Keeping important technologies under British (and Western in general) control

Exactly. ISO9001 simply allows you to define the boxes that are to be ticked. It guarantees nothing.
Your ISO9001 can be completely fictitious just like the stamps and labels that say your product meets all required safety standards and approvals. If you're concerned that someone might check, just use another company's name on your product.

If you're going to sell substandard products there's no reason to hold back in terms of what you print on the outside of the box.
 

Yokel

LE
Your ISO9001 can be completely fictitious just like the stamps and labels that say your product meets all required safety standards and approvals. If you're concerned that someone might check, just use another company's name on your product.

If you're going to sell substandard products there's no reason to hold back in terms of what you print on the outside of the box.

Surely that is the point of being accountable to the customer (in terms of making components to a testable specification) or external organisations such as the Society of Automotive Engineers or the British Standards Institution?

Also UKAS: UKAS is the National Accreditation Body for the United Kingdom. We are appointed by government, to assess and accredit organisations that provide services including certification, testing, inspection and calibration.

A lot of companies put their Quality policy on there website - and it will include things such as calibration of test equipment and checks on material.
 
Surely that is the point of being accountable to the customer (in terms of making components to a testable specification) or external organisations such as the Society of Automotive Engineers or the British Standards Institution?

Also UKAS: UKAS is the National Accreditation Body for the United Kingdom. We are appointed by government, to assess and accredit organisations that provide services including certification, testing, inspection and calibration.

A lot of companies put their Quality policy on there website - and it will include things such as calibration of test equipment and checks on material.
The problem arises when the person in the customer's purchasing department cares about price above all else.

If you are dealing with reputable companies, and those companies in turn are also dealing with reputable companies (all the way down the line), then accreditation can work.

However, when all you care about is getting the cheapest price on EBay then you will end up with brake pads made out of compress sawdust that are sold by company in Florida which consists entirely of some guy working out of his home office who has a Rolodex of dodgy parts manufacturers in Mexico. If you shut his company down he'll simply pop up again a few months later under a new company name. He can write nice looking quality policies on his web site too, or even better, just copy someone else's off theirs.

I don't see accreditation as being a substitute for knowing your suppliers. It can be a useful supplement to direct knowledge, but it's not enough on its own. None the less, for many companies it's all they look for.
 

Yokel

LE
Good luck with making the economics work, in the BBC today:

EU seeks to supercharge computer chip production

Europe used to have a thriving chip-making industry.

But while the Netherlands is still home to NXP Semiconductors, and Germany is the base of Infineon Technologies, they and others have outsourced much of their production.

Setting up cutting-edge fabrication plants is a hugely expensive business.

A large plant can cost up to $20bn (£14.3bn) to build and kit out, according to a report by the US's Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) last year. And it can take many years before the factories make a profit.


Ever wondered why so much manufacturing has moved eastwards? Something to do with Western short term monetarism perhaps?
 
Last edited:
Something to do with Western short term monetarism perhaps?
I'm not sure how a school of economic thought which emphasises the role of governments in controlling the amount of money in circulation would have an impact on the global shift in manufacturing eastward.
 

Yokel

LE
I'm not sure how a school of economic thought which emphasises the role of governments in controlling the amount of money in circulation would have an impact on the global shift in manufacturing eastward.

The Government controls the amount of money in circulation but little else. Companies that provide quick rewards for investors get rewarded by the money market, at the expense of ones making long term investments in things like plant and R&D.

I think that there is a cultural thing too - the culture of the West has been corrupted by the fetish for short term rewards.
 
The Government controls the amount of money in circulation but little else. Companies that provide quick rewards for investors get rewarded by the money market, at the expense of ones making long term investments in things like plant and R&D.

I think that there is a cultural thing too - the culture of the West has been corrupted by the fetish for short term rewards.
That's not monetarism, though.

I would entirely agree about the short termism but that's an inbuilt feature of motivating people with personal gain alone.
 

Yokel

LE
That's not monetarism, though.

I would entirely agree about the short termism but that's an inbuilt feature of motivating people with personal gain alone.

Yes and no - the sole focus on GDP and the short term encouraged short term behaviours and enterprises that had the potential to produce short term rewards, as opposed to investment in facilities and technology that is likely to take time to pay off.
 
Good luck with making the economics work, in the BBC today:

EU seeks to supercharge computer chip production

Europe used to have a thriving chip-making industry.

But while the Netherlands is still home to NXP Semiconductors, and Germany is the base of Infineon Technologies, they and others have outsourced much of their production.

Setting up cutting-edge fabrication plants is a hugely expensive business.

A large plant can cost up to $20bn (£14.3bn) to build and kit out, according to a report by the US's Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) last year. And it can take many years before the factories make a profit.


Ever wondered why so much manufacturing has moved eastwards? Something to do with Western short term monetarism perhaps?
I can't comment on the Taiwan economy in general, but South Korea until recently had a centrally planned economy with cheap capital being directed towards industries selected by the government. Capital intensive industries were given very cheap access to funds, and chip production is one of the most capital intensive industries there is.

The South Korean government have been cutting back on this sort of thing more recently, but their economy was far from being a free market.

In Taiwan, TSMC are the big one and was founded as a joint venture between the Taiwan government and Phillips. It was set up by a man who was invited to Taiwan for the purpose.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. (TSMC) was formed in 1987 as a joint venture between the Taiwan government, which wanted to promote the development of the island's semiconductor industry, and Philips Electronics NV of The Netherlands. The company was set up by Morris Chang, who had been invited by the Taiwan government in 1985 to come to the island and help grow its semiconductor industry. Chang was born in China and educated at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Stanford, where he earned a doctorate in electrical engineering. He was the president of General Instrument Corp. when he left to go to Taiwan.

When TSMC was founded in 1987, it was a major catalyst in transforming Taiwan's semiconductor industry. It provided state-of-the-art manufacturing processes that complemented Taiwan's strength in chip design. Between 1987 and 1992 TSMC gradually added to its foundry capacity by vertically integrating into related disciplines, including wafer sort testing in 1988, mask-making in 1990, and design services utilizing technology licensed from VLSI Technology in 1991. It also improved its process technology. After starting as a six-inch, 2-micron wafer-processing fabrication facility, or fab, it broke the 1-micron barrier in 1991.

TSMC originally was intended to service Taiwan's design houses, which were noted for their chip designs but did not want to get involved in manufacturing processes. TSMC, however, soon became an internationally oriented, profit-driven organization that supported the development of fabless semiconductor companies, that is, that did not own their own manufacturing facilities. Fabless semiconductor companies were strong on design, but they could not afford the large investment required to build their own fabrication facilities.

By 1992 TSMC was rated as the world's top silicon foundry, producing chips for other companies. TSMC employed 250 process engineers and was on the cutting edge of process technology. TSMC accounted for 80 percent of Taiwan's production of SRAM and also produced a variety of other semiconductor chips, including DRAM and EPROM. Revenue for 1992 was around $245 million.

The semi-conductor industry in the Far East is mainly a product of state planning with the intention of gaining a dominating position in a strategic industry.
 

Yokel

LE
Long story short. Russia has purchased the Factory that build and maintain the ships engines for the Norwegian Coastguard and other bits bobs for the Norwegian Navy. Also has a major contract with the U.S Navy.

What is the point of a defense, if Russia is to be responsible for maintenance?
Russias biggest producer of warships, will work together with Bergen Engines.
Sorry, most links are behind a pay wall. No, I am not translating. :)

E24.no
BT.no

My first thought on this was "Who the fook thought this was a good idea?"
My second thought was "WHO THE FOOK THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA, and why are they not answering some very demanding questions in front of the Norwegian government?"
My Third thought was " Politicians are the biggest threat too national security bar none!" *******!

SK

The sale has been stopped

OSLO/LONDON, March 9 (Reuters) – Norway has suspended a planned asset sale by engine maker Rolls-Royce Holdings Plc to a Russian-controlled company as it assesses the security implications for the country’s navy, the justice ministry said on Tuesday.

Norway’s NSM security agency is assessing the 150 million-euro ($178 million) sale of Bergen Engines to a company controlled by Russia’s TMH Group, the ministry said.

Britain’s Rolls-Royce announced the planned sale on Feb. 4 as part of a disposal plan aimed at helping the maker of engines for aircraft and ships survive the pandemic.

Based in the city of Bergen on Norway’s west coast, Bergen Engines is, among other things, a supplier to NATO member Norway’s navy which is headquartered nearby.

“There is significant uncertainty in relation to national security interests, and this uncertainty must be dealt with,” Justice Minister Monica Maeland told a news conference, while adding the sale must be put on hold for the time being.

“We don’t know which conclusion we will draw,” she said.

Any ongoing due diligence linked to the sale must also be put on hold as long as the review is ongoing, the ministry added.

Norway in 2019 introduced a new security law, strengthening the government’s ability to impose conditions or outright block foreign acquisitions when vital national interests are at stake.

A spokesman for Rolls-Royce said it had alerted the government in the proper way before announcing the sale of Bergen Engines.

“We understand, however, that the Norwegian Government now wishes to further investigate the deal and Rolls-Royce will co-operate in any way we can with that review. As requested, we have paused the sales process,” the spokesman said.
 

hoofie

Clanker
Hyundai built a semiconductor plant in Dunfermline around 1997 with a shit-ton of public money, including £20million alone for water supply. It was later purchased by Motorola (who became Freescale) who eventually sold it off in 2010 for development as an industrial estate. It lay empty for the entire 13 years of its existence.
Other semiconductor manufacturers in Scotland were National Semiconductor in Greenock (closed), Motorola/ Freescale in East Kilbride (no longer manufacturing) and a handful of other smaller places which have also mostly gone. As far as I know, Semefab are the only ones left.
The National Semi plant on the hill in Greenock is still there but under different ownership. When I worked there as a grad engineer in the mid-80s US management was trying hard to ship manufacturing to Asia ( rather than just packaging) due to cheap labour costs. The US killed a lot of it's capability just to save money and now the chickens are coming back.

A semi conductor fab is a stunningly expensive factory to build as all the equipment is extremely specialized and comes from only a few companies plus it takes a very long time to commission and get up to speed.
 
The UK are intervening in the sale of ARM to Nvidia on "national security" grounds.
UK invokes national security to investigate Nvidia's ARM deal

Digital minister Oliver Dowden said he had issued a so-called intervention notice over the sale of ARM by Japan's SoftBank (9984.T) to Nvidia.

"As a next step and to help me gather the relevant information, the UK's independent competition authority will now prepare a report on the implications of the transaction, which will help inform any further decisions," he said.
 
Readers of this thread may have noted or may find this speech interesting


I have seen commentary elsewhere that suggests the decisions which need to be made now, where made 20 years ago and we are reaping the fruit of our unwillingness to manufcature domestically now.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Readers of this thread may have noted or may find this speech interesting


I have seen commentary elsewhere that suggests the decisions which need to be made now, where made 20 years ago and we are reaping the fruit of our unwillingness to manufcature domestically now.
Link, please?
 
Readers of this thread may have noted or may find this speech interesting


I have seen commentary elsewhere that suggests the decisions which need to be made now, where made 20 years ago and we are reaping the fruit of our unwillingness to manufcature domestically now.
Perhaps this GCHQ chief could give his desired policy a name to make it more popular. Something like say Juche might be appropriate.

It isn't the 19th century any more. It isn't even the 20th century. It's the 21st. Education, economic development, and technology are spreading world-wide. The sources of new technology will be world-wide. It's not the 1950s any more and the days when all things new flowed from a handful of Western countries and remained in their control are long over. Some people apparently have difficulty coming to grips with this. Either we remain open to trade and technology from all over the world, or we'll fall further and further behind.

With respect to 5G, the idea of every country having their own national champion is a very Soviet solution, and I seem to remember most Soviet consumer kit to be pretty crap.

The realistic solution would be one based on open source software and commodity hardware. At least one UK carrier is already deploying a partially open source 5G network in low density applications.

If the UK government genuinely want sovereignty and security in telecommunications, the realistic answer is to promote this sort of solution. Development can be funded directly by tax grants, or via mandatory contributions by carriers. It should be open to contributions from everyone everywhere, including China. It should be hosted in a neutral country so that nobody gets ideas of playing "sanctions" games. Each country can have it implemented by their own companies under their own control. It's one global standard, open to all, and nobody has to "trust" anyone else because it is all developed in the open.

The open source approach has largely taken over all of the critical functions in the IT market. There's no reason why it can't work in the communications field as well.
 

Latest Threads

Top