Which Came First? The Grinder or the Mill?
February 6th, 2009Warning: This Blog Does not Conform to the Fairness Doctrine
In the morning, I always look at Drudgebart.tv.com to see what’s happening in the world. Today a headline says one of the morning news shows is dedicating a whole day to the guy who landed the plane in the Hudson River. Let me get his name right. Okay, it’s Chesley Sullenberger.
Now, I don’t want to diminish this man’s achievement. He pulled off what is supposedly a very hard maneuver. He landed a big jet in water without breaking it up or harming the passengers. He kept a lot of people alive. That being said, can someone please tell me what all the fuss is about? Why are people calling him a hero?
Think about this. If he had crashed the plane, he would have been the first to die. The pilot sits right up front. If the plane had been totally empty but for the cockpit, he would still have worked very hard to land the plane safely, to save his own life.
Is every person who saves lives a hero? Shouldn’t the term be reserved for people who subject themselves to special risks, or who help others with no expectation of reward? I’ve seen film of the plane that went down in the Potomac a long time ago. It was winter. People driving by got out of their cars and walked into the freezing water to save crash survivors. Cold water can kill you in a very short time. Those people are heroes. They risked their own lives, saved other human beings, and got nothing in return.
What Chesley Sullenberger did was wonderful, and by all accounts, he demonstrated real courage and character as well as skill. But a purely selfish person in the same position would have been just as determined to land the plane safely.
For contrast, consider another man who lost a plane in the water. I refer to Bush I. He joined the Navy as a volunteer, fresh out of high school, instead of sitting around waiting to see if he would be drafted. He became a bomber pilot, which is a high-risk job. He was shot down while flying a mission for the benefit of his countrymen. He didn’t have to be there. He exposed himself to machine gun fire and flak and so on, when he could have been safe at home, minding his own business. By the time he was finished, he had served 58 missions.
That’s a hero. Maybe not the greatest hero in American history, but certainly, a hero. His actions beat anything I expect to do in this life.
What else is going on? I’m still rethinking my tool strategy. I am convinced that my life will be complete if I have a milling machine and a belt grinder (and an acetylene rig and a Bobcat*), but it’s hard to decide which way to turn first. I would very much like to have a mobile base for the milling machine, and if I get a mill before I build a base, it will be mighty hard to get it onto a base later. A mill will weigh 1000 to 2000 pounds. I can’t hoist it. I’ll have to come up with another answer.
A belt grinder would be very helpful while I build the mobile base. I’ve built one base already, and I used a 6″ bench grinder to clean up the parts, and it was pretty slow, and it wasn’t always possible to get to the surfaces I wanted to fix.
The conclusion so far? Belt grinder first.
But wait. A belt grinder has a lot of holes in it. And I would have to make metal parts for the thing that tensions the belt and makes it track correctly. At the very least, a drill press is called for. A mill would be perfect.
On top of that, if I want real freedom in the design of the grinder, machine tools are a must. For example, I’d like to have 4″ or 6″ rollers, so I could use the machine for a wide variety of belts. For metalworking, I would only have enough juice to make use of a 2″ belt, but for woodworking, you can easily run a 6″ belt with 1 1/2 horsepower. I know of no reason why you couldn’t use the same machine. You’d have to have a couple of different tool arms, that’s all.
It’s my understanding–correct me if I’m wrong–that a milling machine can also be used as a lathe, provided you stay within certain limitations. It must be true; people use drill presses for turning small bits of wood. If I can turn small metal objects on a mill, I can make my own pulleys. Think how much easier that is than trying to make them with a welder and a plasma cutter. I can make pulleys by cutting pieces of 6″ tubing to length and welding hubs into them, but imagine how hard it would be to get them centered correctly. I can buy other people’s pulleys, but then I have to live with whatever hubs they have in them, and they may be a pain to match up to the other stuff.
I suppose, then, that a milling machine would be a good first step. Maybe I’d end up with a less-pretty mobile base, because I wouldn’t have a grinder to make it beautiful, but having an ugly mobile base is better than suffering for two weeks trying to make pulleys with, as Spock put it, stone knives and bearskins.
I was thinking about getting a Bridgeport, but I don’t know if I want to utterly destroy a whole corner of the garage, and I’m a little nervous about pushing a one-ton machine around on wheels. Supposedly they like to tip forward. I was considering a Bridgeport because it seems like all mills cost roughly the same amount of money, and you might as well go big. But now I’m thinking Millrite again. I can get one locally, and it’s considerably more compact than a Bridgeport, and–here’s the best thing–I should be able to sell it without losing much, if I get tired of it.
