GGG

Just got back from a trip to the Baltic and stopped in
Stockholm.  Again I got a chance to see the Vasa (look that
up in your Funk and Wagnalls), but this time with a twist.
 The tall ship that I am a volunteer on is a reproduction
of an early 17th c ship from within about 5 years of the
Vasa.  It is the only 17th c ship that sails today - there
are a couple of others that are static displays.  The
curator of the Vasa, Fred Hocker, an American archeologist,
sails on our boat once a year to help him understand what
these boats were like, and he offers that any of us that
show up in Sweden can get on the boat - I did this.

 I was most interested in the hull construction and I was
able to climb down to the very bottom of this magnificent
relic. I crawled from bow to stern along the keel, and saw
the enormous knees that held the frame stable and the tons
and tons of oak that went into this thing.  I was wearing
the Cat's Pajamas sitting in the Cat Bird's Seat while in
Hog Heaven.

The ship sank for a number of reasons, the two big ones
being that the king ordered it to be lengthened while it
was under construction, so it was too narrow, and the king
ordered another gun deck that put a lot of weight up high.
 The ship went about 1000 yards from the dock on its maiden
voyage before it rolled over and sank.

Recently Fred wrote a paper on another contributor to the
disaster - one he discovered and fleshed out.  This is from
a recent article:




"We have, over the last three years, measured every single
piece of the wood in the ship,"? says Hocker. "If we want
to understand how the ship was built, that's what it
takes."?

Hocker's meticulous measurements paid off. They gave him
fresh insight into what made the Vasa unstable.

For one thing, the ship was asymmetrical, more so than most
ships of the day.

"There is more ship structure on the port side of the hull
than on the starboard side,"? explains Hocker.
"Unballasted, the ship would probably heel to port."?

No wonder the ship tipped to the port side when the winds
hit.

But why was the ship so lopsided?

While examining the ship, Hocker discovered four rulers the
workmen had used. Those rulers were based on different
standards of measurement at the time.

Two were in Swedish feet, which were divided into twelve
inches. The other two were in Amsterdam feet, which had
eleven inches in a foot. So each carpenter had used his own
system of measurement.

"When somebody tells him, make that thing four inches
thick, his four inches is not going to be the same as the
next guy's four inches,"? says Hocker. "And you can see
those variations in the timbers, as well."?




How about that!  Have Swedish shipwrights build one side of
the boat while the Dutch shipwrights build the other and
they aren't the same - by a long shot!  Not so bad in a
house, but apparently pretty disastrous in a big ship.

Ed Minch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Web mail provided by NuNet, Inc. The Premier National provider.
http://www.nni.com/

Lucky you, Ed!  Fascinating stuff.  I'm a bit surprised that
no attention, apparently, was paid to the different measuring
standards.  Standards varied from country to country until
very recently.  Reading documents from early California means
translating fanegas to bushels, and interpreting both for
the Russian volumes.

I remember the Vasa, but somewhat vaguely.  Is there someplace
where I can look at the cooperage on board?  Did coopering
artifacts survive?

I'm up to my ears in researching earlier coopering, and Northern
European cooper material would be very high on my list of things to
know and document.

Mike in Sacto

ed, that's fascinating.  thanks for sharing.

bill
felton, ca

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 5:30 AM,  wrote:

