The Mindset of Remanufacturing

Remanufacturing is not just a set of processes. It is a mindset. Five principles distinguish true remanufacturing from lesser imitations. 

Principle 1: Assume Nothing 

The repair technician assumes a component is good until proven otherwise. The remanufacturer assumes a component is bad until proven good.

Principle 2: Wear Items Are Always Replaced 

Certain components have finite lifespans: bearings, seals, gaskets, brushes, filters, belts. Even if they appear functional, they have consumed part of their design life.

Principle 3: Restore, Don't Just Replace (When Economical) 

Some components (housings, shafts, blocks) are expensive to replace but can be restored to original tolerances through machining, grinding, thermal spray coating, or other processes.

Principle 4: Test to New-Product Standards 

A remanufactured product must perform identically to a new product under the same test conditions.

Principle 5: Warranty Parity 

A remanufactured product without a new-product warranty is not truly remanufactured. It is something less—rebuilt, reconditioned, or refurbished—regardless of what the marketing says.

Remanufacturing is not equally applicable to all products. It thrives where: 

• The core has high intrinsic value (e.g., cast iron block, precision-ground shaft) 
• Wear items are modular and replaceable 
• The product is designed for disassembly (or can be disassembled with reasonable effort) 
• New replacement cost is high 
• Customers value reliability and warranty 

Reman: The Gold Standard

Remanufacturing sits at the apex of the three strategies for several reasons. 

Reason 1: Reliability 

A refurbished product is a gamble. It might last years; it might fail next month. A remanufactured product carries the same statistical reliability as a new product—because it has been restored to the same tolerances and specifications. 

Reason 2: Warranty Parity 

Customers who buy new products expect warranties measured in years, not months. Remanufactured products can offer those warranties because the restoration process is comprehensive enough to justify the confidence. 

Reason 3: Environmental Impact 

Remanufacturing saves 80-95% of the energy, water, and raw materials required to manufacture a new product—because the core (the housing, the block, the frame) is preserved. Only wear items are replaced.

Reason 4: Economic Value 

A remanufactured product typically sells for 40-70% of the new price, with gross margins that are often higher than new (because the core is acquired at low cost and the labor-intensive restoration is still cheaper than virgin materials and new component fabrication). 

A customer who pays for a remanufactured product expects new reliability. A rebuilt or reconditioned product will not deliver that. Engineers specifying remanufacturing for safety-critical or high-reliability applications must ensure they are getting true remanufacturing—not a cheaper imitation.  

The Gold Standard?

No, I'm not talking about the precious metal that people the world over looks to as the standard for guarantee, security and stability in the current economic downturn. I'm talking about remanufacturing.

Let's recap the first two strategies for combating obsolescence:

• Refurbishing restores function and appearance but leaves most components original. It is a facelift—valuable, cost-effective, but not a reset. 

• Retrofitting adds new capabilities to old platforms but leaves the core systems untouched. It is an upgrade—powerful, but narrow in scope. 

Remanufacturing is different. It is total. It is complete. It is the closest thing engineering has to a resurrection. 

Remanufacturing takes a used product, disassembles it completely to its core components, cleans and inspects every part, replaces or restores every wear item, and reassembles the product to original (or improved) specifications. The result is indistinguishable from new—and often carries the same warranty.

In other words, remanufacturing is total transformation. Nothing is assumed to be good enough. Every component is inspected, and every wear item is replaced. Period.

Ps: Incidentally, my fourth book Manual PCB-RE: The Essentials, has been dubbed "The Gold Standard" by an Amazon reader.

Remanufacturing (Revisited)

In late March, I was contacted by the DGM of ASTER and was invited to tour their facilities in early April. Then, sometime early June, a representative from the Army sought me out via Facebook Messenger and arrange for a meetup with his superior in the middle of the month.

Was it coincidence that two organizations, one commercial and the other military, expressed interests in my niche skillset of PCB reverse engineering? All within the space of two months this year. Both are also involved in remanufacturing, albeit in their own operational capacities. The timing could not have been anticipated.

