Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 20:59:56 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 13:25:40 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

snip
If you spent your time seeking facts, instead of playing head games
with yourself, you might actually come up with something useful.

/snip

This seems to be a pandemic with economists and policy
makers. The various economic/ideological "schools" now
appear to be no more appropriate to today's top level
socioeconomic/fiscal challenges, such as the disappearance
[not just the off-shoring] of work, than do the "Carlist" or
"Jacobite" positions. Times have moved [rapidly] on and
they are still wandering around lost in the 1930s, debating
exchange rates, emigration policy, inflation rates, and
non-teriff trade barriers.


Well, the study of economics is changing. I think you'll see a new
generation, that was taught in a different way, starting to make their
voices heard in the near future -- less theory, and more
evidence-based research.

My son has a degree in economics and a master's in mathematics. He
represents one wing of it -- the econometrics, Big Data wing. It
landed him a very good job, first with a think tank and now with a
top-ranked consulting firm. But he's only 26; although he's
co-authored a number of journal articles, he's not at a level where
anyone outside of a narrow field would have heard his voice.

The other is the Behavioral Economics wing. These are the ones who are
taking cues from psychology to examine how real people behave
economically in the real world. They have a lot to add to the
conversation.

Between the two, my bet is that what we hear from the economics
profession is going to be very different in ten years or so.


One major area of concern is their failure to appreciate
that another layer of complexity has been abruptly
"trowelled" over the existing micro and macro economic
layers. This new "hyper-economics" [for lack of a better
word] appears to be at least as different from macro as
macro is from micro. This is not only due to the new
globalization and rise of sovereign transnational
corporations including the banks, but also to the rise of
automation, Artificial Intelligence, bioengineering,
nanotechnology, instantaneous world wide communications, and
things we are not yet aware of.


Complexity is a reason that pure theorizing is going to decline in
importance. The theories get tangled up as more of them become
involved in the equations. It's like differential equations in
engineering, and real-world engineering has gravitated toward
numerical analysis, such as FEA. Economics is going the same way.

This is where econometrics comes in. You analyze data with statistics
and calculus; you apply some knowledge and experience to the
relationships; you build a model. Your model is a hypothesis. You test
the model against predicted results. You refine it with new data. You
see if you can simplify it by throwing out variables that you thought
might be important but which prove to be irrelevant. If the model
isn't giving good results, you re-think it, first looking for other
variables that you missed.

This is what my son does for a living. He just completed a big pricing
model for a car company. It took three months of 7-day-a-week work.
Today he left for Costa Rica to cool off. g

Three days per month, for the next two years, he will test and refine
the model as results come in.

That's how much of economics is being done today. It applies to all
sorts of things that economists study.

--
Ed Huntress
  #2   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,888
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 20:59:56 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 13:25:40 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

snip
If you spent your time seeking facts, instead of playing head games
with yourself, you might actually come up with something useful.

/snip

This seems to be a pandemic with economists and policy
makers. The various economic/ideological "schools" now
appear to be no more appropriate to today's top level
socioeconomic/fiscal challenges, such as the disappearance
[not just the off-shoring] of work, than do the "Carlist" or
"Jacobite" positions. Times have moved [rapidly] on and
they are still wandering around lost in the 1930s, debating
exchange rates, emigration policy, inflation rates, and
non-teriff trade barriers.


Well, the study of economics is changing. I think you'll see a new
generation, that was taught in a different way, starting to make
their
voices heard in the near future -- less theory, and more
evidence-based research.

My son has a degree in economics and a master's in mathematics. He
represents one wing of it -- the econometrics, Big Data wing. It
landed him a very good job, first with a think tank and now with a
top-ranked consulting firm. But he's only 26; although he's
co-authored a number of journal articles, he's not at a level where
anyone outside of a narrow field would have heard his voice.

The other is the Behavioral Economics wing. These are the ones who
are
taking cues from psychology to examine how real people behave
economically in the real world. They have a lot to add to the
conversation.

Between the two, my bet is that what we hear from the economics
profession is going to be very different in ten years or so.


One major area of concern is their failure to appreciate
that another layer of complexity has been abruptly
"trowelled" over the existing micro and macro economic
layers. This new "hyper-economics" [for lack of a better
word] appears to be at least as different from macro as
macro is from micro. This is not only due to the new
globalization and rise of sovereign transnational
corporations including the banks, but also to the rise of
automation, Artificial Intelligence, bioengineering,
nanotechnology, instantaneous world wide communications, and
things we are not yet aware of.


Complexity is a reason that pure theorizing is going to decline in
importance. The theories get tangled up as more of them become
involved in the equations. It's like differential equations in
engineering, and real-world engineering has gravitated toward
numerical analysis, such as FEA. Economics is going the same way.

This is where econometrics comes in. You analyze data with
statistics
and calculus; you apply some knowledge and experience to the
relationships; you build a model. Your model is a hypothesis. You
test
the model against predicted results. You refine it with new data.
You
see if you can simplify it by throwing out variables that you
thought
might be important but which prove to be irrelevant. If the model
isn't giving good results, you re-think it, first looking for other
variables that you missed.

This is what my son does for a living. He just completed a big
pricing
model for a car company. It took three months of 7-day-a-week work.
Today he left for Costa Rica to cool off. g

Three days per month, for the next two years, he will test and
refine
the model as results come in.