The fun thing about all this is that I am still not making anything not related to tools. I’m starting to wonder if anyone ever does. Has anyone ever really made a bookshelf or a dresser? Okay, I know they have. My great aunt did. So did my great-grandfather. But from reading my comments and checking out forums, you would think every job mechanically inclined people do is something intended to help them use tools.
By the way, I appreciate the suggestions that I try McMaster-Carr and Grainger and MSC for parts. But if you can think of a place I should try, don’t be surprised if I’ve already been there.
* And a hydraulic press.
February 6th, 2009 at 11:59 AM
If you’re going to use a Mill to drill/bore center-aligned holes, get yourself a rotary table. This makes centering holes a lot easier…here’s the technique (assuming the part is already mounted on a Rotary Table):
.
1. Apply machinist-ink to the part.
2. Insert a scribe-point in the milling head (a collet or a drill-chuck helps here).
3. Center the Mill-head on what you think is center, and adjust the height until the scribe is in contact with the work surface.
4. Turn the Rotary Table one revolution.
5. Repeat 3&4 as necessary.
The exact center is at the center of the scribed circle (assuming you’ve accurately mounted the part on the Rotary table). Most rotary tables have scribed circles on their surface, so alignment shouldn’t be that big of a deal, although you might need to fabricate a clamp to hold the work-piece with the T-Slots.
.
I found some Ebay deals. There are tons, literally, of Rotary Tables on Ebay; just be careful to not go too overboard on the table size. Once you get up to 12″ tables, the weight can be a couple of hundred pounds…not the easiest thing to mount on the Mill table by yourself.
.
I found an 8″ table that weights 80lbs that should handle your 6″ rollers:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Horizontal-Vertical-Rotary-Table-8-NEW_W0QQitemZ310116895850QQihZ021QQcategoryZ41943QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
.
If you want to be super-accurate on the alignment, you may also want to look for a self-aligning chuck.
http://cgi.ebay.com/8-3-JAW-PLAIN-BACK-LATHE-CHUCK-SELF-CENTERING-HARDENED_W0QQitemZ260356698595QQihZ016QQcategoryZ25292QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
.
Who knew enabling would take this much time? đ
February 6th, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Darn.
.
I knew I should have TinyURL’d those links…
February 6th, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Engineering isn’t so easy after all, huh? Imagine trying to make a whole car.
.
Buying as many components as you can, despite compromises, is really the way to go. You can be reasonably sure the material and any necessary processing (heat treat, etc.) were done close to right.
February 6th, 2009 at 12:50 PM
“Now I don’t want to diminish” is a fun social lubricant.
For good or ill, whenever we make mention of our opinion we intend for ourselves to be listened to and therefore given the chance to manipulate someone’s worldview. To say that you do not want to diminish an act’s importance while calling into question the greatness of the individual’s act (while possibly not an outright lie) is mildly dishonest.
Now that I’ve likely antagonized you slightly, I’m going to have to try and answer your question.
Yes and No. Heroism is not determined by the individual who committed the act, but by those who benefit. So yes, a pilot who was “just doing his job” can and likely is just as much a hero to those who did not die on his plane as a military man who was braving fire and potential death to “do his job” is to you. A job, by the way, that does increase the possibility of braving firefights just as the pilot’s job increases the possibility of emergency landings.
Switch “just doing his job” to “just trying not to die” and the result “other people lived due to his actions” does not change…thus I submit their status remains the same.
I can’t count the number of times I’ve been called a hero just for doing my job and it is a far less risky business than piloting aircraft. I troubleshoot technology issues for a college. Big deal right? But for whatever reason those teachers and students thought that my meager actions improved their lives. Risking my life? No. Saving lives? Maybe if it is a lecture on survival and only then by proxy. A hero? To them and them alone.
February 6th, 2009 at 12:55 PM
“To say that you do not want to diminish an actâs importance while calling into question the greatness of the individualâs act (while possibly not an outright lie) is mildly dishonest.”
.
No, there’s nothing dishonest about it. I pointed out that what he did was “wonderful.”
.
“Heroism is not determined by the individual who committed the act, but by those who benefit.”
.
By your own unique definition, which other people don’t apply and have never heard of. If your definition is correct, food inspectors and people who do quality control on airbags are heroes. But they are not. Here’s a definition from Dictionary.com: “a man of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities.”
.
“Noble,” as generally understood (and not just as defined by me) incorporates “unselfish.” Saving yourself doesn’t really qualify.
February 6th, 2009 at 1:15 PM
I must be an outlier – I buy tools to make stuff, as a primary goal.
And I actually do make things with them!
(To be fair, I do own tools I never really used, because I thought they’d be useful for some task or other but they turned out to be unnecessary or inappropriate.
