|
|
Forums - News / General |
For General modelling or hobby-related topics that are not covered by any other specific forum. Please keep to topics concerning the hobby. |
| Topics | 3051 |
| Messages | 23085 |
|
|
| Subject: | tolerances, etc... |  |
| Date: | Apr 26, 2006 |
| From: | christopher benjamin | |
I couldn't read all the posts, but I understand there is a bit of a debate about tolerances and interchanability. Germany suffered from
TOO CLOSE of tolerances, hence parts could not be interchanged when unskilled labor deviated from plan. Todays illustration of WIDE tolerances would be something like the Glock pistol, which I have. You have seen these guns and others like them frozen in blocks of ice, dropped from roofs left in salt water for months and they still fire. Why? The tolerances are very loose but not so loose it won't fire. In fact, the Glock pistol rattles when you shake it hard!
In WW2 slave labors sabotoged the German armament industry's ammo production by making shells too wide in diameter and even in some cases
making the brass for shells too thin so it would explode in the breech.
It doesn't take much too make the shell to thick to fit in the breech also. Quality control would scrap the ammo. Conversley, any Russain
122mm shell that was out of spec. was used on the Katusha rocket launcher. Someone jokingly mentioned wrong 75mm ammo in one post- it wouldn't be loaded in the tank as the crew would notice, but the plethra of 75mm sizes were not interchangable due to the lenth of the breech. (todays example .45 ACP bullets and .45 long colt are not interchangable, neither is .45 GAP)Supply of all these weapons of same diameter would be a hardship on the quartermaster and not enough of the right round could change the course of battle.
Thank you for reading my rambling and hope it makes sense. |
| |
|
|
 | What is acceptable reference? - Paul A. Owen - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . Re: Pz. IV C plans test - Paul A. Owen - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . LOL - John F. Steinman - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . . . . Re: What is the Standard - Paul A. Owen - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: What is the Standard - John F. Steinman - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . not interchangable? - Steve C - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: not interchangable? - John F. Steinman - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: not interchangable? - Paul A. Owen - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . poor quality control :-) - Steve C - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: poor quality control :-) - Paul A. Owen - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: not interchangable? - Steve C - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: What is the Standard - Bill Goodrich - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . Re: What is acceptable reference? - Gerald Owens - Apr 25, 2006 |
| . . . Tiger 1 examples... - David Byrden - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . . . . Re: Tiger 1 examples... - frank forster - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Tiger 1 examples... - John Yergin - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Back to the point... - Paul A. Owen - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Back to the point... - frank forster - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . . . . Potential After-market Kits. - Paul A. Owen - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . Best guess - Kip Rudge - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . Re: What is acceptable reference? - John F. Steinman - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . . . . Re: What is acceptable reference? - Paul A. Owen - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: What is acceptable reference? - John F. Steinman - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: scale - Paul A. Owen - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . One more thing related to the above - John Steinman - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: One more thing related to the above - Paul A. Owen - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tolerances, etc... - christopher benjamin - Apr 26, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: One more thing related to the above - John F. Steinman - Apr 27, 2006 |
| . . . Re: What is acceptable reference? - Steve Frost - Apr 27, 2006 |
| . . . When you get right down to it...only the original mfgr's drawings are correct! - Scott A. Bregi - Apr 27, 2006 |
|
|
