On 1/1/2013 4:01 PM, wrote:
On Jan 1, 10:46 am, jon_banquer wrote:


I believe Jon. But I think he really said is that he can not remember
the last time he machined an aerospace part.

Dan

You have never in your life machined a tight tolerance aerospace part.
You're such an idiot that you think .030 is a typical aerospace
tolerance.

You are correct. I have never machined an aerospace part as I was an
engineer and did no machining. On the other hand I did specify
tolerances on aerospace dwg's. So I do know you are mistaken.


Dan



I was always taught (while working toward my masters in Mechanical
Engineering) that the closer the tolerances the poorer the design.

Tom Gardner wrote:

On 1/1/2013 4:01 PM, wrote:
On Jan 1, 10:46 am, jon_banquer wrote:


I believe Jon. But I think he really said is that he can not remember
the last time he machined an aerospace part.

Dan

You have never in your life machined a tight tolerance aerospace part.
You're such an idiot that you think .030 is a typical aerospace
tolerance.

You are correct. I have never machined an aerospace part as I was an
engineer and did no machining. On the other hand I did specify
tolerances on aerospace dwg's. So I do know you are mistaken.


Dan


I was always taught (while working toward my masters in Mechanical
Engineering) that the closer the tolerances the poorer the design.


Then how do you explain the 'Pinto'? ;-)

"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
...
I was always taught (while working toward my masters in Mechanical
Engineering) that the closer the tolerances the poorer the design.

I may have found the history of the 0.030" tolerance. A WW2 aircraft
sheet metal book I have shows sample prints for minor interior
sheet-metal brackets from Douglas Aircraft on which the default
tolerance for fractional dimensions is 1/32". The default for decimals
is 0.010" unless otherwise specified in the form of max over min, such
as 0.147 over 0.140 for clearance for the wood screws that secure cork
rings onto a thermos bottle holder.
jsw

On Jan 2, 4:26*pm, "Jim Wilkins" wrote:
"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message

...

I was always taught (while working toward my masters in Mechanical
Engineering) that the closer the tolerances the poorer the design.

I may have found the history of the 0.030" tolerance. A WW2 aircraft
sheet metal book I have shows sample prints for minor interior
sheet-metal brackets from Douglas Aircraft on which the default
tolerance for fractional dimensions is 1/32". The default for decimals
is 0.010" unless otherwise specified in the form of max over min, such
as 0.147 over 0.140 for clearance for the wood screws that secure cork
rings onto a thermos bottle holder.
jsw

Sheet metal parts and machined parts aren't in the same class.

I've been a machinist since 1993 (graduated adult education for
machining / toolmaking in 1994 with 1080 hours credited my
apprenticeship) I have worked in the machining trade consistently ever
since. I've never seen a + / - .030 wide open tolerance on a aerospace
machined part in the 20 years I've been in the machining trade.

Neither has the person who posted in this thread and who worked for
Boeing for many years.

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

Then how do you explain the 'Pinto'? ;-)

That was Ford's revenge on small-car buyers. On many visits in the
1970's to midwestern auto plants I saw ONE Honda, NO Volkswagens and
only a couple of Toyotas. What you drove determined how close in you
could park.

Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

Then how do you explain the 'Pinto'? ;-)

That was Ford's revenge on small-car buyers. On many visits in the
1970's to midwestern auto plants I saw ONE Honda, NO Volkswagens and
only a couple of Toyotas. What you drove determined how close in you
could park.


I heard that it was a failed military prototype, intended to be
backed into battle so their exploding gas tank would take out the enemy.
;-)

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
I heard that it was a failed military prototype, intended to be
backed into battle so their exploding gas tank would take out the
enemy.
;-)

I gained more respect for and took better care of my 12 year old, $200
VW Beetle after an Army buddy showed me his new Pinto.

On Jan 2, 5:30*pm, "Jim Wilkins" wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message

* I heard that it was a failed military prototype, intended to be
backed into battle so their exploding gas tank would take out the
enemy.
;-)

I gained more respect for and took better care of my 12 year old, $200
VW Beetle after an Army buddy showed me his new Pinto.

Here is were the VW Beetle really came from:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...an-claims.html

On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 20:16:45 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

Then how do you explain the 'Pinto'? ;-)

That was Ford's revenge on small-car buyers. On many visits in the
1970's to midwestern auto plants I saw ONE Honda, NO Volkswagens and
only a couple of Toyotas. What you drove determined how close in you
could park.


