|
Polymerized Cum posted:Do the four-wings look like... Nazi screws?!?!?!  term. MrYenko posted:Drilling titanium screws is one of those things they don't prepare you for in trade school.
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 16:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 11:45 |
|
|
Lightbulb Out posted:What is the point of a fastener like that? The removal can be aided by a design which incorporates little points on the anticlockwise drive side, with matching "teeth" on the driver bit, but only certain designs do that.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 16:04
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:Why don't aerospace companies use Robertson drive screws? Supposedly the driver will strip before the screw does in most cases.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 19:50
|
|
|
There is no way you would ever live down being "The guy who FOD'd a Pegasus with a Slumberland"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2012 21:59
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:The YF-23 really was the one that should have been. It makes the F-22 look downright bloated and completely out-of-date. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2012 20:08
|
|
|
Vork!Vork!Vork! posted:ah ITAR, I recently started to work for a defense contractor and had to learn about this.  You said a stockist asked you to make 400 of these turbine tie rods? Sure, we're approved manufacturers for you guys, we've made them before and you signed off the first article, and the stockist has proved to us that they have a purchase order from you for the parts. Great, that's fine. Make sure you work to the latest specifications. Yeah, you put your spec listing online, so I can see we're going to need the updated copies of ##### and #####. Can you send them to us? No. Whaddya mean, "No"? No. Also, here's a nonconformance we've raised on you for that batch of studs last month, you didn't add the ant-corrosion oil to the packages like we said in the latest supplier quality alert. The hell with that. You never gave us an alert. Wait, let me guess, you can't, can you? I have to go. We can't be seen together.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2012 13:54
|
|
|
We couldn't move one of our CNC machines during our latest shop-floor reorganisation without them sending out an agent to reset it after we did so. Apparently they had an issue where someone sold a machine on to a company in Iran, and it ended up being used to make things people would rather Iranians didn't make, leading to them getting a massive bollocking, and the machines being set so that breaking them down to move them locks out all the control software until they reset it. We couldn't be bothered, and just painted round it instead.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2012 15:56
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:Situational awareness is a hell of an official purpose when you're driving a small building around a crowded terminal area: I'd guess that Air France's rearranging of JFK's regional jet ramp probably cost them (or their insurers) over a million bucks: http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/post/2011/04/air-france-a380-spins-delta-regional-jet-in-jfk-collision/155560/1
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2012 11:26
|
|
|
I don't really have an issue with turning stuff off for takeoff and landing, and having it in flight mode the rest of the time. Can't really see why people get so wound up about it, it's maybe half an hour at the most at either end of the flight. I'm pretty sure there's unlikely to be a serious problem caused by someone having their electronics turned on at takeoff/landing, but aerospace doesn't run on "pretty sure", so I can't see the rule going away any time soon. Even leaving aside the possibility of interference, I've heard a few other reasons for it, such as wanting passengers paying attention to safety information rather than their phone. The whole thing remains a complete non-issue as far as I'm concerned. What's so bad about being without a kindle or whatever for a little while?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2012 02:35
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:Crosspost from the awesome image thread. Figured it could go in here, too.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Wonder how they figured that one out.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2013 00:17
|
|
|
rscott posted:something like 900 new parts that need FAIs plus subassembly FAIs and assembly FAIs
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2013 18:17
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
Previa_fun posted:I was just reminded of the long YouTube comment battle (ugh) in which there is a good chunk of the population who believes this aircraft was unmanned and flown remotely. Something to do with some TLC show's vague wording describing the accident.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2013 14:29
|
|
|
rscott posted:Sorry guys I am bad at my job and now airplanes are crashing
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
The Russians shall not have Constantinople.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
Cygni posted:This is the most British video ever. InitialDave fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Jan 20, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2013 22:03
|
|
|
If you can get them to try launching ICBMs by throwing them out the back of a C5 while in flight, strapping a few bits onto a B52 should seem completely reasonable.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
They should have tried this, just for a laugh. They were scrapping them anyway, it's not like it matters if it goes horribly wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
ManifunkDestiny posted:Iran unveiled it's totally legit, not a mock-up, domestically produced stealth fighter today:
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 11:45 |
|
|
jammyozzy posted:How does part numbering work in aerospace, are there different certifications etc. for a new part number vs. a revision? Some parts are numbered only, some have revisions noted, manufacturer IDs or CAGE codes, serial numbers etc, it really depends on what the people who designed it say you have to do. Some parts are only labelled on the packaging, you get a variance in what info must be permanent or temporary, and so on. So we get a certain manufacturer's part that says [SPEC] with suffix -11 or -24 for the human readable data, we'll dot peen that on it, but there might be a second note saying a 2D data matrix to suffix -8, so that goes on the packet the part is shipped in. Dealing with this stuff isn't that complicated, in one sense, because you can just brute-force your way through tiers of requirements until you hit something that tells you what to do, and you have a prioritisation of what documents override each other in case of conflict (purchase order beats amendment sheet beats drawing beats manufacturing specification beats sub-specification and so on). However, I am mainly a specs/documents guy, so I'm geared toward that. It only becomes a problem when you encounter unclear or contradictory information and have to kick it back up the chain, at which point people often develop a strong case of Not My Call disease and don't want to give you an answer.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2013 21:41
|
|