Drafting

[Charles Green]

 

These are only my observations on CAD and CAD users: 

 

The economics of my time as a hobbyist is blissfully void of the "How long?" and "How much?" demands of commercial production.  I can comfortably answer these questions with: "As long as it takes." and "I'll do with or without."   On the other hand, commercial economics demands these questions be addressed and in business, CAD gets the nod.  CAD is faster than work made with pencil or pen and ink.  In my hobbies, plans are made with pencil on paper, on a drafting table with an arm.  I have no practical experience nor personal interest in CAD.

 

Following high-school drafting classes and a 12 month, trade-school, mechanical-drafting program, I worked for a while employed drawing maps with pen and ink on vellum or starched linen.  I had at my disposal an enviable set of jewel-tipped Rapid-O-Graph pens.  The job was a pleasure and my maps were beautiful.  I was there when talk of transition to a computerized system began but no one knew what form it would take.  I consider myself lucky I moved on before the transition took place.  It amounted to an upheaval, the increased productivity of CAD put people out of work and I may have been one of them.  A Luddite view?  There is some of that, but I never went as far as tossing a sabot in the works.  I had moved on.

 

My shop was designed with space for a 40 x 60 inch, tilt-top drafting table with a Mutoh Model 6, straight-arm drafting-machine mounted on it.  I had gotten them at an auction some time before for $110.00.  I had to bid against one other guy who wanted them too, otherwise I could have gotten them for the opening bid of $20.00!  In the shop, I also provided space for a 40 x 60 inch, six-drawer flat-file.  Some people admire them.  Devotees of CAD usually view them with distain, as a waste of floor space.  Conversation then usually segues into the merits of their CAD system.  CAD adherents seem to carry  a sort of militant allegiance to what ever system they are invested in.  I detect their divergence away from pencil and paper carries another defensive element.  I get the impression the most vocal CAD adherents would be hard-pressed to draw a three view plan or and isometric view.  But with CAD, they don't have to know how.  That's a shame.

 

Done free-hand or with a straight-edge, drawing is a tactile art-form.  Drawings are an artistic extension of the object being made.  Drawings carry the imprint of the maker as much as the object they represent.  Even when drawn with a straight-edge,  drawings of one object made by different people will show characteristics of their makers.

 

2H, 4H, 6H, HB, B.  Does anyone care?

 

 

For the Season:

 

Excerpts from Robert Service's "The Trappers' Christmas Eve".

 

It's mighty lonesome-like and drear.

Above the Wild the moon rides high,

And shows up sharp and needle-clear

The emptiness of earth and sky;

No happy homes with love a-glow;

No Santa Claus to make believe:

Just snow and snow, and then more snow;

It's Christmas Eve, it's Christmas Eve.

 

Stripped to the buff and gaunt and still

Lies all the land in grim distress.

Like lost soul wailing, long and shrill,

A wolf-howl cleaves the emptiness.

Then hushed as Death is everything.

The moon rides haggard and forlorn...

"O hark the herald angels sing!"

God bless all men - it's Christmas morn.

 

 

 

  

 

     

 

            

[mangulator63]

On 12/23/2020 at 11:44 PM, Hank said:

Tim,

 

You're not alone!! I too, took mech. drafting in 10th grade (1962) and would have pursued an industrial arts path but my parents wanted me to go the "college prep" route instead. After a short college stint, 4 years USN, and back to college to finish, where did I end up??? Western-Electric doing board tech. illustrating prior to learning a pre-CAD computer based graphics program while working on the Safeguard Anti-Ballistic Missile Program. I then took a contract at one of the NC DuPont facilities doing board drafting until 1983 when they brought in IGDS Intergraph CAD - and I've been doing CAD (and a bit of board drafting along the way) ever since. I retired in 2019 but have a full size drafting table in my shop, along with a stand-alone CPU and single monitor for viewing the photos/drawings, etc. for my ship modeling. I have my same Samsonite Briefcase full of drafting equipment (circa. 1970's) and some of it is actually NIB (New In Box)!! A lot of those instruments can't be found anywhere and if you do they're usually of 3rd world mfgr.  I actually suppliment my CAD drawings with small board drafted sketches when I need to refine something without going back to the house where my CAD software resides. I've worked in various industries (Petro-Chem, Electronics, Facilities, Chemical, Food & Drug, Pharma, Bio-tech, etc.) and have also spent an unemployed year doing house plans for an overworked residential house designer.

 

My program of choice (45 years experience) is Bentley MicroStation 2D CAD and I still keep an active license - actually was working today on a stanchion/handrail layout for the pilot house overhead on a FLETCHER class DD that I am building. Another modeler/vet/acquaintance of mine in Fairbanks, AK and I began a self-taught 3D program called Design Spark Mechanical - a free download and it leads to making your own 3D printed resin parts. He's W-A-Y ahead of me at this point and I'll admit that when you use a Cadillac CAD program for 40 odd years and then try to learn a free CAD program - well.....it's not apples to apples. However, I am regularly using metric measurements now so that's some progress on my part. I now make sure I double dimension all my CAD drawings.  I also kept my light table (18x24) as well as a small 18x24 table top drafting board w/parallel bar - the light table occupies the right hand side of my large drafting board and is proving its value all over again. 

 

I can honestly say that most CAD people are NOT draftsmen and either don't have the education/experience of board drafting to understand what a drawing is (or should be) about. Layout and composition (which back in the day was expected!!!) are basically unheard of today and I'll admit that CAD drawings lack the "artistic" originality that the old pen & ink and pencil/vellum drawings had. I spent a week at NARA II in 2016 doing research with some other ship modelers & researchers and found a set of full size (60" wide) drawings of USS PENNSYLVANIA drawn in 1932 after her modernization. I had them scanned and will refer to them when I get to building my 1940s era BB-38 (1:200 scale) - the craftsmanship & artistic beauty of those old drawing is alone worth having a copy of them. I knew one of the Long Beach Nav. Shipyard managers who oversaw modernizations of BB-62 (in 1968 when I was aboard and later in 1981), BB-63 in his many years of shipyard service - and his CAD drawings, while accurate, lacked any sense of artistic ability at all. They were drawn to serve a purpose, not to be enjoyed. Such is 20....whatever. But, CAD  is here and I embrace it - as long as the drawing shows what's to be represented and the drawing as a whole is professionally created and rendered. Sigh...asking a lot😪 these days....!

