I'm looking for any suggestions on a little project we have to do in a
week or so.
This project is basically removing old countertops on a bar so that
they can be replaced with granite. The old tops are job site
installed Formica on particle board over what are essentially kitchen
cabinets. There is also a raised bar.
Removing the raised bar is no problem but about 30' of the L shaped
back bar has a mirror splash that we are supposed to try to save.

We've bid plenty of time for the project and have an understanding
that we'll try to save the mirror but won't have to buy it if we
can't.

Our initial plan is to take a sabre saw and saw out most of the top as
close to the mirror as we can. Once we get that out, we'll try to use
the sawzall to cut between the top and the 3/4" thick blocking that is
attached to the cabinets. If the top comes off then we can remove the
blocking.

How would you go about it?
Any other...better ideas?

Thanks

Mike O.

A Fein Multimaster could get "reeeeeel" close.


"Mike O." wrote in message
...
I'm looking for any suggestions on a little project we have to do in a
week or so.
This project is basically removing old countertops on a bar so that
they can be replaced with granite. The old tops are job site
installed Formica on particle board over what are essentially kitchen
cabinets. There is also a raised bar.
Removing the raised bar is no problem but about 30' of the L shaped
back bar has a mirror splash that we are supposed to try to save.

We've bid plenty of time for the project and have an understanding
that we'll try to save the mirror but won't have to buy it if we
can't.

Our initial plan is to take a sabre saw and saw out most of the top as
close to the mirror as we can. Once we get that out, we'll try to use
the sawzall to cut between the top and the 3/4" thick blocking that is
attached to the cabinets. If the top comes off then we can remove the
blocking.

How would you go about it?
Any other...better ideas?

Thanks

Mike O.

On Jul 21, 6:53*pm, Mike O. wrote:
I'm looking for any suggestions on a little project we have to do in a
week or so.
This project is basically removing old countertops on a bar so that
they can be replaced with granite. *The old tops are job site
installed Formica on particle board over what are essentially kitchen
cabinets. *There is also a raised bar. *
Removing the raised bar is no problem but about 30' of the L shaped
back bar has a mirror splash that we are supposed to try to save. *

We've bid plenty of time for the project and have an understanding
that we'll try to save the mirror but won't have to buy it if we
can't.

Our initial plan is to take a sabre saw and saw out most of the top as
close to the mirror as we can. *Once we get that out, we'll try to use
the sawzall to cut between the top and the 3/4" thick blocking that is
attached to the cabinets. *If the top comes off then we can remove the
blocking.

How would you go about it? *
Any other...better ideas?

Is the mirror some etched/frosted thing or just regular mirror? Such
attempts often go just fine until you get one little chip in the glass
and the Owner insists on replacement - on your dime.

I think this is a job for - ta da! - the Fein Multimaster! I'd just
cut the blocking free from the cabinet and remove the whole top-
remnant.

R

On Jul 21, 7:05*pm, "Leon" wrote:
A Fein Multimaster could get "reeeeeel" close.

Damn, Leon. You beat me by a minute with the Fein Multimaster
suggestion!

Just picked up an older but excellent condition Fein 6" ROS from
craigslist. Think I'm going to send it to my brother as a gift...

R

Leon wrote:
A Fein Multimaster could get "reeeeeel" close.

Agreed--this is one of those jobs where the Multimaster is in its element.

"Mike O." wrote in message
...
I'm looking for any suggestions on a little project we have to do in
a week or so.
This project is basically removing old countertops on a bar so that
they can be replaced with granite. The old tops are job site
installed Formica on particle board over what are essentially kitchen
cabinets. There is also a raised bar.
Removing the raised bar is no problem but about 30' of the L shaped
back bar has a mirror splash that we are supposed to try to save.

We've bid plenty of time for the project and have an understanding
that we'll try to save the mirror but won't have to buy it if we
can't.

Our initial plan is to take a sabre saw and saw out most of the top
as close to the mirror as we can. Once we get that out, we'll try
to use the sawzall to cut between the top and the 3/4" thick
blocking that is attached to the cabinets. If the top comes off
then we can remove the blocking.

How would you go about it?
Any other...better ideas?

Thanks

Mike O.

On Jul 21, 5:53*pm, Mike O. wrote:
I'm looking for any suggestions on a little project we have to do in a
week or so.
This project is basically removing old countertops on a bar so that
they can be replaced with granite. *The old tops are job site
installed Formica on particle board over what are essentially kitchen
cabinets. *There is also a raised bar. *
Removing the raised bar is no problem but about 30' of the L shaped
back bar has a mirror splash that we are supposed to try to save. *

We've bid plenty of time for the project and have an understanding
that we'll try to save the mirror but won't have to buy it if we
can't.

Our initial plan is to take a sabre saw and saw out most of the top as
close to the mirror as we can. *Once we get that out, we'll try to use
the sawzall to cut between the top and the 3/4" thick blocking that is
attached to the cabinets. *If the top comes off then we can remove the
blocking.

How would you go about it? *
Any other...better ideas?

Thanks

Mike O. *

Is it possible to use some solvent or lye solution to crumble the
particle board? Soak overnight? If the mirror is only 1/4" thick,
I'd worry about vibration cracking it. If it's thicker, you're
safer. If it's bonded with RTV, you could use a solvent for that.
You might also need to worry about staining or etching the silvering
if you use liquid, but it's probably protected given its intended use.

On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 18:05:07 -0500, "Leon"
wrote:

A Fein Multimaster could get "reeeeeel" close.

I was thinking about the Fein too.

I'm going to have to get the top out so the new tops can sit on the
cabinets. If I go ahead and cut most of the top out, do you think the
Fein will be man enough to cut through 30' of blocking and fasteners
to separate the top?

Mike O.

On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 16:06:38 -0700 (PDT), RicodJour
wrote:

Is the mirror some etched/frosted thing or just regular mirror?

Just regular 1/4" mirror but in big pieces as it goes 4' up the back
wall.

Such
attempts often go just fine until you get one little chip in the glass
and the Owner insists on replacement - on your dime.

We bid this for a General Contractor and we all agreed that we
wouldn't be responsible for the mirror. My guess is that he covered
his own butt in that regard with his price..

I think this is a job for - ta da! - the Fein Multimaster! I'd just
cut the blocking free from the cabinet and remove the whole top-
remnant.

Since it's L shaped and has splash on the ends too, it has to come out
in pieces. The Fein seems to be the general consensus so it looks
like it's time to get one.

Mike O.

"Mike O." wrote:

If I go ahead and cut most of the top out, do you think the
Fein will be man enough to cut through 30' of blocking and fasteners
to separate the top?

It will, but how about yougrin?

When you buy it get the one with all the blades going in.

They really bite you in the rear for after market blade purchases.

Lew

Check under the cabinets for shims. Maybe removing them, if any,
would help the situation.

Sonny

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
...

"Mike O." wrote:

If I go ahead and cut most of the top out, do you think the
Fein will be man enough to cut through 30' of blocking and fasteners
to separate the top?

It will, but how about yougrin?

When you buy it get the one with all the blades going in.

They really bite you in the rear for after market blade purchases.

Lew


Fortunately those Fein blades have dropped in price with the competition
undercutting their prices. IIRC the Fein 3-packs are about 1/2 the price
that they once were.

On Jul 21, 8:58*pm, Mike O. wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 16:06:38 -0700 (PDT), RicodJour

wrote:
Is the mirror some etched/frosted thing or just regular mirror? *

Just regular 1/4" mirror but in big pieces as it goes 4' up the back
wall.

Such
attempts often go just fine until you get one little chip in the glass
and the Owner insists on replacement - on your dime.

We bid this for a General Contractor and we all agreed that we
wouldn't be responsible for the mirror. *My guess is that he covered
his own butt in that regard with his price.. *

I think this is a job for - ta da! - the Fein Multimaster! *I'd just
cut the blocking free from the cabinet and remove the whole top-
remnant.

Since it's L shaped and has splash on the ends too, it has to come out
in pieces. *The Fein seems to be the general consensus so it looks
like it's time to get one.

Mike O.

