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


This had nothing to do with GPS. It was an off the shelf, customer
configurable, diversity Telemetry system. The 10 MHz came from
other
equipment. It could be configured from 1 KHz to 40 MHz bandwidth fo
it
could be applied to anything from tracking a deep space probe with
low
data rate telemetry, to remote controlled weapons. They didn't tell
us
what they were used for, or how they were used. All they did was
sometimes requset a feature not programmed into a standard unit. It
was
the last new design I worked on.

http://www.morcom.com/radio_surveillance.html

Jim Wilkins wrote:

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


This had nothing to do with GPS. It was an off the shelf, customer
configurable, diversity Telemetry system. The 10 MHz came from
other equipment. It could be configured from 1 KHz to 40 MHz
bandwidth so it could be applied to anything from tracking a deep
space probe with low data rate telemetry, to remote controlled
weapons. They didn't tell us what they were used for, or how they
were used. All they did was sometimes requset a feature not
programmed into a standard unit. It was the last new design I worked
on.

http://www.morcom.com/radio_surveillance.html


Thanks. That is a different market than our equipment was designed
for.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

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

...............

Thanks. That is a different market than our equipment was designed
for.

Clever minds look at possibilities, not intentions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking_outside_the_box

Jim Wilkins wrote:

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

...............

Thanks. That is a different market than our equipment was designed
for.

Clever minds look at possibilities, not intentions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking_outside_the_box


We did that, daily. We found new uses, and new ways to meet them.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

Ed Huntress on Mon, 22 Sep 2014 12:48:16
-0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 08:48:01 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

Ed Huntress on Mon, 22 Sep 2014 09:35:46
-0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Or, as they used to say at GM, "Any damned fool can design a
carburettor for a Rolls-Royce. It takes a genius to design one for a
Chevrolet."

Or the tongue-in-cheek motto applied to Mercedes-Benz: "Never use two
parts to do a job when you can get away with three." g

OTOH, when you have three parts, you can replace one of them. B-)

Nowadays, we have modules which are plug and play, do multiple
functions, and can't really be repaired. Not cost effectively,
compared to removing and replacing.

I don't know about the cost effectiveness. I've had this conversation
with Tier 1 automotive supply-chain engineers -- me being in line with
your thoughts, and the frustrations of not being able to fix many
things these days -- and they've pretty well convinced me that making
things repairable at a flesh-and-bones level is not at all cost
effective with today's engineering.

I don't know. Sometimes I miss my old VWs and MG, which I could fix
while on the road. OTOH, I now own two 10-year-old cars that have
never needed a repair.

My suspicion is that they're doing it right. Nostalgia for fixing and
adjusting my S.U. carburetors (carburettors, I guess) on my mother's
kitchen table isn't enough to overcome the fact that I had to do
*something* with my old cars almost every week.

There is the one side which says "make it good, and get it to
last". There is the other side which wants it "soon" to last "long
enough". I recall reports of a determination by various War
Department Planners which determined that the "life expectancy" of
combat aircraft was limited to N hours. Ergo, it was not "cost
effective" to build aircraft which would "last" for 2N hours, if half
the useful life was not going to be used.
And there is the story of Henry Ford, who sent Engineers out to
the junk yards to find the parts which weren't breaking on his
automobiles. Those parts were "over built", so they could be less
"well made", and saving the Company money in the process. What's the
old saw - that eighty percent of the cost is in the next decimal
place.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."

On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 02:09:15 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

--snip--
My suspicion is that they're doing it right. Nostalgia for fixing and
adjusting my S.U. carburetors (carburettors, I guess) on my mother's
kitchen table isn't enough to overcome the fact that I had to do
*something* with my old cars almost every week.

It's that aspect of old cars which I do NOT miss at all. I'm very
happy today without any grease under my fingernails, TYVM. I would,
however, like to be able to maintain my vehicles if necessary. I'm not
sure I'd be happy doing a valve job on the Tundra's 4-valve-per-cyl
heads, though. It keeps me conservative in my maintenance schedule,
both time- and mileage-wise.


There is the one side which says "make it good, and get it to
last". There is the other side which wants it "soon" to last "long
enough". I recall reports of a determination by various War
Department Planners which determined that the "life expectancy" of
combat aircraft was limited to N hours. Ergo, it was not "cost
effective" to build aircraft which would "last" for 2N hours, if half
the useful life was not going to be used.

The problem with that is that in reality, the service lifetime is
almost always exceeded, causing greater-than-necessary maintenance
costs and labor.


And there is the story of Henry Ford, who sent Engineers out to
the junk yards to find the parts which weren't breaking on his
automobiles. Those parts were "over built", so they could be less
"well made", and saving the Company money in the process.

Ol' Henry wasn't perfect, by any means, but I'm sure that little story
was put out by competitors. If you look at the history of GM vehicles
in the Consumer Reports User Satisfaction charts for many decades,
you'll find them to be nearly the worst of the bunch. Japanese cars
joined them in the late '60s and '70s, then they swapped ends of the
spectrum, becoming the best of the best, leaving GM on the bottom end
again. The ease of maintenance and longevity were two reasons (Dad
and) I chose Fords over other brands early on. I owned 2 used GM
products and would never own another, unless it was a free gift -and-
the SHTF/TEOTWAWKI had already begun. Um, and there was a GM junk
yard/parts store right next door. OTOH, I'd rather change a GM than a
Ford water pump on the side of the road... I was working as a lube
monkey for a GM dealer (my very first job out of tech school) when
the campaigns came in to replace all motor mounts on all vehicles, and
add a cable tiedown to the left mount. That was a true PITA.


What's the
old saw - that eighty percent of the cost is in the next decimal
place.

That has been true in the extreme, but the advent of CNC machining has
lessened it, at least on the bottom-to-middle end. It has provided
more accuracy without an increase in price, and usually a decrease.
Tenths and microns are still pretty damned expensive, though.


--
The more you know, the less you need.
-- Aboriginal Saying

On Friday, September 26, 2014 12:32:23 PM UTC+2, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:
Larry Jaques fired this volley in
:

Indeed. Too many of those uberProfs never get into the trenches at
all, missing 2/3 of knowledge in their field by default. The result
is that I seldom trust anyone with anything over a Master's. Too
often, it _is_ Piled Higher and Deeper.

Heh! I hired an East Indian once who hired on as hourly 'work' staff at
the fireworks plant, but who professed to be a degreed mechanical
engineer by trade.

It became clear early on that he had zero manual skills, and no knowledge
of tools or physical methods. He was simply astounded and enthralled by
a simple scissor-style PVC pipe cutter, when it was demonstrated to him.

I once asked him, as inoffensively as I could, how it could be the case
that he was both degreed in the trade, and absent the manual skills. He
said, "Oh, engineers nebber get deyer hands durty! Dat is for de
laborers! We design... Dey make de products!"

OhhhhhhKaayyyyy!

Never met an engineer worth his salt who couldn't turn a wrench!

LLoyd

Don't get me started. I have a good friend who has a high position in aviation safety engineering. He has such an astoundingly poor understanding of basic physics, mechanics, and electricity that I don't understand how he even manages his household, let alone his job . Many examples, but one day we were talking about car brakes, and I mentioned that the rear discs were typically smaller than the front ones. He had no clue as to why that should be.. Still, he makes way more money than me. My practical knowledge seems to have thwarted my joining the 1%, but I have friends in the 0.1% who say that when the **** really does hit the fan, then it's going to be good old Rob who gets them through it. I like that.

"robobass" wrote in message
...
On Friday, September 26, 2014 12:32:23 PM UTC+2, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
wrote:
Larry Jaques fired this volley
in
:

Indeed. Too many of those uberProfs never get into the trenches
at
all, missing 2/3 of knowledge in their field by default. The
result
is that I seldom trust anyone with anything over a Master's. Too
often, it _is_ Piled Higher and Deeper.

Heh! I hired an East Indian once who hired on as hourly 'work'
staff at
the fireworks plant, but who professed to be a degreed mechanical
engineer by trade.