I heard that it was a failed military prototype, intended to be
backed into battle so their exploding gas tank would take out the enemy.
;-)

^5 !!!

Gunner

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 20:16:45 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

Then how do you explain the 'Pinto'? ;-)

That was Ford's revenge on small-car buyers. On many visits in the
1970's to midwestern auto plants I saw ONE Honda, NO Volkswagens and
only a couple of Toyotas. What you drove determined how close in you
could park.


I heard that it was a failed military prototype, intended to be
backed into battle so their exploding gas tank would take out the enemy.
;-)

You guys. tsk tsk tsk I participated in the warranty repair of
many Pintos (Support gas tank, R&R straps, insert nylon plate. Done.)
while working at a Ford dealership. And I later owned one. Guess
what? I'm still here and I have no burns on me, but I didn't "park it
on the freeway" like the one idiot lady did.

http://www.pointoflaw.com/articles/T...Pinto_Case.pdf
Ford was screwed 'n crucified by the memo and their use of the NHTSA's
own figure of $200k as the exact value of a human life.

--
Inside every older person is a younger person wondering WTF happened.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 22:24:40 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 20:16:45 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

Then how do you explain the 'Pinto'? ;-)

That was Ford's revenge on small-car buyers. On many visits in the
1970's to midwestern auto plants I saw ONE Honda, NO Volkswagens and
only a couple of Toyotas. What you drove determined how close in you
could park.


I heard that it was a failed military prototype, intended to be
backed into battle so their exploding gas tank would take out the enemy.
;-)

You guys. tsk tsk tsk I participated in the warranty repair of
many Pintos (Support gas tank, R&R straps, insert nylon plate. Done.)
while working at a Ford dealership. And I later owned one. Guess
what? I'm still here and I have no burns on me, but I didn't "park it
on the freeway" like the one idiot lady did.

http://www.pointoflaw.com/articles/T...Pinto_Case.pdf
Ford was screwed 'n crucified by the memo and their use of the NHTSA's
own figure of $200k as the exact value of a human life.

We owned a Pinto and found it to be a rather nice car. But..we had the
gas tank mod done.

Gunner

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
I heard that it was a failed military prototype, intended to be
backed into battle so their exploding gas tank would take out the
enemy.
;-)

I gained more respect for and took better care of my 12 year old, $200
VW Beetle after an Army buddy showed me his new Pinto.


I know that it's odd, but I don't remember ever seeing one without
rust or dents.

Larry Jaques wrote:

On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 20:16:45 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

Then how do you explain the 'Pinto'? ;-)

That was Ford's revenge on small-car buyers. On many visits in the
1970's to midwestern auto plants I saw ONE Honda, NO Volkswagens and
only a couple of Toyotas. What you drove determined how close in you
could park.


I heard that it was a failed military prototype, intended to be
backed into battle so their exploding gas tank would take out the enemy.
;-)

You guys. tsk tsk tsk I participated in the warranty repair of
many Pintos (Support gas tank, R&R straps, insert nylon plate. Done.)
while working at a Ford dealership. And I later owned one. Guess
what? I'm still here and I have no burns on me, but I didn't "park it
on the freeway" like the one idiot lady did.


Shame on you, Larry. Where is your sense of humor? You survived,
inspite of driving a Pinto. (AKA: The flaming bean) ;-)

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
...

Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
I heard that it was a failed military prototype, intended to be
backed into battle so their exploding gas tank would take out the
enemy.
;-)

I gained more respect for and took better care of my 12 year old,
$200
VW Beetle after an Army buddy showed me his new Pinto.


I know that it's odd, but I don't remember ever seeing one without
rust or dents.

The rust on my VW was from the salt on icy winter roads and the dents
from rocks and trees, as it could go where hardly anything else could.
The Jeep guys who brag about their 4WD agility were notable for their
absence. After driving an M151 Jeep long distances on the German
Autobahn to reach remote radio relay sites I can see why.

I helped pull a VW out of a sandpit pond after the kids inside
misjudged their hill-climbing skill. The waterline was at about the
top of the rear fender well. We were on dirt bikes and had no rope or
winches, but fortunately VWs are light enough to manhandle.
jsw

On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 05:57:34 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Larry Jaques wrote:

On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 20:16:45 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

Then how do you explain the 'Pinto'? ;-)

That was Ford's revenge on small-car buyers. On many visits in the
1970's to midwestern auto plants I saw ONE Honda, NO Volkswagens and
only a couple of Toyotas. What you drove determined how close in you
could park.


