. It can transport a payload of 363 tons and costs around five million - which comes out to around 14k per ton of payload.
Did the unnamed author divide the price of the truck to the weight of a single load? If so, ignoring that it's not specifying a distance and hence the 1:2 cost ratio may be highly inaccurate, why? Is that some industry standard? It would be weird not taking into account amoritization cost/period too.
Finally, in conclusion, what do "techies" get wrong?
They chose the Caterpillar 797F, which is their largest offering.
Not sure how they even think that the hoe that is loading them will also be able to load on-highway trucks.
It would be like loading water glasses by tipping a 55gal barrel.
The operator inefficiency of dumping into 20 trucks for an equivalent of one would reduce the time the hoe operator could actually mine.
As they are obviously claiming to solve things for very different use cases it looks like they have practically zero knowledge about their customers needs.
If by techies they refer to IT, then just about everything.
I have seen many, many cases over the decades where OT was confused for IT by management and the extensive OT considerations were ignored or had to be re-learned when an IT approach was taken to OT problems.
Often the IT based solution in OT world never ended up working at all and had to be discarded, or re-engineered from the ground up.
Just because you have boxes with screens connected by blue cables, history has proven many times that this does not make IT the best people to architect and implement your OT system, by a long, long way.
Finally, in conclusion, what do "techies" get wrong?
I read the answer as "there are several factors and broader context besides direct productivity gains that need to be taken into account when considering automation". And to be honest some techies do indeed forget about them. Elon Musk seems to be the the most striking example of "it's just an engineering problem" mindset.
Comments
I'm not following this line of reasoning
Did the unnamed author divide the price of the truck to the weight of a single load? If so, ignoring that it's not specifying a distance and hence the 1:2 cost ratio may be highly inaccurate, why? Is that some industry standard? It would be weird not taking into account amoritization cost/period too.
Finally, in conclusion, what do "techies" get wrong?
They chose the Caterpillar 797F, which is their largest offering.
Not sure how they even think that the hoe that is loading them will also be able to load on-highway trucks.
It would be like loading water glasses by tipping a 55gal barrel.
The operator inefficiency of dumping into 20 trucks for an equivalent of one would reduce the time the hoe operator could actually mine.
As they are obviously claiming to solve things for very different use cases it looks like they have practically zero knowledge about their customers needs.
If by techies they refer to IT, then just about everything.
I have seen many, many cases over the decades where OT was confused for IT by management and the extensive OT considerations were ignored or had to be re-learned when an IT approach was taken to OT problems.
Often the IT based solution in OT world never ended up working at all and had to be discarded, or re-engineered from the ground up.
Just because you have boxes with screens connected by blue cables, history has proven many times that this does not make IT the best people to architect and implement your OT system, by a long, long way.
I don't know either but "[Hivekit] is trying to facilitate this."
I read the answer as "there are several factors and broader context besides direct productivity gains that need to be taken into account when considering automation". And to be honest some techies do indeed forget about them. Elon Musk seems to be the the most striking example of "it's just an engineering problem" mindset.