It became clear early on that he had zero manual skills, and no
knowledge
of tools or physical methods. He was simply astounded and
enthralled by
a simple scissor-style PVC pipe cutter, when it was demonstrated to
him.

I once asked him, as inoffensively as I could, how it could be the
case
that he was both degreed in the trade, and absent the manual skills.
He
said, "Oh, engineers nebber get deyer hands durty! Dat is for de
laborers! We design... Dey make de products!"

OhhhhhhKaayyyyy!

Never met an engineer worth his salt who couldn't turn a wrench!

LLoyd

Don't get me started. I have a good friend who has a high position in
aviation safety engineering. He has such an astoundingly poor
understanding of basic physics, mechanics, and electricity that I
don't understand how he even manages his household, let alone his job
.. Many examples, but one day we were talking about car brakes, and I
mentioned that the rear discs were typically smaller than the front
ones. He had no clue as to why that should be. Still, he makes way
more money than me. My practical knowledge seems to have thwarted my
joining the 1%, but I have friends in the 0.1% who say that when the
**** really does hit the fan, then it's going to be good old Rob who
gets them through it. I like that.

=======================

In my experience the most capable engineers resist being moved into
management, so the less qualified ones become the bosses.
-jsw

On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 02:09:15 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

Ed Huntress on Mon, 22 Sep 2014 12:48:16
-0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 08:48:01 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

Ed Huntress on Mon, 22 Sep 2014 09:35:46
-0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Or, as they used to say at GM, "Any damned fool can design a
carburettor for a Rolls-Royce. It takes a genius to design one for a
Chevrolet."

Or the tongue-in-cheek motto applied to Mercedes-Benz: "Never use two
parts to do a job when you can get away with three." g

OTOH, when you have three parts, you can replace one of them. B-)

Nowadays, we have modules which are plug and play, do multiple
functions, and can't really be repaired. Not cost effectively,
compared to removing and replacing.

I don't know about the cost effectiveness. I've had this conversation
with Tier 1 automotive supply-chain engineers -- me being in line with
your thoughts, and the frustrations of not being able to fix many
things these days -- and they've pretty well convinced me that making
things repairable at a flesh-and-bones level is not at all cost
effective with today's engineering.

I don't know. Sometimes I miss my old VWs and MG, which I could fix
while on the road. OTOH, I now own two 10-year-old cars that have
never needed a repair.

My suspicion is that they're doing it right. Nostalgia for fixing and
adjusting my S.U. carburetors (carburettors, I guess) on my mother's
kitchen table isn't enough to overcome the fact that I had to do
*something* with my old cars almost every week.

There is the one side which says "make it good, and get it to
last". There is the other side which wants it "soon" to last "long
enough". I recall reports of a determination by various War
Department Planners which determined that the "life expectancy" of
combat aircraft was limited to N hours. Ergo, it was not "cost
effective" to build aircraft which would "last" for 2N hours, if half
the useful life was not going to be used.
And there is the story of Henry Ford, who sent Engineers out to
the junk yards to find the parts which weren't breaking on his
automobiles. Those parts were "over built", so they could be less
"well made", and saving the Company money in the process. What's the
old saw - that eighty percent of the cost is in the next decimal
place.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."

I think the answer is that we should *collect* those old things,
admire them and shine them up on weekends, and show them off when the
neighbors come over.

And then put them back in the garage or basement, and drive away in
our new cars that we hardly have to touch.

--
Ed Huntress

robobass wrote:

Don't get me started. I have a good friend who has a high position in aviation safety engineering. He has such an astoundingly poor understanding of basic physics, mechanics, and electricity that I don't understand how he even manages his household, let alone his job . Many examples...

Well in any event, fitting traditional credentials and keeping the correct connections *ON PAPER* is usually enough to get and keep a respected place in any profession.

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 02:09:15 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

Ed Huntress on Mon, 22 Sep 2014 12:48:16
-0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 08:48:01 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

Ed Huntress on Mon, 22 Sep 2014 09:35:46
-0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Or, as they used to say at GM, "Any damned fool can design a
carburettor for a Rolls-Royce. It takes a genius to design one
for a
Chevrolet."

Or the tongue-in-cheek motto applied to Mercedes-Benz: "Never use
two
parts to do a job when you can get away with three." g

OTOH, when you have three parts, you can replace one of them.
B-)

Nowadays, we have modules which are plug and play, do multiple
functions, and can't really be repaired. Not cost effectively,
compared to removing and replacing.

I don't know about the cost effectiveness. I've had this
conversation
with Tier 1 automotive supply-chain engineers -- me being in line
with
your thoughts, and the frustrations of not being able to fix many
things these days -- and they've pretty well convinced me that
making
things repairable at a flesh-and-bones level is not at all cost
effective with today's engineering.

I don't know. Sometimes I miss my old VWs and MG, which I could fix
while on the road. OTOH, I now own two 10-year-old cars that have
never needed a repair.

My suspicion is that they're doing it right. Nostalgia for fixing
and
adjusting my S.U. carburetors (carburettors, I guess) on my
mother's
kitchen table isn't enough to overcome the fact that I had to do
*something* with my old cars almost every week.

There is the one side which says "make it good, and get it to
last". There is the other side which wants it "soon" to last "long
enough". I recall reports of a determination by various War
Department Planners which determined that the "life expectancy" of
combat aircraft was limited to N hours. Ergo, it was not "cost
effective" to build aircraft which would "last" for 2N hours, if
half
the useful life was not going to be used.
And there is the story of Henry Ford, who sent Engineers out to
the junk yards to find the parts which weren't breaking on his
automobiles. Those parts were "over built", so they could be less
"well made", and saving the Company money in the process. What's
the
old saw - that eighty percent of the cost is in the next decimal
place.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."

I think the answer is that we should *collect* those old things,
admire them and shine them up on weekends, and show them off when
the
neighbors come over.

And then put them back in the garage or basement, and drive away in
our new cars that we hardly have to touch.

--
Ed Huntress

I've been making the rounds of dealerships to price a few parts and to
see what I might want if a tree fell on my car (the wind is roaring
outside right now). They are telling me that it's a good thing they
don't need much because any serious work requires connection to the
computer to reprogram it. I could still replace plugs and brakes and
belts, but not too much else like the new ignition system I put in my
truck.
-jsw

On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 12:45:10 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 02:09:15 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

Ed Huntress on Mon, 22 Sep 2014 12:48:16
-0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 08:48:01 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

Ed Huntress on Mon, 22 Sep 2014 09:35:46
-0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Or, as they used to say at GM, "Any damned fool can design a
carburettor for a Rolls-Royce. It takes a genius to design one
for a
Chevrolet."

Or the tongue-in-cheek motto applied to Mercedes-Benz: "Never use
two
parts to do a job when you can get away with three." g

OTOH, when you have three parts, you can replace one of them.
B-)

Nowadays, we have modules which are plug and play, do multiple
functions, and can't really be repaired. Not cost effectively,
compared to removing and replacing.

I don't know about the cost effectiveness. I've had this
conversation
with Tier 1 automotive supply-chain engineers -- me being in line
with
your thoughts, and the frustrations of not being able to fix many
things these days -- and they've pretty well convinced me that
making
things repairable at a flesh-and-bones level is not at all cost
effective with today's engineering.

I don't know. Sometimes I miss my old VWs and MG, which I could fix
while on the road. OTOH, I now own two 10-year-old cars that have
never needed a repair.

My suspicion is that they're doing it right. Nostalgia for fixing
and
adjusting my S.U. carburetors (carburettors, I guess) on my
mother's
kitchen table isn't enough to overcome the fact that I had to do
*something* with my old cars almost every week.

