Open to senior R&D · algorithm engineer roles · UK · Available immediately
Home / Consulting

Consulting
for hard trade-offs.

Selective advisory and diagnostic engagements for engineering teams facing high-stakes trade-off decisions. Methods are peer-reviewed and published; client data and application details stay fully confidential.

For engineering and R&D teams making decisions where the right answer depends on balancing many objectives at once — and getting it wrong is expensive. Three structured ways to work together, drawn directly from the methods and frameworks behind the doctoral research and the AcoustR / Sensorry ventures.

§ 00 / When to engage

You may need this if any of these sound familiar.

Trigger 01

You are adding sensors but diagnostic confidence is not improving — or you cannot explain why the current configuration was chosen.

Trigger 02

Multiple teams disagree on which signals matter. False alarms, missed faults, or redundant measurements are increasing maintenance cost.

Trigger 03

You need a defensible sensor or telemetry strategy before a tender, a redesign gate, or an R&D programme review.

Trigger 04

You need to justify a configuration to engineering, finance, safety, or programme leadership — and "it seemed right" is no longer sufficient.

No black-box consulting. The methods behind every engagement — MOSOF and NDCI — are peer-reviewed and published in Sensors (MDPI). You can read them before we speak. Client data and application details remain fully confidential under NDA.

Book a scoping call →
§ 01 / Offers

Three engagements, scoped to fit.

01

Diagnostic Coverage Audit

Sensor Optimisation Audit · Three-week engagement · Fixed scope

The shortest path from "we have a sensor network we're not sure is right" to a defensible answer — what is redundant, what is missing, and what to change first. Built on the MOSOF / NDCI methods validated on the Boeing 737-800 ECS and published in peer-reviewed journals. Applied to your asset and your specific objectives.

Deliverables: NDCI contribution ranking table, sensor redundancy map, coverage-gap analysis, Pareto-optimal configuration options, and a final prioritised recommendation report with executive summary. NDA-compatible; synthetic or anonymised data accepted for initial scoping.

What's included

  • Kick-off workshop to capture stakeholders, objectives, and constraints
  • Analysis of the existing sensor configuration against information-theoretic and reliability metrics
  • NDCI scoring of every sensor in the current network
  • Identification of redundancy, coverage gaps, and a proposed optimised configuration
  • Final read-out with prioritised recommendations

Best for

  • Mid-life sensor reviews on safety-critical assets
  • Pre-tender clarity before specifying a new sensor stack
  • R&D programmes scoping IVHM coverage
  • OEMs reviewing diagnostic value-for-cost across a platform
02

Custom Optimisation Framework

Project-based · Bespoke methodology · Production-grade output

An end-to-end engagement to develop a multi-objective optimisation framework tailored to your platform, system, or programme. We start from the methods of the published research — MOSOF, NDCI, NSGA-family search — and adapt them to your objectives, constraints, decision criteria, and operating reality. The result is a tool your team can use, not a slide deck.

What's included

  • Joint problem-formulation: encoding objectives, constraints, and stakeholder weightings
  • Adaptation of the optimisation algorithm to your specific decision space
  • Validation against a reference case from your operation
  • Documented framework hand-over to your engineering team
  • Optional: training and on-call support during first uses in production

Best for

  • OEMs with a recurring trade-off problem across product lines
  • R&D programmes needing a defensible decision framework
  • Operators planning fleet-wide sensor or maintenance redesigns
  • Teams whose existing tools collapse multiple objectives into a single-axis cost-benefit
03

Technical Advisory Retainer

Ongoing · Strategic input · Senior bandwidth on tap

Ongoing strategic input for engineering and R&D leadership making complex trade-off decisions. A monthly review, on-call expertise across optimisation, IVHM, and system architecture, and a single point of contact for second-opinion judgement on the calls that matter. Designed for scale-ups, OEMs, and innovation programmes that need senior technical bandwidth without the overhead of a full hire.

What's included

  • Monthly working session with the technical leadership team
  • On-call availability for second-opinion judgement and review
  • Quarterly written briefing on the state of the technical roadmap
  • Optional: ad-hoc deep dives on specific decisions (priced as add-ons)

Best for

  • Industrial-AI scale-ups making sensor / data architecture decisions
  • OEM R&D teams entering an IVHM programme
  • Innovation programmes balancing multiple competing pilots
  • Founders building diagnostic / decision products
§ 02 / Process

From brief to delivery.

