|
2001-03-25
If I were to venture a guess, it would have to do with getting a late start
after WWII. By the time Airbus started producing planes, Boeing and MD had
already "perfected" the craft. Everything from design to fasteners had
already been tested and proven. To change anything would mean extensive
testing and delays in production. It was more important to get a plane off
the ground then to start over again with SI.
I can't actually say if Airbus uses inches, or just inch fasteners.
They may have all their drawings in millimetres, with the millimetres being soft
conversions of inch designs. Since machine parts don't always fall into
the rational number category in either SI or inch units, it probably doesn't
matter if a design is soft converted.
It would make more sense if the drawings are in millimetres as this would
allow technicians and assemblers to use the common metric tools available in the
EU market as well the feel of the EU personnel for SI and the lack of knowledge
of inches.
I guess only someone who works for Airbus or knows their operations can
make this clear to us.
John
Keiner ist hoffnungsloser versklavt als derjenige, der irrt�mlich glaubt
frei zu sein.
There are none more hopelessly enslaved then those who falsely believe they
re free!
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832)
|
- [USMA:11834] Re: [ukma] Fw: Italy-news March 24-01 CarletonM
- kilopascal
