Member postings for Andrew Tinsley

Sorry! I did type failing memory! But must have not pressed hard enough.

Andrew.

I remember an uncle telling me that a shaper vice was different from those used on a milling machine. This was many years ago and I cannot remember what the crucial difference was. Perhaps a lower profile?

Any information would be welcome, to help my filing memory!

Regards,

Andrew.

I have had quite a few items over the years, which have been powder coated. Each and every one has peeled over time. It seems that once there is a small hole in the coating, the underlying steel produces a thin layer of rust which spreads like the plague. The powder coating loses adhesion and flakes off.

Maybe I have just been unlucky, but I will stick to traditional painting in future. Even professionally coated bike frames have gone the same way.

Andrew.

Long series drills will certainly give you a long hole, but it wont be straight. As Andrew Johnson has already said, gun drills are the only real way to produce long, straight, round holes and that set up is NOT cheap.

Andrew.

The best cheap drill sharpener I have used is a nasty plastic thing called a Plasplugs sharpener. Don't know if they are still available, but with a little care they can produce much better results than most people can achieve offhand. There are some people that can get very good results by offhand grinding. My late father was one such, but I have NOT inherited that particular skill!

Andrew.

Hello Jason,

Jiri Linka is indeed the man I was trying to remember! Thank you everyone source of tank now found. That will enable me to get the older CO2 motors back into the air!

Andrew.

Unfortunately Ing Stefan Gasparin died couple of years ago, otherwise I would have got the tanks from him. I believe that one of the Prague based dealers / model shop may have some of his stock, but for the life of me, I cannot remember his name.

Liquid CO2 doesn't need a massive container for a few cc size. The tanks are amazingly thin aluminium and I have made the screw in lids with a filler vent and supply tube to the motor without any drama. The real problem is the aluminium tank!

Andrew.

The problem of differing lamp base sizes.is all to do with the odd bayonet size that was a UK standard. I am not aware that it is used anywhere else. When we import large amounts of light fitings they are mainly intended for the major areas of the world which have Edison screw as a lighting standard.

As for only being available in packets of 2 or 3, I cannot agree. All of my local supermarkets sell lamps as singles. A couple of them have packs which are a saving over buying them as singles.

Andrew.

Hello John,

Not sure if I am looking for the right thing, but the stuff I am turning up has a capacity of about a liter! Ideally I would like to go down to 2 cc or less for the smaller engines.

Thanks again,

Andrew.

Hello John, that sounds interesting, must google them and see what is available Nigel that is the sort of shape I am talking of, unfortunately they are too big for most of the engines and the weight is way too high. Pity they don't come in smaller sizes!

Thank you both for the suggestions,

Andrew.

I am working on my collection of model aircraft CO2 engines, bringing them up to a good working standard. Some of the older and rarer models have lost their tanks along the way and I need to do something about it if they are ever to fly again.

The tanks are smaller versions of a Sparklets capsules (used for making fizzy drinks). I need tank sizes from 1 to 10 cc capacity. The originals appear to be extruded or maybe swaged aluminium and are only a few thou thick. Making such lightweight tanks seems to be a difficult operation without sophisticated kit.

Does anyone have any constructional suggestions or maybe some commercial equivalent used in another application?

Thanks.

Andrew.

P.S. The tanks contain liquid carbon dioxide, in case anyone is unfamiliar with these things.

Something odd has happened in the last few weeks. I have to log in several times a day, even if I keep the MEW site open all day. Very odd indeed.

Formerly I could stay logged in for months or every day or so, without any apparent rhyme or reason. Doesn't bother me, but wouldn't mind knowing why the process of logging in is so random?

I usually know what I have got, but don't know where it is! This includes tools and material. My classic was ball joint splitters. I had to clear my workshop during building an upper story on the top of it. I found 8 ball joint splitters! I needed one for my MGB a couple of months ago and! could not find a single one, so no 9 was purchased.

Andrew.

I am never too sure why metric versus imperial gets so emotive. I work in both sets of units and have metric and imperial kit. I move between one and the other without barely noticing.

Andrew.

Thank you Anthony,

Exactly the point I was trying to make,

Andrew.

Hello Nick,

I was aware that 3.1 was not a true OS, but didn't want to complicate the issue. I still claim that the actual programming is a very economical use of programming. Later Window systems took advantage of the ever growing power of the hardware. It didn't have to be economical of systems use, because there was so much more system to use! Hence the discipline of the Windows 3.1 programming went to the dogs!

If you are a normal home user and not a large number cruncher or gamer, the later systems like Win 7 or 10, have little improvement over say Win 2000 in terms of ease of use or perceived speed. I know the later systems are very much faster given the correct hardware, but for the average Joe, there really isn't a lot of difference in the real world. I really do think that the progression of Windows OS owes more to Microsoft's desire to make money than anything else.

I can't see much advantage in upgrading computers or anything else for that matter, if what you have does the job satisfactorily. The time to upgrade is when you NEED something better or you can't get the spares to keep it going.

Andrew.

Sorry Dave, Ask any good programmer and you will find that 3.1 is a very well written and compact OS without the flab of later systems. Don't take my word for it, go and find out what a real professional thinks of it!

Andrew.

Just occurred to me. Why wouldn't anyone use an old computer, as long as it works and does the required task?

I still use an ancient laptop on Windows 3.1 to write script. Which reminds me that Windows 3.1 is a very well written OS, quite unlike the later flabby Windows OS systems which are hardly good examples of precise, economical programming.

Andrew.

I have some scientific software that would cost well over £10,000 to buy today. I still use this programme and to do so requires me to have a computer that supports 5 1/4"inch floppies, uses a very early version of windows. and it also needs a parallel port output that drives a dot matrix printer.

So far, I have had no problem in keeping such an archaic system working. I would be quite happy to go over to the modern version of this programme, if Nick would like to fork out the £10,000 plus that would be required. Somehow, I don't think this will happen!

Andrew.

If you have room for both mill and shaper, then go for the shaper. All the advantages enumerated above and much easier to cut dovetails than with a mill!

Andrew.