 

The 3D end of things is where it's all headed (unfortunately) - because $$$ rules everywhere, it's as simple as that. However, it doesn't rule in MY shop and I do things MY way!!! While my cohort in Alaska is designing 3D parts and printing them (some for me, as well!!) my efforts so far are not getting that far - so, I fall back on my old school handmade model parts, drawn up either on the board, from blueprints, or my 2D CAD drawings. I will pursue this because I have a brand new 3D printer sitting looking at me saying "Choose Me!!, Choose Me!!!" And also because in many cases, there simply aren't vendors selling all the various items we modelers need to build a scratchbuilt model. While tall ships, etc. are IMHO done best by old school methods, the steel ship is sort of hand in hand with more up to date techniques and abilities. A lot of my current model's parts will be 3D designed & printed in conjuction with the kit I started with and my scratchbuilt superstructure add-ons.

 

So, "YES, VIRGINIA - THERE ARE OLD SCHOOL DRAFTSMEN Still out here" - hope this gives you moral courage to continue your craft!

I have all my drafting equipment from the 70's and care for it like I would of anything of value. I find today's drawing equipment lacking in quality of construction compared to some of my German made equipment. I am also surprised as I said at how inexpensive some of the quality equipment from the past is being sold as used on eBay.  Its a dying field I suppose. 

I feel that drawings done on vellum/mylar in ink or pencil or blueprints from the same have more of an art quality vs. the sterile appearance of a CAD drawing. In school my main field of study was in the style of Queen Anne and Victorian architecture and those drawings can get quite busy. I too have collected blueprints of many different subjects over the years. I like the idea of knowing how much work it took to accomplish each drawing and as I have said I find them to be a form of art.

[Nirvana]

Had mechanical drafting on my schedule in 1983-1984 as an exchange student.

In our class room we had a computer station with two 5.25" drives and a 15" mono-chrome display, that we had to learn to work to. 
In my room, back home in Sweden (late 70's) I had a professional drafting table (hydraulic lift, and oil damped X-Y ruler), do I miss that table today.... yes!

Heavy and very stable 40 x 60 table. If I can find such I will buy it directly.

However, what I learned working with a 2H pen drafting in 2d and perspective has given me the knowledge for todays 2d and 3d computer drafting.
When SketchUp came out on the market I bought a license and have used ever since, since 2017 I learned to use Fusion360.

During the early 90's I worked for company converting 2d  pencil plan to CAD plans, this with AutoCad R11 probably the best version ever made.

Using pencil, eraser and paper for design today is a forgotten skill.

I even learned how to make exploded views on the paper.

Designers of today need to learn the basic using paper and pen, and creating models using clay or other material for displaying  ...... dread the day when the whole server system goes down and your deadline is tomorrow.

[mangulator63]

16 hours ago, AON said:

I starting draughting in high school, grade 9.  I had draughting classes for all four years.  Went to college for 3 more years and was exempted from engineering drawing (draughting).  On graduating I got a job in 1975 as a junior draughtsman, on a draughting board... and found out how much I didn't know.  After years of training I was a senior draughtsman.  We had tall sitting stools at our tables but rarely used them.    We also did "napkin sketches"... now there is a lost art.  One fellow made left and right gremlin foot print stamps (toes and all) from two erasers and when you came in in the morning you'd find graphite foot prints across your drawing sheet.  I did pencil and ink drawings back then, but in came computers with AutoCAD.   

 

I miss seeing the draughtman's dance:  doing a few lines, standing back to review the work, stepping forward to fix or add to it.

 

With these computers everything was 2D and I eagerly climbed on board.  No more graphite smudges on my drawings.  The other plus was everyone's lettering was crisp clear and identical.  It was beautiful until you had to revise someone else's drawing and found they used umpteen separate short lines when one long line would suffice.

 

I could never get use to sitting all day.  When the option came to use a standing table I jumped at that.  I would have loved to have a treadmill but the boss wouldn't spring for that.  So I went for a walk every day at my break instead.

 

Then came 3D and my pet peeve for numerous short lines was exponentially increased as the darned programmes don't believe in a single line anywhere.  Don't get me wrong, I love 3D draughting.  If you've ever had to clean an area for clarity, it is a nightmare.

 

So retirement came just at the right time for me.

 

Now I use the Standard version of DraftSight (annual subscription) for my love of draughting, and the free hobbyist version of Fusion 360 for my love of 3D modelling (and preparing files for 3D printing).  I had a 4 foot draughting table at home but sold that off years ago.

 

I loved SolidWorks but personally found AutoDesk Inventor was a better program... I simply cannot afford the expense in retirement.

I would clean all the under surfaces of my equipment daily.  I hated having to clean up smudges so I would make a complete corrected drawing then for making the final ink drawing I overlaid a clean sheet and would trace the work from top down so I would have less chance of smearing. 

[Rik Thistle]

Dr PR,

 

Today DesignCAD is considered to be a "hobby" program, and it lacks some of the bells and whistles of more expensive programs. But it is still a very capable 2D and 3D drawing program. Considering it costs about $100 with free bug fixes and technical support, and it has a great free user Forum where you can ask experienced users how to do things and solve problems, it is a tremendous bargain.

 

Thanks. I'll read up on DesignCAD...$100 is well within my 'budget' range 🙂

 

Richard

 

Later: I see DesignCAD is sold by TurboCAD, who I recognise.  Seems it is now $60 ...   DesignCAD 2D 2020 https://www.turbocad.com/designcad/designcad-2d.html    ...and it's not subscription!  I'll watch some YT videos on it.    

 

They also have a 3D package     DesignCAD 3D Max 2020 and TurboPDF v4 Bundle   https://www.turbocad.com/designcad/designcad-3d-max-2020-and-turbopdf-v4-bundle.html     at $200  which is kinda within the realms of 'well maybe, one day' budgeting. I'm assuming the two packages would use the same interface design....that is as important as anything.