A short, deliberate path. The first call is always free, focused on whether your problem is the right shape for what I do — and saying so honestly when it isn't.

Step 01

Brief

You send a short note about the asset, the decision, and what's at stake. No NDA needed for a first conversation.

Step 02

Scoping call

A 30-minute call to confirm the right offer, the right scope, and whether the problem is genuinely a fit. Free.

Step 03

Proposal

A concise written proposal with objectives, deliverables, timeline, and price. Usually within a week.

Step 04

Delivery

Kick-off, milestones, and a clear hand-over. Senior bandwidth throughout — you talk to me, not a layered team.

§ 03 / Who this is for

The right kind of problem.

I work best on problems where the answer depends on balancing many objectives at once — and where the cost of getting the call wrong is large enough to justify thinking carefully. The home turf is broad: sensors, diagnostics, system architecture, decision frameworks, ML and software systems with multi-objective trade-offs, and anywhere optimisation theory needs to survive contact with real operations.

Where I'm not a fit: single-axis cost-down work that pretends a trade-off doesn't exist, engagements that don't actually need a method behind the decision, and anything that doesn't have a defensible engineering or scientific structure underneath what's being optimised.

Likely a fit

  • Aerospace OEMs & tier-1 suppliers
  • Industrial scale-ups with IoT / sensor stacks
  • Energy & utilities operators
  • MROs running condition-based maintenance programmes
  • R&D programmes funding IVHM, diagnostics, or applied-AI work
  • ML / data teams whose model-design decisions trade off accuracy, cost, latency, and reliability
  • Software teams with multi-objective design, A/B, or system-tuning problems
  • Founders building diagnostic, decision, or industrial-AI products

What I won't do

  • Single-axis cost-down work that pretends a trade-off doesn't exist
  • Engagements scoped under £5k — the work won't have time to be useful
  • Pure-strategy consulting with no engineering or scientific structure underneath
  • "Innovation theatre" — programme work whose deliverable is a deck, not a tool or recommendation
  • Work I cannot defend in writing — every engagement produces an artefact I would put my name on publicly
§ 04 / FAQ

Common questions.

Are the methods you use proprietary or published?

Published. MOSOF and NDCI are both peer-reviewed in Sensors (MDPI). When you engage me, you get the published methods adapted to your problem — not a black box. Any extensions or custom encoding made for your engagement become yours, documented for hand-over.

Will the work be confidential?

Yes. Engagements are NDA-friendly, and any specifics about your asset, configuration, or operation stay confidential by default. The methods I bring are public; the application of them to your problem is yours.

Do you work outside aerospace?

Yes. The methods are domain-agnostic. The strongest published applications are in aerospace IVHM and industrial automation, but the underlying multi-objective structure applies anywhere sensors, diagnostics, ML systems, software architecture, or trade-off-heavy engineering decisions are the bottleneck — including software, applied-AI, and data-systems contexts.

Can you work with our existing tooling?

Usually, yes. Frameworks are typically delivered as Python implementations that integrate with whatever model/simulation environment your team already runs. Where a clean integration isn't possible, I'll say so in the proposal.

How is this different from a generic engineering consultancy?

Two ways. First: depth in one specific method-family (multi-objective sensor and decision optimisation), not breadth across many. Second: you work with the senior practitioner directly — there's no junior team between you and the work.

What's the smallest engagement you'll take?

The Sensor Optimisation Audit at £6,500 is the floor. Below that, the right move is usually a free scoping call and a referral, rather than an engagement that won't have time to be useful.

§ / Send a brief

Tell me the decision.

A few sentences on the asset, the decision in front of you, the timeline, and what wrong looks like is enough for a first reply. No deck, no NDA — just the shape of the problem.

Book a free scoping call ↗ Or send a brief →

30 min · free · UK / GMT · response within one working day · slots typically within 5 working days

Scoping call30 min · Calendly
Audit enquiryThree-week audit
Custom frameworkProject-based
Advisory retainerOngoing input