that fresh applications are making inroads into industry and that these manufacturing tools may, in the future, offset some, of the market softness projected as laser sheet metal cutting matures.
Both of these applications, laser additive manufacturing (LAM) and paint stripping, are not new; developments can be traced back to the 1970s. What prevented them from widespread industry acceptance was basically equipment oriented, the high cost and complexity of the lasers used. With the evolution of improved solid state and carbon dioxide lasers and the introduction of fiber lasers, the cost/watt for beam delivery has decreased to justifiable levels and the ancillary equipment; for LAM better and more efficient powder delivery and for paint stripping improved beam scanning devices and more efficient effluent exhaust systems, has made these two processes more user friendly.
As a consequence LAM, driven in part by today’s lean manufacturing practices, is expanding its user base from costly part repair to actual part manufacture for limited scale production. While paint stripping, heretofore confined to graffiti removal and some military aircraft paint removal operations, has broadened its appeal and other market sectors such as stripping of off-shore drill rigs and highway bridge paint removal are now considered practical. At SALA we saw a back pack model powered by a fiber laser that is being used to strip paint from sections of aircraft.
If indeed, the manufacturing world has gone lean, and orders for specific parts will be filled by instant manufacturing, then the LAM process will soar as it is the perfect answer for art-to-part thinking which is becoming common in certain sectors of manufacturing. At next months LAM Workshop, a large audience of interested manufacturers will get a glimpse of technology changes that bodes well for these processes to be a reliable and well used manufacturing procedure.
As for paint stripping, wider use on military aircraft will be superseded by use in the commercial airline industry, a potential major user of the technology and through the use of back pack type devices experience broader industry use in those applications requiring the ultimate in portability.
Considering that I was personally involved in both technologies in the 1970s it is very satisfying to see them become industry accepted manufacturing practices 35 years later.
On another note, I want to call attention to a feature article appearing in the April 19th issue of Newsweek magazine, where one of my favorite writers, Daniel Gross makes the case for a dramatic turnaround in the U.S. manufacturing sector. In The Comeback Country he makes the case that America has “pulled itself back from the brink - and why it’s destined to stay on top.” A nice contrarian perspective that is only marred by a weak kneed Editors placement of four economist’s view of The Shape of Things to Come. A classic case of my pet peeve on the use of “but” that I describe in My View in the May/June issue of Industrial Laser Solutions.
Both of these applications, laser additive manufacturing (LAM) and paint stripping, are not new; developments can be traced back to the 1970s. What prevented them from widespread industry acceptance was basically equipment oriented, the high cost and complexity of the lasers used. With the evolution of improved solid state and carbon dioxide lasers and the introduction of fiber lasers, the cost/watt for beam delivery has decreased to justifiable levels and the ancillary equipment; for LAM better and more efficient powder delivery and for paint stripping improved beam scanning devices and more efficient effluent exhaust systems, has made these two processes more user friendly.
As a consequence LAM, driven in part by today’s lean manufacturing practices, is expanding its user base from costly part repair to actual part manufacture for limited scale production. While paint stripping, heretofore confined to graffiti removal and some military aircraft paint removal operations, has broadened its appeal and other market sectors such as stripping of off-shore drill rigs and highway bridge paint removal are now considered practical. At SALA we saw a back pack model powered by a fiber laser that is being used to strip paint from sections of aircraft.
If indeed, the manufacturing world has gone lean, and orders for specific parts will be filled by instant manufacturing, then the LAM process will soar as it is the perfect answer for art-to-part thinking which is becoming common in certain sectors of manufacturing. At next months LAM Workshop, a large audience of interested manufacturers will get a glimpse of technology changes that bodes well for these processes to be a reliable and well used manufacturing procedure.
As for paint stripping, wider use on military aircraft will be superseded by use in the commercial airline industry, a potential major user of the technology and through the use of back pack type devices experience broader industry use in those applications requiring the ultimate in portability.
Considering that I was personally involved in both technologies in the 1970s it is very satisfying to see them become industry accepted manufacturing practices 35 years later.