 

 

 

[mangulator63]

12 hours ago, Dr PR said:

As a child I took 9 years of art classes outside the regular school system. In these I learned about perspective, viewpoints and such, all for the purpose of making pretty pictures - what is called "art."

 

But I have always had the ability to create 3D perspective drawings on paper. For me it was fun. I made straight As in geometry in junior high school - it all came naturally to me.  In college my freshman roommate was majoring in engineering, and he had mechanical drawing classes. Like so many people he had no concept of perspective. I would look at the three-view (front, side, top) 2D images and just draw the 3D perspective for him by hand.

 

Years later I learned how to use mechanical drawing tools for work on drafting boards. I read through some drafting books and it was all pretty obvious. Again, it came naturally. I have always loved to draw (and still do), whether it is an artistic picture, a botanical drawing or an engineering plan for a house or machined part.

 

Then along came CAD in the late 1980s. We used AutoCRUD at first and it was awful! What we called a VERY user unfriendly program. One day one of the engineers tried a CAD program called ProDesign. One look at the user interface (the best I have ever seen on any program) and AutoCRUD went into the trash. We have used the same program ever since, although the program has changed hands from company to company several times. Today DesignCAD is considered to be a "hobby" program, and it lacks some of the bells and whistles of more expensive programs. But it is still a very capable 2D and 3D drawing program. Considering it costs about $100 with free bug fixes and technical support, and it has a great free user Forum where you can ask experienced users how to do things and solve problems, it is a tremendous bargain.  Some of the "professional" CAD programs I have also used ($15,000 per seat with $1500 per year fees for technical support and access to user forums) can't do some of the things the $100 DesignCAD can do!

 

So I have experience from both sides. I still do preliminary "back of the napkin" sketches on paper with pencil. I love working with wood and building wood ship models. But the ability to rework a drawing in CAD without messy erasers and whiteout, or just redrawing the entire thing as you do on paper makes CAD the ONLY way to go for a large complex drawing. If you have any doubts, just ask yourself how you rescale the size of text on a paper drawing that was created with a Leroy set? You start over and create a new drawing sheet - all of it. In CAD you click on the text and say I want it 25% larger, and while we are at it let's use a different font. And I can take an old CAD drawing and modify it to create new things without starting over from scratch.

 

But is it art, and can you use it for ship modeling?  And do you need 3D?

 

First, some people will never understand 3D drawing. One of their greatest handicaps has been familiarity with 2D drawing techniques, and even 2D CAD. In 2D you draw an image of something in the real world. In 3D you create an entirely new world. It is not drawing, drafting or anything like it - it is modeling, as if you were creating something out of modeling clay, only it is virtual clay. Very few 2D drawing techniques apply to 3D, and 3D CAD programs have a different set of tools. Instead of a pencil you have to learn to use a virtual chisel or drill. I know a fellow who has been using a 3D CAD program for years and still hasn't developed an understanding of 3D. He just doesn't get it when it comes to turning 2D sketches into 3D models. He cannot create the 3D image in his mind, and you have to be able to do this for 3D CAD. I think it would be better if he didn't try! But I was doing 3D perspective drawing with pencil on paper in grade school and instantly understood 3D CAD. So you should keep this in mind before you take the 3D CAD plunge. Like any program there is a learning curve, but if you understand 3D modeling it will be a lot easier to learn how to use the tools in the program.

 

Can you use CAD for ship modeling? Someone commented it was good for creating new designs, and that certainly is true! But I have seen a number of CAD models of historical ships, even wooden sailing ships. There CAD has a great advantage in some ways. For example, after you have created a double sheave block you can replicate it endlessly and even resize the copies with a few clicks. With a true CAD system you can control dimensions precisely, and that is important if you are copying the design of an historical ship.

 

Is it art? That depends upon what you call art. What is the purpose of the model? Any model, either wood or CAD? Is a chair art? I have seen a few that were exquisitely crafted, but in the end they are chairs, with a functional use.

 

Is this art?

 

 

These are images of a CAD model of the USS Oklahoma City CLG-5 as it existed in the summer of 1971 (when I was aboard). It was created from the original 1959 blueprints with hundreds of modifications that were made over the years. It is a 1:1 scale model, 610 feet long in the CAD universe. You might rightly call me a "rivet counter" because I modeled all the nuts, bolts screws and rivets (everything) that were 3/16 inch (4.76 mm) across or larger in the real world. About 1/3 of the 1+ gigabyte file is nuts, bolts, rivets and screws (however, I did not model the threads - that would have made the file 50-100 gigabytes). There are several hundred thousand individual parts. It took 14 years to acquire the plans and photos of the ship and the equipment on board and convert them into the 3D CAD model.

 

It is not a CAD model of the ship like ship builders use. It only contains the exterior. None of the internal structure is included. But it is a model of an historical ship that was produced in 3D CAD. Perhaps I am boasting, but it may be the most accurate model of a ship ever created. However, it is certainly "too accurate" to be correct for its dimensions are  precise to thousandths of an inch, and for the most part the shipyards certainly didn't do that accurate work! And dimensions in the real world change with temperature and time.

 

So is it art? What is the purpose of a model? Can models be art? If the only way to truly appreciate the model is to view images, how is this different from looking at paintings of historical ships? Each of us has an opinion, and no one's opinions are any better than anyone else's' opinion. But I have enjoyed making this CAD model as much or more than any painting, photograph or wooden model I have made. It was fun!

 

If you are interested in this model and how it was built:

 

 

For a lot more more information about the ship see:

 

www.okieboat.com

 

 

I would have to admit that it is a great rendition and would probably look pretty nice if framed. But may I ask, would a drawing of the same look better? I believe if it were drawn out by hand it would allow for wider choices as to shading and depth of color, again this would have to be done by someone with training in art and drafting.

Years ago I found a set of blueprints for a ship. I was showing the prints to my brother in law and my sister and she just loved the sheet with the side profile of the ship.  So I had a copy made and I built a nice frame of red oak and matted the print had a piece of glass cut to fit and gave it to her as a gift.  Its been over 10 years and she still has it hanging in her living room.  I doubt if the same could be done with a CAD drawing.

 

Don't get me wrong,  I have nothing against CAD and I know this technology is needed and useful in today's manufacturing processes. 