I heard that it was a failed military prototype, intended to be
backed into battle so their exploding gas tank would take out the enemy.
;-)

You guys. tsk tsk tsk I participated in the warranty repair of
many Pintos (Support gas tank, R&R straps, insert nylon plate. Done.)
while working at a Ford dealership. And I later owned one. Guess
what? I'm still here and I have no burns on me, but I didn't "park it
on the freeway" like the one idiot lady did.


Shame on you, Larry. Where is your sense of humor? You survived,
inspite of driving a Pinto. (AKA: The flaming bean) ;-)

I don't feel that wasting a perfectly good (OK, mediocre) vehicle when
a suitable application of high explosives will work much, much better,
is a good idea.

(Did you catch the humor in that, I hope?)

--
Inside every older person is a younger person wondering WTF happened.

Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
...

Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
I heard that it was a failed military prototype, intended to be
backed into battle so their exploding gas tank would take out the
enemy.
;-)

I gained more respect for and took better care of my 12 year old,
$200
VW Beetle after an Army buddy showed me his new Pinto.


I know that it's odd, but I don't remember ever seeing one without
rust or dents.

The rust on my VW was from the salt on icy winter roads and the dents
from rocks and trees, as it could go where hardly anything else could.
The Jeep guys who brag about their 4WD agility were notable for their
absence. After driving an M151 Jeep long distances on the German
Autobahn to reach remote radio relay sites I can see why.

I helped pull a VW out of a sandpit pond after the kids inside
misjudged their hill-climbing skill. The waterline was at about the
top of the rear fender well. We were on dirt bikes and had no rope or
winches, but fortunately VWs are light enough to manhandle.


People used to tell me to sell my stepvan & buy a 4W drive jeep for a
service vehicle. I just laughed at them, and later saw them stuck in a
snowbank & too far away to reach with the chains I had, so they had to
wait & pay for a wrecker. My tyuck weighed 6150 pounds without all the
tools, parts & manuals + a full 30 gallon tank.

It's a good thing the old VWs would float for a while.

Larry Jaques wrote:

I don't feel that wasting a perfectly good (OK, mediocre) vehicle when
a suitable application of high explosives will work much, much better,
is a good idea.

(Did you catch the humor in that, I hope?)


More like thinly veiled sarcasm, but I got it.

On 1/2/2013 7:26 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
...
I was always taught (while working toward my masters in Mechanical
Engineering) that the closer the tolerances the poorer the design.

I may have found the history of the 0.030" tolerance. A WW2 aircraft
sheet metal book I have shows sample prints for minor interior
sheet-metal brackets from Douglas Aircraft on which the default
tolerance for fractional dimensions is 1/32". The default for decimals
is 0.010" unless otherwise specified in the form of max over min, such
as 0.147 over 0.140 for clearance for the wood screws that secure cork
rings onto a thermos bottle holder.
jsw



Exactly. For most die work we'll hold .0005", for the length of the
pins on a die set we use a tape measure. The point is to know the
difference...and obviously the trolls don't.

"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
...
On 1/2/2013 7:26 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
.....
Exactly. For most die work we'll hold .0005", for the length of the
pins on a die set we use a tape measure. The point is to know the
difference...and obviously the trolls don't.

How often do y'all see machinists also shear and bend sheet metal?
jsw

On Jan 4, 9:46*am, "Jim Wilkins" wrote:
"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message

...

On 1/2/2013 7:26 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
.....
Exactly. *For most die work we'll hold .0005", for the length of the
pins on a die set we use a tape measure. *The point is to know the
difference...and obviously the trolls don't.

How often do y'all see machinists also shear and bend sheet metal?
jsw

Depends on the shop. Never in many shops I've worked in. Frequently at
Qualcomm's prototype machine shop. (sheet metal shop is attached to
the machine shop.)

On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 12:46:09 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
m...
On 1/2/2013 7:26 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
.....
Exactly. For most die work we'll hold .0005", for the length of the
pins on a die set we use a tape measure. The point is to know the
difference...and obviously the trolls don't.

How often do y'all see machinists also shear and bend sheet metal?
jsw

Quite a few "general machinists" will do it as part of their project.
Just like they will weld and braze, and torch or plasma cut. And
besides, this is a METALWORKING group - not a "machinists" or "cnc" or
"cad/cam" group. It's RCM - which even includes hammering copper, or
wire sculpture.

On Jan 4, 12:51*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 12:46:09 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"

wrote:
"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
m...
On 1/2/2013 7:26 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
.....
Exactly. *For most die work we'll hold .0005", for the length of the
pins on a die set we use a tape measure. *The point is to know the
difference...and obviously the trolls don't.

How often do y'all see machinists also shear and bend sheet metal?
jsw

Quite a few "general machinists" will do it as part of their project.
Just like they will weld and braze, and torch or plasma cut. *And
besides, this is a METALWORKING group - not a "machinists" or "cnc" or
"cad/cam" group. It's RCM - which even includes hammering copper, or
wire sculpture.

It's now a group hijacked by phony conservative assholes who follow
the cult of Gunner.

These phony conservative assholes have forgotten what conservatism
should mean as well as what ethics are.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 12:46:09 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

How often do y'all see machinists also shear and bend sheet metal?
jsw

...And
besides, this is a METALWORKING group - not a "machinists" or "cnc"
or
"cad/cam" group. It's RCM - which even includes hammering copper, or
wire sculpture.

I've known some willing to stray from their comfort zone and others
who became very defensive when asked to, for instance drilling and
tapping freehand.

It's a simple question, don't wet yourself over it.

On Jan 4, 3:45*pm, "Jim Wilkins" wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 12:46:09 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

How often do y'all see machinists also shear and bend sheet metal?
jsw
...And
besides, this is a METALWORKING group - not a "machinists" or "cnc"
or
"cad/cam" group. It's RCM - which even includes hammering copper, or
wire sculpture.

I've known some willing to stray from their comfort zone and others
who became very defensive when asked to, for instance drilling and
tapping freehand.

It's a simple question, don't wet yourself over it.

I often prefer (see the picture I posted of Qualcomm's prototype
machine shop) to tap by hand using my Tapmatic tapping head rather do
tapping on the CNC and break a tap. This is especially true of small
taps and blind holes. Those two drill presses are there for a reason.

On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 13:08:38 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Jan 4, 12:51*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 12:46:09 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"

wrote:
"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
m...
On 1/2/2013 7:26 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
.....
Exactly. *For most die work we'll hold .0005", for the length of the
pins on a die set we use a tape measure. *The point is to know the
difference...and obviously the trolls don't.

How often do y'all see machinists also shear and bend sheet metal?
jsw

Quite a few "general machinists" will do it as part of their project.
Just like they will weld and braze, and torch or plasma cut. *And
besides, this is a METALWORKING group - not a "machinists" or "cnc" or
"cad/cam" group. It's RCM - which even includes hammering copper, or
wire sculpture.

It's now a group hijacked by phony conservative assholes who follow
the cult of Gunner.

These phony conservative assholes have forgotten what conservatism
should mean as well as what ethics are.

In addition we have the non-metalworking computer idjets.

"Michael A. Terrell" on Wed, 02 Jan 2013
17:07:49 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Tom Gardner wrote:

On 1/1/2013 4:01 PM, wrote:
On Jan 1, 10:46 am, jon_banquer wrote:


I believe Jon. But I think he really said is that he can not remember
the last time he machined an aerospace part.

Dan

You have never in your life machined a tight tolerance aerospace part.
You're such an idiot that you think .030 is a typical aerospace
tolerance.

Gee, it was on the parts I was machining. Boeing parts,
Bombardier, and some others I don't recall. After all, I was just
making the parts, not nattering on about the drawing.

You are correct. I have never machined an aerospace part as I was an
engineer and did no machining. On the other hand I did specify
tolerances on aerospace dwg's. So I do know you are mistaken.

Dan

Oh, so you're the one!!!! (Boeing and their ADCNs which you had
to read to find out why the part actually was in spec, despite not
matching the drawing on the top of the stack.)


I was always taught (while working toward my masters in Mechanical
Engineering) that the closer the tolerances the poorer the design.

Then how do you explain the 'Pinto'? ;-)

There is "poor design" and then there is "Bad Design". "Bad
design! no biscuit for you! Bad design, go to your room!"


--
pyotr filipivich
Question for the gun Control advocates, "Do you agree with
this statement?"
"I would rather have a society without guns, even if it
means that people cannot defend themselves against murder
(with other weapons), rape, robbery, and assault. I would
rather make everyone defenseless than have to endure the
mass shootings that occasionally occur. If that means that
many more people, (particularly the old, the weak, and the
infirm) are subjected to these violent crimes, then so be
it. They'll just have to suffer more. I do claim the power
to dictate whether or not others are able to defend themselves."