Talk:Operations research/Archive 1

message: What are "Wicked Problems"? --Khendon 07:20, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been reading google links on this subject for 20 minutes and I still have no idea what they are.  I'm gonna have to call BS on this.  Unless someone can explicitly state what these things are with some good examples, I'm voting to remove the link.  Monkeyman 19:08, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wicked Problems 

message: I notice that there's a section here about adding armor protection to bombers, and that it's lacking sources. The armor protection example just doesn't sound quite right, and it closely resembles another, better-documented case.
1. Aircraft carry little or no armor - especially British heavy bombers of the Second World War. According to Jane's Fighting Aircraft of World War II 1945/6, the Stirling and Halifax carried armor plating for certain crew members, notably the pilot. The Lancaster carried a little more, for crew, plus protection for "certain other vulnerable parts of the structure." (I'm not even sure that every mark of Lancaster had that much plating; some accounts say that the Lanc's only armor was a single plate behind the pilot's head.) The entry for the Wellington doesn't even mention armor. 
2. The notion that aircraft designers would need to look at bullet holes in order to figure out where to put the armor is bizarre. Think about it for a moment. I'm prepared to accept it but only if someone can provide a source.
3. As I said, this account sounds like a garbled version of a different case, one for which I can provide a source. R.V. Jones, in Most Secret War, mentions OR and Bomber Command as an example of unintended consequences. Bomber Command was losing aircraft because of icing, and engineers proposed to fit de-icing gear to the planes, a process which would require the temporary removal of planes from service. The OR people found that the increase in load to the remaining aircraft would cause more losses than the de-icing gear would save.
Dr. Jones served as Director of Air Scientific Intelligence during the war, a position closely involved in the bomber offensive. He reports the work of OR as an anecdote, but I would trust him to get the details right.
I propose to replace the bomber-armor example with the de-icing gear example. 
Chelt 18:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mtrick, Wiki uses the subheading "History" for the history of a topic, so I've formatted it that way. There's a big blank here after WWII -- please add what you can. If you're not sure about all the formatting stuff yet, just put in what you can and I'll come back and help with the formatting. Edit the History or Scope or whatever. Happy editing! --SueHay 13:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Examples: Bomber Armour Protection

message: I'm a senior in high school, and I'm thinking about going into operations research or systems engineering. Can someone please tell me the differences between the two? Thanks. - Sonica
RESPONSE
One reason that you may have asked this specific question might be due to the fact that operations research and systems engineering both require a good grounding in mathematics and also rely upon approaching problems in a holistic way.
Operations research represents a mathematical-founded approach to solving complex problems across disciplines (eg. management, economics, engineering) whereas systems engineering is nearer a philosophy of applying engineering to solving problems. 
While systems engineering has its own models and techniques, it does require a multi-disciplinary approach to a defined system, rather than a focus of the application of say electrical, mechanical, chemical etc. engineering technology to a single component of a larger system.
I'd suggest that if you are interested in a career in either field that you consider focusing on continuing a good grounding in applied mathematics while looking for examples of the application of both disciplines in solving real-world problems. Simple searches of key words related to either discipline will uncover much further information that will help you decide on which career is for you.
A final note: a lifetime is a long time to consider a single career. I'd suggest it is wiser to keep your later options open by aiming for a good, broad general education while you are younger. I began my post-secondary study with an interest in physics and mathematics, but I also saw benefit in learning more in the humanities. After spending 15 years in the field of engineering, I have more recently found interest in the application of operations research to solving complex organisational problems. I hope this response is helpful to you.
* Excellent advice. Similarly, as an undergraduate I studies math and physics, but also found some of the humanities and softer-science courses very rewarding. I then obtained an M.S. in operations research, and went to work in the LTL industry as an operations analyst for a year and a half, then switched gears & went to work as a software engineer, developing EDA tools. Common themes for I have encountered over these two diverse industries is the frequent appearance of discrete optimization issues, algorithm analysis and optimization issues, and the need for clear and effective written and oral communication. --Cheese Sandwich 02:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question: differences between OR and systems engineering 

message: I needed a brief, one sentence description of OR for an article COIN-OR SYMPHONY.  I used "Operations Research is, roughly, the analysis and optimization of business decisions using mathematics.".  If anyone has a more accurate, but just as accessible alternative, feel free to swap it in.  And perhaps add it to the top of the OR article?  The current introduction seems rather opaque. 66.30.117.127 18:22, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simple sentence describing OR?