 

I started this thread wondering if anyone was still drawing the old fashion way of using a drafting board. Plus I was wondering if others felt as I do when it comes to hand drawn vs. CAD. I was also wondering how others felt on the subject of the disappearance of Drafting, Wood/ Metal Shop classes from the public school system.

I'm pleased to see so many had the ability to have had the opportunity to have taken these classes and are still benifiting from these learned skills.

 

What I surprised about though is that there have been no responses to my added comment that when I went to school a semester of Home Economics Class was mandatory for both boys and girls. I'm sure there are a few out there who have been put into a situation where they find themselves single all of a sudden and I am certainly one of them. I was certainly grateful at the time to have been forced to take those classes.

 

Thanks everyone for your input.

Tim

[Rik Thistle]

Tim,

 

Firstly, yes, thank you for starting the thread...it's brought out a lot of useful knowledge and (somewhat similar) views on drafting/draughting from both sides of the pond and around the world.

 

Secondly, 'Home Economics Class was mandatory for both boys and girls' - in my secondary school it was optional IIRC, and not many lads took it. It probably would have been of great benefit if it had been mandatory for girls AND boys 😉

 

Richard

[mangulator63]

5 hours ago, Charles Green said:

 

These are only my observations on CAD and CAD users: 

 

The economics of my time as a hobbyist is blissfully void of the "How long?" and "How much?" demands of commercial production.  I can comfortably answer these questions with: "As long as it takes." and "I'll do with or without."   On the other hand, commercial economics demands these questions be addressed and in business, CAD gets the nod.  CAD is faster than work made with pencil or pen and ink.  In my hobbies, plans are made with pencil on paper, on a drafting table with an arm.  I have no practical experience nor personal interest in CAD.

 

Following high-school drafting classes and a 12 month, trade-school, mechanical-drafting program, I worked for a while employed drawing maps with pen and ink on vellum or starched linen.  I had at my disposal an enviable set of jewel-tipped Rapid-O-Graph pens.  The job was a pleasure and my maps were beautiful.  I was there when talk of transition to a computerized system began but no one knew what form it would take.  I consider myself lucky I moved on before the transition took place.  It amounted to an upheaval, the increased productivity of CAD put people out of work and I may have been one of them.  A Luddite view?  There is some of that, but I never went as far as tossing a sabot in the works.  I had moved on.

 

My shop was designed with space for a 40 x 60 inch, tilt-top drafting table with a Mutoh Model 6, straight-arm drafting-machine mounted on it.  I had gotten them at an auction some time before for $110.00.  I had to bid against one other guy who wanted them too, otherwise I could have gotten them for the opening bid of $20.00!  In the shop, I also provided space for a 40 x 60 inch, six-drawer flat-file.  Some people admire them.  Devotees of CAD usually view them with distain, as a waste of floor space.  Conversation then usually segues into the merits of their CAD system.  CAD adherents seem to carry  a sort of militant allegiance to what ever system they are invested in.  I detect their divergence away from pencil and paper carries another defensive element.  I get the impression the most vocal CAD adherents would be hard-pressed to draw a three view plan or and isometric view.  But with CAD, they don't have to know how.  That's a shame.

 

Done free-hand or with a straight-edge, drawing is a tactile art-form.  Drawings are an artistic extension of the object being made.  Drawings carry the imprint of the maker as much as the object they represent.  Even when drawn with a straight-edge,  drawings of one object made by different people will show characteristics of their makers.

 

2H, 4H, 6H, HB, B.  Does anyone care?

 

 

For the Season:

 

Excerpts from Robert Service's "The Trappers' Christmas Eve".

 

It's mighty lonesome-like and drear.

Above the Wild the moon rides high,

And shows up sharp and needle-clear

The emptiness of earth and sky;

No happy homes with love a-glow;

No Santa Claus to make believe:

Just snow and snow, and then more snow;

It's Christmas Eve, it's Christmas Eve.

 

Stripped to the buff and gaunt and still

Lies all the land in grim distress.

Like lost soul wailing, long and shrill,

A wolf-howl cleaves the emptiness.

Then hushed as Death is everything.

The moon rides haggard and forlorn...

"O hark the herald angels sing!"

God bless all men - it's Christmas morn.

 

 

 

  

 

     

 

            

I have a very similar set up as you. I have a Vemco Track Arm plus a Martin Parallel Bar. I like to use the bar and a adjustable triangle more for finer work. I built my current board out of 1" thick marine grade ply. I covered the drawing surface with rubber drafting board surface by Alvin. Even though my office is well lit I mounted two adjustable lights with full spectrum bulbs because I hate shadows from the tool edges while drawing. I too made a large flat file for drawings and paper storage it is also handy for 1:24000 topo maps. I have a tube storage rack I made also out of old mailing tubes I got for free from a friend.  I have found a few good deals on used equipment on eBay for next to nothing.  Like I mentioned in my first post, in the early 70's I would only use a Pentel. 05 mechanical drafting pencil that cost $25.00 each.  I hated the older lead holder type you had to sharpen all the time and they spread dust everywhere and you could easily ruin a drawing by knocking over the sharpener which was always on top your desk. I did lose one once, and I was lucky that the local art supply store had some in stock, remember this was before the internet and next day delivery.  I was really mad at myself because that was a lot of money for me back then. I still have that same second pencil I had to replace but recently found a new Pentel brand of mechanical pencils I really like, it's the Pentel Graph Gear 1000 line in .03 .05 .07 and .09 lead thickness.  I purchased two sets of all four and I have different lead hardness in the ones I use for drafting and for sketching.  The funny thing is that they cost under $12 each!  

 

I enjoyed drawing on vellum and mylar but did not like drawing on linen. Today I only use Vellum and for work ups and sketches I use Strathmore 400 or 500 series drawing paper. I use more of the vellum because I got a deal a few years back on 36" x 500' 20lbs. Rolls.  I made a jig that is attached to the underside of my board that allows me to pull out and cut to size what I need much like a paper towel holder. I find while most drafting equipment has gone down in cost the same cannot be said for quality paper. Today a 100 sheet pack of 24"x36" is going for over $250.00 more if you want preprinted borders. 

When I first started working as a technician I was on the road a lot and witnessed the closing of many different industrial offices and shops. I have seen hundreds of drafting tables and equipment tossed in dumpsters. I have seen old Bridgeport mills and lathes being crushed by a dozer so nobody could take anything home. It turned out that they had to destroy anything of value for some stupid insurance reason. In some instances I did luck out and pick up things I could use. I was lucky one time when they were knocking down a old school. I found these 12" wide 1 3/4" thick 25 ft. long locker room benches made out of I believe to be yellow pine. I loaded up my truck with 30 of these, I gave some away and used them in projects for years. I got a bunch of 7 ft high 4 ft wide library book shelves made out of solid maple from a job site and used them in my cabin. I guess if your lucky enough you can find good equipment in strange ways. The one thing I wish I would have had the forethought for was when they were closing down the metal and wood shops in the school districts around me that I had attended the auctions.  A friend told me he heard that they were pretty much giving the stuff away.

 

I have nothing against those who use CAD only for their drawings,  I just prefer paper and pencil vs. keystrokes and mouse clicks.   Like I said I did purchase  CAD software a few years back.  Unfortunately I was unable to get the hang of it.  I had also purchased a few architectural type software programs and those also were just not for me.  I truly believe because of my years of study in architectural , graphic art and all the art classes having put every thought down on paper I am just unable to get into using a computer program for drawing.  In the end I gave the software to a friend. 

[mangulator63]

4 hours ago, Nirvana said:

Had mechanical drafting on my schedule in 1983-1984 as an exchange student.

In our class room we had a computer station with two 5.25" drives and a 15" mono-chrome display, that we had to learn to work to. 
In my room, back home in Sweden (late 70's) I had a professional drafting table (hydraulic lift, and oil damped X-Y ruler), do I miss that table today.... yes!

Heavy and very stable 40 x 60 table. If I can find such I will buy it directly.

However, what I learned working with a 2H pen drafting in 2d and perspective has given me the knowledge for todays 2d and 3d computer drafting.
When SketchUp came out on the market I bought a license and have used ever since, since 2017 I learned to use Fusion360.

During the early 90's I worked for company converting 2d  pencil plan to CAD plans, this with AutoCad R11 probably the best version ever made.

Using pencil, eraser and paper for design today is a forgotten skill.

I even learned how to make exploded views on the paper.

Designers of today need to learn the basic using paper and pen, and creating models using clay or other material for displaying  ...... dread the day when the whole server system goes down and your deadline is tomorrow.

I know how you feel about the table you had in your room back in the 70's  I too had a favorite but unfortunately over time it became obsolete for my needs. My attachment was more sentimental due to my father having purchased it for me.

But since I was in need of a larger working surface I designed and built one to my needs and specifications.  I really took my time and worked out everything in order to have something "future proof" and stable.  You would be surprised at how by designing your own the benefits you receive over a store bought model that has limits. I know that the attached lighting  I designed on my board is like no other and a board of my build quality would cost ten times more if store bought. Your able to incorporate building materials in your own design that just are not available in office furniture made today.  

[Hank]

Tim wrote:

Quote

What I surprised about though is that there have been no responses to my added comment that when I went to school a semester of Home Economics Class was mandatory for both boys and girls. I'm sure there are a few out there who have been put into a situation where they find themselves single all of a sudden and I am certainly one of them. I was certainly grateful at the time to have been forced to take those classes.

Sorry I missed that, Tim - Well, back in the '60s (in NC) boys took shop, girls took home economics - just the way it was back then. I see your point however and that does make sense. Different times, etc. I did learn cooking from my mother and found years later this came in quite handy. Not to bore everyone to tears 😱, but I'll relate this short tale - Having been transferred to a DE in San Diego in 1968 I quickly learned that this would be temporary as this ship was going to transit to Seattle, WA as a USNR Station Ship and they had no billet for a PN3 (Personnelman). So, while we were transferring people here and there to reduce the crew, the cooks were also transferred leaving the galley without proper staffing. Well, I made the BIG mistake early one morning of putting on an apron and proceeding to fry my own eggs - and found myself doing commissary duty 3 times a day for the next week or so until my 2nd Class could arrange for a temporary CM1 to take over. Initially, I found it quite novel (as long as liver [yuk!!!🥴] was not on the menu and I didn't have to mess with it!! ). 3 weeks later I was stepping on the quarterdeck of USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) and reporting aboard (well YEAH!!). 

 

I think a further comment in the thread regarding typing classes was also somewhat overlooked - in today's CAD/CPU world, this is a necessity, not an elective decision to be made lightly. I was fortunate enough in college in 1965 to take a semester of typing - although my professor said I would never amount to anything as far as admin. abilities were concerned. I'm glad I've forgotten what her name was as she was dead wrong!! That typing class actually got me into the admin field in the Navy and later has provided me extremely useful CAD abilities ever since. I can (and do) type roughly 110 wpm and that's not exaggerating, simply a fact. And sadly, I know CAD guys still employed that are "Hunt & Peckers" when it comes to the typing aspect of CAD work (pun intended!!!).

 

Also (and finally🥱) I have seen some very artistically rendered 3D CAD industrial layouts of various utilities & facilities that could rival the best hand drawn architectural renderings out there - but, in the final analysis it is the individual who has to decide which medium to work in. I see benefits using both board and CAD depending on the need, ability of the artist/draftsman, and what is required.

 

Glad you brought all this up!!!

 

Hank

 

[druxey]

A few more random thoughts: 

 

When I went to purchase my first drafting board (wasit really nearly 50 years ago?) I looked at a 4' 0" one and was advised that 5' 0" would be better in the long run. Didn't that turn out to be too small! I 'upgraded' to a 6' 0" board a few years later. A big, solid vintage board it is - I still use it today,

 

My school (British, public) did not offer any technical courses whatsoever. So I taught myself the fundamentals and then more advanced work such as producing two and three point perspectives from floor plans and elevations. I became proficient enough to be engaged by architectural companies to produce renderings for them.

 

Later, as a theatrical designer, I channelled these skills into both working drawings for set construction as well as accurately render sets from an audience POV. It was gratifying to get feedback from construction and painting crews that my work was the easiest that they ever received to work from.

 

Season's greetings to all readers!

[alross2]

I drew with pens on mylar from the late 1970s up to a couple years ago.  Never had any classes and I'm sure some of the things I did would horrify a true draftsperson, but I got by.  Now, I use Corel Draw, which is the program used by our laser at BJ.  Before, I would draw up the parts by hand, then Bill would have to draw them in Corel, which was not an efficient way to do things.  I bit the bullet and learned Corel, which made my design work much more efficient and saved us a lot of time (and sometimes guesswork).  Now, I use it exclusively.  

 

Perhaps the feature I appreciate most about a computer drawing program is it's repeatability.  I'm working on a book which involves a lot of boat plans and the ability to draw a single detailed item which can be scaled and applied in multiples is great.  From a kit design standpoint, the ability to layer objects greatly improves one's ability to ensure that parts are going to fit.

 

On the downside, as many of you have mentioned, is the loss of identity of the draftsperson.  Used to be you could identify the drafter by the line work and lettering.  My late friend John Lambert's drawings were easily recognized by his style.  With the computer images, one usually has to include a constant within the drawing.  On my book drawings, I use color in the windows, even on a black and white image.

 

I still have all of my pens, templates, ducks, curves, and an unused roll of mylar, though, ... just in case. 

 

The MGB drawing is ink on mylar from 1980.  The MTB459 drawing is computer-generated and from 2020.

Edited December 25, 2020 by alross2

[mangulator63]

1 hour ago, druxey said:

A few more random thoughts: 

 

When I went to purchase my first drafting board (wasit really nearly 50 years ago?) I looked at a 4' 0" one and was advised that 5' 0" would be better in the long run. Didn't that turn out to be too small! I 'upgraded' to a 6' 0" board a few years later. A big, solid vintage board it is - I still use it today,

 

My school (British, public) did not offer any technical courses whatsoever. So I taught myself the fundamentals and then more advanced work such as producing two and three point perspectives from floor plans and elevations. I became proficient enough to be engaged by architectural companies to produce renderings for them.

 

Later, as a theatrical designer, I channelled these skills into both working drawings for set construction as well as accurately render sets from an audience POV. It was gratifying to get feedback from construction and painting crews that my work was the easiest that they ever received to work from.

 

Season's greetings to all readers!

I made extra money doing perspective drawings for businesses that were doing remodeling that needed city approval.  I took the floor plans and made different perspective drawings coloring them with markers or colored pencils designed for this type of work and would make as many different views as needed by the owner for presentation to the city. The city needed to have an idea of what the remodeled space would look like when finished and I would use large presentation panels to mount my drawings of the different views or angles to show the changes.  This was before you could use a computer and make slide presentations of CAD drawings. I cannot recall why the city officials required the perspective drawings,  but they did.

Because I was not incorporated and was still a student I was not paid at a professional rate but I still made decent money and enjoyed the work.

[mangulator63]

23 minutes ago, alross2 said:

I drew with pens on mylar from the late 1970s up to a couple years ago.  Never had any classes and I'm sure some of the things I did would horrify a true draftsperson, but I got by.  Now, I use Corel Draw, which is the program used by our laser at BJ.  Before, I would draw up the parts by hand, then Bill would have to draw them in Corel, which was not an efficient way to do things.  I bit the bullet and learned Corel, which made my design work much more efficient and saved us a lot of time (and sometimes guesswork).  Now, I use it exclusively.  

 

Perhaps the feature I appreciate most about a computer drawing program is it's repeatability.  I'm working on a book which involves a lot of boat plans and the ability to draw a single detailed item which can be scaled and applied in multiples is great.  From a kit design standpoint, the ability to layer objects greatly improves one's ability to ensure that parts are going to fit.

 

On the downside, as many of you have mentioned, is the loss of identity of the draftsperson.  Used to be you could identify the drafter by the line work and lettering.  My late friend John Lambert's drawings were easily recognized by his style.  With the computer images, one usually has to include a constant within the drawing.  On my book drawings, I use color in the windows, even on a black and white image.

 

I still have all of my pens, templates, ducks, curves, and an unused roll of mylar, though, ... just in case. 

 

The MGB drawing is ink on mylar from 1980.  The MTB459 drawing is computer-generated and from 2020.

IMO I like the ink on mylar over the CAD print. There is a fineness to it over the CAD work.

You are right about recognizing certain draftsmen by the lettering on blueprints. Its been 45 years and I still to this day when printing out something on a form or making a note, I will print my words out as if I am lettering a drawing.  I also have to absolutely have quad rule in any note book or journal I use, it's just habit I guess, or there is something really wrong with me.  My wife would go with the later. LOL

[alross2]

The MGB in my original post was drawn with 3x0 and 4x0 Rapidograph pens.  That particular print of the MTB drawing used .5 line weight,  The "hairline" weight is much nicer, but is very light, making it hard to see in a book.  The line weights are scalable and you can get an even finer line than "hairline" and mix line weights on the drawing.

 

Using a different drawing (1/96 original), in order:  hairline, color, and .5, all with black outline.

Edited December 25, 2020 by alross2
ADDED DWGS

[kurtvd19]

6 hours ago, mangulator63 said:

What I surprised about though is that there have been no responses to my added comment that when I went to school a semester of Home Economics Class was mandatory for both boys and girls

I was interested in both the home ex for cooking and shorthand.  Back in 1961 home ex was for females only.  No exceptions.  I wanted to learn shorthand so I could take notes in classes.  NO had to take typing before shorthand.  At the time I never envisioned a need to learn typing - if I knew then what I know now I would have taken it.  Back then girls were not allowed to take any shop classes except drafting.

What should be mandatory is a class on life skills.  How to make a budget.  How to balance a check book - realizing only dinosaurs actually write checks.  How to cook.  I had a friend who wound up damn near starving to death when he and his wife separated.  W/o carry out delivery he would have starved.

[alross2]

I went to a Catholic high school 61-65 and had the same problem.  While we didn't have any shop courses and were tracked, the college group wasn't allowed to take typing (business track).  I had to fight with them to allow me to take typing, arguing that college term papers had to be typed.  Took awhile, but they relented.

 

[Rik Thistle]

The MGB drawing is ink on mylar from 1980. 

The above is fit for framing and mounting on a wall. A very nice drawing and interesting subject matter. It would work well from A4 to A0 sizes.

 

Richard

[alross2]

The original mylar for MGB75 is in 1/32 scale on a 24" x 36" sheet.  We have a scanner at work that will take 36" wide sheets, so I might scan it some day.  This is sheet 2.

[Nirvana]

Yep, home economics was mandatory for me too, this in Sweden. They should have that on the schedule today along with shop education and mandatory for both girls and boys, essential surviving skills.

[Roger Pellett]

As part of the CAD-Drafting discussion, the effect on the professional model making world is interesting.  Before CAD, the easiest way to visualize a project in 3-D was to construct a physical model.  This resulted in some amazing work.  The Naval Architecture firm Gibbs and Cox built some remarkable models of Destroyers’ engineering spaces.  The Navy Museum at the Washington Navy Yard used to have on display a large scale model of a World War II LCI showing complete hull structure and interior spaces.  These were intended as serious design documents and construction aids, not office decoration.

 

When I began my civilian working career, our customers the major architect engineering firms, all had model shops.  In the mid 70’s Bechtel, the largest of these had a contract to build 5 or 6 duplicate nuclear power plants; the SNUPPS project.  They built a large collection of models, the most unusual was a construction model, literally several guys playing in a sandbox with scale model cranes.  At the completion of each phase they would call in the photographers to take pictures.  The idea was to provide contractors with an aid to reduce construction costs.  During one of my visits, they were installing the containment building roof; a very tall model crane dangling an orange peel shaped of plastic in the air.  Sadly, all but two of these plants were cancelled.

 

I visited another firm who was building a coal gasification plant.  The purpose of the visit was to determine the quantities and sizes of piping required. They had a huge scale model of the plant.  They also had scale tape measures that I have not seen since. Using the model instead of drawings, I was amazed at how quick and easy it was to finish what could have been a tedious job.  This was also my first exposure to miniature model maker power tools, a “Jarmac” disc sander and a miniature table saw of unknown make.

 

I retired when 3-D CAD was still in its infancy.  I assume that it has since rendered physical models used as engineering tools obsolete.

 

Roger

 

 

[kurtvd19]

One of my local club members is a member and former President of the Association Professional Model Makers www.modelmakers.org  and two others in the club were employed in the field.  They have taken a tremendous hit with the advent of 3D printing.  One is retired - not by choice but he got his SS within a few months.  The other two had shops with machinery and all.  One switched to a related production field - making mold boxes for castings and is doing fine.  The other still has his shop and the work he does for the Chicago area museums keeps him going.  But their prototype work died.  They both did display props for trade shows - all gone in 2020.

The APMM newsletters are a great resource.

[Rik Thistle]

Before CAD, the foolproof way to visualize a project in 3-D was to construct a physical model (aka Space Model).

 

I worked in avionics design. Once we had hardened down on the sizes of the LRU boxes, mounting racks, cable harnesses, cooling ducting etc (LRU = Line Replaceable Unit)  we would hand the draught layout drawings to the model making shop. They would make wooden versions with real connectors, and then we would fit the wooden models + harnesses, cooling etc into the actual aircraft. This never failed to reveal certain issues and conflicts with existing structure, access etc.

 

Model shops were a crucial part of the design process. And the people who worked in them were top notch.

 

Richard

[mangulator63]

9 hours ago, Hank said:

Tim wrote:

Sorry I missed that, Tim - Well, back in the '60s (in NC) boys took shop, girls took home economics - just the way it was back then. I see your point however and that does make sense. Different times, etc. I did learn cooking from my mother and found years later this came in quite handy. Not to bore everyone to tears 😱, but I'll relate this short tale - Having been transferred to a DE in San Diego in 1968 I quickly learned that this would be temporary as this ship was going to transit to Seattle, WA as a USNR Station Ship and they had no billet for a PN3 (Personnelman). So, while we were transferring people here and there to reduce the crew, the cooks were also transferred leaving the galley without proper staffing. Well, I made the BIG mistake early one morning of putting on an apron and proceeding to fry my own eggs - and found myself doing commissary duty 3 times a day for the next week or so until my 2nd Class could arrange for a temporary CM1 to take over. Initially, I found it quite novel (as long as liver [yuk!!!🥴] was not on the menu and I didn't have to mess with it!! ). 3 weeks later I was stepping on the quarterdeck of USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) and reporting aboard (well YEAH!!). 

 

I think a further comment in the thread regarding typing classes was also somewhat overlooked - in today's CAD/CPU world, this is a necessity, not an elective decision to be made lightly. I was fortunate enough in college in 1965 to take a semester of typing - although my professor said I would never amount to anything as far as admin. abilities were concerned. I'm glad I've forgotten what her name was as she was dead wrong!! That typing class actually got me into the admin field in the Navy and later has provided me extremely useful CAD abilities ever since. I can (and do) type roughly 110 wpm and that's not exaggerating, simply a fact. And sadly, I know CAD guys still employed that are "Hunt & Peckers" when it comes to the typing aspect of CAD work (pun intended!!!).

 

Also (and finally🥱) I have seen some very artistically rendered 3D CAD industrial layouts of various utilities & facilities that could rival the best hand drawn architectural renderings out there - but, in the final analysis it is the individual who has to decide which medium to work in. I see benefits using both board and CAD depending on the need, ability of the artist/draftsman, and what is required.

 

Glad you brought all this up!!!

 

Hank

 

Did you serve on the New Jersey?

I have been following a YouTube site run by the US New Jersey Museum. They put out really nice videos on different parts and functions of the ship along with other battleship information.

Years ago I made the Tamiya 1/350 US New Jersey and the US Missouri model kits and enjoyed them immensely.  I was a member of a local modeling club and I would always do as much research on the subject I was modeling.  I have many books on the Iowa Class Battleships of which I used when assembling the ship kits. Back then photo etching was a fairly new way of adding more detail.  If I remember correctly I think I used Gold Medal photoetch sets for both. 

I found the Iowa Class Battleships just fascinating in their complexity. They have such beautiful lines and those 16" guns really packed a punch. I have never had the opportunity to make a trip to any of the Iowa Class Battleships on display as museums. I hope some day I'll get that chance. I would really like to walk the length of Broadway in one of those big ships.

I recently watch a documentary on the Iowa Class on PBS I believe.  I was surprised how the Navy just mothballed them and then spent tons of money on modernization when they were needed. I read that their top speed was never published and very few photographs of their hulls below the water line were taken. I did read one account of a sailor who was sunning on the fantail when the ship was pushed to full speed. He wrote that there was a lot of vibration and the wash from the props left a wake as high as the deck. I would have really enjoyed witnessing such a spectacular event. 

When I modeled the Missouri I went with her WW2 layout and the Jersey in her modern layout. I also modeled a lot of armor and planes back then and took time to get weathered scale appearances on all my models. I was surprised at how well our naval ships appeared compared to those of other countries.  I could get into weathering with rust streaks and paint damage on Navy ships from other countries but I was hard pressed to find the same degree of wear in photographs of our ships. I have a nice line drawing of the Missouri somewhere,  I cannot recall where I got it though.  I think I read somewhere that Tamiya had upgraded their 1/350 line of ship models and now include photoetch and metal gun barrels.

I

 

[thibaultron]

About the comment about the servers going down, just before a deadline. True, but I have a story about regular drafting.

 

Many years ago at a company I worked for a draftsman was working late to finish a batch of drawings. He put the rolled up drawings in his waste basket, as he finished them, to save time. (I will admit that wasn't the best way to store them before filing.) That was fine until he went to the bathroom, and came back to find that the janitors had come through and emptied the trash! The drawings were destroyed before he found the janitors. He spent the entire weekend redrawing them.

[mangulator63]

4 hours ago, kurtvd19 said:

One of my local club members is a member and former President of the Association Professional Model Makers www.modelmakers.org  and two others in the club were employed in the field.  They have taken a tremendous hit with the advent of 3D printing.  One is retired - not by choice but he got his SS within a few months.  The other two had shops with machinery and all.  One switched to a related production field - making mold boxes for castings and is doing fine.  The other still has his shop and the work he does for the Chicago area museums keeps him going.  But their prototype work died.  They both did display props for trade shows - all gone in 2020.

The APMM newsletters are a great resource.

I have seen some complex designs being made on 3D printer. I seen a program where they were going on about the benefits of 3D printers for recreating parts that no longer exist for WW2 planes. So I can see some benefits,  but like everything today machines are eliminating jobs of craftsmen who have spent their lives perfecting their craft.

I was completely shocked when I first seen an solid walnut door that was completely carved by a CNC machine. The amount of detail was shocking. Again a skill that takes years and years to perfect is accomplished now by software and a machine, which since its a digital file can be replicated over and over producing exact copies.

It is funny how I can remember how expensive calculators were when they first came out. The tablet I'm using now has more computing power then the luner module had when they went to the moon!

[Nirvana]

21 minutes ago, mangulator63 said:

It is funny how I can remember how expensive calculators were when they first came out. The tablet I'm using now has more computing power then the lunar module had when they went to the moon!

Someone told long time ago that Texas Instrument TI-33 had more computing power than the lunar module, but I can be wrong.

[Hank]

Tim,

To answer your question, "Yes!" - I reported aboard 03 Sept. 68 a few days before NEW JERSEY left Long Beach, CA for her one and only WestPac cruise 1968-69. We spent 6 months on/off the gun line and then an extra 2 weeks lurking in the Sea of Japan after NK shot down a USAF EC-121.  I have been a member of their veterans group since 1990. I got you beat on the Tamiya 1/350 scale models - that kit first hit the market as a Life-Like kit (and in my opinion was a better kit in many ways - I've had/built 2 of them). I've built the Tamiya kits as well, but sold those in progress as I had no further interest in them. I got involved in the 1/200 scale Trumpeter MISSOURI kit in 2006 and spent 6 years converting it to USS NEW JERSEY 67-69 configuration. During that time I created quite a few CAD drawings in MicroStation to supplement the various modifications made to the ship that the kit did not encompass (it is as MO on surrender day, 1945). The Trumpeter kit, by the way, is far from correct as far as the hull is concerned and that was an exercise in reforming a misshaped hull - I did it one way, other modelers have done it in other fashions. However, the end product is this:

She is 53" LOA. Much of the superstructure and all masts/RADARs/antenna, etc. are scratchbuilt. I incorporated 3D parts from a couple vendors in addition to supplemental PE & Decking - I had the decking vendor (Pontos) create the wood decking to my drawn specifications which was modified from their MISSOURI deck parts. I also designed 2 PE sheets for parts and found a UK vendor to print them for me. During the 6 years of building this model I had the pleasure of correspondence and communications with the late Richard Landgraff who oversaw some of her 1968 final mods and also her complete 1981-82 refit - he knew the ship inside & out.

 

Back to drafting - here is my full size drafting table just after resurrection in my workshop earlier this year:

It is now covered up with FLETCHER Class plans, my CAD drawings, and a light table on the lower right. My shop construction is a complete topic of its own over on Workshop Equipment, etc. forum in case you're interested.

 

Hank

Edited December 26, 2020 by Hank

[Roger Pellett]

 

Another professional model makers story that I assume has been rendered obsolete by CAD:

 

Back in the 1960’s as a very junior naval officer assigned to the Naval Reactors Branch of the Atomic Energy Commission (Admiral Rickover’s Engineering Command) I was sent to the Electric Boat Shipyard in Groton CT for a month’s TDY to learn how submarines were built.

 

There was a section of the yard called “Siberia” that housed full sized wooden mockups (1:1 models) of the reactor compartments and in some cases the engine rooms of all of the classes of nuclear submarines.  An interesting feature of these models was the inclusion of the space to pull out the tube bundles of all heat exchangers and to remove the internals of all valves without requiring removal of nearby equipment.

Edited December 26, 2020 by Roger Pellett

[Hank]

Roger,

I can relate to your sub tale in that when drawing up HVAC & Mechanical equipment (boilers, chillers, heat exchangers, etc.) in new facilities layouts, we had to include repair/replacement space for pulling out tube bundles, etc. and believe it or not, quite a few corp. managers didn't want to allot this extra floor space because it cost more - they simply had no conception of what's required to maintain & operate this equipment - they were only interested in the bottom line.

Hank