Humanoid-Assembly Fleet Recovery Leader — Aerospace Manufacturing

The mandate

A learned fastening and material-presentation policy performed within its pilot cell but produced unstable reach and recovery behaviour after transfer to a differently staged assembly zone. Safeguards contained the event and no product escaped Quality control. The embodied-automation leader resigned after review showed that fleet release evidence did not preserve tooling, operator proximity, surface, lighting and work-sequence context.

The interim must begin within two weeks for ten months, commanding deployment containment, context reconstruction, fleet release control, two production-rate ramps and successor induction. Permanent recruitment opens after an eighty-day deployment baseline. Six weeks are protected for overlap; the term will not extend to unrelated fixed automation, new factory design or autonomous material-movement programmes.

Handover requires every released skill to resolve demonstration and training episodes, robot embodiment, tool, fixture, workpiece state, zone context, human role, safety constraint, simulation, qualification, rollout and rollback. The successor must lead unseen tool-wear and zone-transfer exercises, while Safety and Quality accept residual hardware variation, simulation coverage and supplier-model debt.

The authority may suspend skills or robots, cap rollout cohorts, require witnessed operation, set recovery and rollback gates, direct the approved €32 million remediation and appoint temporary workstream owners. Safety approves protective measures; Industrial Operations releases production; Quality accepts product. The interim cannot certify machinery, alter aircraft design authority, dismiss permanently or spend beyond delegation.

Development of general-purpose humanoid intelligence, procurement of a replacement fleet and optimisation of assembly methods unrelated to the contained behaviours are excluded. The leader may demand accessible policy, episode and configuration evidence but cannot weaken workforce consultation or formal industrial controls. Recovery is bounded to trustworthy skill transfer across approved tasks and operating zones.

Why this seat is open

The contained transfer failure showed that a successful pilot had been treated as a portable fleet capability without preserving the context that made it safe. The responsible executive’s departure left no authority spanning Robotics, Production, Safety and Quality. Temporary leadership is needed through rate ramps before the company appoints a long-term embodied-automation owner.

What you will own

• Reconstruct affected skills across demonstration, episode curation, policy build, embodiment, tool, fixture, zone, qualification, release and rollback.
• Define context envelopes for workpiece state, lighting, surface, access, operator proximity, tool wear and production sequence.
• Decide which skills may resume, require narrowed conditions, need retraining or must remain withdrawn from production.
• Command exercises for worn tool, shifted fixture, altered lighting, unfamiliar operator action, sensor occlusion and recovery interruption.
• Establish cohort and stop rules that prevent a local performance gain from silently becoming an unbounded fleet deployment.
• Govern remediation against qualified contexts, safe interventions, product-quality evidence, rollback speed and repeated manual rescue.
• Transfer command through two rate ramps and successor acceptance of embodiment, simulation and proprietary-policy limitations.

Candidate qualifications

• Held executive embodied-AI, advanced robotics or autonomous-assembly authority within live aerospace, automotive or precision manufacturing.
• Reconstructed learned manipulation across demonstrations, datasets, robot embodiment, end effector, fixture, workpiece and production context.
• Contained fleet transfer after distribution shift, tool wear, environmental change or unexpected human interaction under schedule pressure.
• Operated within machinery safety, product quality and workforce consultation without treating model performance as production approval.
• Governed staged deployment and rollback across heterogeneous robots, cells and proprietary learning or simulation platforms.
• Handed recovered embodied automation to permanent leadership through adversarial zone-transfer and production-rate exercises.

Non-negotiables

• Available within two weeks for exclusive Toulouse service and shift-level presence during both production-rate ramps.
• Has governed learned manipulation in live industrial work; laboratory humanoid demonstrations alone are insufficient.
• No undisclosed interest in humanoid, simulation, annotation, tooling or robot-maintenance suppliers in scope.
• Will preserve product, worker and machinery controls even when restricted rollout delays publicised automation targets.

1. 49 words maximum. State your Toulouse availability and one robot skill that failed when transferred beyond its pilot context.
2. 49 words maximum. How did you bound a learned manipulation policy across tool wear and human proximity?
3. 49 words maximum. Which unseen zone-transfer exercise would qualify permanent leadership before handover?