There is the one side which says "make it good, and get it to
last". There is the other side which wants it "soon" to last "long
enough". I recall reports of a determination by various War
Department Planners which determined that the "life expectancy" of
combat aircraft was limited to N hours. Ergo, it was not "cost
effective" to build aircraft which would "last" for 2N hours, if
half
the useful life was not going to be used.
And there is the story of Henry Ford, who sent Engineers out to
the junk yards to find the parts which weren't breaking on his
automobiles. Those parts were "over built", so they could be less
"well made", and saving the Company money in the process. What's
the
old saw - that eighty percent of the cost is in the next decimal
place.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."

I think the answer is that we should *collect* those old things,
admire them and shine them up on weekends, and show them off when
the
neighbors come over.

And then put them back in the garage or basement, and drive away in
our new cars that we hardly have to touch.

--
Ed Huntress

I've been making the rounds of dealerships to price a few parts and to
see what I might want if a tree fell on my car (the wind is roaring
outside right now). They are telling me that it's a good thing they
don't need much because any serious work requires connection to the
computer to reprogram it. I could still replace plugs and brakes and
belts, but not too much else like the new ignition system I put in my
truck.
-jsw

I mostly just work on my lawnmower and leaf-blower now. At least I
understand the engines. g

--
Ed Huntress

Jim Wilkins wrote:

I've been making the rounds of dealerships to price a few parts and to
see what I might want if a tree fell on my car (the wind is roaring
outside right now). They are telling me that it's a good thing they
don't need much because any serious work requires connection to the
computer to reprogram it. I could still replace plugs and brakes and
belts, but not too much else like the new ignition system I put in my
truck.


I know you have some laptops. Buy a usb to OBDII interface on Ebay
for around $10.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

Ed Huntress wrote:

I mostly just work on my lawnmower and leaf-blower now. At least I*
understand the engines. g*

Well, it's good to know that republicans spend time with yard work. I figured that wasn't the case when Mitt Romney was caught setting an example of hiring people with disputed social security numbers to do that kind of work..

On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 09:17:42 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"robobass" wrote in message
...
On Friday, September 26, 2014 12:32:23 PM UTC+2, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
wrote:
Larry Jaques fired this volley
in
:

Indeed. Too many of those uberProfs never get into the trenches
at
all, missing 2/3 of knowledge in their field by default. The
result
is that I seldom trust anyone with anything over a Master's. Too
often, it _is_ Piled Higher and Deeper.

Heh! I hired an East Indian once who hired on as hourly 'work'
staff at
the fireworks plant, but who professed to be a degreed mechanical
engineer by trade.

It became clear early on that he had zero manual skills, and no
knowledge
of tools or physical methods. He was simply astounded and
enthralled by
a simple scissor-style PVC pipe cutter, when it was demonstrated to
him.

I once asked him, as inoffensively as I could, how it could be the
case
that he was both degreed in the trade, and absent the manual skills.
He
said, "Oh, engineers nebber get deyer hands durty! Dat is for de
laborers! We design... Dey make de products!"

OhhhhhhKaayyyyy!

Never met an engineer worth his salt who couldn't turn a wrench!

LLoyd

Don't get me started. I have a good friend who has a high position in
aviation safety engineering. He has such an astoundingly poor
understanding of basic physics, mechanics, and electricity that I
don't understand how he even manages his household, let alone his job
. Many examples, but one day we were talking about car brakes, and I
mentioned that the rear discs were typically smaller than the front
ones. He had no clue as to why that should be. Still, he makes way
more money than me. My practical knowledge seems to have thwarted my
joining the 1%, but I have friends in the 0.1% who say that when the
**** really does hit the fan, then it's going to be good old Rob who
gets them through it. I like that.

=======================

In my experience the most capable engineers resist being moved into
management, so the less qualified ones become the bosses.
-jsw

WAY too true. The good engineers (among other disciplines) don't have
a stomach for the politics and bull**** that is involved, generally,
in a management position. They know what they are good at - and prefer
to stay with that.

Those who are not so good at what they do move up to something else.

Ed Huntress writes:

I think the answer is that we should *collect* those old things,
admire them and shine them up on weekends, and show them off when the
neighbors come over.

And then put them back in the garage or basement, and drive away in
our new cars that we hardly have to touch.