That's how much of economics is being done today. It applies to all
sorts of things that economists study.

--
Ed Huntress


FEA works because the interactions between elements can be
quantitatively characterized. The soft sciences have always lagged
behind the hard ones because they can't fully understand the motives
of and interactions between people. As Niven and Pournelle(?) wrote,
the difference between lawyers and engineers is that the truths a
lawyer seeks actively avoid discovery, and so it is with market
research.
-jsw
-jsw


  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:39:51 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 20:59:56 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 13:25:40 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

snip
If you spent your time seeking facts, instead of playing head games
with yourself, you might actually come up with something useful.
/snip

This seems to be a pandemic with economists and policy
makers. The various economic/ideological "schools" now
appear to be no more appropriate to today's top level
socioeconomic/fiscal challenges, such as the disappearance
[not just the off-shoring] of work, than do the "Carlist" or
"Jacobite" positions. Times have moved [rapidly] on and
they are still wandering around lost in the 1930s, debating
exchange rates, emigration policy, inflation rates, and
non-teriff trade barriers.


Well, the study of economics is changing. I think you'll see a new
generation, that was taught in a different way, starting to make
their
voices heard in the near future -- less theory, and more
evidence-based research.

My son has a degree in economics and a master's in mathematics. He
represents one wing of it -- the econometrics, Big Data wing. It
landed him a very good job, first with a think tank and now with a
top-ranked consulting firm. But he's only 26; although he's
co-authored a number of journal articles, he's not at a level where
anyone outside of a narrow field would have heard his voice.

The other is the Behavioral Economics wing. These are the ones who
are
taking cues from psychology to examine how real people behave
economically in the real world. They have a lot to add to the
conversation.

Between the two, my bet is that what we hear from the economics
profession is going to be very different in ten years or so.


One major area of concern is their failure to appreciate
that another layer of complexity has been abruptly
"trowelled" over the existing micro and macro economic
layers. This new "hyper-economics" [for lack of a better
word] appears to be at least as different from macro as
macro is from micro. This is not only due to the new
globalization and rise of sovereign transnational
corporations including the banks, but also to the rise of
automation, Artificial Intelligence, bioengineering,
nanotechnology, instantaneous world wide communications, and
things we are not yet aware of.


Complexity is a reason that pure theorizing is going to decline in
importance. The theories get tangled up as more of them become
involved in the equations. It's like differential equations in
engineering, and real-world engineering has gravitated toward
numerical analysis, such as FEA. Economics is going the same way.

This is where econometrics comes in. You analyze data with
statistics
and calculus; you apply some knowledge and experience to the
relationships; you build a model. Your model is a hypothesis. You
test
the model against predicted results. You refine it with new data.
You
see if you can simplify it by throwing out variables that you
thought
might be important but which prove to be irrelevant. If the model
isn't giving good results, you re-think it, first looking for other
variables that you missed.

This is what my son does for a living. He just completed a big
pricing
model for a car company. It took three months of 7-day-a-week work.
Today he left for Costa Rica to cool off. g

Three days per month, for the next two years, he will test and
refine
the model as results come in.

That's how much of economics is being done today. It applies to all
sorts of things that economists study.

--
Ed Huntress


FEA works because the interactions between elements can be
quantitatively characterized. The soft sciences have always lagged
behind the hard ones because they can't fully understand the motives
of and interactions between people. As Niven and Pournelle(?) wrote,
the difference between lawyers and engineers is that the truths a
lawyer seeks actively avoid discovery, and so it is with market
research.
-jsw
-jsw


Having done a fair amount of market research, I don't think that's an
accurate contrast. Market researchers don't *avoid* discovery; they
just don't have the legal means to do it.

But they certainly don't avoid it. They dig up every bit of
competitive data that they can. I used to spend hours pouring over
import data for clients, trying to tease the specific, by-company
competitor data out of the government reports, which made an effort to
disguise the by-company data.

Sometimes they succeeded at hiding it, and sometimes I succeeded in
digging it out.

--
Ed Huntress
  #4   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,888
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:39:51 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


FEA works because the interactions between elements can be
quantitatively characterized. The soft sciences have always lagged
behind the hard ones because they can't fully understand the motives
of and interactions between people. As Niven and Pournelle(?) wrote,
the difference between lawyers and engineers is that the truths a
lawyer seeks actively avoid discovery, and so it is with market
research.
-jsw
-jsw


Having done a fair amount of market research, I don't think that's
an
accurate contrast. Market researchers don't *avoid* discovery; they
just don't have the legal means to do it.

But they certainly don't avoid it. They dig up every bit of
competitive data that they can. I used to spend hours pouring over
import data for clients, trying to tease the specific, by-company
competitor data out of the government reports, which made an effort
to
disguise the by-company data.

Sometimes they succeeded at hiding it, and sometimes I succeeded in
digging it out.

--
Ed Huntress


Have another coffee and reread what I posted. It's the facts
themselves that avoid discovery, not the researchers, in a situation
where revealing them would aid your business competitors.

I spent my time in the Army keeping payroll data secret, not because
anyone cares what a Lieutenant makes, but because the location where
he receives it reveals troop deployments. Even the length of the
encrypted stream is valuable to a spy because it reveals changes in
the number of troops unless it's padded. Similar indirect analysis is
valuable in commercial espionage.

