Jccarlton,
My guess is that Lucas did a LOT to retard Brit technology.
I used to own a Triumph 650 motorcycle. The sweetest handling bike I ever owned. But it was a bear to keep on the road because of the Lucas electrics. Well that and the fact that the oil seals were dodgy.
A perfect example of american Creativity
Unfortunately, Jccarlton has exposed himself to hold know-nothing dipwit ideas.MSimon wrote:Jccarlton,
My guess is that Lucas did a LOT to retard Brit technology.
Lucas was at the forefront of trying to mass produce many advnaced technologies. I won't defend some of the product output, but they made an awful lot of it so it is inevitable that as they made more than anyone else at one time so they made more defective product than anyone else.
Don't forget Lucas was also an aerospace company, so the engineering knowledge was there, it was just compromised by 'the commercial imperative'.
So, Jccarlton, when Tyco come back to you with your order and they sayJccarlton wrote: Connectors are easy:
AMP
http://www.tycoelectronics.com/default.aspx
You don't really need to know anything else unless you are putting your stuff on airplanes.
"Are you sure you want;
- this size
- this pitch
- this metallisation
- these plating thicknesses
- this shape of pin
- this blade material/thickness
- this socket material/thickness
- plating before or after crimp formation, or both
- postive lock
- anti-backout
- this tradeoff of cable strands to strand thickness
- this wing-barrel dimension
- this flashing material
- this solder plating
- these fretting characteristics
- this surface finish
- this amount of crimp fill
- this thickness of cable insulator
- &c.
- &c.
- &c. "
... and you say "oh, connectors are easy, I'll get a secretary to give you a few answers"
Geezos!...
It is exactly that attitude as to why connectors are the most unreliable part of any system - the root cause being that the purchasing power is in the hands of "purchasing" and the "business model" rather than down to the engineers to specify the connector.
Connectors are the biggest reliability headache for the automotive, industry and commercial sectors alike. I would hasten to suggest that its because the buyers are in control of connector purchasing and, like you, think it's easy.
Connectors are not [generally] the biggest reliability headache for aerospace because know-nothings like you aren't in charge of the final sign-off of parts acquisition.
You're "not even wrong" on this and hope this'll remind us all to be cautious about the things we don't know that we don't know.
The keystone of American invention is not believing what others say can't be done. It is audacious and even arrogant. Authority be damned, I won't believe it without data (experience)!Tom Ligon wrote: The keystone of American invention is not knowing what can't be done. It is audacious and even arrogant.
Lucas as crooks:
Lucas monopoly practices
Lucas Jokes:
http://everything2.com/title/Lucas+Electric
* The Lucas motto: "Get home before dark."
* Lucas is the patent holder for the short circuit.
* Lucas - Inventor of the self-dimming headlamp.
* The three position Lucas switch - Dim, Flicker and Off. The other three switch settings - Smoke, Smolder and Burn.
They have more.
Why they went wrong:
http://www.vv.corvair.org/pipermail/vir ... 69724.html
They are better than they used to be
http://www.helium.com/items/1080218-car ... al-systems
More Jokes
http://www.hermit.cc/mania/tmc/articles/lucas.htm
Lucas, the Prince of Darkness
=======
I have had honest Brit friends who agreed with the above.
Lucas is reported to have said, "Gentlemen do not go motoring after dark."
When I first worked for Sundstrand Aerospace I had two Brit engineers on my team. We would trade Lucas stories. Charming chaps. Excellent engineers. Very exacting.
Lucas monopoly practices
Lucas Jokes:
http://everything2.com/title/Lucas+Electric
* The Lucas motto: "Get home before dark."
* Lucas is the patent holder for the short circuit.
* Lucas - Inventor of the self-dimming headlamp.
* The three position Lucas switch - Dim, Flicker and Off. The other three switch settings - Smoke, Smolder and Burn.
They have more.
Why they went wrong:
http://www.vv.corvair.org/pipermail/vir ... 69724.html
They are better than they used to be
http://www.helium.com/items/1080218-car ... al-systems
More Jokes
http://www.hermit.cc/mania/tmc/articles/lucas.htm
Lucas, the Prince of Darkness
=======
I have had honest Brit friends who agreed with the above.
Lucas is reported to have said, "Gentlemen do not go motoring after dark."
When I first worked for Sundstrand Aerospace I had two Brit engineers on my team. We would trade Lucas stories. Charming chaps. Excellent engineers. Very exacting.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
The keystone of what!?!
Name an invention by an American that wasn't an innovation of something that hadn't already been invented.
I fully agree with the earlier comments about Americans being audacious that they can take something that the inventor couldn't get to work and build it [very successfully] anyway. There is no shred of doubt over that.
The only inventions that spring to my mind are those of Edison and Fessenden. Maybe Tesla's as well, if you count him as American.
Just name a US invention that wasn't predceded by a British device which did the same function?
Name an invention by an American that wasn't an innovation of something that hadn't already been invented.
I fully agree with the earlier comments about Americans being audacious that they can take something that the inventor couldn't get to work and build it [very successfully] anyway. There is no shred of doubt over that.
The only inventions that spring to my mind are those of Edison and Fessenden. Maybe Tesla's as well, if you count him as American.
Just name a US invention that wasn't predceded by a British device which did the same function?
-
alexjrgreen
- Posts: 815
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:03 pm
- Location: UK
See how many of these you can disprove: Timeline of United States inventions...
Ars artis est celare artem.
You don't seem to get it. And that would be hardly surprising because if Americans understood the difference between innovation and invention,. then maybe some of them would think 'hmm.. maybe I need to invent something'.
'swim-fins'; function - a swimming aid to assist a swimmer in more efficient swimming. I can't really say that I know of a previous example, but I'd find it hard to believe it wasn't done before.
'sextant'; are you kidding? There were plenty of devices that took the angle of the sun and moon, they were just a bit crap.
'mail order'; so you're saying that no-one ever bought anything and had it delivered, prior to 1744. hmm...
'lightining rod' - I'll give you that. good invention.
'harmnica' - bit obscure. let's just put it down as adding Franklin to my short list.
'flatboat' - yeah, no-one ever transported good by boat before!
y'see, like that last one, it's a fantastic development, I am sure, but it is confusing invention with innovation. Patents very very rarely cover 'inventions', they tend to cover 'innovations' of particular configurations of kit to do a job better.
In fact, you could argue that patents are specifically NOT inventions because to get a patent you have to show a particular utility and if you *invent* a thing to do a function then it would be impossibly to see what utility it does better than the state-of-the-art.
Patents must, generally, claim to do a thing better than that which is extant. So patents cover innovation, not invention.
'swim-fins'; function - a swimming aid to assist a swimmer in more efficient swimming. I can't really say that I know of a previous example, but I'd find it hard to believe it wasn't done before.
'sextant'; are you kidding? There were plenty of devices that took the angle of the sun and moon, they were just a bit crap.
'mail order'; so you're saying that no-one ever bought anything and had it delivered, prior to 1744. hmm...
'lightining rod' - I'll give you that. good invention.
'harmnica' - bit obscure. let's just put it down as adding Franklin to my short list.
'flatboat' - yeah, no-one ever transported good by boat before!
y'see, like that last one, it's a fantastic development, I am sure, but it is confusing invention with innovation. Patents very very rarely cover 'inventions', they tend to cover 'innovations' of particular configurations of kit to do a job better.
In fact, you could argue that patents are specifically NOT inventions because to get a patent you have to show a particular utility and if you *invent* a thing to do a function then it would be impossibly to see what utility it does better than the state-of-the-art.
Patents must, generally, claim to do a thing better than that which is extant. So patents cover innovation, not invention.
Just reflect for a moment on the greatest invention that powered the 20th C; electricity.
Faraday would not have been able to get a patent for his generator design. Generating electricity had no function at the time. Without an evident utility, you cannot get a patent.
I would not accept, for one microsecond, that the electric generator wasn't one of the 5 most significant inventions in modern times, if not the most significant.
Faraday would not have been able to get a patent for his generator design. Generating electricity had no function at the time. Without an evident utility, you cannot get a patent.
I would not accept, for one microsecond, that the electric generator wasn't one of the 5 most significant inventions in modern times, if not the most significant.
I hate this forum. This is the America sucks forum. Admittedly, the thread started with and America rules sentiment before quickly morphing into the prevailing America sucks continuation of every other thread. This became the America can't invent shit, even when we do it is just a knock off, and when we do produce a decent knock off, it is because we are arrogant thread. Apparently we are terrible evil people who torture and kill innocents all over the world. Apparently we are too wealthy and don't give enough of it away. Apparently we are now responsible for the earth's death. How that can be when we couldn't have possibly invented anything that would kill the earth is beyond me, but hey, find a way to make it our f'ing fault.chrismb wrote:Name an invention by an American that wasn't an innovation of something that hadn't already been invented.
Glass houses everywhere.
Son's of Nazi's telling me my countries health care isn't as good as his. Hell, the current population of his country is barely bigger than the number of Jews that his country participated in killing.
Notorious torturing nations who have recently used enhanced interigations of their own on THEIR OWN CITIZENS lecturing me about waterboarding. Did America invent the rack?
People claiming that I am extreme for supporting my countries consitution.
Man, I waste so much time talking to people who obviously hate me. Why do I do this? I won't any more.
I tried to be a kinda reasonable person, but I was still called evil and my country was still continuously denegrated. I don't like being called names. I don't like being generalized. I don't like my country being mis-represented. I know this is all pretty much off topic for this thread, but consider this one "the straw".
Name an invention by ANYONE that wasn't an innovation of something that had already been invented.
Name an invention done by any non-American, that could not be described as only innovation just the way you do.chrismb wrote:The keystone of what!?!
Name an invention by an American that wasn't an innovation of something that hadn't already been invented.
So you did think that Chinese invented paper? Nope, that is just innovation of papyrus. Guns? Ha, only bow and arrow innovated.
We can play this game for years, if you wish.
Already have - electricity.
I have also conceded the lightning rod is a clear, unprecedented invention.
A crossed-field radio transmitter (one based on magnetron radiation,
rather than oscillating electric circuit)
A continuous compressive combustion process (the jet engine).
A programmable machine capable of performing multiple mathematical tasks.
The hot water bottle.
The rubber duck.
How many do you want? These are the most important ones (in reverse order!)
I have also conceded the lightning rod is a clear, unprecedented invention.
A crossed-field radio transmitter (one based on magnetron radiation,
rather than oscillating electric circuit)
A continuous compressive combustion process (the jet engine).
A programmable machine capable of performing multiple mathematical tasks.
The hot water bottle.
The rubber duck.
How many do you want? These are the most important ones (in reverse order!)
Don't jump to assumptions that just because somebody makes a joke, they have no clue as to what they are doing. I have designed connectors and components for aerospace. I have specced connectors for things and places you would not believe. I have participated in writing the specs for components for a large commercial aircraft company, the one that does not live in Europe. There is very little about connectors I do not know. I spent way to much time learning more than I have really needed on the details of the mil series locking connectors. In the end, for the 90% envelope, where the environment is not the primary issue connectors are easy. The other 10% drives you nuts. Just because you Brits can't keep connections dry doesn't mean the rest of us don't know how.chrismb wrote:Unfortunately, Jccarlton has exposed himself to hold know-nothing dipwit ideas.MSimon wrote:Jccarlton,
My guess is that Lucas did a LOT to retard Brit technology.
Lucas was at the forefront of trying to mass produce many advnaced technologies. I won't defend some of the product output, but they made an awful lot of it so it is inevitable that as they made more than anyone else at one time so they made more defective product than anyone else.
Don't forget Lucas was also an aerospace company, so the engineering knowledge was there, it was just compromised by 'the commercial imperative'.
So, Jccarlton, when Tyco come back to you with your order and they sayJccarlton wrote: Connectors are easy:
AMP
http://www.tycoelectronics.com/default.aspx
You don't really need to know anything else unless you are putting your stuff on airplanes.
"Are you sure you want;
- this size
- this pitch
- this metallisation
- these plating thicknesses
- this shape of pin
- this blade material/thickness
- this socket material/thickness
- plating before or after crimp formation, or both
- postive lock
- anti-backout
- this tradeoff of cable strands to strand thickness
- this wing-barrel dimension
- this flashing material
- this solder plating
- these fretting characteristics
- this surface finish
- this amount of crimp fill
- this thickness of cable insulator
- &c.
- &c.
- &c. "
... and you say "oh, connectors are easy, I'll get a secretary to give you a few answers"
Geezos!...
It is exactly that attitude as to why connectors are the most unreliable part of any system - the root cause being that the purchasing power is in the hands of "purchasing" and the "business model" rather than down to the engineers to specify the connector.
Connectors are the biggest reliability headache for the automotive, industry and commercial sectors alike. I would hasten to suggest that its because the buyers are in control of connector purchasing and, like you, think it's easy.
Connectors are not [generally] the biggest reliability headache for aerospace because know-nothings like you aren't in charge of the final sign-off of parts acquisition.
You're "not even wrong" on this and hope this'll remind us all to be cautious about the things we don't know that we don't know.
Brits invented the "tin can" and proceeded to demonstrate how useful they were by provisioning an arctic expedition with food in tins. We found the bodies a few years ago and they suffered severe lead poisoning.
Lucas is known over here as "the prince of darkness". My experience, working in the aerospace field with Tyco connectors and a number of others, is that connectors are not nearly so much a problem as ChrisMB seems to think. We do occasionally have a problem or two with some types, but I fully expect 38999's to just bloody-well work. Reliability of solder joints in surface mount devices, particularly ball grid arrays, is more of a problem.
BTW, Tyco has a reputation in the crook department, too, so I prefer to deal with their competition, at least those they have not already bought out.
Lucas is known over here as "the prince of darkness". My experience, working in the aerospace field with Tyco connectors and a number of others, is that connectors are not nearly so much a problem as ChrisMB seems to think. We do occasionally have a problem or two with some types, but I fully expect 38999's to just bloody-well work. Reliability of solder joints in surface mount devices, particularly ball grid arrays, is more of a problem.
BTW, Tyco has a reputation in the crook department, too, so I prefer to deal with their competition, at least those they have not already bought out.