After ten years and six engineering books on PCB-RE and its related subjects, I couldn't believe that here, locally in Singapore, there are actually people who not only read my works but also actively practicing this craft. I was both consolated and excited! It has opened new opportunities for future collaborations as well as enhancing local expertise.

Now that I have drafted two out of the three Rs (Refurbishing and Retrofitting) of Solutions to Obsolescnce, perhaps it's time to work on the final R (Remanufacturing).

Ps: Overseas readers and professionals who have read my book or are involved in these three aspects of overcoming obsolescence, do comment on this post and give your views.  They may prove invaluable to the upcoming book I'm currently working on...

Economic Modeling

After all the technical assessments—voltage, protocols, inertia, safety—one question remains. 

"Does this retrofit make financial sense?" 

Engineers often treat economics as someone else's problem. That is a mistake. The engineer who can build a credible economic model is the engineer who gets projects approved. The reason is obvious: Economics is not the only driver for retrofits, but it is almost always the first question asked.

For that, we need the tools to answer the following questions with rigor: 

▪ How do we calculate simple payback and return on investment (ROI)? 

▪ How can we model energy savings (the most common retrofit driver)? 

▪ How to account for productivity gains, maintenance reductions, and avoided downtime? 

▪ How do we handle uncertainty and risk in economic models? 

▪ How can we navigate incentives, grants, and carbon accounting?

In the upcoming book: Solutions to Obsolescence, I will try to address these questions and more. 

The Five Compatibility Domains

A retrofit that works is a triumph of engineering efficiency. A retrofit that fails—spectacularly or subtly—is a reminder that old and new systems do not always play well together. The difference is risk assessment performed before the first wire is cut. 

A systematic framework for identifying, evaluating, and mitigating the technical risks of retrofitting is therefore essential. It covers the five critical compatibility domains where old and new systems interact, namely: 

1. Electrical (voltage, current, power quality) 
2. Signal and protocol (communications) 
3. Physical (space, mounting, thermal) 
4. Mechanical (loads, dynamics, wear)
5. Safety (risk migration, integrity levels)

The Venn diagram above provides a visual representation of the five domains in their overlapping relationships. For each domain, the three areas of concern are failure modes, assessment methods, and mitigation strategies.

The Three Drivers of Retrofitting

Retrofitting is not a single activity with a single motivation. It is driven by three distinct forces, often in combination. 

Driver 1: Energy Efficiency 

The most common retrofit driver worldwide. Existing buildings and machines consume energy at levels that would be unacceptable in new installations. Retrofitting can close the gap. 

Driver 2: Functional Modernization (Industry 4.0 / Smart Systems) 

The factory of the future is connected. Sensors, data analytics, predictive maintenance, 

and remote monitoring are becoming standard. But replacing all existing equipment to gain these capabilities is economically impossible.

Driver 3: Safety and Compliance 

Regulations change. A machine that was perfectly safe when built may no longer meet modern standards. Retrofitting can add safety features without replacing the entire machine.

Compliance driver: OSHA, EPA, or local regulations may require upgrades. Retrofitting is often the lowest-cost path to compliance. 

The Paradox of Obsolescence

Consider two machines: 

Machine A is twenty-five years old. Its mechanical systems—the frame, the bearings, the gears, the hydraulic cylinders—are in excellent condition. It was overbuilt in an era when steel was cheap and engineers added safety factors of five or more. This machine will probably outlive its operators. 

But its control system is a relic. The programmable logic controller (PLC) comes from a manufacturer that went out of business fifteen years ago. The user interface is a monochrome screen with a membrane keypad. There is no data port, no network connection, no way to monitor its performance remotely. Replacement parts for the control system are unobtainable except from scavenged units. 

Machine B is brand new. It has a sleek touchscreen interface, cloud connectivity, predictive maintenance algorithms, and energy-optimized servo drives. But its frame is lighter, its bearings are smaller, and its expected service life is ten years—not twenty-five. 

Which machine is more valuable? 

The answer depends entirely on what you value.  

