"HEMI-Powered" schreef in bericht
...
snip
Bouler, it has been said that anyone can give an hour talk on any
subject, even one they know nothing at all about. But, to give an
effective 15 minute talk or to distill a complex and technical subject
down to only 5 minutes, both of which I had to do on my job, is VERY
difficult indeed.

I most appreciate the complements you extend to me on my knowledge of
cars and other things. However, there is likely far LESS here than
meets the eye, meaning that while I can speak reasonably intelligently
about all cars, not just Chrysler, I cannot speak to specifics of even
cars designed during my tenure at Chrysler. The reason I can at least
speak to most anything vehicular regardless of company or national
origin is that the basics of the vehicle product development process
from design (styling) to engineering to testing to tooling to
manufacturing and assembly is pretty much universal throughout the
world. What separates the better car companies from the 2nd and 3rd
tier crowd is how well they APPLY basic principles and how much
proprietary knowledge they can accumulate and effectively implement to
increase features, fuel economy, safety, etc. while at the same time
increasing quality, reliability, and durability (those are 3 different
things, ask if interested) at the lowest possible cost.

I think carfactories can build cars that go on for many more years, but at
the same time the're digging their own grave.

I know I burned DVDs from some History Channel episodes maybe a
year or
so ago. If I get ambitious enough, I'll try to find them but I have
made a mental note to re-record them again on my DVR. It's a dumb
coincidence that a rather long episode or two aired just last week,
I think, relating the story of Titanic's construction, it's major
structural and safety weaknesses, details of the sinking itself,
and results of the most recent dives on the wreak, which I think
began in 2002 and maybe ended a year or two later (but I'm rather
hazy about that, please help me out if you can).

Sorry Jerry I cant.

OK, if these shows come on again, I'll try to snag them and perhaps I
can mail you a DVD of something you may not have seen in The
Netherlands.

That would be nice.

Maybe I should have put in a grin or two of my own, but each of
us is gifted in different ways. Perhaps one of mine to compensate
for lack of foreign language skills is what people tell me is a
logical mind and an insatiable appetite for new information. In
fact, it has been a basic philosphy of mine back at least to my
High School days as a teen-ager that learning is a life-long
endeavor. Unfortunately, ALL of my classmates in Engineering School
were like me and I suddently found myself as a brand new freshman
in 1965 going from top 5% in my H.S. class to about the bottom
5-10% and on academic probation for 3 trimesters. One more and I'd
have flunked out. Still in all, I barely made it, I recall
something like only a 2.32 or so GPA.

Could you explain that, we have a comlete other schoolsystem, so I
don't have a clue what 2,32 GPA means.

Sorry, I did it again, damnit! GPA means Grade Point Average. We use a
4.0 grading system in community colleges and universities where 0.0 is
an E or F, 0.5 is barely passing maybe with a D-, 2.0 is a C, 3.0 is a
B and 4.0 is an A. My school, Oakland University, used a 4.3 system
where 4.3 was essentially an A+. I hope your schools at least use a
similar letter grading system.

Most schools use a decimal system from 1 till 10, of course 1 is not very
good and thats an understatement, but 10 is passing a test without mistakes.
Avrage 6 is suficcient to go to a higher class.

To recap, American schools are basically organized this way: K-6
(Kindergarten through 6th grade) is called "elementary school, grades 7
and 8 "middle school" and 9-12 "high school." Colleges and universities
are divided into "undergraduate" which means one hasn't yet earned the
most basic degree, a bachelor of science or bachelor or arts, and
"graduate" degrees which include a masters or PhD (Doctor of
Philosophy) and also MD (Medical Doctor), DDS (Doctor of Dental
Surgery), and LLD (Letter of Law Doctorate, I think, i.e., an attorney.

Schoolsystem is very different in The Netherlands since I was young and I
can hardly explain the system now.
Basisschool (children from 4 till 12), kindegarten is included but the name
does not exist anymore.
They are talking in groups, grop 1 till group 8.
After that school is a very complex system I cannot explain anymore.
University is of course the highest grade.

So, under my university's grading system, I graduated barely above the
minimum necessary, a 2.0, with what amounted to be a low C+.

My youngest daughter went always for the minimum because there were much
things nicer than school, she only worked hard when she decided to become a
maternity nurse (says my dictionary)
She looks like her father, till my 16th I did not study very hard.

The only thing thats clear is that you had to work hard to graduate,
so we can shake hands.
I completely agree that learning is a life-long endeavor, for you,
for me because we are interested in a lot of things.
Not everybody thinks the same way.

Yeah, I worked my skinny ass off, Bouler! Here's what one of my days
was like: I'd get up early, eat a breakfast of oatmeal or bacon and
eggs, finish up any homework and commute to school Go to school and
study on campus until early afternoon, return home, eat a fast dinner
and go to work in a department store from 5-9 PM to earn gas money and
money to go on dates with girls. Then, study until about midnight or
when I fell asleep at the kitchen table. On weekends, I'd date, have
fun with my friends, go cruising to try to pick up girls or maybe
engage in drag racing at night while working Saturday and Sunday 8
hours and studying in whatever time was left besides sleeping.

Because I was studyïng in a boardingschool we studied 6 days of the week and
had specific studyhours and you did not get a chance to miss them, the
punishment was most of the time staying in school the whole weekend.
We had not much choice we simply had to.
No time to earn some money and not much time to have fun, exept when you
were doïng something cultural so me and my friends played in a band, were
singing in a lot of choirs, we did everything possible to get out of the
building to make fun and of course with girls.
Sometimes it was dangerous because you could be send home and never
graduate.
4 times I was very near but I came away with it.
I did not choose the school for earning a lot of money, I wanted to educate
children and pass my knowledge to them.
After all it was not payïng bad an we had lots of holidays;-)

The goal for me was two-fold: earn a degree that would enable me to try
for a high-paying job (which is why I chose engineering which is still
the highest paying job with a B.S. degree, the most I hoped to attain)
and stay out of the Army and a rice paddy in Viet Nam at least long
enough to earn my degree. Our draft system believed that having a
college degree, especially a technical one, was an important asset
militarily even if one did not become an officer (I was an enlisted
man, coming out a sergeant with 3 stripes after 20 months), so we had a
system of student deferrments that allowed only 4 years for college.
So, I HAD to get it done. I started work the next day after
commencement and fought the draft for about a year and lost. But, as it
turned out while Army life was hardly fun at the time, I DID get a
chance to tour much of southern Europe and the experience of being
completely on my own matured me greatly and turned out to be quite
useful in my later career.

