I was looking over the article Larry Lange wrote for Electronic Engineering
Times on the "Engineer as Hero" movie thing we did in this newsgroup some
months back (and which subsequently got into the What Engineers Are and Do
FAQ), and I had a couple thoughts I wanted to get a response on:

First, in the "top ten" Larry put in his article was "The Fighting Seabees,"
and I finally had a chance to see this John Wayne movie for the first time
this past weekend.  This after having skimmed a book on the Seabees from the
public library.  My fundamental problem with this movie was that the
*engineering* practiced by the Seabees in World War II was skimmed over in
favor of the war aspect.  (With John Wayne, you get love and war, and mostly
war.)  This really bothered me because the Seabees, whose name is a variation
of Construction Battalions, did some terrific engineering -- they developed
simple portable airplane landing strips; popularized the use of the Quonset
hut; innovated techniques to land heavy equipment on beaches in rough water.
We saw almost none of this in the movie.  I'm used to "engineers" being
ignored -- and of course, this was done here too -- in favor of some other
profession (in this case "construction workers").  But I felt some great
professional works were also ignored as well.  Has anyone else seen this
movie that would care to comment?  Bill Holt in particular was quoted in the
article, and I don't know his e-mail address, so if you're out there, Bill,
I'd like to hear your two cents.

Second, Larry's top ten also included "Star Trek: Generations," and I have
been criticized for including this flick in our FAQ list as well.  After
having seen the movie a third time, I have concluded that the critics are
right: it doesn't belong.  I only originally included it because it was the
only Star Trek movie to include both James Doohan (as Scotty) and LeVar
Burton (as Geordi LaForge), the two legendary fictional engineers.  But
the fact is that Doohan and Burton (a) never appeared on the screen together
and (b) didn't do any *engineering* when they were on screen (i.e. bit parts).
My feeling is that if you really want to see Doohan and Burton together, you
want the TV Star Trek: the Next Generation episode "Relics."  But in any case,
I want to take this movie off the FAQ list.  Larry did not quote any of us
newsgroup people in the article; does anyone have comments?

Ron

"The difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little longer."
 -  a slogan of the US Navy Seabees

In <5DEC199514532...@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov> ecax...@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov
Seabees,"
..................cut..................
have
...................cut................

Don't we have to make a distinction here between heros who happened to
be doing otherwise ordinary engineering, and people doing some really
heroic engineering.  In the latter category I would place engineers who
made honest decisions when a lot was at stake.  Some of the engineers
who got the Apollo 13 crew back might qualify.  One of my favorites
wasn't even an engineer by trade: Col. Stapp, an Air Force Physician
who used himself as a guinea pig riding rocket sleds to test g-limits
of the human body, ultimately so that safe pilot ejection systems could
be designed.

Ken Z.

-=> Quoting Ron Graham to All <=-
 RG> because it was the only Star Trek movie to include both James Doohan
 RG> (as Scotty) and LeVar Burton (as Geordi LaForge), the two legendary
 RG> fictional engineers.  But  the fact is that Doohan and Burton (a) never
 RG> appeared on the screen together and (b) didn't do any *engineering*
 RG> when they were on screen (i.e. bit parts). My feeling is that if you
 RG> really want to see Doohan and Burton together, you want the TV Star
 RG> Trek: the Next Generation episode "Relics."  But in any case, I want to
 RG> take this movie off the FAQ list.  Larry did not quote any of us
 RG> newsgroup people in the article; does anyone have comments?

With your reasoning, I would recommend taking the movie off.  (I never
actually saw the movie.).  However, the "Relics" episode is good since
the two of them work together to solve a problem.

The beauty of a FAQ, it is a living document, great for discussion.

~~~ PGPBLUE 3.0 <NR>

Steve Johnson - Aiken, South Carolina USA <steven.john...@mecheng.asme.org>

... If at first you do succeed, try not to look *too* astonished!
---
 þ Blue Wave/DOS v2.21 þ

   ___________The Amer Society of Mechanical Engineers ________________
       MechEng Archive:  Technical and scientific software
       MechEng BBS:      Usenet, email, archive, and LISTSERV services
       Write:            i...@mecheng.asme.org
   --------------------------------------------------------------------