Cars, we agree, are better. My last car went twelve years with only a
starter motor failure. Died of rust in salted-road country. When I was
in the trade 45 years ago, a car that made 100,000 miles without major
mechanical work was nearly unheard-of.

OTOH, household stuff ain't so good. I recently retired a recliner
chair when the recliner mechanism broke terminally. It's Naugahyde
upholstry was cracked here and there but intact. 44 years old. The
new one is three years old and the surface has worn off the fake
leather upholstry everwhere the sitter's body touches it. The seat
shape is better -- nearly therapeutic for aging joints -- but it looks
like something found in a alley.

My electric toaster was 100 years old last year. How long does a
toaster last today? My inherited blender, circa 1950 model, broke. We
went through three new blenders before I got serious, repaired the old
one. Repair is three or four years old now.

Oh, well, my perceptions are probaly distorted. As a blacksmith, the
average age of a tool in my shop is probably in excess of 50 years,
all the newish mechanic's and power tools notwithstanding. Hey, I
have a Black & Decker 1/2" electric drill and B&D end grinder that are
going strong -- models advertised for sale in a 1925 catalog.

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

On 03 Nov 2014 02:51:33 -0400, Mike Spencer
wrote:


Ed Huntress writes:

I think the answer is that we should *collect* those old things,
admire them and shine them up on weekends, and show them off when the
neighbors come over.

And then put them back in the garage or basement, and drive away in
our new cars that we hardly have to touch.

Cars, we agree, are better. My last car went twelve years with only a
starter motor failure. Died of rust in salted-road country. When I was
in the trade 45 years ago, a car that made 100,000 miles without major
mechanical work was nearly unheard-of.

OTOH, household stuff ain't so good. I recently retired a recliner
chair when the recliner mechanism broke terminally. It's Naugahyde
upholstry was cracked here and there but intact. 44 years old. The
new one is three years old and the surface has worn off the fake
leather upholstry everwhere the sitter's body touches it. The seat
shape is better -- nearly therapeutic for aging joints -- but it looks
like something found in a alley.

My electric toaster was 100 years old last year. How long does a
toaster last today? My inherited blender, circa 1950 model, broke. We
went through three new blenders before I got serious, repaired the old
one. Repair is three or four years old now.

Oh, well, my perceptions are probaly distorted. As a blacksmith, the
average age of a tool in my shop is probably in excess of 50 years,
all the newish mechanic's and power tools notwithstanding. Hey, I
have a Black & Decker 1/2" electric drill and B&D end grinder that are
going strong -- models advertised for sale in a 1925 catalog.

Nah, I think your perceptions are right. Small electric appliances are
often real junk these days. I don't know why, except that they also
tend to be very cheap.

--
Ed Huntress

On Monday, September 22, 2014 6:31:43 PM UTC-4, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:
.....
...... I have a 1948 Meteor SP (1/2-frame 35) rotary focal plane
shutter camera that's a lot simpler than a Nikon-F, if you really want
'simple'.
...........
LLoyd


A bit late to the game, but I have a Universal Camera Corp Mercury II, Model CX, also a rotary shutter 1/2 frame 35mm. It was Dad's, so I'm unsure when it was made. Late 40's, I think. I used it all thru high school. I don't think the film advance works anymore, but I sure ran some Tri-X thru it back in the day. It's just a shelf nick-knack / keepsake now.

I also have his Kodak Medalist 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 baby press camera. Supposedly it was the last one off the line before the Navy started taking all of 'em for ship's cameras. The leather case has a steel liner. Somewhere around here there's a repair manual for it, stamped 'Classified'.

He was the yard photographer at Norfolk Naval Shipyard when the US entered the war.

Jim H.

On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 02:34:27 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On 03 Nov 2014 02:51:33 -0400, Mike Spencer
wrote:


Ed Huntress writes:

I think the answer is that we should *collect* those old things,
admire them and shine them up on weekends, and show them off when the
neighbors come over.

And then put them back in the garage or basement, and drive away in
our new cars that we hardly have to touch.