Lots of pretty
smart men and women go to engineering school and the admissions
process we used here prior to affirmative action initiatives
guaranteed that only the best of the best got in.

Thats life Jerry, for my school to study for teacher there were 120
people that want that study at that specific school, after a
starting examination only 48, the maximum the school could handle
got that chance I I was one of them.

I did not have to take the standard testing of the day, such as the SAT
(Scholasitic Appitude Test) as a senior in High School, but my grades
and a recommendation from my counselor, principle, and at least one
teacher were required. Then, I had to compete against all other
applicants based on the number of freshman class openings. Once
accepted, I spent two entire days of mathematics and English aptitude
written testing, one day for each. Talk about difficult! Wow! My
English scores were OK but my math score was barely passing. My advisor
told me that if I actually cut it and graduated I would be the first in
his experience with a math aptitude that low. That sobered me up -
fast! He helped me a great deal through the many tank traps along the
way such as scheduling conflicts and getting me into the lesser
difficulty liberal arts classes that were required beyond what were
called "core curriculum" for my engineering school degree.

I don't know what the numbers were at my college as I didn't have
access to the number of applicants nor the number who failed to make
the cut on the 2-day testing gig, but I would suspect it was similary
to your experience. My engineering class itself was small, maybe 40 or
50 (I've always wished that OU had a yearbook, but they didn't) and I
think they all managed to graduate. That I know of, my ranking was 4th
from the bottom, or maybe 5th, but no higher. The class was divided
along lines of intelligence and grades informally. The smart guys
studied together and refusted to help us not so smart guys because they
wanted us to get lousy grades so the "curve", or statistical grading
system to decide the numeric score you're probably familiary with is
helped by the number of people on a test that score below the
statistical median or mean and skew the grade distribution to the low
end making it easier to earn a 3.0 or 4.0.

We helped each other a lot, maybe because teaching each other is a way of
learning too.
I still heve many contacts from that time and we had several reunions.
Next year again a reunion because its than 45 years ago we graduated.

Very smart after all;-)
Nobody knows 100% of something is my humble opinion.
A specialist is someone who knows almost everything about almost
nothing.

I agree. Just like the gun slinger days of the old American West,
where there was ALWAYS someone faster on the draw, there is always
someone smarter than you and wealthier than you. But, there is also
at least one person dumber and poorer than you, also! grin here,
no insult intended Seriously, one of my favorite saying from the
Dirty Harry cop movies is "a man's GOT to know his limitations",
that is, be humble one can NEVER know it all, no matter how hard or
long one tries, because the colllective body of knowledge on even a
narrow subject is exploding so fast.

I think that was the best Dirty Harry ever said and I agree
completely. Yes I know those movies from Clint Eastwood, I think he
is in politics now. Now I think I need some sleep, its 4.30 AM;-)

Most people like his other quotes, basically "this is a .44 Magnum and
will blow you head clean off, now do you feel lucky? well, do you,
punk?" Yeah, that's OK, but I liked the other one because it was useful
in real-life and not just cop movies. It is interestint that you are
familiar with the Dirty Harry series. It was a money maker but not an
award-winning movie. I often use movies to illustrate things to you and
others and I wonder a lot if my international friends know what the
hell I'm talking about! grin

Guns in America and guns in The Netherlands is world of difference.
Not many people have guns here and its even forbidden exept for policeman
and guards.
I think there are to many guns in the states.
--
Greetings
Bouler (The Netherlands)

Bouler added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

I'll try again but I thought my URL was OK. But, as to your
writing it vs. reading it, let me respectfully refer you to your
exact words, in English, of course, right under your [snip] -
"here you can read what I WROTE". Did I misunderstand/misconstrue
your intent here?

My mistake, I must have had a black out and thought wrote was the
past tense of read (sorry sir;-)

I had similar problems when trying to learn written French in
college. In English, the past-tense of "read" (reed) is also "read"
but is pronounced "redd".

Yes I know, but sometimes I'm only human and make mistakesgrin

Ain't that the truth! Hope you didn't feel insulted or ****ed off at me.

[big snip]
Without going off in the tall weeds on lots of techie stuff,
mathematicians and statisticians describe it two ways that may be
useful in understanding where the rivet failure theory fits into
the entire Titanic investigation. First is the principle that some
types of data or testing are termed NECESSARY but NOT SUFFICIENT,
meaning it may be necessary to test for failed rivets to explain
the Titanic sinking but it is not sufficient on its own and one
must look further for a complete and proveable explanation.

Second is the principle of determining "root cause". ALL problems,
failures, anything that goes bad may have one or more causes,
perhaps dozens, or even thousands of causes, but there is only ONE
so-called root cause. Some equate this with "most important cause"
but that is inaccurate. Perhaps the best example I can cite is the
1985 space shuttle disaster where it blew up 85 seconds into
launch. Some hundreds of causes were found and resulting in nearly
1,000 engineering changes to the shuttle and its booster rockets.
But, the ROOT CAUSE turned out to be O-rings on the fuel tanks that
failed and allowed leakage during a cold-weather launch. This is
the first launch of a space vehicle in below-freezing weather at
Cape Kennedy in Florida. Continuing just a bit, the cold weather
itself was also a cause of the disaster, of course, yet it couldn't
have caused it solely but ONLY because the O- rings failed. In the
theory of statistics, specific failure mode analysis (sorry for the
jargon but it is necessary to be precise and accurate here, please
just accept it, OK?) one strives to identify ALL the modes of
failure then use deductinve reasoning based on the facts found and
inductive reasoning based on facts NOT found to arrive at a
conclusion as to the most likely root causes in descending order of
importants and probability of likelihood. Then, using the
probability and statistics methods of positive, negative, and null
hypothesis testing, one attempt to isolate the ONE cause which MUST
be fixed in order to prevent a future failure.

