Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Mounts

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)
Jarrod
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 01/20/13

Loc: SE USA
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: amicus sidera]
      #6027319 - 08/15/13 02:35 PM

Fred - what you describe is simply a different philosophy. None of what you said invalidated my statements. I assume that you and the Final Test staff at your firm did not work for free. Therefore, it added cost to the product.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
nodalpoint
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 06/03/13

Loc: FEMA camp
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: Jarrod]
      #6027371 - 08/15/13 02:51 PM

Who cares? I ordered an AVX today!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
amicus sidera
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/14/11

Loc: East of the Sun, West of the M...
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: Jarrod]
      #6027374 - 08/15/13 02:53 PM

Yes, but the final test cost was hardly a significant sum. Mind you, there was ongoing inspection at all phases of production, but the final test was the least costly of all of them, as it could be done rapidly and hence inexpensively; it also held the greatest cost/benefit ratio.

Final inspection of a telescope mount should take far less than a minute if set up correctly, with experienced personnel... to what degree would that increase the cost to the consumer? A dollar or less?

Many companies are afflicted with bean-counters whose existence is predicated upon saving small sums at the cost of quality... it saves a few pennies to shift quality control onto the customer, but the bad taste that some will surely get from such folly can linger for a long time.

A different philosophy, indeed.

Fred



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO *DELETED* new [Re: amicus sidera]
      #6027562 - 08/15/13 04:22 PM

Post deleted by rmollise

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: rmollise]
      #6027575 - 08/15/13 04:27 PM

Quote:



Folks, please do not attempt to tell me that it would prove too costly to briefly inspect every single unit for power-up and basic function; I worked in this field for most of my life...




We are just telling you the way it is in manufacturing. Usually, this is quite effective. The QA guys start seeing problems in the samples, and the problem is corrected for all the products coming out. For most products, detailed QA of every item is simply not necessary. If you are building expensive and at least partially handcrafted items like jet engines or thermonuclear weapons, you test every item rigorously because of the possibility for human screwups and the possible (extremely) disastrous results that could result. A sub 1K telescope mount? Not so much.

The problems come when QA is sloppy about what it is supposed to sample/test.

If you want more, there is a solution, which is Astro-Physics, Takahashi, and Bisque. These are small boutique manufacturers, and their volume and economic model allows them to test everything. Nevertheless, people still can have problems with even these mounts. Alas, that is the way the Universe works.




Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
cn register 5
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 12/26/12

Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: amicus sidera]
      #6027659 - 08/15/13 05:10 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I'm not sure why people post this sort of thing here, even before contacting the supplier. We can't make it work, the suppler has a responsibility to do so.

Chris.




In my opinion, the OP's experience is exactly the sort of thing that should be posted here.

A defect which occurs after a mount has been in use for some time is one thing; an out-of-box failure is quite another. The latter strongly suggests that the mount left the factory in non-working condition, which does not speak well for the level of quality control surrounding it. Speaking out about unpleasant experiences such as this is of great benefit to the amateur community, and should be encouraged... after all, does anyone think that the manufacturers are going to tell us how many returns they're faced with on a given piece of equipment?

Fred



The thing that concerns me is not that the OP posted about a faulty mount but that he posted about it here BEFORE contacting the dealer or manufacturer. They were given no chance of resolving the problem. This seems unfair to me.

Chris


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Stew57
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: cn register 5]
      #6027666 - 08/15/13 05:15 PM

Outliers happen. Defects happen. It is being taken care of. If it is a one off no big deal. If it gets reported regularly than it looks like a trend (remember the early CGEM hand controllers failing?) which means it would need to be reported. I can't see many being turned off by a one off problem.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
amicus sidera
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/14/11

Loc: East of the Sun, West of the M...
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: rmollise]
      #6027675 - 08/15/13 05:18 PM

No need to tell me anything about manufacturing, thank you kindly; been there, done that, got the pictures back. My contention is that failing to give even a cursory test to every unit leaving a manufacturing facility (if indeed that is the case in this instance, as it's entirely possible that such inspection was performed, and, although I think it unlikely, that the failure of the OP's mount then occurred in transit) can lead to customer-relations problems. One does not need to be a high-end manufacturer to do this; one merely needs the resolve to take a tiny financial hit to ensure that each and every customer receives a working product.