>
>
>
> GGG
>
> Just got back from a trip to the Baltic and stopped in
> Stockholm.  Again I got a chance to see the Vasa (look that
> up in your Funk and Wagnalls), but this time with a twist.
>  The tall ship that I am a volunteer on is a reproduction
> of an early 17th c ship from within about 5 years of the
> Vasa.  It is the only 17th c ship that sails today - there
> are a couple of others that are static displays.  The
> curator of the Vasa, Fred Hocker, an American archeologist,
> sails on our boat once a year to help him understand what
> these boats were like, and he offers that any of us that
> show up in Sweden can get on the boat - I did this.
>
>  I was most interested in the hull construction and I was
> able to climb down to the very bottom of this magnificent
> relic. I crawled from bow to stern along the keel, and saw
> the enormous knees that held the frame stable and the tons
> and tons of oak that went into this thing.  I was wearing
> the Cat's Pajamas sitting in the Cat Bird's Seat while in
> Hog Heaven.
>
> The ship sank for a number of reasons, the two big ones
> being that the king ordered it to be lengthened while it
> was under construction, so it was too narrow, and the king
> ordered another gun deck that put a lot of weight up high.
>  The ship went about 1000 yards from the dock on its maiden
> voyage before it rolled over and sank.
>
> Recently Fred wrote a paper on another contributor to the
> disaster - one he discovered and fleshed out.  This is from
> a recent article:
>
>
>
>
> "We have, over the last three years, measured every single
> piece of the wood in the ship,"? says Hocker. "If we want
> to understand how the ship was built, that's what it
> takes."?
>
> Hocker's meticulous measurements paid off. They gave him
> fresh insight into what made the Vasa unstable.
>
> For one thing, the ship was asymmetrical, more so than most
> ships of the day.
>
> "There is more ship structure on the port side of the hull
> than on the starboard side,"? explains Hocker.
> "Unballasted, the ship would probably heel to port."?
>
> No wonder the ship tipped to the port side when the winds
> hit.
>
> But why was the ship so lopsided?
>
> While examining the ship, Hocker discovered four rulers the
> workmen had used. Those rulers were based on different
> standards of measurement at the time.
>
> Two were in Swedish feet, which were divided into twelve
> inches. The other two were in Amsterdam feet, which had
> eleven inches in a foot. So each carpenter had used his own
> system of measurement.
>
> "When somebody tells him, make that thing four inches
> thick, his four inches is not going to be the same as the
> next guy's four inches,"? says Hocker. "And you can see
> those variations in the timbers, as well."?
>
>
>
>
> How about that!  Have Swedish shipwrights build one side of
> the boat while the Dutch shipwrights build the other and
> they aren't the same - by a long shot!  Not so bad in a
> house, but apparently pretty disastrous in a big ship.
>
> Ed Minch
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Web mail provided by NuNet, Inc. The Premier National provider.
> http://www.nni.com/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool
> aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history, usage,
> value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of
> traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools.
>
> To change your subscription options:
> http://rucku
s.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools
>
> To read the FAQ:
> http://swingleydev.com/archi
ve/faq.html
>
> OldTools archive: http://swingleydev.com/archive/">http://swingleydev.com/archive/
>
> OldTools@r...
> http://rucku
s.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools
>

On 9/16/2014 7:30 AM, ruby@m... wrote:
>
>
> GGG
>
> Just got back from a trip to the Baltic and stopped in
> Stockholm.  

Howdy Ed!

Thanks for sharing your experience and insight learned.  I've read 
several articles on the Vasa having first read about it in National 
Geographic years ago.  One of the things I remember having read is that 
the ship was well preserved because it sank into very cold water that 
provided less free oxygen for decomposition than would have been the 
case in warmer climes.

Do I recall correctly that the preservation techniques - although the 
best known at the time - were inappropriate and that the wreckage is 
deteriorating?  Or is that the case with the older English ship?

Finally, I have always been fascinated by the hubris exhibited in this 
episode.  The king ordered a super warship built and presumably hired 
the best designers, marine engineers, and craftsmen to build it; yet he 
superseded their work by ordering that the hull be lengthened.  Is there 
any evidence that the designers, engineers and artisans gave any advice 
for or against this change?  If not, why not?  Deference to a royal?  To 
a twelfth generation colonist and American, I can understand political 
shenanigans and the havoc often resulting form the exercise of political 
power (not starting a flame war here, folks . . .  just making an 
observation without even citing examples from history or the present); 
but I cannot understand deference.  I guess I have benefited too much 
from the principle of freedom of speech and expression.  Of course, if 
the failure to observe the differences in measurements or disregarding 
them is an indicator, perhaps the designers, engineers and craftsmen 
were not as good as they might have been or succumbed to other pressures 
than their own talents.

Again, thank you for sharing your experience and the information gathered.

Bob,

Measurement problems like this are not relegated only to the olden days.
Remember when Paddy tried to land something on Mars a few years ago?  Mixing
meters and feet, even in the NASA, era is not a good idea.  (Paddy: I apologize
if it wasn't your fault.)  :-)

Frank Sronce (Fort Worth Armadillo Works)

--------------------------------------------
 "... if  the failure to
 observe the differences in measurements or disregarding 
 them is an indicator, perhaps the designers,
 engineers and craftsmen 
 were not as good as
 they might have been or succumbed to other pressures 
 than their own talents."

Thanks for the info about the Vasa.  I have followed what has been published in
the popular pressover the years about the sinking and the raising of the ship.
It is too bad about the attempted preservationgone bad.  I'm sure the time,
effort and cost was huge but the try at preserving an important pieceof
national/nautical history has been important even if the lesson was what not to
do. My mind was boggled when I read about the two different standards for a
foot.  How could someone (anyone?)not notice in 2 1/2 years of construction that
something just didn't look right?  But then Frank reminded meof the Mars mission
that crashed a lander into the surface of the planet.  An ounce of prevention is
worth 0.4536 kg of cure.  We humans...ain't we a kick. chuck
 

> 
> The ship sank for a number of reasons, the two big ones
> being that the king ordered it to be lengthened while it
> was under construction, so it was too narrow, and the king
> ordered another gun deck that put a lot of weight up high.
>  The ship went about 1000 yards from the dock on its maiden
> voyage before it rolled over and sank.

> Hocker's meticulous measurements paid off. They gave him
> fresh insight into what made the Vasa unstable.
> 
> For one thing, the ship was asymmetrical, more so than most
> ships of the day.
> 
> "There is more ship structure on the port side of the hull
> than on the starboard side,"? explains Hocker.
> "Unballasted, the ship would probably heel to port."?
> 
> No wonder the ship tipped to the port side when the winds
> hit.
> 
> But why was the ship so lopsided?
> 
> While examining the ship, Hocker discovered four rulers the
> workmen had used. Those rulers were based on different
> standards of measurement at the time.
> 
> Two were in Swedish feet, which were divided into twelve
> inches. The other two were in Amsterdam feet, which had
> eleven inches in a foot. So each carpenter had used his own
> system of measurement.
> 
> "When somebody tells him, make that thing four inches
> thick, his four inches is not going to be the same as the
> next guy's four inches,"? says Hocker. "And you can see
> those variations in the timbers, as well."?
> 
 > How about that!  Have Swedish shipwrights build one side of
> the boat while the Dutch shipwrights build the other and
> they aren't the same - by a long shot!  Not so bad in a
> house, but apparently pretty disastrous in a big ship.
> 
> Ed Minch

------------------------------------------------------------------------

A bit off topic... But didn't Airbus have a similar problem with one of
their planes?  The French and Germans used incompatible software to design
parts of the same jet?

> My mind was boggled when I read about the two different
> standards for a foot.  How could someone (anyone?)not
> notice in 2 1/2 years of construction that something just
> didn't look right?  But then Frank reminded meof the Mars
> mission that crashed a lander into the surface of the
> planet.  An ounce of prevention is worth 0.4536 kg of
> cure.  We humans...ain't we a kick. chuck


Chuck

We don't know the particulars of the inch differences.
 Maybe the inch was the same, but they were divided
differently so that 4" was the same for both rulers, but
4-3/4" was different.

Be interesting to find out.

I remember reading that Napoleon started the metric system
because France had 9 different inches??  IIRC.

Ed Minch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Web mail provided by NuNet, Inc. The Premier National provider.
http://www.nni.com/

Snip
From: Chuck Ramsey


How could someone (anyone?)not notice in 2 1/2 years of construction that
something just didn't look right?  But then Frank reminded meof the Mars mission
that crashed a lander into the surface of the planet.  An ounce of prevention is
worth 0.4536 kg of cure.  We humans...ain't we a kick. chuck
Unsnip

So true Chuck. Negotiations sometimes end up with a compromise that suits the
negotiators but is less than satisfactory in the real world.
In a previous life I was the engineer in charge of writing assembly instructions
for heavy equipment components. We bid on a 80/20 project in support of a
supplier who was tooling up for increased production but couldn’t meet the
current demand. We were to be the 20% supplier involving one group of
components.
I went with a crew down to the current suppliers plant to gather information for
assembly instructions and to train the welders on the assembly.
The customer had supplied prints to the Project Manager who ordered parts. One
of the parts was an access port on the side of a tank. After the crew assembled
the first tank they sent it over for leak testing. Following the assembly prints
supplied by the customer and the assembly instructions they tried bolting on the
blank plate made for testing the tanks integrity under 15 psi. The 3/8” fine
thread bolts would only thread in about 1/2” and then hung up. The tester got a
3/8” fine thread tap and chased the threads. The tank passed. It was assembled,
painted, and ready to be shipped.
I stopped out and talked to the crew and the tester walked over to complain
about the screwed up threads in the access port. Knowing that the chances of all
8 threaded holes being damaged at 1/2” deep were pretty slim I stopped the
assembly process and started chasing prints.
The set that the Project Manager had ordered the parts from were a set from the
customers engineering department. The access port had not been converted to
English inches like the rest of the assembly had 5 years previously. When the
supplier was making the tank they just knew that they were supposed to be 3/8”
fine thread and made them that way.
The company had bid and bought materials based on the prints given so the
project had a hermaphrodite tank assembly. After consultation at a much higher
level than I was used to, the first 40 units were shipped with metric bolts.
Doesn't sound like a problem until in the field someone tries to work on one of
the oddball tanks and taps out what appears to be damaged thread. Tapping the
holes to 3/8” will hold 15 psi. I never heard any complaints but I know in the
field the operations that ran this equipment used automatic fill systems to fill
the tanks through an auto shutoff  that stopped when it hit 50 psi of back
pressure.

While working for Ameron Pipe, I got a call from the installation contractor
telling me that the bolts supplied for the 36" flanges simply would not work. I
drove to the job site to see what the problem was. They were grade 8 bolts and
nuts, 1" diameter. They had tried almost half a barrel of the bolts, and ruined
them all. The bolts were metric and the nuts were SAE.

I wondered how smart you have to be to keep trying to thread bolts and nuts from
the same barrels together before you figure out that they are all the same and
none are going to work.

And then... Edison wanted to revamp the piping in the San Onofre nuke plant, and
they wanted to do it cheap. So they contracted with Mitsubishi to fabricate it
offshore. This work had previously been done by American Boilermakers, and it
was always successful. But not this time. Hundreds of millions of dollars were
wasted because there is turbulence causing premature wear inside the pipes.
Edison wanted to sue Mitsubishi, but Mitsubishi has an ironclad case. They built
it exactly according to specs supplied by Edison. Rather than commit more
hundreds of millions into doing it right, they closed down the nuke plant.
Decommissioning this plant will cost many billions.

When I was working construction I saw a lot of horrible mistakes. These are not
at all rare.

On Sep 17, 2014, at 3:19 AM, David Nighswander  wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> 
> Snip
> From: Chuck Ramsey
> 
> 
> How could someone (anyone?)not notice in 2 1/2 years of construction that
something just didn't look right?  But then Frank reminded meof the Mars mission
that crashed a lander into the surface of the planet.  An ounce of prevention is
worth 0.4536 kg of cure.  We humans...ain't we a kick. chuck
> Unsnip
> 
> So true Chuck. Negotiations sometimes end up with a compromise that suits the
negotiators but is less than satisfactory in the real world.
> In a previous life I was the engineer in charge of writing assembly
instructions for heavy equipment components. We bid on a 80/20 project in
support of a supplier who was tooling up for increased production but couldn’t
meet the current demand. We were to be the 20% supplier involving one group of
components.
> I went with a crew down to the current suppliers plant to gather information
for assembly instructions and to train the welders on the assembly.
> The customer had supplied prints to the Project Manager who ordered parts. One
of the parts was an access port on the side of a tank. After the crew assembled
the first tank they sent it over for leak testing. Following the assembly prints
supplied by the customer and the assembly instructions they tried bolting on the
blank plate made for testing the tanks integrity under 15 psi. The 3/8” fine
thread bolts would only thread in about 1/2” and then hung up. The tester got a
3/8” fine thread tap and chased the threads. The tank passed. It was assembled,
painted, and ready to be shipped.
> I stopped out and talked to the crew and the tester walked over to complain
about the screwed up threads in the access port. Knowing that the chances of all
8 threaded holes being damaged at 1/2” deep were pretty slim I stopped the
assembly process and started chasing prints.
> The set that the Project Manager had ordered the parts from were a set from
the customers engineering department. The access port had not been converted to
English inches like the rest of the assembly had 5 years previously. When the
supplier was making the tank they just knew that they were supposed to be 3/8”
fine thread and made them that way.
> The company had bid and bought materials based on the prints given so the
project had a hermaphrodite tank assembly. After consultation at a much higher
level than I was used to, the first 40 units were shipped with metric bolts.
> Doesn't sound like a problem until in the field someone tries to work on one
of the oddball tanks and taps out what appears to be damaged thread. Tapping the
holes to 3/8” will hold 15 psi. I never heard any complaints but I know in the
field the operations that ran this equipment used automatic fill systems to fill
the tanks through an auto shutoff  that stopped when it hit 50 psi of back press
ure.------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool
> aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history, usage,
> value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of
> traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools.
> 
> To change your subscription options:
> http://rucku
s.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools
> 
> To read the FAQ:
> http://swingleydev.com/archi
ve/faq.html
> 
> OldTools archive: http://swingleydev.com/archive/">http://swingleydev.com/archive/
> 
> OldTools@r...
> http://rucku
s.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools

Edison wanted to sue Mitsubishi, but Mitsubishi
> has an ironclad case. They built it exactly according to
> specs supplied by Edison. Rather than commit more
> hundreds of millions into doing it right, they closed
> down the nuke plant. Decommissioning this plant will cost
> many billions.


Jim

What was the problem with the specs?  If the American firm
could make it work to the specs, why wouldn't the
Mitsubishi version work?

Ed Minch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Web mail provided by NuNet, Inc. The Premier National provider.
http://www.nni.com/

Speaking of nuts and bolts, my favorite gaff happened at Cal-Trans.
Hardware for a section of freeway had been put out to bid, and the
bids came back outrageously expensive (yes, even for Cal-Trans).

It turned out that, to save time, the engineers making the drawings
had simply reversed one side for the drawing of the other side.
This was fine, insofar as the two sides were identical.  But the
drawings included nuts and bolts, which the engineers didn't think
about.  The outrageous cost came from making all the left hand thread
nuts and bolts.

Luckily the mistake was caught before production started.

Mike in Sacto

Snip

From: Michael Blair


Speaking of nuts and bolts, my favorite gaff happened at Cal-Trans.
Hardware for a section of freeway had been put out to bid, and the
bids came back outrageously expensive (yes, even for Cal-Trans).

It turned out that, to save time, the engineers making the drawings
had simply reversed one side for the drawing of the other side.
This was fine, insofar as the two sides were identical.  But the
drawings included nuts and bolts, which the engineers didn't think
about.  The outrageous cost came from making all the left hand thread
nuts and bolts.

Luckily the mistake was caught before production started.
Unsnip

We have a winner. 
That would have been a case where there actually were fasteners for one side but
not the other.

GGs

I had a similar problem on a job. Nailing weatherboards (siding) on to a
house, another carpenter working with me kept throwing away just about every
second nail that he pulled out of his nail-bag. I asked what was wrong with
the nails, and he said the heads were on the wrong end.

I put him straight, told him those nails are for the other side of the
house.

Mick Dowling




On 18/09/2014 10:18 am, "Dave Nighswander" 
wrote:

> Snip
> 
> From: Michael Blair
> 
> 
> Speaking of nuts and bolts, my favorite gaff happened at Cal-Trans.
> Hardware for a section of freeway had been put out to bid, and the
> bids came back outrageously expensive (yes, even for Cal-Trans).
> 
> It turned out that, to save time, the engineers making the drawings
> had simply reversed one side for the drawing of the other side.
> This was fine, insofar as the two sides were identical.  But the
> drawings included nuts and bolts, which the engineers didn't think
> about.  The outrageous cost came from making all the left hand thread
> nuts and bolts.
> 
> Luckily the mistake was caught before production started.
> Unsnip
> 
> We have a winner.
> That would have been a case where there actually were fasteners for one side
> but not the other.

> ...another carpenter working with me kept throwing away just about 
> every
> second nail that he pulled out of his nail-bag. I asked what was wrong 
> with
> the nails, and he said the heads were on the wrong end.

A mazing the ignernce of some people!  Glad you put him straight/

> ...another carpenter working with me kept throwing away just about 
> every
> second nail that he pulled out of his nail-bag. I asked what was wrong 
> with
> the nails, and he said the heads were on the wrong end.

A mazing the ignernce of some people!  Glad you put him straight/

Very interesting.   I would like to see video of it in action.   I've never
seen anything quite like that,  but the idea of driving the nail while
standing sound great.   I found this statement interesting:

" I've had a play around with it and it seems to work. Easily drives a 50mm
2"
nail through a softwood floorboard into a hardwood joist in 2 strokes."

Here,  it would almost always be the other way around.   Attaching a
hardwood flooring board (maple,  walnut, pecan,  etc), to a softwood joist
or sub floor (pine or fir).

Doc
On Sep 18, 2014 4:00 AM, "Mick Dowling"  wrote:

> GGs
>
> This showed up at the HTPAA meeting on Tuesday night and followed me home;
> http://tinyurl.com/l2xscz9
>
> It's a floor nailing gun, made by F L Hudson and CO. in Brisbane Australia.
>
> I've had a play around with it and it seems to work. Easily drives a 50mm
> 2"
> nail through a softwood floorboard into a hardwood joist in 2 strokes.
>
> There's no magazine, each nail needs to be loaded individually.
>
> I still hand nail some floors, so when I get the chance I'll give it a
> proper test run.
>
> Anyone on the list know how to access pre 1978 Australian Patents on the
> internet? I've tried the IP Australia site but Homer Simpson must have been
> the web designer. I can't get it to work.
>
> I was able to find a US patent referencing this Australian patent. US
> 5562168. This gave me the clue that the patent dates to 1952.
>
> Mick Dowling
> Melbourne
> Member, Hand Tool Preservation Association of Australia Inc.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool
> aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history, usage,
> value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of
> traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools.
>
> To change your subscription options:
> http://rucku
s.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools
>
> To read the FAQ:
> http://swingleydev.com/archi
ve/faq.html
>
> OldTools archive: http://swingleydev.com/archive/">http://swingleydev.com/archive/
>
> OldTools@r...
> http://rucku
s.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools
>

Hi Doc

I¹ll see if I can do a video over the weekend.

House floor joists around these parts generally have been Australian
hardwood, 100 X 50 (4² X 2²), now mostly 90 X 45. What we call Œdeep
joists¹, as in joists for a first floor, or those spanning more than a
couple of metres would likely be Douglas Fir (in Victoria at least, maybe
something else in the other states).

Floorboards were commonly Baltic Pine (from Wikipedia, Picea abies or,
excelsa), Kauri Pine (New Zealand timber, stunning stuff to work with), or
Australian hardwood of some type.

Mick Dowling
Melbourne
Member, Hand Tool Preservation Association of Australia Inc.






On 18/09/2014 9:48 pm, "John Holladay"  wrote:

> Very interesting.   I would like to see video of it in action.   I've never
> seen anything quite like that,  but the idea of driving the nail while
> standing sound great.   I found this statement interesting: 
> 
> " I've had a play around with it and it seems to work. Easily drives a 50mm 2"
> nail through a softwood floorboard into a hardwood joist in 2 strokes."
> 
> Here,  it would almost always be the other way around.   Attaching a hardwood
> flooring board (maple,  walnut, pecan,  etc), to a softwood joist or sub floor
> (pine or fir).
> 
> Doc
> 
> On Sep 18, 2014 4:00 AM, "Mick Dowling"  wrote:
>> GGs
>> 
>> This showed up at the HTPAA meeting on Tuesday night and followed me home;
>> http://tinyurl.com/l2xscz9
>> 
>> It's a floor nailing gun, made by F L Hudson and CO. in Brisbane Australia.
>> 
>> I've had a play around with it and it seems to work. Easily drives a 50mm 2"
>> nail through a softwood floorboard into a hardwood joist in 2 strokes.
>> 
>> There's no magazine, each nail needs to be loaded individually.
>> 
>> I still hand nail some floors, so when I get the chance I'll give it a
>> proper test run.
>> 
>> Anyone on the list know how to access pre 1978 Australian Patents on the
>> internet? I've tried the IP Australia site but Homer Simpson must have been
>> the web designer. I can't get it to work.
>> 
>> I was able to find a US patent referencing this Australian patent. US
>> 5562168. This gave me the clue that the patent dates to 1952.
>> 
>> Mick Dowling
>> Melbourne
>> Member, Hand Tool Preservation Association of Australia Inc.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool
>> aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history, usage,
>> value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of
>> traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools.
>> 
>> To change your subscription options:
>> http://ruck
us.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools
>> 
>> To read the FAQ:
>> http://swingleydev.com/arch
ive/faq.html
>> 
>> OldTools archive: http://swingleydev.com/archive/">http://swingleydev.com/archive/
>> 
>> OldTools@r...
>> http://ruck
us.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools
>