I completely understood the above and rememberd he horrible view of
that disaster on TV.

At last, I'm on the right track with stories of enough technical detail
that my international friends can also more easily comprehend. Thanks for
the feedback, Bouler, I'll try even harder the next time some technical
subject comes up.

Als I see you're very accurate and logic in explaining the problem.
I think its the same accuracy you use in engineering cars.
Ik don't have that background with cars nor with ships so I'm not an
expert on nautical things, I just love ships..

Bouler, don't EVER sell yourself short, my good friend! We ALL have
gifts, we ALL have strenghts, and we ALL have weaknesses. Friends don't
dwell on shortcomings but they do try to accentuate the positive, that's
what it is all about, I think.

Engineering of most anything from software to cars to airplanes to ships
to houses to bridges and tunnels - EVERYTHING is a pretty exact science.
Trouble is, engineering is also the art of compromise as it is NEVER
possible to forsee all failure modes much less test for them and design
around them. Financial considerations often preclude such things as
planning for 100 year rains or flood even though when one occurs it is a
tragedy. That's what laws and regulations are for, the provide some cost-
benefit guidance even though no value can ever be placed on the loss of
even a single human life.

That said, what IS both SAD and TRAGIC is when a company building
anything CAN recognize risks and test for them and CAN design for them
but doesn't because the bean counters, i.e., the financial crowd, claim
it is too expensive. So, all too many people lost their lives on the
Titanic because there weren't enough life boats, no matter what the hell
did or didn't cause the actual sinking.

Please remember also, Bouler, that one doesn't need a PhD in engineering
to love ships or cars or buildings, and it is a damn good thing as I
could never have cut even a master's program much less a doctorate.
People who are passionate about their hobbies and love for fine pieces of
design and engineering excellence can often accumulate more information
than the so-called experts basically because of the can't-see-the-forest-
for-the-trees syndrome, meaning experts are often too mired down in
minutia to see the beauty of their work as passionate buyers or hobbyists
do.

I get used to your technical jargon (Learning fast because I want to
kwow what you're writing)
My dictionnary was my friend the last days;-)
Important is I need not to know all the words to undrstand you.
Combining and a little logic helps a lot.

I've come to know you are a very intelligent person, Bouler, and one with
even more tenacity than I have, which is also considerable. Use your
dictionary, Wikopedia (or, however it is spelled), Google, whatever you
like - OR - ask me to clarify my thoughts and define my jargon, whichever
works for you. And, as I discussed I think last night, if I am more than
a bit verbose, it is for a reason. Besides liking to write, I prefer to
offer more info than less because you then have the option of ignoring
some and concentrating on what you really want to know. If I practice a
laconic style of writing, which means brevity/briefness to the max, if
what you're looking for gets left out, well, it's left out forever.

Have a great day and we can cover anything left over via E-mail if you
like.

Specific to my mistake on this one, though, my intentions were MOST
honorable because my intent was to HONOR you for what I perceived
as an important contribution to the collective pool of knowledge
about the Titanic sinking. Sorry that I already knew about the
rivet theory but I was about to flood you with complements for
superior knowledge of the sinking based on careful research that
enabled the ABA to quote you directly. So, again, please accept my
apologies for both misunderstanding you and for snowing you under
in what must've looked to you like I was trying to refute your
expert testimony. You are far more the nautical expert then me, I
just have a few - very few! - tricks up my old-time engineer's
sleeve when it comes to understanding the science behind the
sinking's many theories. But, you can trust and I thank you for the
fact that I now have a Favorite in IE6 pointing to the ABA article.

I'm glad to stand on my feeth again, when you were talking that I
wrote that article I was sitting on a cloud for a while but fell off
and that hurts grin

Good one, my fault really.

In my case, my mother was Polish written and spoken bi-lingual and
I picked up a few words here and there because we went to
Massachusetts every year when my father was laid off at the
Plymouth Plant and heard lots of Polish spoken at family
gatherings. And, in my stay in West Germany in the Army circa 1971,
I picked up enough to order a good meal anywhere - "eine wiener
schnizel mit pomme frits und salade, und eine bier, bitte, snell!".
grin

Feeding yourself is very important so I can imagine this sentece was
a lifesavergrin

Yep, besides which they taste good. I also used to like a wurst, either
pork or beef but it's a little messy to eat the German way, with the
sausage in one hand and the bread in the other taking alternating bites
rather than making a sandwhich kind of meal. Also, I found that unless
you're fluent enough in German, in the smaller town gasthauses (guest
houses, combination bed & breakfast hotel and restaurant) you are going
to get a standard vinegar and oil salad dressing and horseradish mustared
on the wurst whether you want it or not, so I learned to like it.

These are exactly what I was referring to that I believe are still
in use in cars today. We call these "pop rivets", perhaps the
English translation of "popnagels", I don't know that.

nagel=nail in English so it's understandeble.

Suspected that even though I can't translate.

Bouler, I am neither a car mechanic nor a car designer, I had a
relatively minor role early in my career in the development of
front and rear car SEATS. But, through my long career as I changed
from pure engineering into a variety of jobs related to computers
and CAD, I began to get to know more and more people from
technicians and mechanics to designers and draftsmen, engineers,
supervisors, managers, chief engineers, all the way up the vice
presidents within Engineering and Manufacturing. That's not
bragging, it was just necessary for me to know these people in
order to do MY job of supporting their job by providing CAD
training and support and OA (Office Automation) support to their
people. Naturally, the more I could glean about the product
development process, the better I was able to do this.

