Technical and engineering drawing.

Ah, postings are wanted, so here you get it. Sorry if this one sometimes sounds aggressive,  That's not what I want to express. Blame my limited knowledge of English please

My opinion, after following this discussion: does it really make sense to publish a (long?) series of articles describing the BSxxx standard? Considering that:

- ME authors (mostly, it seems) do not use it

- there is a big rest of the world who does not use it either.

I can finally understand David C's position better. The long series about that 3D-CAD (which in reality wasn't one, and used a outdated version to boot) was enough.

I don't care much if something is drawn in first angle or third or whatever, if I can find the necessary informations to produce the part (and if the angle number is given somewhere if it is not absolutely clear).

Yes, I also saw the examples in the XYZ magazine, demonstrating that even a benevolent attempt at correcting something can result in a failure.

The professional drawings I get here are in first angle!

No, I could not solve the conundrum 

Enough now,

Greetings, Hansrudolf

Edited By tractionengine42 on 22/04/2011 12:04:12

The number of postings on this thread shows that the topic is of great interest, but I feel there is another aspect that isn't being considered. As well as the 'how will it help me to make models now' approach, what about the historical side? Surely part of the fascination of model engineering is understanding the history of the subject?

Engineering drawings were an essential part of the history of what was made and how. A lot of contributors are obviously of my generation or older and grew up with 'old fashioned' drawings. What about all the 'youngsters' who only know about computer generated images?

'Whilst looking to the future, let us not forget the glories of the past' – to quote the Newcomen Society. Technical drawing may only be a small part of the glory, but it's an essential one, so let's understand it.

Terry – please get writing!

I must first apologise to Steve and Graham for having been so long in replying to them. Unfortunately, other pressures on my time have not let be become fully involved in the thread. Even so, I have learnt an important lesson from the experience, that is, do not become involved with an item on the forum unless one has the time to follow it up.

Dealing first with Graham's nurse (20/04-16:13)who wishes to take up metalwork in the home workshop and needs to understand the drawings and maybe produce drawings eventually for use in the magazine. Obviously, in the first instance, he or she will find it difficult but this is not confined to just drawings but to most aspects of the hobby. I will add here that I have no objection to an article from Terry, providing it can be seen that sufficient of the magazines readership wishes it.

Even with an article available, this will only be the first hurdle and studying numerous drawings over a long period will be required in an attempt to understand them, as a result, gaining the necessary experience. Very many able readers of the magazine will have started in this way (without an article) so it is possible if one is willing to spend the time getting the experience. A common saying, “you have got to walk before you can run”.

As to the second part of the question, producing drawings. This I consider is quite a different as most of what is required has been gained at the reading stage. To produce good drawings the draughtsman needs an, eye to detail, and an ability to produce drawings that are both complete and accurate, requirements that are not just confined to drawing. As an electrical/electronic engineer I used to produce information on the basis of “I don't know what you don't know” so I explained everything, worthwhile if it were to be used by a newcomer to the drawing office or the shop floor. This is a good approach to produce drawings for the magazine as there is definitely a very wide range of abilities having to read them. Those on the first rung of the ladder will of course still find them much more difficult.

I could add a lot more but will refrain.

As to Steve,s (19/04-23:05) reservation regarding my comment that the view of 0.2% of the readers cannot reliably be taken as the overall wish of the readers I can see his reasoning but still feel it is far too small proportion of the readership on which to base a decision.

With this subject in mind it is interesting that in Graham's contribution (22/04-21:26) he considers that almost all out of 80 readers who are happy with the present drawing standard proves nothing, basically taking the same approach as mine but with a much larger number. At some point though we have to let the editor make the choice as any survey will never reach 50% of the readership voting one way.