Brer alexander koryagin wrote to Brer Roy Witt about Re: 3xHa!:

 ak>>> I read some years ago that an American Martian probe crashed on
 ak>>> its surface because the programmers mixed up miles and kilometers.
 ak>>> It is difficult to sit on two chairs.

 RW>> You got your stories mixed up with Mars 2. Mars 3 was an unmanned
 RW>> space probe of the Soviet Mars program which spanned the years
 RW>> between 1960 and 1973. Mars 3 was launched nine days after its twin
 RW>> spacecraft Mars 2. The probes were identical spacecraft, each
 RW>> consisting of an orbiter and an attached lander. Mars 2
 RW>> crash-landed on the martian surface. No American mars probes have
 RW>> crashed.

 ak>     I told you of NASA's Mars Climate Orbiter which crashed in 1999.
 ak> http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news...
 ak> article "Mars Mission's Metric Mixup"

And I told you about the Soviet's doing it 30 years before.

 RW>> <skipped>
 RW>>>> LOL! All Tupolev had to do was mulitiply any inch dimension by
 RW>>>> 25.4 and he'd have the equivalant dimension in metric.
 ak>>> As I can explain it, an aircraft is made from the materials
 ak>>> produced by the local industry.

 RW>> And as the American SAE has found, there is a metric to SAE
 RW>> equivalant or vice versa that fits the requirements. i.e. there is
 RW>> very little measured weight difference between a 3mm sheet of
 RW>> aluminum and a SAE sheet of 1/8th inch. Yet, one is thicker than
 RW>> the other.
 ak>>> The USSR industry had different metric standards.

 RW>> Not a problem, if you can "sit on two chairs" at once and have the
 RW>> ability to figure these things out, it's quite easy to do.

 ak>     As I said, it was a funny accusation, but some reasons were
 ak> logical.

None that I've read so far.

 ak> The aircraft documentation consisted of thousands of pieces
 ak> of engineering drawings.

Are you sure? There is a difference between drawings and velum masters.

 ak> No AutoCad software existed at that time.

Correct. Any changes would have to be made on the master, then new
drawings made.

 ak> So, there were two different consequences: if the drawings were OK,
 ak> all you needed was just copying them,

Today that can happen, but not in the 1930s. The master drawings of the
1930s (even into the 1980s) were drawn on a material that we used to call
velum, but that word means something else in modern day medical
terminology. It was a clear plastic type of material with the parts drawn
on it by a draftsman with lead pensils.

The "velum" could then be put into a primitive sort of copy machine and
re-produced in enough quantity so that everyone working on the project
could have a copy if need be. If changes were needed, they would be noted
in a notebook and sent to the drafting department for a change on the
master, then reproduced as a REV # as required. REV meaning 'Revision'.
I've worked with drawings made in the 1930s with a REV in double letters,
as in REV AA thru ZZ, in the 1960s. If that design still exists today, it
may be into its XXX revision.

 ak> as many as you needed at your plant. The production could started
 ak> immediately. But if every piece of drawing was not in the metric
 ak> system and materials were different you would need to redraw the full
 ak> documentation from the scratch.

True. And it would take an entire team of draftsmen to accomplish such a
feat.

 ak> It could take months.

Yeup, sometimes even longer if your changes were incorrect.

 ak>     Suppose you have to drill a hole 1/2 of inch. In metric system a
 ak> worker must drill 1/2 * 2.54 = 12.7 millimeters hole -- he hasn't
 ak> such drilling bits.

On the contrary, such drill bits were available for metric system countrys
to use for situations just like this.

 ak> So every piece of the documentation has to be not only recalculated,
 ak> but updated in addition. It takes time and resources.

Or you find a source for the 1/2 inch drill that you need and buy them,
which could have taken a few hours to a few days.

 ak>     In short, the overall cost was similar to designing a whole
 ak> aircraft from the scratch. AFAIR, only one American (passenger)
 ak> aircraft (from those bought by Tupolev) had actually been produced in
 ak> metal.

Or not at all. Without further information, I wouldn't be able to say
which if any were drawn but not built here.

 ak>>> Even screws were different.
 RW>> It's very easy to convert a 1/4" screw call out to a metric
 RW>> equivalant. You can have one smaller and lighter, as in 6mm or you
 RW>> can have one a little heavier, as in 7mm or 8mm.

 ak>     But it was not up to a worker to do such conversion. All the
 ak> documentation had to be reworked, redrawn....

That's where engineering comes into play. A worker says to his supervisor
that he doesn't have such and such a tool to make a hole or cut something
to size. The supervisor tells the project manager and the PM makes the
changes and informs the drafting department of his changes, or he simply
orders the proper tool. They pull out the 'velum' - make the changes and
run a copy out to the shop. No big deal in the USA.

 RW>> We even take your 7.62mmx39mm AK-47 cartridges and convert them to
 RW>> SAE and they're made to NATO specs.

 ak>     It's no wonder. The metric system was introduced in Russia after
 ak> 1917. Before that time Russian weapon and shells were made in inches
 ak> (or units derived from it). So, we had "line" unit = 1/10 of inch; 3
 ak> lines calibers is 7.62 mm.