Cars, we agree, are better. My last car went twelve years with only a
starter motor failure. Died of rust in salted-road country. When I was
in the trade 45 years ago, a car that made 100,000 miles without major
mechanical work was nearly unheard-of.

OTOH, household stuff ain't so good. I recently retired a recliner
chair when the recliner mechanism broke terminally. It's Naugahyde
upholstry was cracked here and there but intact. 44 years old. The
new one is three years old and the surface has worn off the fake
leather upholstry everwhere the sitter's body touches it. The seat
shape is better -- nearly therapeutic for aging joints -- but it looks
like something found in a alley.

My electric toaster was 100 years old last year. How long does a
toaster last today? My inherited blender, circa 1950 model, broke. We
went through three new blenders before I got serious, repaired the old
one. Repair is three or four years old now.

Oh, well, my perceptions are probaly distorted. As a blacksmith, the
average age of a tool in my shop is probably in excess of 50 years,
all the newish mechanic's and power tools notwithstanding. Hey, I
have a Black & Decker 1/2" electric drill and B&D end grinder that are
going strong -- models advertised for sale in a 1925 catalog.

Nah, I think your perceptions are right. Small electric appliances are
often real junk these days. I don't know why, except that they also
tend to be very cheap.
Look back at what a toaster, electric mixer, or, horror of horrors,
a blender or food processor cost in the fifties or sixties. You can
buy them for the same price today (or less) No wonder the one from the
fifties will still outlast the new one....

On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 19:38:17 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 02:34:27 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On 03 Nov 2014 02:51:33 -0400, Mike Spencer
wrote:


Ed Huntress writes:

I think the answer is that we should *collect* those old things,
admire them and shine them up on weekends, and show them off when the
neighbors come over.

And then put them back in the garage or basement, and drive away in
our new cars that we hardly have to touch.

Cars, we agree, are better. My last car went twelve years with only a
starter motor failure. Died of rust in salted-road country. When I was
in the trade 45 years ago, a car that made 100,000 miles without major
mechanical work was nearly unheard-of.

OTOH, household stuff ain't so good. I recently retired a recliner
chair when the recliner mechanism broke terminally. It's Naugahyde
upholstry was cracked here and there but intact. 44 years old. The
new one is three years old and the surface has worn off the fake
leather upholstry everwhere the sitter's body touches it. The seat
shape is better -- nearly therapeutic for aging joints -- but it looks
like something found in a alley.

My electric toaster was 100 years old last year. How long does a
toaster last today? My inherited blender, circa 1950 model, broke. We
went through three new blenders before I got serious, repaired the old
one. Repair is three or four years old now.

Oh, well, my perceptions are probaly distorted. As a blacksmith, the
average age of a tool in my shop is probably in excess of 50 years,
all the newish mechanic's and power tools notwithstanding. Hey, I
have a Black & Decker 1/2" electric drill and B&D end grinder that are
going strong -- models advertised for sale in a 1925 catalog.

Nah, I think your perceptions are right. Small electric appliances are
often real junk these days. I don't know why, except that they also
tend to be very cheap.
Look back at what a toaster, electric mixer, or, horror of horrors,
a blender or food processor cost in the fifties or sixties. You can
buy them for the same price today (or less) No wonder the one from the
fifties will still outlast the new one..

Right. Actually, my blender from the '60s IS my new one.

One drop of South Bend spindle oil on the Oilite bushing, every third
or fourth time I use it, has kept it running great for the last 35
years. And a drop of mineral oil on the gasket, wiped on carefully,
will keep that 20-cent part going for at least ten years. d8-)

--
Ed ("Cheapskate") Huntress

On 23 Sep 2014 01:34 PM ,"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Jim Wilkins wrote:

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

Cydrome Leader wrote:
[grumble...]


Tektronix figured it out in the '50s & '60s. Slide an item out,
lift
and remove for service. Or lock the rails and rotate the chassis to
service it in place.

It was a real joy to be able to connect to a piece of equipment
from
the front of a rack, then slide it into place.

So did HP. My early-70's 8555A spectrum analyzer is a masterpiece of
both electronic and mechanical design. It even has a Magic Crystal for
a heart
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YIG_sphere

Then they lost their way on the scopes with keypads and a single
control dial that took two minutes to change any setting. I have one
because it sold cheap but much preferred their Infinium with separate
knobs for each function.


I like my Tek 2465A scopes. The newer HO spectrum analyzers could
print the screen, but the setup was six menus deep and it only worked
with a couple HP printers. Engineers would come to the production floor
to ask us to set one up for them.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

My son liberated a Tektronix 555 O'scope, with the cart and the breakout adaptors so the modules could be adjusted. Right at 100 firebottles and the thing works perfect. It had sat in an abondoned lab at his college and it must have been maintained regularly by the college for it to work so well. Heats my little antique electronic repair shop nicely. We call it the "Scope-o-saurus".


--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post

On Sunday, November 2, 2014 9:17:22 AM UTC-5, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"robobass" wrote in message
...
On Friday, September 26, 2014 12:32:23 PM UTC+2, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
wrote:
Larry Jaques fired this volley
in
:

Indeed. Too many of those uberProfs never get into the trenches
at
all, missing 2/3 of knowledge in their field by default. The
result
is that I seldom trust anyone with anything over a Master's. Too
often, it _is_ Piled Higher and Deeper.

Heh! I hired an East Indian once who hired on as hourly 'work'
staff at
the fireworks plant, but who professed to be a degreed mechanical
engineer by trade.

It became clear early on that he had zero manual skills, and no
knowledge
of tools or physical methods. He was simply astounded and
enthralled by
a simple scissor-style PVC pipe cutter, when it was demonstrated to
him.

I once asked him, as inoffensively as I could, how it could be the
case
that he was both degreed in the trade, and absent the manual skills.
He
said, "Oh, engineers nebber get deyer hands durty! Dat is for de
laborers! We design... Dey make de products!"

OhhhhhhKaayyyyy!

Never met an engineer worth his salt who couldn't turn a wrench!

LLoyd

Don't get me started. I have a good friend who has a high position in
aviation safety engineering. He has such an astoundingly poor
understanding of basic physics, mechanics, and electricity that I
don't understand how he even manages his household, let alone his job
. Many examples, but one day we were talking about car brakes, and I
mentioned that the rear discs were typically smaller than the front
ones. He had no clue as to why that should be. Still, he makes way
more money than me. My practical knowledge seems to have thwarted my
joining the 1%, but I have friends in the 0.1% who say that when the
**** really does hit the fan, then it's going to be good old Rob who
gets them through it. I like that.

=======================



In my experience the most capable engineers resist being moved into
management, so the less qualified ones become the bosses. -jsw

But in reality, there always is another side to people moving up the corporate ladder that others rarely see. Supervisors know.

zerousair wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

I like my Tek 2465A scopes. The newer HP spectrum analyzers
could print the screen, but the setup was six menus deep and it
only worked with a couple HP printers. Engineers would come to
the production floor to ask us to set one up for them.

My son liberated a Tektronix 555 O'scope, with the cart and the breakout adaptors so the modules could be adjusted. Right at 100 firebottles and the thing works perfect. It had sat in an abondoned lab at his college and it must have been maintained regularly by the college for it to work so well. Heats my little antique electronic repair shop nicely. We call it the "Scope-o-saurus".


The 2565A is 350 MHz, four channel. One of my scopes has an IEEE-488
interface, and is rack mounted for ATE applications.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

On 2014-11-04, zerousair wrote:

My son liberated a Tektronix 555 O'scope, with the cart and the
breakout adaptors so the modules could be adjusted. Right at 100
firebottles and the thing works perfect. It had sat in an abondoned lab
at his college and it must have been maintained regularly by the college
for it to work so well. Heats my little antique electronic repair shop
nicely. We call it the "Scope-o-saurus".

That's the one with two vertical plugins, two horizontal
plugins, two traces, and a separate power supply chassis on the bottom
deck of the cart?

Lots of heat.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | (KV4PH) Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---