The CIA has large departments dedicated to collecting and analyzing
open-source economic data to better understand the strengths and
weaknesses of potential enemies. We had and used it to plan WW2
bombing raids on Japan because we had helped them build the factories
we destroyed, and kept copies of the plans.

Naturally we don't make it easy for others to reciprocate similarly
against us. The government -shouldn't- release economic data in such
detail that it will help the Chinese take over. Your difficulty was an
unintended collateral consequence.

The Titanium for Vietnam fighter jets came from the USSR, through a
tortuous network that concealed its final destination. The Market
Basket article I referenced told how they used intermediaries to buy
up land to avoid revealing their intent and driving up the price.
Those are examples of old tricks to deceive market, CIA, KGB, NSA
et.al. analysts looking for patterns.

As long as those trying to hide have incentive and means to pay better
than those trying to find, they will attract the better brains.
-jsw


  #5   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,152
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:09:11 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

snip
Complexity is a reason that pure theorizing is going to decline in
importance. The theories get tangled up as more of them become
involved in the equations. It's like differential equations in
engineering, and real-world engineering has gravitated toward
numerical analysis, such as FEA. Economics is going the same way.

/snip

Indeed, and this may well be a reason to adopt a far more
pragmatic approach such as EvOp and Action Research
methodology
http://tinyurl.com/nffwfkz
http://tinyurl.com/2rarbb
rather than trying to predict the future, which Mandlebrot
has demonstrated may well be impossible in other than the
most general terms, one the order of "if its wintertime the
temperature will be below average."
http://tinyurl.com/pz5rmxp

One of the major problems is the failure of the policy
makers to formulate their goals and objectives in
quantifiable, measurable and objective terms, and then to
collect data to evaluate the effects of their policy on the
areas of interest. [if the data is not available or can't be
collected, its not quantifiable, measurable or objective].
It appears the unintended consequences and "side effects" of
a policy frequently have more impact on the socioeconomy
than to the objectives.

Behavioral economics and non-rational economic decisions
should have driven a stake through the heart of Fama's
"efficient marketplace hypothesis" but so far it hasn't.
While labor/time intensive, Stephenson's Q methodology
http://tinyurl.com/nvdxfo would seem to offer far better
insight into the market, e. g. The Alibaba IPO
http://tinyurl.com/myf2vor.


One of the major problems is getting agreement on exactly
what the [non contradictory] objective are. Is it good or
bad when the median wage increases? Is it good or bad when
corporations pay less in taxes? Is it good or bad when
unemployment or high? Much depends on which perspective or
valiance you are responding from, i.e. individual (employee
or CEO), business, industrial sector, aggrigiate/national,
sovereign supranational corporation, etc.


--
Unka' George

"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"

-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"


  #6   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:09:18 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:39:51 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


FEA works because the interactions between elements can be
quantitatively characterized. The soft sciences have always lagged
behind the hard ones because they can't fully understand the motives
of and interactions between people. As Niven and Pournelle(?) wrote,
the difference between lawyers and engineers is that the truths a
lawyer seeks actively avoid discovery, and so it is with market
research.
-jsw
-jsw


Having done a fair amount of market research, I don't think that's
an
accurate contrast. Market researchers don't *avoid* discovery; they
just don't have the legal means to do it.

But they certainly don't avoid it. They dig up every bit of
competitive data that they can. I used to spend hours pouring over
import data for clients, trying to tease the specific, by-company
competitor data out of the government reports, which made an effort
to
disguise the by-company data.

Sometimes they succeeded at hiding it, and sometimes I succeeded in
digging it out.

--
Ed Huntress


Have another coffee and reread what I posted. It's the facts
themselves that avoid discovery, not the researchers, in a situation
where revealing them would aid your business competitors.


Maybe you'll want to have another cup yourself. It was clear that your
sentence contained a grammatical error; it just wasn't clear what kind
of error you made. d8-)

"Facts" don't have volition -- they don't "actively avoid" anything. I
didn't think you were waxing lyrical and indulging in personification,
because the previous statement was about people -- lawyers and
engineers. So I guessed that you were referring to the people who do
those things, not that "facts" got up and ran away from "discovery."

My mistake. You WERE waxing lyrical. g



I spent my time in the Army keeping payroll data secret, not because
anyone cares what a Lieutenant makes, but because the location where
he receives it reveals troop deployments. Even the length of the
encrypted stream is valuable to a spy because it reveals changes in
the number of troops unless it's padded. Similar indirect analysis is
valuable in commercial espionage.

The CIA has large departments dedicated to collecting and analyzing
open-source economic data to better understand the strengths and
weaknesses of potential enemies. We had and used it to plan WW2
bombing raids on Japan because we had helped them build the factories
we destroyed, and kept copies of the plans.

Naturally we don't make it easy for others to reciprocate similarly
against us. The government -shouldn't- release economic data in such
detail that it will help the Chinese take over. Your difficulty was an
unintended collateral consequence.


Well, the Dept. of Commerce is explicit about why they do that.
They've been ordered by Congress not to divulge information that would
give one company an advantage over another. In this case, my client
was an American company, trying to find out what a couple of Japanese
companies were doing. That was 30 years ago.

Ed Huntress


The Titanium for Vietnam fighter jets came from the USSR, through a
tortuous network that concealed its final destination. The Market
Basket article I referenced told how they used intermediaries to buy
up land to avoid revealing their intent and driving up the price.
Those are examples of old tricks to deceive market, CIA, KGB, NSA
et.al. analysts looking for patterns.

As long as those trying to hide have incentive and means to pay better
than those trying to find, they will attract the better brains.
-jsw

  #7   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,888
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:09:18 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


My mistake. You WERE waxing lyrical. g


That was a pristine stream-of-consciousness first draft.

Normally I edit substantially after capturing the important ideas.


  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,152
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:09:11 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:
snip
Well, the study of economics is changing. I think you'll see a new
generation, that was taught in a different way, starting to make their
voices heard in the near future -- less theory, and more
evidence-based research.

/snip

Those who are following this fork may enjoy
[shame the good articles now seem to be in the overseas
press]
http://tinyurl.com/lhhw5xu

--
Unka' George

"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"

-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"
  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 12:24:07 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:09:18 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


My mistake. You WERE waxing lyrical. g


That was a pristine stream-of-consciousness first draft.

Normally I edit substantially after capturing the important ideas.


Well, I don't. That's too much like work. So feel free to misconstrue
my grammatical errors. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress
  #10   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,888
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:09:11 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:
snip
Well, the study of economics is changing. I think you'll see a new
generation, that was taught in a different way, starting to make
their
voices heard in the near future -- less theory, and more
evidence-based research.

/snip

Those who are following this fork may enjoy
[shame the good articles now seem to be in the overseas
press]
http://tinyurl.com/lhhw5xu

--
Unka' George



Thanks, good article.

We have been there befo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1873
"The Panic of 1873 and the subsequent depression had several
underlying causes, of which economic historians debate the relative
importance."
I.e., they still don't understand.

The hazard of government involvement in business:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cr%C3%A...merica_scandal

jsw




  #11   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,152
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 13:29:31 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

snip
The hazard of government involvement in business:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cr%C3%A...merica_scandal

/snip

While correct, this is only one half the story. What is the
hazard of the government non involvement in business,
particularly when this can occur early enough to avoid
problems requiring taxpayer funded bailouts?

You may find this informative Like the GM ad said "its not
your father's Oldsmobile," and it's not your father's
economy. Some things really are different this time.
http://tinyurl.com/lycxejn



We can never know, but huge sums of money may have been
saved and years of lost economic progress avoided if there
had a procedure in place to monitor the Lehmans, AIGs, GMCs,
and intervene with some sort of conservatorship while there
was still time for corrective action.

IMNSHO we desperately need a "careless and reckless
operation of a business enterprise" analog to the "careless
and reckless operation of a motor vehicle" statute, with
license/charter suspension and revocation. If it works for
the NFL, it would appear that a few 90 day suspensions of
Fuld, Greenberg, Corzine, Cayne, etc. from the team [with
salary/perk-bennie forfeiture] for unsportsmanlike conduct,
delay of game or unnecessary roughness, would have done
wonders in improving their concentration and focus.


--
Unka' George

"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"

-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"
  #12   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 10:41:23 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:09:11 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

snip
Complexity is a reason that pure theorizing is going to decline in
importance. The theories get tangled up as more of them become
involved in the equations. It's like differential equations in
engineering, and real-world engineering has gravitated toward
numerical analysis, such as FEA. Economics is going the same way.

/snip

Indeed, and this may well be a reason to adopt a far more
pragmatic approach such as EvOp and Action Research
methodology
http://tinyurl.com/nffwfkz
http://tinyurl.com/2rarbb
rather than trying to predict the future, which Mandlebrot
has demonstrated may well be impossible in other than the
most general terms, one the order of "if its wintertime the
temperature will be below average."
http://tinyurl.com/pz5rmxp

One of the major problems is the failure of the policy
makers to formulate their goals and objectives in
quantifiable, measurable and objective terms, and then to
collect data to evaluate the effects of their policy on the
areas of interest. [if the data is not available or can't be
collected, its not quantifiable, measurable or objective].
It appears the unintended consequences and "side effects" of
a policy frequently have more impact on the socioeconomy
than to the objectives.


They usually do better than doing nothing.


Behavioral economics and non-rational economic decisions
should have driven a stake through the heart of Fama's
"efficient marketplace hypothesis" but so far it hasn't.


Behavioral economics is in its infancy.

While labor/time intensive, Stephenson's Q methodology
http://tinyurl.com/nvdxfo would seem to offer far better
insight into the market, e. g. The Alibaba IPO
http://tinyurl.com/myf2vor.


One of the major problems is getting agreement on exactly
what the [non contradictory] objective are. Is it good or
bad when the median wage increases?
Is it good or bad when
corporations pay less in taxes? Is it good or bad when
unemployment or high?


Like Schrodinger's cat, they're both.

Much depends on which perspective or
valiance you are responding from, i.e. individual (employee
or CEO), business, industrial sector, aggrigiate/national,
sovereign supranational corporation, etc.


Those are all questions that economomists are asked to answer. But the
policy goals are not economics. They're politics.

--
Ed Huntress
  #13   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,888
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 13:29:31 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


IMNSHO we desperately need a "careless and reckless
operation of a business enterprise" analog to the "careless
and reckless operation of a motor vehicle" statute, with
license/charter suspension and revocation. ....


Sure, if we can apply the same standards and remedies to governments
and their institutions.



  #14   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:09:18 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:39:51 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


FEA works because the interactions between elements can be
quantitatively characterized. The soft sciences have always lagged
behind the hard ones because they can't fully understand the motives
of and interactions between people. As Niven and Pournelle(?) wrote,
the difference between lawyers and engineers is that the truths a
lawyer seeks actively avoid discovery, and so it is with market
research.
-jsw
-jsw


Having done a fair amount of market research, I don't think that's
an
accurate contrast. Market researchers don't *avoid* discovery; they
just don't have the legal means to do it.

But they certainly don't avoid it. They dig up every bit of
competitive data that they can. I used to spend hours pouring over
import data for clients, trying to tease the specific, by-company
competitor data out of the government reports, which made an effort
to
disguise the by-company data.

Sometimes they succeeded at hiding it, and sometimes I succeeded in
digging it out.

--
Ed Huntress


Have another coffee and reread what I posted. It's the facts
themselves that avoid discovery, not the researchers, in a situation
where revealing them would aid your business competitors.

I spent my time in the Army keeping payroll data secret, not because
anyone cares what a Lieutenant makes, but because the location where
he receives it reveals troop deployments. Even the length of the
encrypted stream is valuable to a spy because it reveals changes in
the number of troops unless it's padded. Similar indirect analysis is
valuable in commercial espionage.

The CIA has large departments dedicated to collecting and analyzing
open-source economic data to better understand the strengths and
weaknesses of potential enemies. We had and used it to plan WW2
bombing raids on Japan because we had helped them build the factories
we destroyed, and kept copies of the plans.

Naturally we don't make it easy for others to reciprocate similarly
against us. The government -shouldn't- release economic data in such
detail that it will help the Chinese take over. Your difficulty was an
unintended collateral consequence.

The Titanium for Vietnam fighter jets came from the USSR, through a
tortuous network that concealed its final destination. The Market
Basket article I referenced told how they used intermediaries to buy
up land to avoid revealing their intent and driving up the price.
Those are examples of old tricks to deceive market, CIA, KGB, NSA
et.al. analysts looking for patterns.


Out of curiosity, what Vietnam fighter jets was titanium used on?
I ask as I spent several years servicing the various fighter jets that
were used in Vietnam and I don't remember any that used titanium. The
first airplane that I saw in USAF use that used any quantity of
titanium was the SR-71, hardly a Vietnam fighter jet.
--
Cheers,

John B.
  #15   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,888
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

"John B. Slocomb" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:09:18 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


The Titanium for Vietnam fighter jets came from the USSR, through a
tortuous network that concealed its final destination. The Market
Basket article I referenced told how they used intermediaries to buy
up land to avoid revealing their intent and driving up the price.
Those are examples of old tricks to deceive market, CIA, KGB, NSA
et.al. analysts looking for patterns.


Out of curiosity, what Vietnam fighter jets was titanium used on?
I ask as I spent several years servicing the various fighter jets
that
were used in Vietnam and I don't remember any that used titanium.
The
first airplane that I saw in USAF use that used any quantity of
titanium was the SR-71, hardly a Vietnam fighter jet.
--
Cheers,

John B.


http://www.tomcattersassociation.org...h-titanium.htm

I can't tell titanium from stainless unless I can pick it up and feel
the weight.

-jsw




  #16   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,025
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 15:28:11 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 13:29:31 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


IMNSHO we desperately need a "careless and reckless
operation of a business enterprise" analog to the "careless
and reckless operation of a motor vehicle" statute, with
license/charter suspension and revocation. ....


Sure, if we can apply the same standards and remedies to governments
and their institutions.


Talk about a nationwide multi-car-pileup...

--
One word frees us of all the weight and pain of life: That word is love.
-- Sophocles
  #17   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 21:57:03 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"John B. Slocomb" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:09:18 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


The Titanium for Vietnam fighter jets came from the USSR, through a
tortuous network that concealed its final destination. The Market
Basket article I referenced told how they used intermediaries to buy
up land to avoid revealing their intent and driving up the price.
Those are examples of old tricks to deceive market, CIA, KGB, NSA
et.al. analysts looking for patterns.


Out of curiosity, what Vietnam fighter jets was titanium used on?
I ask as I spent several years servicing the various fighter jets
that
were used in Vietnam and I don't remember any that used titanium.
The
first airplane that I saw in USAF use that used any quantity of
titanium was the SR-71, hardly a Vietnam fighter jet.
--
Cheers,

John B.


http://www.tomcattersassociation.org...h-titanium.htm

I can't tell titanium from stainless unless I can pick it up and feel
the weight.

-jsw


Interesting. And I did work on F-4's and one of the problem areas was
the stabulators. Although not the skin but the pivot.

The major difference in using titanium is that it is complicated to
weld and it work hardens very rapidly. In the early 1970's the USAF
certification test for titanium was still welded in an inert
atmosphere box. I had an extra day at my last certification test and
the Instructor asked if I wanted to try titanium and the biggest
problem was trying to work inside the box using the attached gloves.

The sheet metal guys used to curse the stuff as drilling rivet holes
was a bit of a struggle as the stuff was forever turning diamond hard
if you let the drill slip the tiniest bit.

We worked on the SR's a little when they were first transferred to
Beal and they didn't yet have their full compliment of workers and no
one was sorry when they got fully manned and we could go back to our
"regular" airplanes :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.
  #18   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:19:55 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 21:57:03 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"John B. Slocomb" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:09:18 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


The Titanium for Vietnam fighter jets came from the USSR, through a
tortuous network that concealed its final destination. The Market
Basket article I referenced told how they used intermediaries to buy
up land to avoid revealing their intent and driving up the price.
Those are examples of old tricks to deceive market, CIA, KGB, NSA
et.al. analysts looking for patterns.


Out of curiosity, what Vietnam fighter jets was titanium used on?
I ask as I spent several years servicing the various fighter jets
that
were used in Vietnam and I don't remember any that used titanium.
The
first airplane that I saw in USAF use that used any quantity of
titanium was the SR-71, hardly a Vietnam fighter jet.
--
Cheers,

John B.


http://www.tomcattersassociation.org...h-titanium.htm

I can't tell titanium from stainless unless I can pick it up and feel
the weight.

-jsw


Interesting. And I did work on F-4's and one of the problem areas was
the stabulators. Although not the skin but the pivot.

The major difference in using titanium is that it is complicated to
weld and it work hardens very rapidly. In the early 1970's the USAF
certification test for titanium was still welded in an inert
atmosphere box. I had an extra day at my last certification test and
the Instructor asked if I wanted to try titanium and the biggest
problem was trying to work inside the box using the attached gloves.

The sheet metal guys used to curse the stuff as drilling rivet holes
was a bit of a struggle as the stuff was forever turning diamond hard
if you let the drill slip the tiniest bit.

We worked on the SR's a little when they were first transferred to
Beal and they didn't yet have their full compliment of workers and no
one was sorry when they got fully manned and we could go back to our
"regular" airplanes :-)


In addition to the SR-71, the F-111 had titanium skin. I was told that
the original method for welding it was electron-beam, performed in a
vacuum. I think the atmosphere came later.

You can't use aluminum above Mach 2, roughly. The limit is around 300
deg. F, which was the result of skin friction at high speeds. It loses
too much strength above that temperature. That's what limited the
Concorde's speed, too; it was aluminum, for cost. Above that you need
titanium or steel. The Russions, despite their considerable expertise
in metallurgy and a good supply of titanium, couldn't weld it. So the
Mig 25 (Foxbat) was skinned and framed in steel.

--
Ed Huntress
  #19   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 22:21:30 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:19:55 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 21:57:03 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"John B. Slocomb" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:09:18 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


The Titanium for Vietnam fighter jets came from the USSR, through a
tortuous network that concealed its final destination. The Market
Basket article I referenced told how they used intermediaries to buy
up land to avoid revealing their intent and driving up the price.
Those are examples of old tricks to deceive market, CIA, KGB, NSA
et.al. analysts looking for patterns.


Out of curiosity, what Vietnam fighter jets was titanium used on?
I ask as I spent several years servicing the various fighter jets
that
were used in Vietnam and I don't remember any that used titanium.
The
first airplane that I saw in USAF use that used any quantity of
titanium was the SR-71, hardly a Vietnam fighter jet.
--
Cheers,

John B.

http://www.tomcattersassociation.org...h-titanium.htm

I can't tell titanium from stainless unless I can pick it up and feel
the weight.

-jsw


Interesting. And I did work on F-4's and one of the problem areas was
the stabulators. Although not the skin but the pivot.

The major difference in using titanium is that it is complicated to
weld and it work hardens very rapidly. In the early 1970's the USAF
certification test for titanium was still welded in an inert
atmosphere box. I had an extra day at my last certification test and
the Instructor asked if I wanted to try titanium and the biggest
problem was trying to work inside the box using the attached gloves.

The sheet metal guys used to curse the stuff as drilling rivet holes
was a bit of a struggle as the stuff was forever turning diamond hard
if you let the drill slip the tiniest bit.

We worked on the SR's a little when they were first transferred to
Beal and they didn't yet have their full compliment of workers and no
one was sorry when they got fully manned and we could go back to our
"regular" airplanes :-)


In addition to the SR-71, the F-111 had titanium skin. I was told that
the original method for welding it was electron-beam, performed in a
vacuum. I think the atmosphere came later.

I don't know about the "F-111" but I was part of the test detachment
for the FB-111 and I don't remember that any of the skin where there
was access panels being aluminum. Certainly the panels behind the
cockpit module were aluminum and the fuselage skin around the exhaust
outlets was aluminum -- the reason I know was that the screws in the
panels behind the cockpit had left hand threads and the Airframe guys
used to try to take them out with an air screwdriver and stripped the
plate nuts off, and the aft fuselage fairing because a pin that held
it on jammed and we had to cut a hole in the skin to beat it out. The
"splitter plates" that separate air flow between the fuselage and the
engine inlets was aluminum and the aft wing spar was aluminum as we
had to come up with repairs for both those items.

You can't use aluminum above Mach 2, roughly. The limit is around 300
deg. F, which was the result of skin friction at high speeds. It loses
too much strength above that temperature. That's what limited the
Concorde's speed, too; it was aluminum, for cost. Above that you need
titanium or steel. The Russions, despite their considerable expertise
in metallurgy and a good supply of titanium, couldn't weld it. So the
Mig 25 (Foxbat) was skinned and framed in steel.


While I was at Edwards with the FB-111 I worked in the "Base Shops"
for a while and some guys came in with a nose gear, obviously from a
small airplane. It had no data plates or other obvious markings on it
and the question was how to get it apart. I got called in because I
was Air Force and the rest of the shop was civilians, so I got to look
it over pretty closely.

It was a complete nose gear strut with the trunions on the top and the
axle on the bottom. Obviously an Oleo strut, there was a high pressure
air valve in the top. But no way to disassemble it. It appeared that
it was somehow assembled and then welded together and no way to take
it apart.

I asked the guys "what kind of airplane did this come off?" and got no
answer. Based on the timing I suspect that it was the nose gear from
the MIG that was flown to Taiwan and then sort of disappeared.

I never worked on small airplanes and I don't know how much nose gear
problem they have (the big ones don't have much) and the strange nose
gear was pretty light. Maybe a steel tubing, welded together, change
the whole thing, nose gear makes sense. A lot of the things the
Russians did that were condemned as "crude" actually made very good
sense.
--
Cheers,

John B.
  #20   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:45:05 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 22:21:30 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:19:55 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 21:57:03 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"John B. Slocomb" wrote in message
m...
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:09:18 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


The Titanium for Vietnam fighter jets came from the USSR, through a
tortuous network that concealed its final destination. The Market
Basket article I referenced told how they used intermediaries to buy
up land to avoid revealing their intent and driving up the price.
Those are examples of old tricks to deceive market, CIA, KGB, NSA
et.al. analysts looking for patterns.


Out of curiosity, what Vietnam fighter jets was titanium used on?
I ask as I spent several years servicing the various fighter jets
that
were used in Vietnam and I don't remember any that used titanium.
The
first airplane that I saw in USAF use that used any quantity of
titanium was the SR-71, hardly a Vietnam fighter jet.
--
Cheers,

John B.

http://www.tomcattersassociation.org...h-titanium.htm

I can't tell titanium from stainless unless I can pick it up and feel
the weight.

-jsw

Interesting. And I did work on F-4's and one of the problem areas was
the stabulators. Although not the skin but the pivot.

The major difference in using titanium is that it is complicated to
weld and it work hardens very rapidly. In the early 1970's the USAF
certification test for titanium was still welded in an inert
atmosphere box. I had an extra day at my last certification test and
the Instructor asked if I wanted to try titanium and the biggest
problem was trying to work inside the box using the attached gloves.

The sheet metal guys used to curse the stuff as drilling rivet holes
was a bit of a struggle as the stuff was forever turning diamond hard
if you let the drill slip the tiniest bit.

We worked on the SR's a little when they were first transferred to
Beal and they didn't yet have their full compliment of workers and no
one was sorry when they got fully manned and we could go back to our
"regular" airplanes :-)


In addition to the SR-71, the F-111 had titanium skin. I was told that
the original method for welding it was electron-beam, performed in a
vacuum. I think the atmosphere came later.

I don't know about the "F-111" but I was part of the test detachment
for the FB-111 and I don't remember that any of the skin where there
was access panels being aluminum. Certainly the panels behind the
cockpit module were aluminum and the fuselage skin around the exhaust
outlets was aluminum -- the reason I know was that the screws in the
panels behind the cockpit had left hand threads and the Airframe guys
used to try to take them out with an air screwdriver and stripped the
plate nuts off, and the aft fuselage fairing because a pin that held
it on jammed and we had to cut a hole in the skin to beat it out. The
"splitter plates" that separate air flow between the fuselage and the
engine inlets was aluminum and the aft wing spar was aluminum as we
had to come up with repairs for both those items.


The F-111 and its variants, including the FB-111, used titanium where
they had to, where skin friction at high speeds generated too much
heat for aluminum, and then they used aluminum where they could get
away with it. Those aircraft also employed steel in parts of the
airframe.


You can't use aluminum above Mach 2, roughly. The limit is around 300
deg. F, which was the result of skin friction at high speeds. It loses
too much strength above that temperature. That's what limited the
Concorde's speed, too; it was aluminum, for cost. Above that you need
titanium or steel. The Russions, despite their considerable expertise
in metallurgy and a good supply of titanium, couldn't weld it. So the
Mig 25 (Foxbat) was skinned and framed in steel.


While I was at Edwards with the FB-111 I worked in the "Base Shops"
for a while and some guys came in with a nose gear, obviously from a
small airplane. It had no data plates or other obvious markings on it
and the question was how to get it apart. I got called in because I
was Air Force and the rest of the shop was civilians, so I got to look
it over pretty closely.

It was a complete nose gear strut with the trunions on the top and the
axle on the bottom. Obviously an Oleo strut, there was a high pressure
air valve in the top. But no way to disassemble it. It appeared that
it was somehow assembled and then welded together and no way to take
it apart.

I asked the guys "what kind of airplane did this come off?" and got no
answer. Based on the timing I suspect that it was the nose gear from
the MIG that was flown to Taiwan and then sort of disappeared.

I never worked on small airplanes and I don't know how much nose gear
problem they have (the big ones don't have much) and the strange nose
gear was pretty light. Maybe a steel tubing, welded together, change
the whole thing, nose gear makes sense. A lot of the things the
Russians did that were condemned as "crude" actually made very good
sense.


They made a lot of things for reliability and easy maintenance, and
their military equipment was often selected by third-world countries
for that very reason. They also made a lot of junk for non-military
applications.

The Soviets had especially good metallurgists.

--
Ed Huntress


  #21   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,888
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

"John B. Slocomb" wrote in message
...

I never worked on small airplanes and I don't know how much nose
gear
problem they have (the big ones don't have much) and the strange
nose
gear was pretty light. Maybe a steel tubing, welded together, change
the whole thing, nose gear makes sense. A lot of the things the
Russians did that were condemned as "crude" actually made very good
sense.
--
Cheers,

John B.


I've watched a Russian engineer bend the framework of a military
optical device to align the lenses, where we would have made the frame
heavier and added screws.

I've read that the TBO for their fighters was 200 hours, then they
tear it down and replace what's worn or damaged, like the hot section
and accessories.

In WW2 the average life of ours =in combat= was supposedly about 50
hours, though they held up far longer in training or on patrols.
http://www.wwiifoundation.org/missio...ircraft-facts/
"In 1942-43 it was statistically impossible for bomber crews to
complete a 25-mission tour in Europe."

-jsw


  #22   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:34:58 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:45:05 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 22:21:30 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:19:55 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 21:57:03 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"John B. Slocomb" wrote in message
om...
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:09:18 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


much snipped

The F-111 and its variants, including the FB-111, used titanium where
they had to, where skin friction at high speeds generated too much
heat for aluminum, and then they used aluminum where they could get
away with it. Those aircraft also employed steel in parts of the
airframe.

You can't use aluminum above Mach 2, roughly. The limit is around 300
deg. F, which was the result of skin friction at high speeds. It loses
too much strength above that temperature. That's what limited the
Concorde's speed, too; it was aluminum, for cost. Above that you need
titanium or steel. The Russions, despite their considerable expertise
in metallurgy and a good supply of titanium, couldn't weld it. So the
Mig 25 (Foxbat) was skinned and framed in steel.


While I was at Edwards with the FB-111 I worked in the "Base Shops"
for a while and some guys came in with a nose gear, obviously from a
small airplane. It had no data plates or other obvious markings on it
and the question was how to get it apart. I got called in because I
was Air Force and the rest of the shop was civilians, so I got to look
it over pretty closely.

It was a complete nose gear strut with the trunions on the top and the
axle on the bottom. Obviously an Oleo strut, there was a high pressure
air valve in the top. But no way to disassemble it. It appeared that
it was somehow assembled and then welded together and no way to take
it apart.

I asked the guys "what kind of airplane did this come off?" and got no
answer. Based on the timing I suspect that it was the nose gear from
the MIG that was flown to Taiwan and then sort of disappeared.

I never worked on small airplanes and I don't know how much nose gear
problem they have (the big ones don't have much) and the strange nose
gear was pretty light. Maybe a steel tubing, welded together, change
the whole thing, nose gear makes sense. A lot of the things the
Russians did that were condemned as "crude" actually made very good
sense.


They made a lot of things for reliability and easy maintenance, and
their military equipment was often selected by third-world countries
for that very reason. They also made a lot of junk for non-military
applications.

The Soviets had especially good metallurgists.


I worked at a steel plant in E. Java that was started by the Russians,
who left abruptly when the local communists attempted a coup, leaving
all the heavy equipment behind. It was noticeable that most of the
equipment was not made of "exotic" alloys (crane booms looking like
U.S. 50 ton and rated for 30 tons) and every engine had at least two
starting methods, some had three.

We reckoned that it might get cold in Russia :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.
  #23   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default Liberals score higher on IQ tests, Multiple choice fill in the bubble IQ tests. Some can even read their diploma....

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 12:09:51 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"John B. Slocomb" wrote in message
.. .

I never worked on small airplanes and I don't know how much nose
gear
problem they have (the big ones don't have much) and the strange
nose
gear was pretty light. Maybe a steel tubing, welded together, change
the whole thing, nose gear makes sense. A lot of the things the
Russians did that were condemned as "crude" actually made very good
sense.
--
Cheers,

John B.


I've watched a Russian engineer bend the framework of a military
optical device to align the lenses, where we would have made the frame
heavier and added screws.

I've read that the TBO for their fighters was 200 hours, then they
tear it down and replace what's worn or damaged, like the hot section
and accessories.

Hot section repairs are a fairly frequent and common repair on most
jets. The KC-135's had a heat deflector ring inside the tail pipe that
would have cracked mounting screw holes on every teardown. The navy
had some fighters that would run on either avgas or JP and they used
to crawl up the tail pipe to inspect the turbine wheel. As the engines
might have been burning avgas the protection gear worn during the
inspection was quite exotic :-)

In WW2 the average life of ours =in combat= was supposedly about 50
hours, though they held up far longer in training or on patrols.
http://www.wwiifoundation.org/missio...ircraft-facts/
"In 1942-43 it was statistically impossible for bomber crews to
complete a 25-mission tour in Europe."

-jsw


The original WW II rotation plan (War Department Directive of 1 July
1942) was a one year combat tour.
http://www.afhra.af.mil/shared/media...080424-048.pdf
--
Cheers,

John B.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OT DNA tests ARWadsworth UK diy 13 May 15th 12 12:19 AM
PAT tests Sky UK diy 4 October 23rd 07 10:03 PM
pregnancy tests davidrsalsbury UK diy 7 March 9th 07 10:59 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"