On another note, I want to call attention to a feature article appearing in the April 19th issue of Newsweek magazine, where one of my favorite writers, Daniel Gross makes the case for a dramatic turnaround in the U.S. manufacturing sector. In The Comeback Country he makes the case that America has “pulled itself back from the brink - and why it’s destined to stay on top.” A nice contrarian perspective that is only marred by a weak kneed Editors placement of four economist’s view of The Shape of Things to Come. A classic case of my pet peeve on the use of “but” that I describe in My View in the May/June issue of Industrial Laser Solutions.
Friday, April 16, 2010
Is it or isn't it?
Guess who I ran into at the tavern this past weekend: the Town Crier. We shared a hard cider while he brought me up to date on what was happening on the local scene; he didn’t report world news because it would be stale by the time he got it from London. When last I had seen him he was preparing for the winter as we were in the throes of what appeared to be “an old fashioned New England winter.” It didn’t happen, though, and that old furry forecaster from Punxsutawney was wrong: we had an early spring.
The river stayed open this year, the Town Crier told me, but record rainfall precipitated high water all winter with floods in the spring, as new records for rainfall were set, so he couldn’t get out in his boat.
“Just goes to show you,” I intoned, “You can’t count on anything when it comes to forecasting. Why, I heard that the Federal government has a special committee that convenes to tell us when we are in or out of financial recession." )
“Is that right? “He asked as he exhaled some alcoholic breath that caused me to move the candle that illuminated our table, in case he ignited. “How do they do that?”
“Beats me,” I said, scratching my head for emphasis. “I guess they hibernate in that same hole as Punxsutawney Phil and don’t come out until the guys that meet under that old tree on Wall Street in New York City, to invest in companies, pick the magic number.”
I told him that the country seems to be doing okay as more pleasant weather arrives. Shoppers were back and the Merchant has been bragging about how increasing sales for the past three months has wiped out his thin inventory. The Farmer got his seed in already thanks to the early Spring and he is talking about record crops this year. It seems he has found some export markets and he is thinking about turning over some new acreage. This of course is good news for the Cooper as the need for his barrels has increased.
“But I heard that things in Europe were somewhat dicey," he countered.
“Old stuff.” I replied. “You need to get better data sources. You’re beginning to sound like that government committee who just peeked out of their hole and still see clouds. Maybe you need a better news source."
“But I get my news from travelers who post notes on the bulletin board in front of the town hall across the river where the stage stops. The people who leave these seem to have some interesting thoughts.”
“Ah, but do they sign them? And, if they do, what are their credentials and do they have an agenda?” I posited.
“Can’t say, but they seem to be in the know.” he apologized.
“There you go,” I said. “And this is what you have been broadcasting?”
Plunking down a few coins for the cider I left him scratching his head in a quandary as I head out for an afternoon tea party.
The river stayed open this year, the Town Crier told me, but record rainfall precipitated high water all winter with floods in the spring, as new records for rainfall were set, so he couldn’t get out in his boat.
“Just goes to show you,” I intoned, “You can’t count on anything when it comes to forecasting. Why, I heard that the Federal government has a special committee that convenes to tell us when we are in or out of financial recession." )
“Is that right? “He asked as he exhaled some alcoholic breath that caused me to move the candle that illuminated our table, in case he ignited. “How do they do that?”
“Beats me,” I said, scratching my head for emphasis. “I guess they hibernate in that same hole as Punxsutawney Phil and don’t come out until the guys that meet under that old tree on Wall Street in New York City, to invest in companies, pick the magic number.”
I told him that the country seems to be doing okay as more pleasant weather arrives. Shoppers were back and the Merchant has been bragging about how increasing sales for the past three months has wiped out his thin inventory. The Farmer got his seed in already thanks to the early Spring and he is talking about record crops this year. It seems he has found some export markets and he is thinking about turning over some new acreage. This of course is good news for the Cooper as the need for his barrels has increased.
“But I heard that things in Europe were somewhat dicey," he countered.
“Old stuff.” I replied. “You need to get better data sources. You’re beginning to sound like that government committee who just peeked out of their hole and still see clouds. Maybe you need a better news source."