Man, you guys sure make it hard on yourselves. 1/10 of an inch decimally
is .1 of an inch. .1 x 3 = .3 inch. But we require more accuracy in the
specification, at least 3 places after the decimal point. So, 7.62 is not
the size of the projectle. It actually measures .308 inch which is
actually 7.823mm, but we call it 7.62mm to satisfy the NATO standard.
Working in fractions is taught here, but never used beyond the 3rd grade
of primary school.

 ak>     Of course, if Bolsheviks had started producing weaponry using the
 ak> metric system they could not have used a lot of prerevolutionary
 ak> weapon. So, they refused from the metric system in weapon making.

And they should have remained with it until there was time to convert to
the metric system without all the screwups that they had or stick with the
cold and get the job done.

 ak>>> It was not enough to change sizes, they needed to make tons of new
 ak>>> documentation, taking in mind the USSR's standards; they had to be
 ak>>> sure that, for instance, an aircraft rear had such a weight that
 ak>>> didn't spoil the overall balance during the flight.

 RW>> But the Soviets learned how to do that in a hurry when Germany
 RW>> invaded your country and kicked butt, until winter set in.

 ak>     It's no wonder, Hitler was strong. However, if we tell of Europe
 ak> we can say it had fainted in front of Hitler as a girl before a rat.
 ak> ;=)

It didn't hurt any that he was an eloquent speaker and a strong leader
with a vision of greatness for his country. It also didn't hurt any that
the Germans had been mistreated by the Treaty of Versailles.

The treaty imposed on Germany by the Allied powers in 1920 after the end
of World War I which demanded exorbitant reparations from the Germans. Who
didn't start that war.

 RW>> Meanwhile, the Soviets used Americn made equipment on a 'lend
 RW>> lease' basis until they could get their *&%& together and make
 RW>> their own. Even then, Soviet tanks, etc., where copies of American
 RW>> tanks and equipment, including airplances.

 ak>     There was no need for that. Russian planes and tanks were
 ak> superior than Americans, everyone, who has some knowledge in
 ak> weaponry, knows such famous names as T-34 tank, Yak 3 and Yak 9
 ak> fighters.

I'll give you the benefit of doubt on the tanks, but not the aircraft. Not
until the Migs came along were Russian airplanes superior to anything.
American planes were superior to German airplanes and you know how much
better they were than any Russkie craft.

Example: Here's a comparison of the Yak1 vs the NAA P-51 Mustang. These
two aircraft first appeared in 1940, the P51 being larger and heavier
thant the Yak1. In fact, the Yak1 looks like it is a direct copy of the
Mustang, but in smaller form.

And yet:

Powerplant:
Yak1 - 1 x Klimov M-105P V12 liquid-cooled inline engine delivering 1,180
horsepower.
P-51 - 1 x Packard V-1650-7 Merlin piston engine generating 1,590hp.

Conclusion: the P51 was more powerful.

Maximum Speed:
Yak1 368 mph (592 km/h) (320 kts)
P51  437 mph (703 km/h) (380 kts)

The P51 was faster.

Maximum Range:
Yak1 - 435 miles (700 km)
P51 - 2,080 miles (3,347 km)

The P51 had a longer range.

Service Ceiling:
34,465 feet (10,505 m) (6.5 miles)
41,900 ft (12,771 m) (7.9 miles)

The P51 could climb higher.

Armament:
STANDARD:
1 x 20mm ShVAK cannon in propeller hub

1 x 12.7mm Berezin UBS machine gun OR 2 x 7.62mm machine guns in forward
fuselage.

The P51 had more armament.

P51 OPTIONAL:
Up to 441lbs of external stores including both bombs and rockets.
Dependent upon model:
4 x 20mm long-barrel Hispano-Suiza cannons in wings,
2 x 12.7mm machine guns in nose
4 x 12.7mm machine guns in wings

P-51D:
6 x .50 cal machine guns in wings

Up to 1,000 lbs (454kg) of bombs, rockets or fuel droptanks

And the Mustang was produced in quantities twice that of the Yak1...

The Yak3 came along in 1944 and wasn't any more impressive than the
Yak1...

 ak> All the experts acknowledged that they were the best during
 ak> the WW2.

Obviously, only Russky experts. 8^) The rest of the world knows better.

 ak> It's only after WW2, when the Americans captured fascist
 ak> constructors, they managed to construct some intricate machinery and

LOL! I can tell you're a product of Soviet propaganda...aka: Brain
Washing...

 ak> even landed on the Moon before the USSR's Lunokhod. On the
 ak> modification of the rocket that bombed London.

No, that was a rocket of our own design. I worked as a Tool & Die maker
for the company that produced it.

 ak> Ah, I forgot that there was Sikorsky from Russia. ;=)

Who invented the helicopter but not until he had been in the USA for 20+
years. Igor imigrated to the USA in 1919 and 20 years later in 1939
designed and flew the Vought-Sikorsky VS-300. All subsequent helicopters
were built by the Sikorsky Manufacturing Company in New York, USA...the
first production model was produced and sold in 1942...


         R\%/itt - K5RXT

 Reminder: "On Friday September 8th 2006, Mike Godwin's 16 year experiment
 was concluded and Godwin's Law was officially repealed by a MAJORITY vote
 among millions of individuals." http://repealgodwin.tripod.com/

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-31012
--- D'Bridge 3.92
 * Origin: Lone-Star BBS - San Antonio, Texas - USA (1:387/22)