Ok, but you spend energy to learn stuff t make yourself and other
people working as a team, I respect that very much.
Is CAD Computer aided design or has it something to do with the
computerprogram autocad?

It does indeed mean Computer Aided Design and CAE means Computer Aided
Engineering, most often used for structural analysis studies, aerodynamic
studies, and the like. Sorry I didn't define these but I thought most
people knew those. Autocad is just a very popular computer tool for a PC
of workstation. In its case, in the beginning CAD meant "Computer Aided
Drafting" as early versions of Autocad were 2-D drafting apps only, but
are now full 3-D. At Chrysler, we had not one, but two in-house CAD
systems but beginning in 1990, we began a very expensive and very painful
change over to Dassault Systemes CATIA. CATIA is an acronym for their
CAD/CAE program that means Computer Aided Three-D Interactive
Application. Dassault Systemes was spun off as an independed company to
sell CATIA commercially when it was found to be a potential money maker
beyond the Dassault aircraft design that originally drove its
development.

General Motors and Ford also developed in-house CAD systems but in the
late 1980s/early 1990s they, too, began a quest to buy rather than build
for primarily two reasons: we are car companies, not software development
firms and this costs both money and people, and it was VERY desirable for
our suppliers to buy a commercial CAD/CAE system so we could transfer our
design and engineering data to them in native format without the really
nasty problems associcated with the neutral format known as IGES (Initial
Graphics Exchange Specification). The operative word is "initial" and it
literally throws away much of the useful data and leaves just the so-
called "wire-frame" stuff. I believe it has now progressed to being a
full-featured 3-D transfer spec including mathematical "surfaces" and
what are known as "solid models" along with all text specifications,
dimensions, tolerances, etc. - a lot like a vastly bigger EXIF for a JPEG
picture file.

I bet I've gone off in the tall weeds again on you by blowing too many
words and still too much jargon, so I'll quit while I'm behind before I
get behinder. grin Seriously, if you want to know more of any of this,
please ask questions here or move to E-mail, I'll be glad to help you.
I've continued the discussion here primarily for the benefit of all the
lurkers who might be tangentially interested.


That said, the car biz is VERY complex, and my knowledge is much
more complete - such that it is at all - on the sheet metal body,
soft and hard trim, and other aspects of the body of the car than
it is for the electrical systems, and my knowledges drops off very
fast for engine and transmission design, and for suspensions and
brakes.

Well that makes you standing on your feeth again IMO, I thought you
did know everything of cars.
I worked a lot on all the secondhand cars I bought, I came very far
with the mecanical stuff, but todays cars you cannot do anything as
an amateur. Far to much electronic in cars and thats not my
specialty.

I think you're saying my limitations and modesty make me more of a real
human than some lofty pie-in-the-sky guru or expert, so I will take your
very kind words as a complement. Now, I HAVE done my share of auto repair
when I wore the clothes of a young man who also had very little money to
spare during High School and college and when I was first married and
trying to pay for a new house. That was invaluable experience and my
father was my teacher. There wasn't anything that one does with their
hands that he couldn't do. Carpentry, plumbing, electrician work, car
bodies, engines, transmissions, assembly work of all kinds in car plants,
he could run any machine in a machine or tool shop and could do tool and
die design but never was able to earn a journeyman's card which would
have made him what our unions call a "skilled tradesman" because these
programs required a long apprenticeship and he couldn't afford the cut in
wages.

What is much more common today are structural adhesives which allow
very fast assembly with no fasteners at all but with all of the
strength of a traditional fastener such as a screw or pop rivet.
Another fastener in common use today is the so-called single use
plastic push fastener. One type of these are called "Christmas tree
fasteners" because the little pieces of plastic has small ribs that
make them look like a Xmas tree. They are inserted from the back
side of a trim panel of some sort and pushed into a pre-stamped
hole in the inside sheet metal. They only go in once and are
destroyed by the removal process if a repair is need, so new
fasteners must be used.

I know them.

Thought you would if I could describe them in words but I have no
pictures.

The American use of visible chrome-plated sheet metal screws with a
Phillips head went on for decades until the Japanes automakers such
as Honda and Toyota taught us quite painfully in the 1980s that
interior and exterior trim could be attached more firmly yet with a
much better look, fit, and finish with NO visible fasenters, hence
the rapid rise of adhesives and the one-time fasteners. Today, a
visible screw or rivet is almost impossible to find and
manufacturers pride themselves oon the good looks of even things
like the engine compartment where everything is hidden vs. the
olden days where there were tubes, pipes, hoses, clamps, wiring
harnesses, all sorts of ugly stuff snaking it's way around to
support the powertrain.

Right and working on a car need special tools so fixing a car by
myself is almost over and out.

After about the mid-1990s when electronic controls first came into
widespread use, yes, special tools are required as are very expensive
computer diagnostic tools and very expensive computer chip update tools,
plus one must pay to subscribe to quarterly updates of what used to be
called "service manuals". Even if one could diagnose their newer car's
problems, they couldn't possibly afford the wide spectrum of tools and
parts, so most people need to take their car to some shop these day. And,
if a major computer in your newer cars falls over, e.g., the engine or
transmission controller or the theft protection encryption module, there
is no longer a "limp home" mode. The car is just dead, dead, DEAD and you
have to call a tow truck.

You mean "hypothetical" here, I assume? Yes, it is possible, but
one would have to get the water to flow over the rudder in a
different way than is traditional for a rudder steering system. One
way might be the growing use of water jets in patrol boats,
pleasure craft, even larger warships that squirt a high-pressure
high volume stream of water out to both propel and steer the craft.
Obviously here, the force of the water squirting to starboard would
move the stern to port and the bow to starboard.

Yes I mean hypotatical and dont know if its used in ships.

Can't really say. One of my favorite movies is "The Hunt For Red
October" because I love the acting, but it is an example of a fictious
silent drive system using water jets which were in actual use as early as
the Viet Nam war PBR (Patrol Boat River) boats for the Mekong Delta
rivers. In the movie they called it a "caterpiller drive" which was
claimed to be something called hydromagneto propulsion. So, I am certain
that system far in advance of simple rudder and prop are in wide-spread
use in everything from small pleasure boats to very large warships, super
tankers, and cargo ships.

Now, if you really mean that a rudder or water jet
steering/propulsion system can actually move physically to
starboard and the BOW moves to port, please describe it to me, as
I'm not familiar with that I don't think. Your analogy of a
reversible drill motor is a good one and it's application to a boat
or ship is that which one major theory of the Titanic sinking is
based on. Namely, that it MIGHT have been more effective in
preventing a collision with the iceberg of minimizing the damage if
it did hit, if the office on the bridge hadn't ordered full astern
AND a hard a port turn but instructing the helmsman to spin the
wheel counter clockwise to move the rudder to port which was
intended under British convention to mean move the stern to
starboard. The reason this theory may have minimized the damage and
possibly prevented or delayed the sinking time is that the headlong
dash due to inertia of a huge ship traveling at over 20 knots might
well have struck only a glancing blow if the bow had turned INTO it
rather than trying desperately to turn away from it by both moving
the rudder and reversing propulsion.

You're examening the consequences, I like that.

To the extent that I can. I quickly run up against my limits of nautical
knowledge and my relatively meager knowledge of the entire Titanic thing.

Again, I must bow to you and others here who have superior
knowledge of the sea and nautical design by far than me. I am
speaking ONLY of my body of anecdotal, i.e., practical and
observable, evidence and some engineering knowledge. Please
elaborate and/or correct anything I have said that you believe to
be both right and wrong.

My knowledge of ships is not much more than yours, I mostly dont go
into technicak stuff, I like to see a nice ship and can enjoy it.

I still have this strong suspicion that you know a lot more than you let
on, your long personal experience and very high interest are quite
conducive to learning, whether it is at the technical level or simply the
empirical or practical level. I will readily admit that I simply am NOT
anything of a nautical expert. Not power or sail pleasure craft, not
commercial power or sailing vessels, and certainly not military ships,
although I do know a little about each and I have toured as many
destroyers, battleships, submarines, and aircraft carriers as I possibly
could when my family and I took vacations where they have floating
museums. If this interests you, I can talk about it in a new thread or
via E-mail. Let me know, we BOTH may learn a few new tricks!

I appreciate that I didn't insult you directly as I feared but I
feel I AM guilty of "insulting" you by acting in what appeared to
be a superior manner in attempting to put too much science and math
out too fast. My apologies for THAT, Bouler.

I'm learning fast Jerry.

You are a very quick learner, Bouler. I don't know you well enough to
understand how you do it, but your thirst for knowledge that drives your
tenacity is likely the "culprit" because you're not at all afraid to use
Wikopedia, Google, or printed reference materials. You'd probably believe
that I have a couple dozen car picture books and maybe a dozen moderately
expensive car reference books to fill in the many holes in my knowledge
when I need to, and within your budget, I'd think you own some boat and
ship books.

Of course, if I am still unclear but you are still interested in
what I may be able to teach you, please help ME by asking for
clarification where needed. And, to help me avoid another of my own
nautical "disasters", please guide me when you can as to what you
already know and where your strengths and weaknesses may be on the
more technical subjects.

I hope we call ALL agree on a couple of things he one is that
nobody knows the complete story of the Titanic sinking and the
other is that nobody knows it all when it comes to ship and boat
design or seamanship. Thank you for a most stimulating discussion.

You're a very clever man, you're apoligizing before I can even say
somethinggrin

It's not that I'm being clever or trying to anticipate you, I'm trying to
answer a concern you had that I was blowing too much smoke and techical
jargon and usage at you, so I made a conscious effort today to tone that
down and expand on things you were commenting on.

But you have nothing to apologize for Jerry you're smart enough to
build in a lot of caution.
If we are goïng on this way we're writing a book together;-)

Thank you, Bouler, I appreciate that a lot. Hey, you may have a damn good
idea - collaborating on a research book about something!

--
HP, aka Jerry

"If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck"

Bouler added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

I most appreciate the complements you extend to me on my knowledge
of cars and other things. However, there is likely far LESS here
than meets the eye, meaning that while I can speak reasonably
intelligently about all cars, not just Chrysler, I cannot speak to
specifics of even cars designed during my tenure at Chrysler. The
reason I can at least speak to most anything vehicular regardless
of company or national origin is that the basics of the vehicle
product development process from design (styling) to engineering to
testing to tooling to manufacturing and assembly is pretty much
universal throughout the world. What separates the better car
companies from the 2nd and 3rd tier crowd is how well they APPLY
basic principles and how much proprietary knowledge they can
accumulate and effectively implement to increase features, fuel
economy, safety, etc. while at the same time increasing quality,
reliability, and durability (those are 3 different things, ask if
interested) at the lowest possible cost.

I think carfactories can build cars that go on for many more years,
but at the same time the're digging their own grave.

At one time, at least from the 1950s to the OPEC Oil Embargo of 1973,
the American car companies followed a philosophy called "planned
obsolecscence" where minor styling changes were made every year and
major styling changes were made every 2 or 3 years. The idea was to
make your 3 year-old buggy look like last week's lettuce to entice you
to buy a new one. So, quality was simply awful and problems never got
fixed, just replaced by new ones much the same way that software bugs
never get fixed anymore. The Japanese "invasion" in the 1980s taught us
very painfully two big things: quality IS very important and resale
value/overall mimimum cost/mile driven IS very important to owners.
These 2 things, the rapid rise of Federal emissions and safety
regulations and the outrageous costs of doing all those redesigns made
it impossible to continue. These days, cars pretty much look the same
for the 4, 5, 6, 7 years of their "platform", resale value is greatly
enhanced and the high development costs can be amortized over much more
sales volume.