“But I get my news from travelers who post notes on the bulletin board in front of the town hall across the river where the stage stops. The people who leave these seem to have some interesting thoughts.”
“Ah, but do they sign them? And, if they do, what are their credentials and do they have an agenda?” I posited.
“Can’t say, but they seem to be in the know.” he apologized.
“There you go,” I said. “And this is what you have been broadcasting?”
Plunking down a few coins for the cider I left him scratching his head in a quandary as I head out for an afternoon tea party.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Markets are looking better
Markets are looking better
It must be a sign of the early Spring we are experiencing here in the Northeast: flowers are popping up way ahead of schedule, and my telephone is ringing with requests for an update on the January forecast for the industrial laser market.
I have just finished preparing a report I will deliver at the AKL ’10 Technology Business Day in Aachen next month (http://www.optoiq.com/index/photonics-technologies-applications/lfw-display/lfw-article-display/371996/articles/laser-focus-world/industry-news-2/2009/12/eli-innovation-award-2010-deadline-imminent.html) so I have been reviewing my numbers and find they are pretty much as expected (http://www.optoiq.com/index/lasers-for-manufacturing/display/ils-article-display/6731610609/articles/industrial-laser-solutions/volume-250/issue-10/features/the-worst_is_over.html). I was on target with growth in the energy, aerospace, semiconductor, microelectronics, and medical devices sectors. And, so far I've been correct on the timing stretch for the fabricated metal products market (second half) and automotive prospects (next year). So my first quarter grade rates an A.
I am concerned about disturbing news for Germany, as reported by Laura Stevens in the Wall Street Journal (http://on.wsj.com/c7DaDj) about German corporate failures. In addition, I have been receiving reports from other sources that all is not well with the Mittelstand (small and medium companies). These companies are the backbone of Germany’s export economy and also happen to be big-time users of industrial lasers, thanks to government subsidies to promote laser technology in the 1990s.
Germany is the engine that pumps the European economy, and its industrial laser products dominate certain markets. It’s a little early to speculate on the impact of an anticipated record number of bankruptcies, but the experts are projecting a sharp decline in the country's GNP. Will this disrupt my forecasts? Yes and no. I had planned on a slow recovery in Germany with probable help from expanding markets for its products in some of the other EU countries. But the depth of the problem with the Mittelstand may act to stultify my forecast to a greater degree.
On the other hand, China keeps increasing the demand for imported industrial lasers and, surprisingly, the aforementioned market sectors in the U.S. are stirring some unexpected growth with domestic suppliers. These may act to offset some of the German decline, and it still looks as though the 5% growth target is achievable.
In June I will be presenting a world view of the markets in a plenary session in celebration of the 50th anniversary of the laser to be given at the Stuttgart Laser Days. Perhaps I will have a better perspective at that time.
It must be a sign of the early Spring we are experiencing here in the Northeast: flowers are popping up way ahead of schedule, and my telephone is ringing with requests for an update on the January forecast for the industrial laser market.
I have just finished preparing a report I will deliver at the AKL ’10 Technology Business Day in Aachen next month (http://www.optoiq.com/index/photonics-technologies-applications/lfw-display/lfw-article-display/371996/articles/laser-focus-world/industry-news-2/2009/12/eli-innovation-award-2010-deadline-imminent.html) so I have been reviewing my numbers and find they are pretty much as expected (http://www.optoiq.com/index/lasers-for-manufacturing/display/ils-article-display/6731610609/articles/industrial-laser-solutions/volume-250/issue-10/features/the-worst_is_over.html). I was on target with growth in the energy, aerospace, semiconductor, microelectronics, and medical devices sectors. And, so far I've been correct on the timing stretch for the fabricated metal products market (second half) and automotive prospects (next year). So my first quarter grade rates an A.
I am concerned about disturbing news for Germany, as reported by Laura Stevens in the Wall Street Journal (http://on.wsj.com/c7DaDj) about German corporate failures. In addition, I have been receiving reports from other sources that all is not well with the Mittelstand (small and medium companies). These companies are the backbone of Germany’s export economy and also happen to be big-time users of industrial lasers, thanks to government subsidies to promote laser technology in the 1990s.
Germany is the engine that pumps the European economy, and its industrial laser products dominate certain markets. It’s a little early to speculate on the impact of an anticipated record number of bankruptcies, but the experts are projecting a sharp decline in the country's GNP. Will this disrupt my forecasts? Yes and no. I had planned on a slow recovery in Germany with probable help from expanding markets for its products in some of the other EU countries. But the depth of the problem with the Mittelstand may act to stultify my forecast to a greater degree.
On the other hand, China keeps increasing the demand for imported industrial lasers and, surprisingly, the aforementioned market sectors in the U.S. are stirring some unexpected growth with domestic suppliers. These may act to offset some of the German decline, and it still looks as though the 5% growth target is achievable.
In June I will be presenting a world view of the markets in a plenary session in celebration of the 50th anniversary of the laser to be given at the Stuttgart Laser Days. Perhaps I will have a better perspective at that time.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
If this is Tuesday, it must be Belgium
Four industrial laser events are coming up in the next three months, two in Europe and two in the U.S., the first here in New England in two weeks. This event, the Symposium for Advanced Laser Applications (SALA) (www.ccat.us/sala) is, as the title implies, a two-day look at advances in industrial materials processing, with a focus on the applications that are of interest to the aerospace industry. However, the presenters are careful to advise that these applications are applicable to other industry sectors as well. One of two highlights is the first CCAT Innovation Award for Laser Applications in Manufacturing Operations, a long overdue recognition of the efforts individuals make to transition the technology into industry. The second is an Open House tour of CCAT, where SALA attendees will view five advanced laser material processing systems performing state-of-the-art applications such as laser cladding, laser drilling and laser paint stripping.
The second event chronologically is AKL’10, the International Laser Technology Congress (www.lasercongress.org) to be held in Aachen on May 5-7. This biennial event featuring more than 60 speakers has built a reputation as Germany’s leading forum for applications of laser technology in the production environment. As a presenter at the opening Technology Business Day, I can vouch for the quality of the technical presentations and the always busy technology exhibits that draw large crowds. This year the organizer, the Fraunhofer Institute for Laser Technology, celebrates its 25th Anniversary with a social celebration and tours of its facility on the last day. At a Wednesday evening banquet, the Arbeitskreis Lasertechnik AKL e.V. and the European Laser Institute will present their Innovation Award Laser Technology in a very impressive ceremony.
Later in May, the Laser Institute of America will present the Laser Additive Manufacturing (LAM) workshop in Houston on May 11-12. This is the second in the series that showcases the advances being made in this fast-growing technology. This year the feature, appropriate for the venue, will be tailoring surfaces for use in the oil, gas and energy industries. As the title indicates, this is a workshop where attendees have the opportunity to network with the speakers to learn more about LAM solutions. The highlights of LAM (www.laserinstitute.org/LAM) this year are the presentations by the always entertaining Professor Bill Steen, who will share his thoughts on the technology, and by Ingomar Kelbassa. who will describe an example of a processing application on aero-engine repairs.
And finally, if you made it this far, there is one left and that is the big one, LASYS 2010 (www.lasys-messe.de) in Stuttgart on June 8-10. A relative newcomer to the international show scene, this biennial trade fair for systems solutions in laser material processing is a one-of-a-kind event where, under one roof at the beautiful new Messe Stuttgart, legions of exhibitors, many direct competitors, will show their newest laser solutions for manufacturing operations. LASYS covers industrial lasers only and to back this up a new feature, The Solutions Centre, will be staffed by professionals ready to answer your most complex laser processing questions. Concurrent with the show are the Stuttgart Laser Technology Forum (SLT), the International Symposium on Laser Precision Microfabrication (LPM) and a short course on the Basics of Lasers and Laser Materials processing by the WLT.
If I survive all these events, there should be a resulting raft of interesting blogs.
I would be remiss if I did not mention my indebtedness to ILS Senior Editor Laureen Belleville, who is leaving for the world of biotechnology. Twenty-five years ago Laureen started her career with ILS helping me produce the first Industrial Laser Annual Handbook. Just fresh out of college she decided that technology publishing was her future and off and on over the next 20+ years, she and I worked to make ILS a leading industrial publication. Most recently, Laureen had been the driver behind our journey into the digital world and she deserves most of the credit for the ILS website and the e-newsletters. Frankly, without her, this would have been a hard trip for a dinosaur like me. So thanks, Laureen, and best of luck in your new endeavor; you will be missed.
The second event chronologically is AKL’10, the International Laser Technology Congress (www.lasercongress.org) to be held in Aachen on May 5-7. This biennial event featuring more than 60 speakers has built a reputation as Germany’s leading forum for applications of laser technology in the production environment. As a presenter at the opening Technology Business Day, I can vouch for the quality of the technical presentations and the always busy technology exhibits that draw large crowds. This year the organizer, the Fraunhofer Institute for Laser Technology, celebrates its 25th Anniversary with a social celebration and tours of its facility on the last day. At a Wednesday evening banquet, the Arbeitskreis Lasertechnik AKL e.V. and the European Laser Institute will present their Innovation Award Laser Technology in a very impressive ceremony.
Later in May, the Laser Institute of America will present the Laser Additive Manufacturing (LAM) workshop in Houston on May 11-12. This is the second in the series that showcases the advances being made in this fast-growing technology. This year the feature, appropriate for the venue, will be tailoring surfaces for use in the oil, gas and energy industries. As the title indicates, this is a workshop where attendees have the opportunity to network with the speakers to learn more about LAM solutions. The highlights of LAM (www.laserinstitute.org/LAM) this year are the presentations by the always entertaining Professor Bill Steen, who will share his thoughts on the technology, and by Ingomar Kelbassa. who will describe an example of a processing application on aero-engine repairs.
And finally, if you made it this far, there is one left and that is the big one, LASYS 2010 (www.lasys-messe.de) in Stuttgart on June 8-10. A relative newcomer to the international show scene, this biennial trade fair for systems solutions in laser material processing is a one-of-a-kind event where, under one roof at the beautiful new Messe Stuttgart, legions of exhibitors, many direct competitors, will show their newest laser solutions for manufacturing operations. LASYS covers industrial lasers only and to back this up a new feature, The Solutions Centre, will be staffed by professionals ready to answer your most complex laser processing questions. Concurrent with the show are the Stuttgart Laser Technology Forum (SLT), the International Symposium on Laser Precision Microfabrication (LPM) and a short course on the Basics of Lasers and Laser Materials processing by the WLT.
If I survive all these events, there should be a resulting raft of interesting blogs.
I would be remiss if I did not mention my indebtedness to ILS Senior Editor Laureen Belleville, who is leaving for the world of biotechnology. Twenty-five years ago Laureen started her career with ILS helping me produce the first Industrial Laser Annual Handbook. Just fresh out of college she decided that technology publishing was her future and off and on over the next 20+ years, she and I worked to make ILS a leading industrial publication. Most recently, Laureen had been the driver behind our journey into the digital world and she deserves most of the credit for the ILS website and the e-newsletters. Frankly, without her, this would have been a hard trip for a dinosaur like me. So thanks, Laureen, and best of luck in your new endeavor; you will be missed.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Change for the sake of change, or…?
News item: The U.S. army has decided to forego bayonet training in favor of alternate exercises, learned in Iraq and Afghanistan ducking rifle-mounted projectiles, that place emphasis on twisting, turning, and dodging maneuvers than in hand-to-hand contact. In a spirit of disclosure, I am a Cold War veteran (got a medal to prove it) who was obliged to take bayonet training while in an expedited basic training program. I kept trying to explain to my Drill Sargent, a combat veteran named Hartsock (really), that I, with a Class C non-combat profile and destined for the Signal Corps Electronics school, shouldn't have to undergo this strenuous exercise.
Besides, I argued, unsuccessfully, if there was one round left in my weapon I was going to fire it rather than engage in a duel of cold steel with an adversary whose bayonet was three inches longer than mine. And it turns out, as a left hander in an Army whose training manuals were written for right-handers, the exercise as taught was backwards for me. So you can see my relief that a new generation of warriors won't be saddled with this outdated training regime. Today our highly trained and well educated warriors just call down air support, no more cold steel for them.
I'm reminded of this and another Cold War anecdote as I was having dinner in Bruges, Belgium, with a diverse international group and the subject turned to the former Eastern Block, our erstwhile foes in the Cold War. I told them the story of sitting with a colleague, just days after the Wall came down and the former Soviets became our friends overnight. We were in his apartment in St. Petersburg, and after a few vodka toasts started reminiscing about us being opponents in the Cold War. I recited the bayonet training exercise story to him and, laughing, he told a very similar story about his experiences as a conscripted basic trainee who, being a graduate physicist, found it even more amusing. We laughed because within a period of a few weeks we had become friends and compatriots as opposed to the previous situation.
All of the above happened because the Bruges dinner table discussion was about economic geography. I was being mildly criticized for continued use of the term Eastern Europe as an economic entity in European laser system sales. Actually, I simply use the same designations that appear in the Europeans' analysis of the laser market there; and this term is also used by financial reporters in other publications both here in the States and abroad.
My dinner host suggested I was really referring to the rise of industrial laser activity in Central Europe, as opposed to Eastern Europe; the difference being that the former, composed of hot economies in Slovenia, Slovakia, Romanian, Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic (to name a few) are being confused with the less-than-exuberant markets in the former Soviet States, known as Eastern Europe, which includes all the ‘stans.
"Whoa," I say, "Is this a reality? Am I off-base here?" Others at the table, mostly from the American Continent, agree with me. "Yes, you are," say my European hosts. "We refer to markets here in Europe as Western, Central, and Eastern and we see vibrant action in the Central region, but not in the Eastern."
Should I be a pioneer among my fellow laser market reporters and now divide European sales into three categories that mean nothing to most readers? My hosts agreed the too-detailed division does not resonate with most of the ILS readers. I'll throw it to these readers. Would it be better to refer to the markets as EU and non-EU countries; a description favored in the offices of NATO and the EU in Brussels? This would be a harder concept to get across in Asia where these geographic and economic distinctions are too complex to define when the message is laser sales, not politics.
So I'll leave it to readers. Should I, like the U.S. Army, drop an outdated exercise and get with the real world today or is the status quo OK for now? Frankly, divining the economic health of markets in three European entities, when I can barely get cooperation on financial statistics from just two now, will be a difficult task. But then I learned how to balance a bayoneted rifle under my right forearm, contrary too what my brain was wired for, so I should be able to adapt.
Besides, I argued, unsuccessfully, if there was one round left in my weapon I was going to fire it rather than engage in a duel of cold steel with an adversary whose bayonet was three inches longer than mine. And it turns out, as a left hander in an Army whose training manuals were written for right-handers, the exercise as taught was backwards for me. So you can see my relief that a new generation of warriors won't be saddled with this outdated training regime. Today our highly trained and well educated warriors just call down air support, no more cold steel for them.
I'm reminded of this and another Cold War anecdote as I was having dinner in Bruges, Belgium, with a diverse international group and the subject turned to the former Eastern Block, our erstwhile foes in the Cold War. I told them the story of sitting with a colleague, just days after the Wall came down and the former Soviets became our friends overnight. We were in his apartment in St. Petersburg, and after a few vodka toasts started reminiscing about us being opponents in the Cold War. I recited the bayonet training exercise story to him and, laughing, he told a very similar story about his experiences as a conscripted basic trainee who, being a graduate physicist, found it even more amusing. We laughed because within a period of a few weeks we had become friends and compatriots as opposed to the previous situation.
All of the above happened because the Bruges dinner table discussion was about economic geography. I was being mildly criticized for continued use of the term Eastern Europe as an economic entity in European laser system sales. Actually, I simply use the same designations that appear in the Europeans' analysis of the laser market there; and this term is also used by financial reporters in other publications both here in the States and abroad.
My dinner host suggested I was really referring to the rise of industrial laser activity in Central Europe, as opposed to Eastern Europe; the difference being that the former, composed of hot economies in Slovenia, Slovakia, Romanian, Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic (to name a few) are being confused with the less-than-exuberant markets in the former Soviet States, known as Eastern Europe, which includes all the ‘stans.
"Whoa," I say, "Is this a reality? Am I off-base here?" Others at the table, mostly from the American Continent, agree with me. "Yes, you are," say my European hosts. "We refer to markets here in Europe as Western, Central, and Eastern and we see vibrant action in the Central region, but not in the Eastern."
Should I be a pioneer among my fellow laser market reporters and now divide European sales into three categories that mean nothing to most readers? My hosts agreed the too-detailed division does not resonate with most of the ILS readers. I'll throw it to these readers. Would it be better to refer to the markets as EU and non-EU countries; a description favored in the offices of NATO and the EU in Brussels? This would be a harder concept to get across in Asia where these geographic and economic distinctions are too complex to define when the message is laser sales, not politics.
So I'll leave it to readers. Should I, like the U.S. Army, drop an outdated exercise and get with the real world today or is the status quo OK for now? Frankly, divining the economic health of markets in three European entities, when I can barely get cooperation on financial statistics from just two now, will be a difficult task. But then I learned how to balance a bayoneted rifle under my right forearm, contrary too what my brain was wired for, so I should be able to adapt.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Recovery is on track, sort-of
The subjects today are “jobless recovery” and “productivity,” both interrelated so I will treat them as one. The financial media has seized on the former in an attempt to explain why the overall economic news is positive but the not-so-positive news on the unemployment front continues week after week. And more astute observers looking for causes have latched onto the recent productivity increases as one culprit.
There may be some truth in this as we close out the first quarter of 2010 and the time for retrospective analysis is upon us. From what I have read, heard, and experienced so far this year, the picture for manufacturing, globally, is about what was forecast in January; slow but positive growth in the manufacturing sector and caution on the part of the manufacturers in regard to company expansion and capital spending. In January I was told by a number of equipment suppliers and their customers that the first quarter would be the bellwether and that a “wait and see” attitude before committing to expansion would be the prudent thing to do. And the manufacturers could afford to do this as they were running lean and able to handle increasing business from their customers with the status-quo. All of this understandable and commendable.
But as the quarter closes we should have started to hear comments from the capital equipment suppliers that their markets were beginning to stir. And it is happening, for industrial lasers in market sectors that were identified as potential drivers back in January—medical devices, energy, and semiconductors. But the fabricated metal products sector still seems frozen, about what was expected with that industry talking about a late-first-half recovery beginning.
News of companies hiring temporary workers and others adding part-time help is often heard today. Becoming more common is the talk, and action thereof, about automation; taking us back to the jobless recovery and productivity issues. Investing in automation for manufacturing operations is expensive but not as expensive as the recurring costs of salaries and benefits. I have spoken to manufacturers who, having run lean for more than a year, are reassessing their production operations as they gear up for business growth and asking the hard questions about restaffing. Many of these companies are looking hard at what they want to be as their businesses normalize to pre-recession levels.
Back in the summer of 2009 we heard a lot about companies using the recession as a time to look to innovations. It may turn out that innovation is a cover word for automation that will lead to productivity and profit enhancement. No mention of employment here.
I’ve just returned from a trip to Europe where the same prospects and solutions are under consideration in manufacturing, both in the established industrialized West and the burgeoning states of Central Europe. Admittedly there are certain restrictive government polices that acted as a deterrent to employment reductions and consequently inhibit to a degree automated solutions to productivity increases, but the issue is a factor and automation is a well used word today.
I had the privilege of visiting two fabricated metal product producers in two regions in Belgium. One, a manufacturer of air handling equipment, has automated his turret punching systems with robot load/unload automation that not only allows for unattended and more productive operations but in the doing also improves the quality of the parts produced on the systems. As he said, “In order to compete against China (his main competitor) he must keep overhead costs down.” If he adds non-automated equipment (needing more people) it will take him 5 years to get his investment back, with automation it is 3 years.
The other, an international maker of industrial paint booths, has added a laser cutting system that uses an automated shuttle system to load/unload sheet metal and cut components, again adding the advantage of “lights-out” operation. In fact, at this company the only staffed work shift was leaving the plant at 4 p.m. and the lights were being turned off, and yet the laser cutter was still spitting out cut parts and the shuttle was feeding more sheets and shifting completed work. And yet no mention of this was made by the company owner who didn't even call this to my attention as I was exiting the now abandoned shop floor.
Both of these represent recent additions and investment made as the recovery begins, in automation, not in employment, as both company owners told me they do not have plans to add people. Just a small example of what I think may be support for the “jobless recovery” idea; and certainly examples of productivity enhancement through automation.
There may be some truth in this as we close out the first quarter of 2010 and the time for retrospective analysis is upon us. From what I have read, heard, and experienced so far this year, the picture for manufacturing, globally, is about what was forecast in January; slow but positive growth in the manufacturing sector and caution on the part of the manufacturers in regard to company expansion and capital spending. In January I was told by a number of equipment suppliers and their customers that the first quarter would be the bellwether and that a “wait and see” attitude before committing to expansion would be the prudent thing to do. And the manufacturers could afford to do this as they were running lean and able to handle increasing business from their customers with the status-quo. All of this understandable and commendable.
But as the quarter closes we should have started to hear comments from the capital equipment suppliers that their markets were beginning to stir. And it is happening, for industrial lasers in market sectors that were identified as potential drivers back in January—medical devices, energy, and semiconductors. But the fabricated metal products sector still seems frozen, about what was expected with that industry talking about a late-first-half recovery beginning.
News of companies hiring temporary workers and others adding part-time help is often heard today. Becoming more common is the talk, and action thereof, about automation; taking us back to the jobless recovery and productivity issues. Investing in automation for manufacturing operations is expensive but not as expensive as the recurring costs of salaries and benefits. I have spoken to manufacturers who, having run lean for more than a year, are reassessing their production operations as they gear up for business growth and asking the hard questions about restaffing. Many of these companies are looking hard at what they want to be as their businesses normalize to pre-recession levels.
Back in the summer of 2009 we heard a lot about companies using the recession as a time to look to innovations. It may turn out that innovation is a cover word for automation that will lead to productivity and profit enhancement. No mention of employment here.
I’ve just returned from a trip to Europe where the same prospects and solutions are under consideration in manufacturing, both in the established industrialized West and the burgeoning states of Central Europe. Admittedly there are certain restrictive government polices that acted as a deterrent to employment reductions and consequently inhibit to a degree automated solutions to productivity increases, but the issue is a factor and automation is a well used word today.
I had the privilege of visiting two fabricated metal product producers in two regions in Belgium. One, a manufacturer of air handling equipment, has automated his turret punching systems with robot load/unload automation that not only allows for unattended and more productive operations but in the doing also improves the quality of the parts produced on the systems. As he said, “In order to compete against China (his main competitor) he must keep overhead costs down.” If he adds non-automated equipment (needing more people) it will take him 5 years to get his investment back, with automation it is 3 years.
The other, an international maker of industrial paint booths, has added a laser cutting system that uses an automated shuttle system to load/unload sheet metal and cut components, again adding the advantage of “lights-out” operation. In fact, at this company the only staffed work shift was leaving the plant at 4 p.m. and the lights were being turned off, and yet the laser cutter was still spitting out cut parts and the shuttle was feeding more sheets and shifting completed work. And yet no mention of this was made by the company owner who didn't even call this to my attention as I was exiting the now abandoned shop floor.
Both of these represent recent additions and investment made as the recovery begins, in automation, not in employment, as both company owners told me they do not have plans to add people. Just a small example of what I think may be support for the “jobless recovery” idea; and certainly examples of productivity enhancement through automation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)