Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Picatinny Rails?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Razor18" data-source="post: 860948" data-attributes="member: 11395"><p>Dear westcliife01,</p><p></p><p>THANK YOU, this is exactly the kind of answer I was looking for from Someone who tries to understand the question instead of answering some nonsense, like "the drawing is not perfect, so what?" (let alone from someone who's been engineer, claiming to have "been there done that" on jet engines for decades...). Drawings are invented to show how to do something, and if something isn't on the drawing, how could anyone expect it to be done right?</p><p></p><p>Yes, I got the same answer from another credible source too: the edge-to-edge dimension of 0.835 is in fact the distance of the "chamfering" after cutting the 2x45° edges, and not the edges themselves, as drawn. With this additional information the drawing is perfectly enough to mill a rail, but on the drawing there is no sign of any chamfering, so again, the drawing is simply wrong, and no rail can be done based on that without this additional information, which is missing from the drawing. Would like to watch the jet engineer try to mill it by the original drawing to make him understand.</p><p></p><p>Thanks, I appreciate your approach to the problem.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Razor18, post: 860948, member: 11395"] Dear westcliife01, THANK YOU, this is exactly the kind of answer I was looking for from Someone who tries to understand the question instead of answering some nonsense, like "the drawing is not perfect, so what?" (let alone from someone who's been engineer, claiming to have "been there done that" on jet engines for decades...). Drawings are invented to show how to do something, and if something isn't on the drawing, how could anyone expect it to be done right? Yes, I got the same answer from another credible source too: the edge-to-edge dimension of 0.835 is in fact the distance of the "chamfering" after cutting the 2x45° edges, and not the edges themselves, as drawn. With this additional information the drawing is perfectly enough to mill a rail, but on the drawing there is no sign of any chamfering, so again, the drawing is simply wrong, and no rail can be done based on that without this additional information, which is missing from the drawing. Would like to watch the jet engineer try to mill it by the original drawing to make him understand. Thanks, I appreciate your approach to the problem. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Picatinny Rails?
Top