Which reminds me, since you brought up “using the drill press to turn small parts”, that will totally let me make a thing or two I’ve been wanting to make, without having to buy and place a lathe…)
February 6th, 2009 at 1:38 PM
“I must be an outlier – I buy tools to make stuff, as a primary goal.”
.
What are you? Crazy?
February 6th, 2009 at 1:45 PM
“No, thereâs nothing dishonest about it. I pointed out that what he did was âwonderful.â”
.
And yet you are attempting to convince me (the reader) that his actions were possibly not heroic. Now I don’t mean to insinuate that you are wrong here, but I think you are wrong. And I enjoy being contrary. From what I’ve seen a little counter opinion really gets you typing some good stuff.
.
“By your own unique definition, which other people donât apply and have never heard of. If your definition is correct, food inspectors and people who do quality control on airbags are heroes. But they are not. Hereâs a definition from Dictionary.com: âa man of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities.â”
.
“But they are not” …according to a Dictionary? But it has no character determining ability. It is simply a collection of words with their meanings, meaning which have been agreed to by committee in an attempt to standardize this English language. It has no power to deem them as being men “of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualitiesâ as it is not alive.
Only you (a human being) can choose to admire a person’s courage, skill, brave deeds, and noble qualities.
Only you (a human being) can determine for yourself if the person in question has noble qualities at all, according to your standards for being “Noble.”
Thus you (a human being) are uniquely qualified to classify someone as a hero…or not, that’s okay too.
So, my answer remains Yes and No. Yes to some, No to others.
Because frankly I’d rather not be forced to believe that the Che Guevara, and Mussolini were heroes. They weren’t to me, and probably weren’t to you…but some good arguments could be made for their selflessness and ability by some who do consider them heroes.
February 6th, 2009 at 1:47 PM
By the way I do love your insights. Your blog is a fun read, though your recipes have tried to kill me. đ
February 6th, 2009 at 1:47 PM
I think the selfishness and sadism of people like Che Guevara make them impossible to describe as heroes.
February 6th, 2009 at 1:53 PM
Yes, but selfishness and sadism to us and the ones we would see protected is quite the opposite to those of warped mind that we would see tried for crimes or at least relegated to obscurity.
February 6th, 2009 at 2:32 PM
Arrgghh, when are you going to make something that isn’t another tool, or for an existing tool or for a tool which you plan to acquire in the future? You mentioned something about box making, if that ends up being a toolbox, I might go off the deep end. It’s like some cruel extended practical joke.
February 6th, 2009 at 2:52 PM
It’s quite possible Sullenberger is being lauded as a hero because he did his job, something increasingly rare these days.
February 6th, 2009 at 3:33 PM
I, OTOH, want a Ford tractor. The gray and red ones. I’m sure I need it. My wife won’t let me have one. Even when I found one – in *running* condition – on craigslist for $900, she wouldn’t relent. It was such a deal.
.
I mean, with the right attachments I could mow the lawn. Right? And till the garden. Right? And dig trenches. Right?
.
…so what that we’ve only got a 6,000 sq ft lot in suburbia. That’s not the point.
.
A man needs what a man needs.
.
…and I need a Ford tractor.
.
February 6th, 2009 at 4:03 PM
I think GHWB and everyone who has James Baker on their is going to hell, but he did some heroic things.
Bad people can do good, even heroic, things.
Good people can do some scummy things at times, too.
February 6th, 2009 at 6:18 PM
s/b “James Baker on their Rolodex”
February 6th, 2009 at 9:00 PM
I just want to point out in my unobtrusive way that if you got the Bobcat first, before anything else, you would not have any problem lifting heavy machinery and placing it wherever you want it to be placed. The Bobcat would go nicely on a trailer you would pull behind your classic, three quarter ton pickup where you would also be able to stow your oxy-acetylene rig locked up nicely against the cattle guard across your back window. Your truck could then be used to transport yourself and your tools of choice anywhere you want to go do something.
.
Anywhere.
.
Think about it.
February 7th, 2009 at 12:52 PM
Nice point about heroes, Steve. Something to think about. I alos recall that when ‘Sully’ had the opportunity to make a speech about his actions on that flight, he was mildly deprecative & rather laconic.
.
Kinda fitting, wouldn’t you say?
February 8th, 2009 at 1:48 PM
I think there’s a bit of misuse or misunderstanding of the words “hero” and “heroic.”
.
What Sullenberger did was unquestionably heroic – that is, like or in the manner of a hero.
.
But does behaving heroically necessarily make one a hero? Obviously not. Any self-centered poltroon would have tried to do as Sullenberger did….
.
… Until you add in the fact that he walked the aisles of his [potentially] sinking aircraft twice to ensure everyone was out. I have a hard time seeing the poltroon doing that.
.
But that’s just me.