Why practical skills matter more than ever
What happened
An experienced engineer argues that AI tools help with code snippets, documentation and design suggestions but cannot replace hands-on troubleshooting for plant recovery. The article emphasises that when SCADA alarms escalate, teams call human troubleshooting experts, not chatbots. Watch RFx and LTSA competence evidence to avoid substituting AI claims for verifiable operator skills
Buyer takeaway
Keep operator competence and hands-on troubleshooting as contract deliverables and acceptance gates—AI tools are supportive, not a substitute
Cost / money
Expect negotiation on priced training, mobilisation and on-site expert days if competence verification is mandated in contracts
Supplier / commercial
Use pre-qualification to require evidence of field competence and knowledge-transfer plans from service suppliers
Safety / operations
Preserving human troubleshooting capability reduces shutdown duration and unsafe improvised fixes; require proof during handover
What to watch
Vendors promoting AI-first solutions may under-deliver in emergency response; treat those claims skeptically in technical evaluations
Key facts
- Author with decades of cross-industry engineering experience
- Focus on AI as augmentation (code snippets, summaries) rather than replacement
- Practical troubleshooting remains the on-site response for process upsets
Source excerpts
They call the troubleshooting expert. AI tools are based on probability, suggesting the next word in a sentence, for instance
They call the troubleshooting expert
The temperature appears normal, but the associated control valve is either faulty or the product entering the plant has changed grade. This is the world of instrumentation and automation professionals: a place where measurement is never just a number, and control is never just code