Will the granite slide under the mirror or be elevated and butt up
against the mirror?

Mike O. wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 18:05:07 -0500, "Leon"
wrote:

A Fein Multimaster could get "reeeeeel" close.

I was thinking about the Fein too.

I'm going to have to get the top out so the new tops can sit on the
cabinets. If I go ahead and cut most of the top out, do you think the
Fein will be man enough to cut through 30' of blocking and fasteners
to separate the top?

Yep. Only real limitation is has is its cut depth. Plan on taking your
time though--it's not a fast cutter.

Mike O. wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 16:06:38 -0700 (PDT), RicodJour
wrote:

Is the mirror some etched/frosted thing or just regular mirror?

Just regular 1/4" mirror but in big pieces as it goes 4' up the back
wall.

Such
attempts often go just fine until you get one little chip in the
glass and the Owner insists on replacement - on your dime.

We bid this for a General Contractor and we all agreed that we
wouldn't be responsible for the mirror. My guess is that he covered
his own butt in that regard with his price..

I think this is a job for - ta da! - the Fein Multimaster! I'd just
cut the blocking free from the cabinet and remove the whole top-
remnant.

Since it's L shaped and has splash on the ends too, it has to come out
in pieces. The Fein seems to be the general consensus so it looks
like it's time to get one.

You're going to be glad you did. It's one of those 'problem solver' tools
that you don't grab to start a job but will probably have out before you're
done on most of them.

Get the "top" kit--that gives you most of the accessories and a good set of
blades at a good discount.

Leon wrote:
"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
...

"Mike O." wrote:

If I go ahead and cut most of the top out, do you think the
Fein will be man enough to cut through 30' of blocking and fasteners
to separate the top?

It will, but how about yougrin?

When you buy it get the one with all the blades going in.

They really bite you in the rear for after market blade purchases.

Lew


Fortunately those Fein blades have dropped in price with the
competition undercutting their prices. IIRC the Fein 3-packs are
about 1/2 the price that they once were.

Heh!

HF blades are $5.99 each - and they throw in two scrapers! The scrapers can
be turned into cutting blades quite easily. Simply take your rotary Dremel
and cut as many 1/16" notches as you can on the business end.

Mike O. wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 16:06:38 -0700 (PDT), RicodJour
wrote:

Is the mirror some etched/frosted thing or just regular mirror?

Just regular 1/4" mirror but in big pieces as it goes 4' up the back
wall.

Such
attempts often go just fine until you get one little chip in the
glass and the Owner insists on replacement - on your dime.

We bid this for a General Contractor and we all agreed that we
wouldn't be responsible for the mirror. My guess is that he covered
his own butt in that regard with his price..

I think this is a job for - ta da! - the Fein Multimaster! I'd just
cut the blocking free from the cabinet and remove the whole top-
remnant.

Since it's L shaped and has splash on the ends too, it has to come out
in pieces. The Fein seems to be the general consensus so it looks
like it's time to get one.


Try the Harbor Freight model first. It's about one-tenth the price of a Fein
(walk-in-off-the-street $39.95).

On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:28:05 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
wrote:

Will the granite slide under the mirror or be elevated and butt up
against the mirror?

We're removing 1 1/2" of top and the granite is 3mm so theoretically,
it's supposed to go under the mirror. I'm not the granite guy though
so all I'm supposed to do is remove the old tops.

Mike O.

"Mike O." wrote in message
...
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:28:05 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
wrote:

Will the granite slide under the mirror or be elevated and butt up
against the mirror?

We're removing 1 1/2" of top and the granite is 3mm

Maybe 3 cm?

"MikeWhy" wrote in message
...
"Mike O." wrote in message
...
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:28:05 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
wrote:

Will the granite slide under the mirror or be elevated and butt up
against the mirror?

We're removing 1 1/2" of top and the granite is 3mm

Maybe 3 cm?

Maybe it is some of that new fangled granite VENEER??

On Jul 22, 10:46*pm, "Lee Michaels"
wrote:
"MikeWhy" wrote in message

... "Mike O." wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:28:05 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
wrote:

Will the granite slide under the mirror or be elevated and butt up
against the mirror?

We're removing *1 1/2" of top and the granite is 3mm

Maybe 3 cm?

Maybe it is some of that new fangled granite VENEER??

Comes in rolls?

On Jul 22, 9:20*pm, Mike O. wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:28:05 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy

wrote:
Will the granite slide under the mirror or be elevated and butt up
against the mirror?

We're removing *1 1/2" of top and the granite is 3mm so theoretically,
it's supposed to go under the mirror. *I'm not the granite guy though
so all I'm supposed to do is remove the old tops.

Mike O. *

That will give them 1/4" to play with and that should be all they
need. (I knew you meant either 3 cm or 30 mm, an industry
standard...unlike some of the wise-asses around here, and I don't mean
that in a bad way. G)

There is virtually zero 'feel' during a granite/quartz installation,
so feel good that it isn't your problem.

On Jul 22, 11:46*pm, "Lee Michaels"
wrote:
"MikeWhy" wrote in message

... "Mike O." wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:28:05 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
wrote:

Will the granite slide under the mirror or be elevated and butt up
against the mirror?

We're removing *1 1/2" of top and the granite is 3mm

Maybe 3 cm?

Maybe it is some of that new fangled granite VENEER??

Hardly newfangled, Lee. Granite veneer has been around a long time.
Usually mounted on a honey-comb aluminum back, super thin stone
surfaces have been around for use in elevators, vertical surfaces, but
it a bit thicker than 3 mm. 1/4" to 3/8" is quite common.
Smarty pants.

You see, if you 'Murkans had joined the rest of the planet in going
metric, you'd also have an extra Mars lander to play with and a better
understanding of mm vs cm...:-)

Robatoy wrote:

You see, if you 'Murkans had joined the rest of the planet in going
metric, you'd also have an extra Mars lander to play with and a better
understanding of mm vs cm...:-)

I'm not sure - it may be because we didn't join the rest of the planet
in going metric that we get to play with 'em on Mars.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

On Jul 23, 10:55*am, Morris Dovey wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
You see, if you 'Murkans had joined the rest of the planet in going
metric, you'd also have an extra Mars lander to play with and a better
understanding of mm vs cm...:-)

I'm not sure - it may be because we didn't join the rest of the planet
in going metric that we get to play with 'em on Mars.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USAhttp://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

If you had a better understanding of metric, you'd have an extra one
to play with...that's what I meant..G

Morris Dovey wrote:
Robatoy wrote:

You see, if you 'Murkans had joined the rest of the planet in going
metric, you'd also have an extra Mars lander to play with and a
better understanding of mm vs cm...:-)

I'm not sure - it may be because we didn't join the rest of the planet
in going metric that we get to play with 'em on Mars.

Was French plot to sabotage noble British exploration efforts.

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 22:25:35 -0500, "MikeWhy"
wrote:

We're removing 1 1/2" of top and the granite is 3mm

Maybe 3 cm?


Ooops, you can tell I'm not the granite guy.

Mike O.

Morris Dovey wrote:

Robatoy wrote:

You see, if you 'Murkans had joined the rest of the planet in going
metric, you'd also have an extra Mars lander to play with and a better
understanding of mm vs cm...:-)

I'm not sure - it may be because we didn't join the rest of the planet
in going metric that we get to play with 'em on Mars.


Well, that and the fact that even if the lander in question had been fully
metric throughout the same error could have occurred in the interface -- km
being passed instead of m.

The real lesson from this is that there is no excuse for not performing
careful systems engineering and walking through all interfaces to make sure
nothing is missed.

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

On Jul 23, 10:58*pm, Mark & Juanita wrote:
Morris Dovey wrote:
Robatoy wrote:

You see, if you 'Murkans had joined the rest of the planet in going
metric, you'd also have an extra Mars lander to play with and a better
understanding of mm vs cm...:-)

I'm not sure - it may be because we didn't join the rest of the planet
in going metric that we get to play with 'em on Mars.

* Well, that and the fact that even if the lander in question had been fully
metric throughout the same error could have occurred in the interface -- km
being passed instead of m. *

* The real lesson from this is that there is no excuse for not performing
careful systems engineering and walking through all interfaces to make sure
nothing is missed.

I thought we "learned" that lesson from Hubble.

On Jul 24, 8:27*am, " wrote:
On Jul 23, 10:58*pm, Mark & Juanita wrote:





Morris Dovey wrote:
Robatoy wrote:

You see, if you 'Murkans had joined the rest of the planet in going
metric, you'd also have an extra Mars lander to play with and a better
understanding of mm vs cm...:-)

I'm not sure - it may be because we didn't join the rest of the planet
in going metric that we get to play with 'em on Mars.

* Well, that and the fact that even if the lander in question had been fully
metric throughout the same error could have occurred in the interface -- km
being passed instead of m. *

* The real lesson from this is that there is no excuse for not performing
careful systems engineering and walking through all interfaces to make sure
nothing is missed.

I thought we "learned" that lesson from Hubble.

Or camshafts for GM's 307 engines..

wrote:
On Jul 23, 10:58 pm, Mark & Juanita wrote:
Morris Dovey wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
You see, if you 'Murkans had joined the rest of the planet in going
metric, you'd also have an extra Mars lander to play with and a better
understanding of mm vs cm...:-)
I'm not sure - it may be because we didn't join the rest of the planet
in going metric that we get to play with 'em on Mars.
Well, that and the fact that even if the lander in question had been fully
metric throughout the same error could have occurred in the interface -- km
being passed instead of m.

The real lesson from this is that there is no excuse for not performing
careful systems engineering and walking through all interfaces to make sure
nothing is missed.

I thought we "learned" that lesson from Hubble.


Mars Climate Orbiter actually. See
http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric/ and no, it was NOT my
fault.
;-)
jo4hn

jo4hn wrote:
wrote:
....
I thought we "learned" that lesson from Hubble.


Mars Climate Orbiter actually. See
....

Unfortunately, it seems it be a lesson that continually has to be
relearned in virtually every walk of life, technology or no...

--

jo4hn writes:
wrote:
On Jul 23, 10:58 pm, Mark & Juanita wrote:
Morris Dovey wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
You see, if you 'Murkans had joined the rest of the planet in going
metric, you'd also have an extra Mars lander to play with and a better
understanding of mm vs cm...:-)
I'm not sure - it may be because we didn't join the rest of the planet
in going metric that we get to play with 'em on Mars.
Well, that and the fact that even if the lander in question had been fully
metric throughout the same error could have occurred in the interface -- km
being passed instead of m.

The real lesson from this is that there is no excuse for not performing
careful systems engineering and walking through all interfaces to make sure
nothing is missed.

I thought we "learned" that lesson from Hubble.


Mars Climate Orbiter actually. See
http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric/ and no, it was NOT my
fault.
;-)
jo4hn

Back farther, there was the gimli glider units issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

scott

Mark & Juanita wrote:

The real lesson from this is that there is no excuse for not performing
careful systems engineering and walking through all interfaces to make sure
nothing is missed.

I agree - and yet the only lesson we seem to learn is recognizing the
previous mistakes when we make 'em again. s

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

On Jul 24, 7:34*pm, Dave Balderstone
wrote:
In article , Scott

Lurndal wrote:
Back farther, there was the gimli glider units issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

There were/are many pilots that belived the crew should have been fired
rather than made heros.

That's a tough one. The heroism manifested itself in some incredible
flying skills, and saving the lives of all aboard. However, they
should have never been in that situation in the first place.
They made the best of a very bad, avoidable situation. That has to
account for something.

*sitting on the fence here*

Frankly, Science and Engineering has been in Metric.
Software engineers don't use voltmeters or galvanometers.

I want to know where the engineering management unit test was on that.
Most unlikely to typical or most all software and hardware processes.

Martin

Scott Lurndal wrote:
jo4hn writes:
wrote:
On Jul 23, 10:58 pm, Mark & Juanita wrote:
Morris Dovey wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
You see, if you 'Murkans had joined the rest of the planet in going
metric, you'd also have an extra Mars lander to play with and a better
understanding of mm vs cm...:-)
I'm not sure - it may be because we didn't join the rest of the planet
in going metric that we get to play with 'em on Mars.
Well, that and the fact that even if the lander in question had been fully
metric throughout the same error could have occurred in the interface -- km
being passed instead of m.

The real lesson from this is that there is no excuse for not performing
careful systems engineering and walking through all interfaces to make sure
nothing is missed.
I thought we "learned" that lesson from Hubble.


Mars Climate Orbiter actually. See
http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric/ and no, it was NOT my
fault.
;-)
jo4hn

Back farther, there was the gimli glider units issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

scott

"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote:

Frankly, Science and Engineering has been in Metric.
Software engineers don't use voltmeters or galvanometers.

But the hardware (Automobiles, machine tools, etc) are/were in English
and that's where the money was invested.

Not defending it, just stating reality.

Lew

Martin H. Eastburn wrote:

Software engineers don't use voltmeters or galvanometers.

This one will 'fess up to never needing a galvanometer, but I've used a
sizable number of scopes (ranging from simple 2-channel Tektronix to an
ultra-fast 16-channel recording scope from HP) and fair range of
voltage, current, rf-power, capacitance, (etc) meters. Would you allow
substitution of a spectrum analyzer for the galvanometer?

What makes people nervous is a software engineer with a screwdriver or
soldering iron in his hand...

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

wrote:

On Jul 23, 10:58Â*pm, Mark & Juanita wrote:
Morris Dovey wrote:
Robatoy wrote:

You see, if you 'Murkans had joined the rest of the planet in going
metric, you'd also have an extra Mars lander to play with and a better
understanding of mm vs cm...:-)

I'm not sure - it may be because we didn't join the rest of the planet
in going metric that we get to play with 'em on Mars.

Well, that and the fact that even if the lander in question had been
fully metric throughout the same error could have occurred in the
interface -- km being passed instead of m.

The real lesson from this is that there is no excuse for not performing
careful systems engineering and walking through all interfaces to make
sure nothing is missed.

I thought we "learned" that lesson from Hubble.

Some lessons are so fun, we seem to enjoy repeating them. :-(



--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Martin H. Eastburn wrote:

Frankly, Science and Engineering has been in Metric.

Depends upon what one is doing and for whom. Aerospace has some very
interesting unit choices at times, including combined units, depending upon
the end user and customer. For example, there are places that measure
altitude in feet and ground range in meters. It's not because people are
luddites, it's because that is how the end user works.

Software engineers don't use voltmeters or galvanometers.

I want to know where the engineering management unit test was on that.
Most unlikely to typical or most all software and hardware processes.

Martin

Scott Lurndal wrote:
jo4hn writes:
wrote:
On Jul 23, 10:58 pm, Mark & Juanita wrote:
Morris Dovey wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
You see, if you 'Murkans had joined the rest of the planet in going
metric, you'd also have an extra Mars lander to play with and a
better understanding of mm vs cm...:-)
I'm not sure - it may be because we didn't join the rest of the
planet in going metric that we get to play with 'em on Mars.
Well, that and the fact that even if the lander in question had been
fully
metric throughout the same error could have occurred in the interface
-- km being passed instead of m.

The real lesson from this is that there is no excuse for not
performing
careful systems engineering and walking through all interfaces to make
sure nothing is missed.
I thought we "learned" that lesson from Hubble.


Mars Climate Orbiter actually. See
http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric/ and no, it was NOT my
fault.
;-)
jo4hn

Back farther, there was the gimli glider units issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

scott

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Morris Dovey wrote:

Martin H. Eastburn wrote:

Software engineers don't use voltmeters or galvanometers.

This one will 'fess up to never needing a galvanometer, but I've used a
sizable number of scopes (ranging from simple 2-channel Tektronix to an
ultra-fast 16-channel recording scope from HP) and fair range of
voltage, current, rf-power, capacitance, (etc) meters. Would you allow
substitution of a spectrum analyzer for the galvanometer?

What makes people nervous is a software engineer with a screwdriver or
soldering iron in his hand...


An electrical engineer with a wrench can accomplish the same thing. :-)



--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough