Hi > On Feb 17, 2021, at 11:08 AM, Magnus Danielson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > On 2021-02-17 16:24, Tom Van Baak wrote: >> See pages 20-29 in the Mar-1981 HPJ for the "new SC-cut" 10811 >> article(s): >> >> https://www.hpl.hp.com/hpjournal/pdfs/IssuePDFs/1981-03.pdf >> >> It talks about 10544A/C/B and 10811A/B in detail. It compares AT/BT/SC >> cuts. >> >> Read especially "The SC Cut, a Brief Summary" on page 22. > > Thanks for reminding us of this HPJ. > > In here it is also noted that the 10544 is a BT cut, and this comes to > contrast that HP never come clean with which cut was used, as some have > said. Here we have some clear evidence.
Indeed, once they no longer were *using* the BT cut, they would talk about it. > > Also note that it traces the SC-cut back to 1974, and that the same cut > also been called TTC and TS in early papers. It's interesting to note > that HP had double-angle cut machines since 1965, so the new cut did not > caused them a big challenge. Depends on what you call a big challenge. Gear that actually could cut an SC with > 1% yields was indeed very much “in the future” back the early 1970’s. It continued to be somewhat rare through the early 1980’s. Bob > Exactly which double-angle cut's they did > before SC remains to be found. > > It is however interesting. They also refer to early papers in page 22 > and 23. > > Cheers, > Magnus > > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe, go to > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > and follow the instructions there. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com and follow the instructions there.