This very same idea spread quickly to all the world's car makers, even
including your French-made Renault. French cars and maybe Italian city
cars were/are about the only brands WORSE than American cars of the
halcyon days so if Renault had not adopted a new philsophy based on the
world-class Japanese, it is highly unlikely your car would ever have
made it to 16+ years of driving without rusting away and the engine
falling on the ground. Of course, your countries very strong inspection
laws force you to do preventative maintenence on your car, at least for
safety and emissions parts.

OK, if these shows come on again, I'll try to snag them and perhaps
I can mail you a DVD of something you may not have seen in The
Netherlands.

That would be nice.

I have an MS Word list of my movies that I'll send to you, Bouler.
Except for the ones marked with $$$ meaning they're commercial tapes
and DVDs that most often cannot be copied, the rest I burned on my
Panasonic DVR. Besides things we've been talking about here, the
Titanic and the number of shows about that, I have many TV shows about
Iwo Jima where my father was, the so-called American Muscle Car series
on Speed Channel, THC's Modern Marvels series, and the like.

All of you lurkers, I'm not exactly in the DVD biz, so don't salivate
quite just yet. But, Bouler, if you see a few things that may interest
you, it is very inexpensive for me to copy some DVDs. In advance of
that, please privately send me your address and international phone
number. I'll send you mine if you don't mind figuring out how to make
an international number from our local standard.

Sorry, I did it again, damnit! GPA means Grade Point Average. We
use a 4.0 grading system in community colleges and universities
where 0.0 is an E or F, 0.5 is barely passing maybe with a D-, 2.0
is a C, 3.0 is a B and 4.0 is an A. My school, Oakland University,
used a 4.3 system where 4.3 was essentially an A+. I hope your
schools at least use a similar letter grading system.

Most schools use a decimal system from 1 till 10, of course 1 is not
very good and thats an understatement, but 10 is passing a test
without mistakes. Avrage 6 is suficcient to go to a higher class.

Hmmm. Not at all familiar with that, so I'm glad I expanded on our
system so you'd at least have a chance to understand ours. Thanks for
that.


To recap, American schools are basically organized this way: K-6
(Kindergarten through 6th grade) is called "elementary school,
grades 7 and 8 "middle school" and 9-12 "high school." Colleges and
universities are divided into "undergraduate" which means one
hasn't yet earned the most basic degree, a bachelor of science or
bachelor or arts, and "graduate" degrees which include a masters or
PhD (Doctor of Philosophy) and also MD (Medical Doctor), DDS
(Doctor of Dental Surgery), and LLD (Letter of Law Doctorate, I
think, i.e., an attorney.

Schoolsystem is very different in The Netherlands since I was young
and I can hardly explain the system now.
Basisschool (children from 4 till 12), kindegarten is included but
the name does not exist anymore.
They are talking in groups, grop 1 till group 8.
After that school is a very complex system I cannot explain anymore.
University is of course the highest grade.

This sounds similar to our idea, but I recall discussing some pretty
big differences between your boarding school and our combo of high
school and college so there's not all that much overlap, I don't think.

So, under my university's grading system, I graduated barely above
the minimum necessary, a 2.0, with what amounted to be a low C+.

My youngest daughter went always for the minimum because there were
much things nicer than school, she only worked hard when she decided
to become a maternity nurse (says my dictionary)
She looks like her father, till my 16th I did not study very hard.

I would have really wanted to do better but luckily for me back in
1969, the car companies were hiring any graduate engineers with a pulse
because of the total redesign of their entire car and truck lines due
to the 1968 MVSS (Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) that came out of the
NTHSA (Nationalal Traffic and Highway Safety Administration, I think)
and the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) for emissions and toxic
substances regulations and the like. We were also burned with regs from
OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) for increasing
safety from injury and poisoning in our plants and offices.

Yeah, I worked my skinny ass off, Bouler! Here's what one of my
days was like: I'd get up early, eat a breakfast of oatmeal or
bacon and eggs, finish up any homework and commute to school Go to
school and study on campus until early afternoon, return home, eat
a fast dinner and go to work in a department store from 5-9 PM to
earn gas money and money to go on dates with girls. Then, study
until about midnight or when I fell asleep at the kitchen table. On
weekends, I'd date, have fun with my friends, go cruising to try to
pick up girls or maybe engage in drag racing at night while working
Saturday and Sunday 8 hours and studying in whatever time was left
besides sleeping.

Because I was studyïng in a boardingschool we studied 6 days of the
week and had specific studyhours and you did not get a chance to
miss them, the punishment was most of the time staying in school the
whole weekend. We had not much choice we simply had to.

Something that the United States has yet to learn is that the rest of
the world, but primarily the Asians, have as much education at the end
of what amounts to be our high school nearly as we have with a bachelor
degree from a university. These countries are literally eating our
lunch in engineering and software/computers as well because they have
50% or more technical education than we require. Worst of all, though,
American students are pretty damn lazy and do not comprehend that their
livelihood for 4 decades or more depends on a good an education as they
can possibly get, and not playing with sex and drugs.

No time to earn some money and not much time to have fun, exept when
you were doïng something cultural so me and my friends played in a
band, were singing in a lot of choirs, we did everything possible to
get out of the building to make fun and of course with girls.
Sometimes it was dangerous because you could be send home and never
graduate.
4 times I was very near but I came away with it.
I did not choose the school for earning a lot of money, I wanted to
educate children and pass my knowledge to them.
After all it was not payïng bad an we had lots of holidays;-)

I found that being forced by circumstances - my father was a "blue
collar" hourly paid auto worker - to work while in college and I found
that to be a very worthwhile endeavor, so we pretty much made our
daughter work for spending money also.

I don't know what the numbers were at my college as I didn't have
access to the number of applicants nor the number who failed to
make the cut on the 2-day testing gig, but I would suspect it was
similary to your experience. My engineering class itself was small,
maybe 40 or 50 (I've always wished that OU had a yearbook, but they
didn't) and I think they all managed to graduate. That I know of,
my ranking was 4th from the bottom, or maybe 5th, but no higher.
The class was divided along lines of intelligence and grades
informally. The smart guys studied together and refusted to help us
not so smart guys because they wanted us to get lousy grades so the
"curve", or statistical grading system to decide the numeric score
you're probably familiary with is helped by the number of people on
a test that score below the statistical median or mean and skew the
grade distribution to the low end making it easier to earn a 3.0 or
4.0.

We helped each other a lot, maybe because teaching each other is a
way of learning too.
I still heve many contacts from that time and we had several
reunions. Next year again a reunion because its than 45 years ago we
graduated.

Most people like his other quotes, basically "this is a .44 Magnum
and will blow you head clean off, now do you feel lucky? well, do
you, punk?" Yeah, that's OK, but I liked the other one because it
was useful in real-life and not just cop movies. It is interestint
that you are familiar with the Dirty Harry series. It was a money
maker but not an award-winning movie. I often use movies to
illustrate things to you and others and I wonder a lot if my
international friends know what the hell I'm talking about! grin

Guns in America and guns in The Netherlands is world of difference.
Not many people have guns here and its even forbidden exept for
policeman and guards.
I think there are to many guns in the states.

Over here, most Americans have an entirely incorrect understanding of
our 2nd Amendment. Here's what it says, and I'll explain why most
people think what they do:


"Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free
state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be
infringed."

People ONLY use the "right of the people to keep and bear arms" clause
and delete the rest. The root of this Amendment goes back to our
British Colonial period prior to 1776 and the later Revolutionary War
because the British would regularly confiscate all the farmer's muskets
anytime there was unrest. The modern version of a "militia" is what we
now call the National Guard which is a full military organization of
both the Army and Air Force under the command of a state governor. The
idea originally was for states to use a paramilitary organization for
the common good AND to defend against the possibility of a rogue
Federal goverenment trying to change the rules and establish tyranny.
Our Supreme Court heard arguments for a Washington D.C. handgun ban
last month that is its first 2nd Amendment case in 75 years.

In short, if one reads this Amendment and has ANY knowledge of why it
is there, they can easily see that it does NOT guarantee you the right
to own a rifle, shotgun, handgun, assault weapon, sub-machine gun or
anything. But, the threat IS real even today. In New Orleans,
Lousianna, the city hit the hardest by Hurrican Katrina in 2005, the
Mayor actually sent his police around and confiscated over 1,000 guns
presumeably to prevent deaths due to looting. I don't want to start
some gigantic flame war about guns, so I'll stop now.

--
HP, aka Jerry

"If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck"

"HEMI-Powered" wrote in message
...
Bouler added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

snipage

OK, if these shows come on again, I'll try to snag them and perhaps I
can mail you a DVD of something you may not have seen in The
Netherlands.

Maybe I should have put in a grin or two of my own, but each of
us is gifted in different ways. Perhaps one of mine to compensate
for lack of foreign language skills is what people tell me is a
logical mind and an insatiable appetite for new information. In
fact, it has been a basic philosphy of mine back at least to my
High School days as a teen-ager that learning is a life-long
endeavor. Unfortunately, ALL of my classmates in Engineering School
were like me and I suddently found myself as a brand new freshman
in 1965 going from top 5% in my H.S. class to about the bottom
5-10% and on academic probation for 3 trimesters. One more and I'd
have flunked out. Still in all, I barely made it, I recall
something like only a 2.32 or so GPA.

Could you explain that, we have a comlete other schoolsystem, so I
don't have a clue what 2,32 GPA means.

Sorry, I did it again, damnit! GPA means Grade Point Average. We use a
4.0 grading system in community colleges and universities where 0.0 is
an E or F, 0.5 is barely passing maybe with a D-, 2.0 is a C, 3.0 is a
B and 4.0 is an A. My school, Oakland University, used a 4.3 system
where 4.3 was essentially an A+. I hope your schools at least use a
similar letter grading system.

OU, there in Rochester, Mich.? I know where that is. :-)

wizofwas

wizofwas added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

B and 4.0 is an A. My school, Oakland University, used a 4.3 system
where 4.3 was essentially an A+. I hope your schools at least use a
similar letter grading system.

OU, there in Rochester, Mich.? I know where that is. :-)

wizofwas

Exactly, wiz, Class of 1969. Oakland University was originally charted
as MSUO - Michigan State University at Oakland but changed to OU a
couple of years before I was admitted in 1965. Prior to my class, the
Engineering School was the Department of Engineering under the School
of Mathematics. As such, I would not have gone there as I would not
have been able to earn a B.S. degree in engineering from an accredited
university, and thus unable to secure employment. Pretty good school,
really. Some 2/3 of the number of credits needed to graduate needed to
come from the liberal arts - some say "breadless arts" from the
initials of their degrees, B.A. - side. I thought that was pretty much
a waste of my time back then but a decade or so later, I realized that
their intent was to provide a well-rounded and full EDUCATION even for
the hard science majors. That grounding in English, writing,
literature, world history, language, music or art, and other "soft"
things has stood me in very good stead over the years. In fact, one of
my most interesting classes was a freshman American History 101 lecture
class I snuck into to get an easy 4 credits when I was a senior -
learned a lot that trimester!

Do you still live in SE Michigan, wiz? If so, where? I'm sure you know
I live in Troy, about 19 miles NNW of the Detroit River. If you've
moved away, where did you live when here and where are you now? Thanks.

--
HP, aka Jerry

"If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck"

"HEMI-Powered" wrote in message
...
wizofwas added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

B and 4.0 is an A. My school, Oakland University, used a 4.3 system
where 4.3 was essentially an A+. I hope your schools at least use a
similar letter grading system.

