DEME(A) Engineering standards?

Discussion in 'REME' started by ducebigalo, Oct 1, 2003.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Is this a new concept or is some-one re-inventing the wheel. Do we not adhere to strict engineering regulations anyhow?

    I am in front of the wall blindfolded..............shoot away!!
     
  2. Of course we do and any new standards will be regarded with just as much disdain as the old ones. How long before the Brig passes his train set on and a new pamphlet is published?
     
  3. I think that you're right. It is re-inventing he wheel. But, it's a wheel that needed re-inventing. At least these standards are based on engineering and not TQ management.

    I know a lot of the stuff is not new, it's what we do anyway. The main thing is that now it's in black & white we can use it to justify demands for better kit, better tools, better training even!

    The best thing I've seen lately though is the AESP on Eqpt Care (LUEMS). At last DEME(A) has given us a big stick to shove up the users arrse when he wants us to change his light bulbs or top up his oil for him.
     
  4. It's really sickening that this latest "cunning plan" comes from the bloke who was running the training school when training cut backs whittled vast amounts of basic engineering training (turning,blacksmithing etc) was implemented.
     
  5. OK, having done the old Engineering Standards course type thingy, I can see the logic behind it all. Basically, it is aimed at Operational Engineering, that is, putting a Operational Focus back on to what we do, rather than the years of lovely management speak and related twaddle that we got so good at, while the rest of the field army looked on and laughed at us!

    DEME(A) Engineering Standards (or DES) is quite a workable document, that encompasses all TQ, Techeval, and the old Self Assessment and a few other things I can't remember because I paid lip service to them. I admit it will take some time to implement because of the op tour cycle of my particular outfit, but hopefully, we will have it all up and running soon.

    For those of you that are interested, I will be putting out the respective DES documents that we will do, once I get around to it (in the next couple of months). Hopefully, that will help. If anyone is particularily bogged down by DES, then contact me and I will try to shine some light on it for you!

    As for the comments on our Brig - well, its nice to see someone who is determined to make some of the harder decisions rather than just sitting on it and having lots of lovely dinners in West Court.
     
  6. A bit late to the thread I know, but you do realise DES is just a plagarism of the civvi ISO 9001. I'm betting it won't be long until we see a set of environmental standards, to make our workshops more environmentally friendly/safer, a rehash of ISO 14001....
     
  7. It is not reinventing the wheel most people who were managing their soldiers properly were probably doing something along similar lines but less formalised. Now as a guy gets posted his record goes with him so to his new boss he is not completely an unknown quantity.

    It is a lot of work initially but I think it will pay dividends once it is in full swing across the Corps


    Dave
     
  8. Wait out for DES 2, the REC has been distilled quite a lot and is more likely to be used - why were we expected to record currency on generic kit anyway?

    Do we reaally need to know that Sgt Bloggs is capable of replacing the brake pads on a TUM (HS)?

    DES on the whole seems prety good, certainly a lot less bollocks than the first stab at TQ all those years ago.
     
  9. I'm all for RECs for Junior Ranks, it is a fair, equal system that recognises the hard workers and rewards them (in the case of Class 3-2). It also ensures (in principle at least) that soldiers posted in to new units do not have to waste the first six months of their posting getting known and trusted by their new bosses.

    What would be a good idea however would be a means of recognising Competency of OCs and EME, EMELTs. I wonder how quickly such a suggestion would be acted upon by DEME(A) if we were asking them to show us how much Engineering Management Competency our gaffers had?

    We all know that the majority of OCs, EMEs are great, but why is it that the Stiffers amongst them get to become highly regarded REME Officers?

    Lets get their Competency plastered up on Workshop Noticeboards, then we will finally see who is really running Wksps and LADs, them or the Tiffies!

    We could call them REMEs (Record of Engineering Management Epitaphs?)

    Thoughts?
     
  10. You are fecking bonkers mate!
    But i like the idea ha ha
     
  11. what happened to just fixing things ?
     
  12. "Ug, ug, knuckle scrape, ug. Me um big VM, need 'ammer to hit it wiv." Don't think too hard dood eh?