If you need cutting-edge functionality and connectivity, Machine B wins. If you need durability and long-term reliability, Machine A's mechanical bones are superior—but its obsolete brain holds it back.

Retrofitting resolves this paradox. It takes the durable bones of Machine A and gives them the brain of Machine B. The result: a machine that is both durable and modern. 

 

Why Retrofitting Matters

 

Three converging trends have made retrofitting more relevant today than at any point in the last 50 years. 

Trend 1: The Longevity of Physical Assets 

Industrial machinery, commercial buildings, and heavy equipment are built to last 30, 40, or even 50 years. A bridge or a stamping press does not wear out quickly. But the controls that run them—the sensors, controllers, and software—become obsolete every 5 to 10 years. The physical asset has decades of life left. The brain needs an upgrade. Retrofitting connects the two. 

Trend 2: The Energy Efficiency Imperative 

Existing buildings and machines are responsible for a massive share of global energy consumption. Retrofitting—adding LED lighting, variable frequency drives (VFD), smart thermostats, and insulation—is often the fastest, most cost-effective way to reduce carbon emissions from the built environment. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that retrofitting existing buildings could reduce global CO₂ emissions by 30% by 2030—at lower cost than new construction. 

Trend 3: The Digital Transformation of Industry (Industry 4.0) 

Factories are becoming connected. Sensors, data analytics, and predictive maintenance are no longer optional. But replacing a $500,000 machine to gain connectivity is uneconomical. Retrofitting—adding IoT sensors, edge computers, and communication gateways—turns "dumb" machines into smart ones for a fraction of the replacement cost. 

Leave a comment and let me know what you think...

Retrofitting

Retrofitting is the process of adding new features, components, or systems to an existing product—features that were not part of the original design. One of the most significant retrofitting project I've done in my twenty-fives years with ST Electronics is upgrading the disc drive system on the RADCOM test station for the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF).

Believe it or not, the RADCOM test programs—the very heart of its ability to diagnose E-2C avionics—were stored on magnetic cartridges. Not hard drives as we know them today. Not solid-state memory. Magnetic cartridges, about the size of a three-stacked 15-inch pizza, mounted in an HP7906 disc drive and run off an HP1000 host computer.

Over time, the disc access heads of the HP7906 drive built up ferrite dirt. Microscopic particles, accumulated through normal operation, clinging to the heads that read the magnetic media. And when those dirty heads passed over the cartridges, they could cause a head crash—the read head literally scraping against the magnetic surface, scratching it, destroying the data.

It happened more often than anyone liked. Cartridges that had worked for years suddenly became unreadable. Scrap. Trash. Years of test programs, lost to a few microns of ferrite dust. The RSAF was desperate. They had approached Grumman Aerospace—the original equipment manufacturer—for help. Grumman came back with an interim upgrade solution. Price tag: 1.5 million US dollars.

The RSAF project manager reached out to us. After researching for alternative solutions, we decided on the magneto-optical (MO) drive. It uses laser and magnetic technology together, writing data to discs that were far more robust than magnetic cartridges. No head crashes. No ferrite dirt. No scratched media. More importantly, it could be configured to emulate older storage devices. To the host computer, it would look exactly like an HP7906 disc drive. The system wouldn't know the difference. The test programs would load and run exactly as before.

Over the following months, we transferred hundreds of test programs from their vulnerable cartridges to the robust MO discs. Each migration was verified. Each program was tested. By the end, the entire RADCOM test suite lived on media that wouldn't scratch, wouldn't crash, wouldn't fail. 

The cost to the RSAF? Less than half of what Grumman had asked.

The project manager called me after the final acceptance to personally thank me. I appreciated the sentiment. But the real reward was seeing those MO drives spin up day after day, month after month, never losing a single byte of data.

Another obsolescence issue resolved—this time through retrofitting.

Ps: You can read the details and more in my latest book, A Memoir of Electronics, Discoveries, and a Life Less Ordinary by clicking on the book title.

The Hidden Engine of Refurbishing

A novice refurbisher focuses on cleaning and repairing products. A professional refurbisher focuses on flow—a steady, predictable stream of incoming used products (cores) and an efficient, low-cost channel for delivering finished goods to buyers. Refurbishing creates a circular supply chain. Unlike linear manufacturing (raw materials → factory → use → disposal), refurbishing feeds used products back into the value stream. 

If you really want to go into the refurbishing business, you'll need to know about supply chain and reverse logistics, which include the following areas:

▪ Sourcing cores (where used products come from) 
▪ Reverse logistics networks (getting cores to your facility) 
▪ Inventory management (balancing supply and demand) 
▪ Quality variability (handling the unknown) 
▪ Outbound logistics (selling and shipping refurbished units) 

▪ Metrics for a healthy refurbishing supply chain 

I've listed some references for further reading:

▪ Rogers, D. S., & Tibben-Lembke, R. S. (1999). Going Backwards: Reverse Logistics Trends and Practices. Reverse Logistics Executive Council. 
▪ Guide, V. D. R., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2009). "The Evolution of Closed-Loop Supply Chain Research." Operations Research, 57(1), 10-18. 
▪ International Organization for Standardization. (2018). ISO 14021: Environmental labels and declarations—Self-declared environmental claims (includes guidance on refurbished claims).

Hope that helps.

 

The Refurbishment Window

Not every product is a good candidate for refurbishing at every point in its life. The figure above illustrates the concept of the refurbishment window. Refurbishing is most valuable when a product has passed its early reliable life but still has significant structural value remaining.

Safety Warning: Never refurbish safety-critical components where failure could cause injury or death. This includes brake components, airbags, medical implants, pressure vessel seals, and aircraft structural parts. Refurbishing is for convenience and cost savings—not for life safety.

The Repair Trap 

One of the most common errors in asset management is the repair trap: repeatedly repairing a product because each repair has low upfront cost, while ignoring the accumulating total cost and downtime. Refurbishing resets the clock at a fraction of replacement cost as the figure below shows:

Despite the virtues of refurbishing, replacement is sometimes unavoidable. So when do you choose repair or replacement over refurbishing? The decision tree below might help:

The choice between repair, refurbish, and replace depends on four criteria: required reliability, available time, budget, and strategic value. 

 

The Refurbishing Workflow

If you're doing a one-off refurbishing job in your daily repair work, then a workflow may not really matter much. But if you're thinking of making refurbishing a sustaining business model then it is imperative to adopt a proper process to ensure success.

Refurbishing follows a repeatable workflow, though the depth of each step varies by product type. Of interest is the first step: Intake/Triage. What exactly is triage, you might ask. In refurbishment, it refers to the initial, rapid assessment and sorting of returned, damaged, or aging items to determine the most cost-effective action: repair, refurbish, resell, or dispose. This process prevents wasting resources on irreparably damaged items and prioritizes those that can be quickly returned to the market. 

You might not realize it but intake triage is the most economically critical stage. A misclassified unit will lose money at every subsequent step. Here's an economic triage rule you would do well to adhere to: 

A product is economically viable for refurbishing if (Resale value of refurbished unit) – (Cost of parts + labor + overhead) ≥ 30% of resale value. That's the minimum margin threshold and it varies by business model. If the margin falls below this threshold, the product is better used as a donor unit or sent to recycling.

A "donor" unit in refurbishing refers to a used, broken, or identical device (often a hard drive, appliance, or electronic component) that is utilized to supply parts for the repair of a "patient" device. This process allows technicians to restore non-functional equipment to working condition by replacing damaged, rare, or obsolete parts that are no longer produced. It's also referred to as "parts harvesting".

It is also important that each unit received during the intake has a unique tracking identifier (serial number, barcode, or RFID). This ID follows the product through all six stages, creating an audit trail. It ensures traceability, compliance, and quality control, providing visibility into the "who, what, and when" of the refurbishing process. 

Bet not many know of such details involved in starting a refurbishing business. There's more but I'll stop here for now. Once I sort out the workflow process in my upcoming book, you'll have the needed information all in one place.

 

Is Refurbishing Viable?

Refurbishing is not suitable for every product. The table above summarizes the sweet spot. The rule of thumb is simple: If a product's value is more than 3-5 times the cost of common replacement parts, and safety does not depend on its exact original tolerances, refurbishing is viable. 

However, refurbishing is not a panacea. Engineers and asset managers must recognize its boundaries. Refurbishing does not reset the fatigue life of mechanical components. A refurbished fan motor with new bearings still has an aged stator winding. Intermittent faults or degraded components (e.g., capacitors near end of life) may not be detected. Also, a refurbished product typically lasts 30-60% as long as a new one, and refurbished items usually have shorter warranties with added conditions.

Always do your homework and be realistic in your expectations.

 

Planned Obsolescence

How many ever heard of this term? If you hear remarks like, "They don't make things like they used to." and "Things don't last as long as they did in the past."—then you'll know what I mean.

Planned obsolescence is a profitable but short-sighted strategy: it drives repeat sales by intentionally limiting a product's lifespan, yet it shifts hidden costs onto consumers and the environment. While it can sustain business cycles, it often undermines trust, encourages waste, and runs counter to more sustainable, circular approaches to design and manufacturing.

The term gained currency in the 1950s, but the concept is older. Manufacturers discovered that durable products—products that lasted decades—limited repeat sales. The solution was to design products with intentionally limited lifespans. This is accomplished through one or more of the mechanisms listed in the above table.

Refurbishing directly counters systemic and functional obsolescence by keeping products in service. It does little against psychological obsolescence—you cannot refurbish a status symbol back into fashion. 

What is your take on this manufacturer-related issue?

 

What's the Difference?

Since I'm setting out to write a book about the three R's, it's worth establishing a clear boundary at the outset. (see above table)

Refurbishing is the most accessible of the three strategies: 

• It requires no specialized tooling (screwdrivers, cleaning supplies, basic test equipment) 
  
• It can be performed in a small workshop or even a garage 
• It has the lowest barrier to entry for small businesses and entrepreneurs 
• It delivers value quickly (days, not weeks)

Refurbishing is also the most scalable in terms of volume. A remanufacturing line for automotive engines is a capital-intensive operation. A refurbishing line for laptops can be set up in a warehouse with rented tables and hired labor. 

And refurbishing is often the only economically viable strategy for low-to-medium value products. No one remanufactures a $50 coffee maker. But thousands of coffee makers are refurbished every day. In short, refurbishing works because it aligns economic incentives with life extension. It is not charity. It is good business. 

 

Refurbishing

In my previous company, I've done quite a fair bit of refurbishing work on top of PCB testing and repairs. One such project I still recall fondly was the control panel of a lighthouse installation on the controversial island-rock of Pedra Branca.

The unit was sent to my work centre for repair—not just the PCB within but also the front panel which suffered defacing from constant use. After assessing various options, I reckoned that the easiest and safest way was to recreate the panel layout using Microsoft Visio, print out in color and laminate the pieces, which were then affixed over the original damaged artwork using double sided tapes.

Crude, but it worked and was aesthetically appealing as far as the customer was concerned. That was my first attempt at refurbishing and I was quite pleased with the outcome.

Industrial refurbishing, however, is more than just a cosmetic operation. Once you define what refurbishing is as the starting point of combating obsolescence, the process—from assessment to aesthetics becomes obvious. Then the decision naturally rests on when to choose refurbishing over repair and replacement.

This is the route I'm taking as I started out to write for the first of three parts for my upcoming book on Solutions to Obsolescence. It'll be a good idea to also throw in an actual case study to cement the practice, if necessary.

We'll see how that works out...

 

The Three R's Relationships

The relationships between the three R's can be quite intricate for the uninitiated to the world of obsolescence. So I've created a simple venn diagram to illustrate their intertwining similarities and differences.

As a first cut, I've come up with a preliminary paragraph for my book blurb:

Obsolescence is not the end—it’s an opportunity.