I don't believe that is too much to ask, but apparently others here see it differently. While I respect these opinions, I will continue to disagree with them. Carry on.

Fred


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rmollise
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 07/06/07

Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: amicus sidera]
      #6027699 - 08/15/13 05:32 PM

Quote:

No need to tell me anything about manufacturing, thank you kindly; been there, done that.




Then, you know this is the way the world works. I agree with you that the ideal would be a power-up of every TV, blender, and telescope mount on the line. But that is, alas, just not going to happen.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: amicus sidera]
      #6027708 - 08/15/13 05:37 PM

I already know where the end of this train of thought is- the AP Mach 1 GTO is built, tested, and calibrated by one person who puts the initial PEC program in place. No Mach 1 GTOs fail to run when they show up. Note the price delta to an AVX.

With that said, I'd be really interested in getting any duds back ASAP to find out what was the issue and see about a fix- usually it's a short list and then the product appears bulletproof.

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rockstarbill
sage


Reged: 07/16/13

Loc: Snohomish, WA
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: rmollise]
      #6028470 - 08/16/13 02:40 AM

Quote:

Quote:



Folks, please do not attempt to tell me that it would prove too costly to briefly inspect every single unit for power-up and basic function; I worked in this field for most of my life...




We are just telling you the way it is in manufacturing. Usually, this is quite effective. The QA guys start seeing problems in the samples, and the problem is corrected for all the products coming out. For most products, detailed QA of every item is simply not necessary. If you are building expensive and at least partially handcrafted items like jet engines or thermonuclear weapons, you test every item rigorously because of the possibility for human screwups and the possible (extremely) disastrous results that could result. A sub 1K telescope mount? Not so much.

The problems come when QA is sloppy about what it is supposed to sample/test.

If you want more, there is a solution, which is Astro-Physics, Takahashi, and Bisque. These are small boutique manufacturers, and their volume and economic model allows them to test everything. Nevertheless, people still can have problems with even these mounts. Alas, that is the way the Universe works.







I am going to chime in and agree with Uncle Rod on this topic. It is basic accounting that dictates that businesses plan appropriately for a percentage of bad product. It is just silly to assume that every product that comes off of the line is perfect, and I can assure you that a company like Celestron plans and manages these errors through a model that supports the appropriate responses to these errors (example: Strong warranties, clear and consistent response, and root cause investigation when something slips through the cracks, etc...) QA is an effective tool to limit external (read: customer reported) failures, but it by no means 100% effective.

If you want to buy products that have a 0% external failure rate - be prepared to pay out your behind for them. They are not effective for mass production, have much higher direct labor costs, along with much much higher manufacturing overhead costs. Someone has to pay for that, and it certainly does not come out of the bottom line.

Quote:


With that said, I'd be really interested in getting any duds back ASAP to find out what was the issue and see about a fix- usually it's a short list and then the product appears bulletproof.

-Rich




Again, external failures can either be discarded as a one off (or "no repro" for you dev minded folks) or used as a test case going forward once the flaw in the design, code, etc. are rectified. To assume the root cause can be found in this case is a presumption that we should not make, nor should people shy way from the AVX as a result of this issue. Anyone that would do so, should buy a bus pass and never purchase a car - as those are far more prone to external failures than any of these goods we are talking about will ever be.

-Bill

Edited by rockstarbill (08/16/13 02:48 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
MartinTreadgold
super member


Reged: 04/17/13

Loc: Netherlands
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: amicus sidera]
      #6028631 - 08/16/13 07:10 AM

There are and always will be costs associated with quality testing every product. The costs of which will drive the price of the product up considerably. Thats why, to keep the cost to the customer as low as possible, it is more feasible to sample test a percentage of the number of units made, not test every single product made. Testing every product is costly and in most cases impractical. Celestron Do Carry out Quality Checking, no doubt about that. But Quality Checking every product does not 100% prevent dead on Arrival products from happening.

Lets remember the AVX is the new entry level GEM at a very affordable price. Very good product. Celestron have really pushed new boundaries with the AVX and raised the game.

Really sorry to hear that one showed up DOA, but C'est la vie.. etc just a bit unlucky.

That does not however mean all AVX's have a problem.

Let us know how you get on with your replacement mount.

Regards

Martin


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
telfish
sage
*****

Reged: 11/17/10

Loc: Adirondack Mountains NY
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: MartinTreadgold]
      #6028708 - 08/16/13 08:34 AM

I seem to remember Meade shipping mounts that were badly tested/not fully developed.

And look where they are!

There is also a cost to shipping unsatisfactory product, both in dollars and reputation.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Seanem44
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 09/22/11

Loc: Woodbridge, VA
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: telfish]
      #6028768 - 08/16/13 09:21 AM

In terms of dollars, its a lot cheaper for Celestron, or any company, to deal with less QC than to hire full time QC. We save in the end, as there are less on the payroll. Sadly, every now and then, one person has to take one for the team with a random one off. I've dealt with this in my other hobby, British model railroading. And it's a pain when something fails and you are over seas, but the dealer is ALWAYS willing to exchange and deal with the vendor. In the OPs case, it looks like Optcorp took care of him.

So yeah, faulty equipment sucks, but one out of 100, or a 1000, or whatever is not enough to indict an entire company or there QC process with.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
amicus sidera
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/14/11

Loc: East of the Sun, West of the M...
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: telfish]
      #6029251 - 08/16/13 01:59 PM

Quote:

I seem to remember Meade shipping mounts that were badly tested/not fully developed.

And look where they are!

There is also a cost to shipping unsatisfactory product, both in dollars and reputation.




Exactly.

I have no idea of the QC/TQM/QMF background of those replying here, but based on my experience I will continue to disagree with the notion that brief final inspections conducted by any company prior to shipment would substantially raise the end cost to the customer. Additionally, the idea that a customer should be willing to receive a defective unit in order to save other customers a little money is, quite frankly, abhorrent to me.

This has been an excellent discussion; it makes abundantly clear just how little some of us have in common...

Fred


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Stew57
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: amicus sidera]
      #6029275 - 08/16/13 02:16 PM

I worked for a tool company in Owattona MN years ago. There were some electrical tools in which every one was plugged in to make sure it would turn on. It was done by the person packaging the device. Probably took all of 5 seconds or so as the came off the line. I was not in the department but I did do maintaince on the line. I have no idea if they still do that as it was in the lat 70's.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
amicus sidera
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/14/11

Loc: East of the Sun, West of the M...
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: Stew57]
      #6029281 - 08/16/13 02:20 PM

Thanks for the example, Mark; in essence, that's all I'm saying should be done: plug the product in briefly just prior to shipment, and see if it powers up! I honestly can't see how anyone could disagree with such a common-sense precaution.

Fred


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
nodalpoint
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 06/03/13

Loc: FEMA camp
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: amicus sidera]
      #6029409 - 08/16/13 03:28 PM

Maybe it was plugged in, maybe it worked, maybe during shipping some connection that was already marginal came loose...

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Seanem44
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 09/22/11

Loc: Woodbridge, VA
Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: amicus sidera]
      #6029412 - 08/16/13 03:29 PM

The other factor affecting QC is that made in China stamp.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bretm
member


Reged: 12/27/09

Re: NOT a good start. Celestron AVX here a NO GO new [Re: Seanem44]
      #6029544 - 08/16/13 04:54 PM

I have a different take on this. Maybe you all have different USPS/UPS/Fedex workers where you live, but boxes arrive at my house with obvious signs of trama. Even if Celestron made certain that 100% of the mounts worked perfectly when they left the factory, the 10,000+ miles that it travels to get from there to my doorstep provide ample opportunity for issues to arise. And yes, they could package it well enough to survive anything, but then we are back to Rod's observation that most people couldn't afford them anymore...

Bret


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)


Extra information
27 registered and 24 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Dave M, richard7, bilgebay 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 3193

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics