archive-org.com » ORG » C » COMPUTINGCASES.ORG

Total: 197

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • Ethical Dissent and Whistleblowing
    is behaving unethically In these pages we will provide you with some options and some advice You might first try to change things from within your organization and if that does not work and the stakes seem important enough you might decide to go public with your allegations or blow the whistle Ethical Dissent The IEEE has guidelines for ethical dissent within an organization We help unpack these guidelines in

    Original URL path: http://computingcases.org/case_materials/hughes/support_docs/whistleblowing/whistleblowing_contents.html (2016-04-30)
    Open archived version from archive


  • The Chips in Use
    consequences could be dire indeed To give a more specific example of this the AMRAAM 15 will be described in terms of its history capabilities relation to the hybrid microcircuit and the potential effect a faulty chip might have on it The AMRAAM and potential effects of chip failure The Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile AMRAAM development program started in 1975 28 In February 1979 the AMRAAM program completed its conceptual phase The United States Air Force USAF selected two companies as competing contractors to continue to develop the AMRAAM Hughes Aircraft Co and Raytheon Co Raytheon Thirty three months later in December 1981 both companies successfully demonstrated the effectiveness of their prototypes The AMRAAM was designed to outpace its predecessor the AIM 7 Sparrow by having higher speed greater range increased maneuverability better resistance to electronic counter measures an active terminal radar seeker and improved reliability and maintainability 28 American was selected as the full scale developer Test missiles were launched sometime after full scale development was complete and kills in Operation Southern Watch and Bosnia proved the AMRAAM s capability 29 The AMRAAM entered service in 1991 after it was delayed by development problems The AMRAAM is a lethal missile that can be launched from the USAF s F 15 Figure 1 the Navy s F 14 Germany s F 4 Britain s Sea Harrier and other aircraft from over seas Allied forces 3 65 meters in length and weighing 157 kg before launch the AMRAAM carries a 22 kg high explosive hollow charge blast effect warhead The blast effect warhead does not explode upon impact with its target instead when the missile senses it is within lethal range it self detonates Even more it is a directed fragmentation warhead filled with 198 separate rod shaped projectiles It is reported that the proximity system can sense which side of the missile the target is on and direct the blast projectiles towards the target rather than being distributed in an even circular pattern 28 The AMRAAM can travel at super sonic speeds and it can fly in some cases up to 40 miles to its target 29 Most importantly though the AMRAAM has a built in radar system so the pilot of the F 15 or F 14 does not need to be an active participant in its guidance Instead they can concentrate on more important maneuvers like evading enemy fire After leaving the range of the plane s guiding radar and once it is within range of the enemy plane it goes into autonomous mode This self guidance system works using a technique called Semi Active Radar Homing SARH Pulses of radar signal are sent out of the missile s head instead of a continuous stream of radar so the target cannot lock on to the missile s signal and administer counter measures The missile s seeking system follows the target designated by a radar lock from the warplane and then it follows its own radar

    Original URL path: http://computingcases.org/case_materials/hughes/support_docs/hughes_case_narr/the_chips_in_use.html (2016-04-30)
    Open archived version from archive

  • The Test
    minimum temperatures and time conditions that hybrid microcircuits can be subjected to They are all equivalent to one another but vary in length and intensity Three examples of valid conditions are 100 degrees C for 1 000 hours 160 degrees C for 16 hours or 200 degrees C for 6 hours End point measurements are then run on the hybrids after they have been removed from the heating apparatus within 96 hours Temperature Cycle Method 1010 This test is conducted to determine the resistance of a part to extremes of high and low temperatures and to the effect of alternate exposures to these extremes The hybrids are cycled between two extremes in temperature One cycle starts when a hybrid is subjected to 65 degree C temperature between 10 and 15 minutes Then the hybrid is transferred in less than a minute to a temperature of 150 degrees C for 10 to 15 minutes The transfer time remains less than a minute when it completes the hot section and is returned to the cold section This one cycle is repeated a minimum of 10 times If the number of interruptions failure in machinery failure to transfer the hybrid between cycles in less than a minute etc exceed 10 of the total number of cycles run the test must be completely restarted Failure of end point measurements evidence or damage to the case leads seals or illegible markings shall be considered a failure Constant Acceleration Method 2001 This test is used to determine the effects of constant acceleration on microelectronic devices It is an acceleration test designed to indicate types of structural and mechanical weakness not necessarily detected in shock and vibration tests It may be used as a high stress test to determine the mechanical limits of the package internal metallization and lead system die or substrate attachment and other elements of the microelectronic device The hybrid is oriented respectively at X1 X2 Y1 Y2 Z1 and Z2 as if on a 3 dimensional plane For each orientation it is spun around in a centrifuge machine for 1 minute at 30 000 gravity units g s Mechanical Shock Method 2002 The shock test is intended to determine the suitability of the devices for use in electronic equipment which may be subjected to moderately severe shocks as a result of suddenly applied forces or abrupt changes in motion produced by rough handling transportation or field operation Shocks of this type may disturb operating characteristics of cause damage similar to that resulting from excessive vibration particularly if the shock pulses are repetitive The hybrid subjected to 5 shock pulses at a 1 500 g level lasting 5 ms each This procedure is repeated in the X1 X2 Y1 Y2 Z1 and Z2 orientations After subjection to the test failure of any specified measurements or examination evidence of defects or damage to the case leads or seals or illegible markings shall be considered a failure P I N D Test Method 2020 The purpose

    Original URL path: http://computingcases.org/case_materials/hughes/support_docs/hughes_case_narr/the_tests.html (2016-04-30)
    Open archived version from archive

  • The Lisa Lightner Incident
    could seep in over time and damage the chip She came to Goodearl for advice Should she do what LaRue said and pass a chip she knew was a leaker Goodearl suggested they take the chip together to the Quality Assurance people and tell them the story Quality Assurance QA was the group whose job was to oversee the manufacture and testing of the chips They had the authority to make this decision Goodearl knew one of the people in QA Ruth Ibarra After consulting with Ibarra Goodearl and Lightner decided to keep the chip for the moment and make an appointment with Karl Reismueller the head of the entire Division of Microelectronics They were not successful and were told they would need to go through channels They did get a meeting with Richard Himmel the manager of the Microelectronics Circuit Product Line Lightner was afraid for her job because LaRue had told her she would lose it if she disobeyed him Himmel assured her that her job was safe and told her she should try to work with LaRue Still he said she was not required to pass parts that she knew did not pass the tests Lightner was somewhat calmed by this conversation but Goodearl s life got worse rapidly Goodearl got a call less than an hour later from a very upset manager Frank Saia Saia was the direct supervisor for LaRue and thus also Goodearl s supervisor Saia was known for his temper and displays of anger and after letting her know how unhappy he was he demanded to know who the damn squealer was out there If I don t hear from you by 4 o clock on this you re fired Just before she took that call she has walked by Saia s office

    Original URL path: http://computingcases.org/case_materials/hughes/support_docs/hughes_case_narr/lightner_incident.html (2016-04-30)
    Open archived version from archive

  • The Shirley Reddick Incident
    questioning But things were not over yet Later that day she received a phone call from Jim Temple one of her superiors telling here to come to his office Temple informed her in no uncertain terms that she needed to back down You are doing it again You are not part of the team running to Quality with every little problem Goodearl insisted she did not run to Quality but that Quality came to her with the concern Temple was unmoved Shape up and be part of the team if you want your job At this point Goodearl decided to talk with the personnel office to inquire about making a harassment complaint regarding the threats of firing After her meeting there she saw the person immediately walk down the hall to Frank Saia s office the head of the entire product line on which she worked She then got a call to come to Frank Saia s office She had had a run in with Saia in the earlier incident so as she went to the meeting she was nervous Saia ask her to sit down and then erupted throwing his glasses across the room in her direction If you ever do anything like that again I will fire your ass right out of here Later that week at a company dinner meeting she spoke with the head of the personnel department Mr Neiendam who assured her that her job was not at stake and that she did not have to worry about Saia or LaRue After another week passed she heard from LaRue himself that he had been transferred to another department Production Control but that he will still be moving chips in and out of the environmental testing area The chips that started this incident by the way

    Original URL path: http://computingcases.org/case_materials/hughes/support_docs/hughes_case_narr/reddick_incident.html (2016-04-30)
    Open archived version from archive

  • The AMRAAM Incident
    not be retested and needed to be simply thrown away So why was someone keeping them She also knew that these were officially hot parts and that the company was behind schedule in shipping these parts After consulting with Ruth Ibarra the two of them decided to do some sleuthing They took the chips and their lot travelers to a photocopy machine and made copies of the travelers with failed

    Original URL path: http://computingcases.org/case_materials/hughes/support_docs/hughes_case_narr/AMRAAM_incident.html (2016-04-30)
    Open archived version from archive

  • The Fraud Hotline
    an organization s channels like this is called whistleblowing and though it looks easy to do it can produce significant hardship for the whistleblower Supervisors feel like their trust has been betrayed co workers can avoid or gang up against you and the organization can isolate and eventually fire you For this reason hotline for reporting problems are usually confidential This is the way the Inspector General s hotline is set up You can read all about this at the hotline website the Inspector General has set up Of course in 1985 when the problems at Hughes surfaced the web was not an option but Goodearl and others working at the plant knew about the hotline because brochures about it were passed out Here is how the hotline worked then and now except you can now use email The person who wants to lodge a complaint makes the call and is connected to an investigator The investigator will ask a series of questions who what where when how and why to get the background needed to investigate the complaint The caller can remain anonymous no identifying information is given or can give information so he or she can be contacted

    Original URL path: http://computingcases.org/case_materials/hughes/support_docs/hughes_case_narr/the_fraud_hotline.html (2016-04-30)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Life on the Testing Line
    had to carefully read the lot travelers to determine the appropriate tests and settings Thus each tester Selected a chip and its traveler from the line of chips to be tested at that station This meant making a decision about which chips were more important that is were there any hot parts Checked the lot traveler that was attached to the chip Made sure the setting on the test machine was done as per the specifications on the traveler Put the chip in the testing device and ran the test Read the results of the test and marked this on the traveler that went with the chip Moved the chip on to the next appropriate testing station or put it in the rework bin or marked it to be discarded all depending on the type of chip and the outcome of the type of test This work was relentless painstaking and done under great time pressure Chips needed to go out to customers and Hughes Microelectronics in the person of Don LaRue would not tolerate any slow or inaccurate work It was made more difficult by the fact that at any one time there were between 500 and 1 000 chips in the testing room Each of these chips had its own testing regimen outlined on its traveler But even chips that were the same might be marked differently on the traveler since in addition to production parts that were shipped to customers some were simply for the folks in engineering to use or for proof of design does it work or manufacture can we make it These chips required less testing Matters were not made better by the management style that was standard at Hughes People would be told to do things given no reason and were expected to

    Original URL path: http://computingcases.org/case_materials/hughes/support_docs/hughes_case_narr/life_on_the_testing_line.html (2016-04-30)
    Open archived version from archive



  •