Every year, millions of tons of equipment—from industrial machinery and medical devices to electronics and building systems—are discarded not because they have failed, but because they are “outdated.” In an era of supply chain fragility, rising material costs, and mounting environmental pressure, the ability to extend product life is no longer a niche skill—it is a strategic imperative.

I will not divulge much on what I intend to cover as there are still grey areas that need to be sorted out. In fact, writing on a topic of this magnitude can be quite a challenge. Perhaps if I have the opportunity to explore further with ASTER's business model and process, it will become clearer what direction the book should take.

Until then...

The Three R's in the Work

I've spent a couple of days designing the front cover for my next engineering book. I decided that the best way to accelerate and build my knowledge on the subject of remanufacturing is to write a book on it, alongside two others I'm familiar with—refurbishing and retrofitting. Hence the title of the book.

Back in 2009, my former company had sponsored me to attend a course "Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS)" conducted by Donald Seger. This was in view of the threat of obsolescence stemming from a shortage of critical electronic components and the importance of stocking up based on predict forecast of the repair works we were doing.

On hindsight, it was an eye-opening experience though I did not link it to the three R's as the plausible Solution to Obsolescence. Now that I revisited the subject after my eventful visit to the ASTER facilities, I'm beginning to see how all these things tie up.

As usual, I will need to write a book blurb to keep me focus on what I want to write. Chapter outline will then follow, subject to changes as the work progresses, of course. It will be both interesting and challenging. And I suspect it will take me beyond electronics—well into the broader industries facing this same problem.

We'll see how it goes...

Solutions to Obsolescence

My recent visit to ASTER has set me thinking about the problem of obsolescene, not just in the electronics industry but other sectors as well—commercial and military.

Granted, in my previous company I had taken on several jobs by the military to address their obsolescence concern, albeit on a smaller, customized scale, which included refurbishing and retrofitting their aging equipment. But ASTER has up the ante by doing remanufacturing—which is on an institutional scale.

It's not hard to see that there are three options to the obsolescence problem:

1. Refurbishing
2. Retrofitting
3. Remanufacturing

So which option is suitable? That depends on the kind of issue you have on hand. If it's just  low-cost cosmetic and basic functional restoration, then refurbishing is the way to go. If it's adding new features to an old platform, retrofitting would fit the bill. But if you want to return a high-value asset to like-new reliability with a full warranty, consider remanufacturing—but be prepared to fork out cash.

In other words, refurbishing is the light-weight solution, retrofitting provides strategic upgrades, while remanufacturing entails deep industrial processes.

ASTER

The name may not ring a bell to many people in Singapore. And no, it's got nothing to do with the leading provider of chemical and energy solutions in Singapore and Southeast Asia by the same name.

Right after my last post, I was informed by my former manager that someone from ST Engineering, a deputy president of International & PSS/SG BizDigital Systems, asking for my contact. Soon after, someone by the name Leo contacted me. He introduced himself as a deputy general manager of ASTER, a subsidiary of ST Engineering specializing in Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO) services for the Singapore Armed Forces.

Leo claimed that he and his team had read my books on PCB Reverse Engineering, and would like to invite me to tour their remanufacturing facility. That piqued my curiosity and I readily accepted the invitation.

We fixed a date in early April. I was given a VIP reception upon arrival and the heads of each section in turn introduced their workplace and process flow, accompanied by the DGM himself and a few support staff. It was quite an eye-opening experience to be given free access to their electronics lab, mechanical workshop, engine bay, and the various test setups. There were similarity in some of their work practices that I could identify with my former work centre, but the majority of what I observed were new to me.

I was deeply impressed by what I saw.

At the end of the tour, we adjorned to a cozy meeting room where refreshments awaited. The DGM asked for my opinion on their setup, and whether there are room for improvements in terms of the processes and practices. In all honesty, I was humbled by the thought that someone of my status, a secluded self-published author, was given such recognition and honor at an institutional-scaled setting.

We had a good time of discussion and the engineers present eagerly asked questions to tap on my experience in reverse engineering and obsolescence solution. I reckoned this first meeting would not be the last, as the DGM generously offered his team and facilities at my service for a possible future collaboration.