OU, there in Rochester, Mich.? I know where that is. :-)

wizofwas

Exactly, wiz, Class of 1969. Oakland University was originally charted
as MSUO - Michigan State University at Oakland but changed to OU a
couple of years before I was admitted in 1965. Prior to my class, the
Engineering School was the Department of Engineering under the School
of Mathematics. As such, I would not have gone there as I would not
have been able to earn a B.S. degree in engineering from an accredited
university, and thus unable to secure employment. Pretty good school,
really. Some 2/3 of the number of credits needed to graduate needed to
come from the liberal arts - some say "breadless arts" from the
initials of their degrees, B.A. - side. I thought that was pretty much
a waste of my time back then but a decade or so later, I realized that
their intent was to provide a well-rounded and full EDUCATION even for
the hard science majors. That grounding in English, writing,
literature, world history, language, music or art, and other "soft"
things has stood me in very good stead over the years. In fact, one of
my most interesting classes was a freshman American History 101 lecture
class I snuck into to get an easy 4 credits when I was a senior -
learned a lot that trimester!

Do you still live in SE Michigan, wiz? If so, where? I'm sure you know
I live in Troy, about 19 miles NNW of the Detroit River. If you've
moved away, where did you live when here and where are you now? Thanks.

Born and raised in Clarkston, it was a great little town back then. And
I've
also lived in E. Lansing and Grand Blanc. Now I'm in St. Petersburg, Fla.
My one year of sailboat racing, we took 1st in class (Tartan 10) in the
Port Huron to Mackinaw race.

And yes, I know where Tory is. Exit 69 off of I-75 at Big Beaver Rd.
How could I ever forget that exit. I don't know if it's still there, but I
used to try to eat at the A&W there at Big Beaver & Rochester Rd.
when I was working in that area. I had a job as a computer tech so
I got to go to a lot of "job shops" in that area, as well as most of the
LP. And I've also worked over a lot of the Midwest.

wizofwas

"HEMI-Powered" schreef in bericht
...

Read all and I agree.


In short, if one reads this Amendment and has ANY knowledge of why it
is there, they can easily see that it does NOT guarantee you the right
to own a rifle, shotgun, handgun, assault weapon, sub-machine gun or
anything. But, the threat IS real even today. In New Orleans,
Lousianna, the city hit the hardest by Hurrican Katrina in 2005, the
Mayor actually sent his police around and confiscated over 1,000 guns
presumeably to prevent deaths due to looting. I don't want to start
some gigantic flame war about guns, so I'll stop now.

You're right, but we have a lot in common.
--
Greetings
Bouler (The Netherlands)

"HEMI-Powered" schreef in bericht
...

In The Netherlands every car older than 3 year has to be checked
every year by a garage who has their qualifications to do so.
So every year in September I hope my 16 years old Renault 19 will
make it. If something is wrong it has to be fixed, if not you may
not drive that car anymore.
I think its a good thing, you don't see rusty vehicles on the road
any more.

I somewhat often see cars so crappy they are actually a danger to those
around them. Bald tires, fascias hanging literally, smoke pouring out the
tailpipe, everything. Sad.

Thats new for me, I thougt safety came first in the USA.
But go to Ireland or Poland and other east-European countrys, I think its
even worse than in America.
--
Greetings
Bouler (The Netherlands)

"HEMI-Powered" schreef in bericht
...

Read it all and agreed to make a long story shorter.

You're a very clever man, you're apoligizing before I can even say
somethinggrin

It's not that I'm being clever or trying to anticipate you, I'm trying to
answer a concern you had that I was blowing too much smoke and techical
jargon and usage at you, so I made a conscious effort today to tone that
down and expand on things you were commenting on.

OK.but you still are clever;-)

But you have nothing to apologize for Jerry you're smart enough to
build in a lot of caution.
If we are goïng on this way we're writing a book together;-)

Thank you, Bouler, I appreciate that a lot. Hey, you may have a damn good
idea - collaborating on a research book about something!

Noooooooooooooo, I don't have the energy and the knowledgegrin
--
Greetings
Bouler (The Netherlands)

Bouler added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...


"HEMI-Powered" schreef in bericht
...

In The Netherlands every car older than 3 year has to be checked
every year by a garage who has their qualifications to do so.
So every year in September I hope my 16 years old Renault 19 will
make it. If something is wrong it has to be fixed, if not you may
not drive that car anymore.
I think its a good thing, you don't see rusty vehicles on the road
any more.

I somewhat often see cars so crappy they are actually a danger to
those around them. Bald tires, fascias hanging literally, smoke
pouring out the tailpipe, everything. Sad.

Thats new for me, I thougt safety came first in the USA.
But go to Ireland or Poland and other east-European countrys, I
think its even worse than in America.

Safety is paramount only for new cars. Car makers must certify to very
rigorous MVSS (Motor Vehicle Safety Standards). I'm not familiar with
individual state safety and emissions requirements so beyond
California's very strict rules from CARB (California Air Resources
Board) on tailpipe emissions, I'm sure there are at least some states
that also do safety inspections, but our driver's licensing process is
generally quite loose. e.g., in Michigan, you literally CANNOT fail the
10 or 12 question written test you must take only every 8 years. I
asked which one(s) I missed the last time I took it and the clerk told
me it didn't matter as EVERYONE passes! Then, what's the sense of a
test?!

But, I do not think that ANY state is any near as tough as you're
saying The Netherlands is, nor do I think any are as tough as I
remember the inspection for my car in West Germany when I bought it and
when I needed a re-inspection before selling it. We just don't do much.
And, while the police DO inspect vehicles involved in injury or fatal
accidents, it takes something pretty bad before the driver is ticketed.
However, car companies are routinely sued by drivers, passengers, or
surviving relatives in serious injury and fatality accidents not for
safety per se but for alleged product liability, i.e., the plaintiffs
allege the accident was caused by faulty design and/or manufacture.
Most are dismissed or the car company wins but there are notable
exceptions.

--
HP, aka Jerry

"If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck"