Who is Skiddaddle??

[ck454ss]

CK
Like Skiddaddle, I know for a fact that this year the Air Force was still removing entire sections of the manufacturers "warrented specification" because it was not needed for Air Force requirements.  (Look at some of the Tektronix DSO 70000 series oscilloscopes procedures.)  Unless you verify Table 1 of 33K-procedures to the manufacturers specifications, you do not know if you are meeting customer requirements.

ISO 17025 has an entire section on Procedures, and requires that the calibration laboratory contacts the customer to ensure that the calibrations meet the customer requirements.  Many times the customer does not have access to the GIDEP procedures and have no clue as to what specifications they are getting certified.  The customer purchased the equipment based on those specific manufacturers specifications and expect a full calibration based upon those fully procured, warrented manufacturers' specifications.  It is not the customers responsibility to ensure that the procedure YOU use is correct.  It is OUR responsibility as calibration technicians to verify that the customer needs are completely met before we slap a sticker on the equipment.

I agree, for the most part.  I am a customer who sends some equipment to a "Third Party House".  It is MY responsibility to ensure Im getting the correct calibration not yours.  Any new Cal Supplier I use goes through a process of me sending a list of equipment to be calibrated and then them sending me either the procedure or data points with tolerances so I can review them ahead of time to ensure they meet my needs.  Many times I will remove many of these points as I dont need many of the functions calibrated on equipment.  Like benchtop meters only used for DC or only for AC Volts etc.  Sometimes I will add points to be tested as it is important for my requirements and not necessarily a mfg requirement.

You state its OUR responsibility to ensure the customer needs are met but how can you if you have no idea what the customer needs are?  I develop a partnership with my suppliers not just a "Fast Food" mentality with them.  I dont expect any sticker to be slapped on my equipment but I will ensure every need I want has been met by my "Third Party" calibration.  I trust no one but myself to ensure things are done right.

Ultimately I(The Customer) am responsible for ensuring the calibration work performed meets the requirement of my business needs not the Third Party Calibration House.

[djshepp21]

I agree, for the most part.  I am a customer who sends some equipment to a "Third Party House".  It is MY responsibility to ensure Im getting the correct calibration not yours.  Any new Cal Supplier I use goes through a process of me sending a list of equipment to be calibrated and then them sending me either the procedure or data points with tolerances so I can review them ahead of time to ensure they meet my needs.  Many times I will remove many of these points as I dont need many of the functions calibrated on equipment.  Like benchtop meters only used for DC or only for AC Volts etc.  Sometimes I will add points to be tested as it is important for my requirements and not necessarily a mfg requirement.

You state its OUR responsibility to ensure the customer needs are met but how can you if you have no idea what the customer needs are?  I develop a partnership with my suppliers not just a "Fast Food" mentality with them.  I dont expect any sticker to be slapped on my equipment but I will ensure every need I want has been met by my "Third Party" calibration.  I trust no one but myself to ensure things are done right.

Ultimately I(The Customer) am responsible for ensuring the calibration work performed meets the requirement of my business needs not the Third Party Calibration House.

I don't know what part of this is confusing for people and why it is so controversial.  Yes, the customer has the ultimate responsibility to ensure that they send their equipment to a cal house of good standing.
The responsibility of the cal house is to communicate their procedures and processes with the customer, PERIOD.  If the customer isn't quite sure what their ultimate needs are (lacking an engineer or metrologist of some type to understand what particular aspects of the equipment they truly need), the calibrating technician should do a full calibration to the manufacturers warranted specifications.
ISO 17025 in essence states that it is the cal house's responsibility to communicate the details of each calibration with the customer.  Most customers don't have access to GIDEP to review those procedures (as access to GIDEP requires that the customer is currently working on government contracts).  Jim Bob's Amateur Radio Repair Shop may not have the most knowledgeable people working there, and the cal techs should never assume that the customers know everything about calibration.
The matter is actually quite simple.  If the equipment is not fully checked it, it is a limitation.  It doesn't matter what the cal house's quality manual states.  It doesn't matter if the quality manual states the equipment is "Calibrated to report of measurement" (as some labs tend to use).  If the cal tech doesn't run performance checks on each of the OEM's warranted parameters, if the cal house hasn't communicated the details of the procedures in use (and the customer does not have access to the procedures), it is a limitation.  If the cal house and/or technician do not communicate that limitation with the customer, it is in essence submitting a false documentation and your customer can and should take you to court over the matter.

[John Treekiller]

Before we get too far down the road, maybe we should get these posts on the GIDEP thread where it belongs.

[spanishfly25]

If you like what someone else posted, make a good comment, if you don't keep it to your self and don't let it bother you. we should keep the forum as clean as possible.

[Squire]

If you like what someone else posted, make a good comment, if you don't keep it to your self and don't let it bother you. we should keep the forum as clean as possible.

I totally disagree.  A forum should be an exchange of ideas not a "Barney" love fest.  Oh, Mr. Treekiller and Phys print some more pages for me. 

[John Treekiller]

If you like what someone else posted, make a good comment, if you don't keep it to your self and don't let it bother you. we should keep the forum as clean as possible.

I totally disagree.  A forum should be an exchange of ideas not a "Barney" love fest.  Oh, Mr. Treekiller and Phys print some more pages for me. 

No one said it should be a "Barney" love fest.  Personal attacks saying someone is part of the problem or doesn't know what he's talking about, just because he doesn't fully agree with you should not be allowed.  Even though some people might take offence at your little reposte directed at me; I just remember the many times you sought me out to give you information to do your job and I feel that you're asking for more since I know you have to use 33K T.O.s.  Just wish you'd be more specific with the information you require to do your current job.  I'd be glad to help.

[HarryBee]

Question:  How do you block Skiddaddle and his 2 other personas? I really do not care to read his posts no matter which account he is using.

Thanks.
Eric

Said the person with 3 posts.  Try the ignore feature, worked for me.

[HarryBee]

It took me a moment to realize what you meant.  My first answer was going to be "I don't know if that's possible, why would someone want to block themselves"?  Now that I understand, I am going to tell you something right here and right now.  If I have something to say to someone then I'm going to say it to their faces or not hide who I am.  I think it's cute you think I may be skidaddle.  I happen to know him personally and can say that I am much prettier than that man.  All of that aside if you have a problem with me personally then state your case instead of comparing me to someone else you are being agitated by. It's childish and honestly, a little beneath you.

[CalDude]

Wow...hey Eric, if your going to come into this thread and try to start bashing people, come armed and come prepared.

[CalLabSolutions]

I happen to know him personally and can say that I am much prettier than that man. 

Really..  Is that what this site have boiled down to... a beauty contest. 

This is a metrology site guys so I have to ask... 
What standard are you using to measure pretty?
And is is traceable?
And are you willing to write a paper on how to measure pretty?

  Some days this site cracks me up..

[HarryBee]

LMAO, I know.  I refused to get on here for years because of all the drama but decided to join in some of the fun.

On a serious note, the standard for pretty is me 

[djshepp21]

Wow...hey Eric, if your going to come into this thread and try to start bashing people, come armed and come prepared.

Everyone knows that you don't bash people with arms.  Use bricks, it hurts more.

And I believe there is standard for measuring prettiness.  Don't quote me on this, but if memory serves me you use ANSI standard 5EX1.E to measure prettiness.  I believe it uses optical standards and there are some uncertainty parameters.  Just watch out for the parallax errors.

[Broken_Wings]

LMAO, I know.  I refused to get on here for years because of all the drama but decided to join in some of the fun.

On a serious note, the standard for pretty is me 

The standard for handsome is PMEL Whore. If they are synonymous then I disagree with you.
crawling back under a rock and out of the sunlight.

[PMEL Whore]

  Some days this site cracks me up..

+1, I won't block anybody, this is too much fun.  I reiterate my earlier statement, "PMEL Guys a bunch of whiney little girls"  HAHA

[PMEL Whore]

The standard for handsome is PMEL Whore.

Why thank you very much, a girl likes to be noticed!