I took note of his kind offer and promised to get back to him and his lead engineer, once I am able to provide a viable solution to their black box issue in PCB reverse engineering. In the meantime, there will be a lot of catching up on my part to get up to speed on the subject of remanufacturing.

Ps: As I made my way out, one of the security guards, a retired civil servant, came and shook my hand. He recognized me as the author of an eschatological book he read, and expressed his appreciation for the insights gained from my theological work. Now, that really surprised me and make my day!

A Trilogy in the Works...

(Click on the image to go to the HAVAH blogsite)

In the first half of last year, I completed and published the sequel to HAVAH, a sci-fi novel that centers around the AI entity who gained sentience. Then, I diverted to other novels and books of a devotional nature for a change.

Since completing my memoir, I am now contemplating on resuming the HAVAH series to give it a trilogy. It's definitely not an easy undertaking and I'm exploring different approaches and possible storylines to up the ante. This is expected of any sci-fi series worthy of any ardent reader of this genre.

Hopefully, I can get all the details sort out to start writing the next adventure for my favorite protagonists. If you have read my engineering books and found it enjoyable, I am sure you will find the HAVAH stories equally compelling and engaging.

Do give it a try and let me have your thoughts. Thank you very much!

 

Release Announcement!

(Click on book cover to order)

For readers who have been following the progress of my memoir, I'm happy to annouce that the final draft has been completed and submitted for publication on Amazon KDP. It will be available for order on March 23, 2026.

It has been an emotional journey retracing the steps I took from a boy of nine whose first exposure to electronics led to a career which, if I may put it succinctly, brought not only immeasurable joy and fulfillment but a treasure trove of knowledge that resulted in a legacy of six engineering books to the PCB-RE community.

Now that the snapshots of my memories have been put into print, there is no more regret as far as I can honestly attest. The only hope I have now is that readers around the world will be inspired by my words to go farther and do better in their own journeys.

I look forward to your support and reviews in the days ahead. Take care and stay safe, my friends!

 

Completing the Circuit

And so, here we are.

The full schematic of a life. Traced connection by connection, component by component, from the boy with the first spark to the man with six engineering books and a lifetime of memories.

Every path had a purpose, even when I couldn't see it at the time. The sacrifice that led me to the Air Force. The training that defined my skills. The mentors who taught me to see. The apprentices who carried the knowledge forward. The wife who believed when it was all she could offer.

The circuit is complete. Not finished—life continues, and who knows what new components may yet be added? But complete in the sense of coherent. Understood. Traced and mapped and made visible.

I look back at the journey and feel only gratitude. For the challenges that strengthened me. For the people who shaped me. For the work that gave me purpose. For the readers who made the writing worthwhile. Nothing that happened was wasted. Every moment contributed to the whole.

That's the beauty of a full schematic.

 

The Published Author

It's been over ten years since I exchanged the workbench for the writing desk.

Ten years. A decade. When I look back, it feels both long and short—long in terms of what I've accomplished, short in terms of how quickly the time has passed.

I have written a total of six engineering books. Each one well received by the engineering community. Each one contributing, in its own way, to the body of knowledge around PCB reverse engineering.

But I didn't stop there.

In between the engineering titles, I ventured into other genres. Family. Faith. Fiction. Writing, like engineering, is multi-disciplined. I couldn't be content with just writing about technical stuff. There were other stories to tell, other worlds to explore.

You never know what you're capable of until you try. That mantra has stuck with me through all these years.

In the process, my writing journey took on a life of its own. Not by compulsion or necessity, but by the sheer pleasure of discovering new worlds. Of seeing what words and imagination can come up with when you give them free rein.

Through trials and errors, I've come to realize that not every genre works for every author. My non-engineering books are well-received by peers and friends. That's about it. 

I've wished, sometimes, that international readers would give my other works a chance to land on their bookshelves—the way they did the engineering titles.

But perhaps that's not how it's meant to be. Perhaps my engineering voice is the one that resonates beyond my immediate circle. 

And that's enough. More than enough.