On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:41:57 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/25/2022 8:30 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 7:58:39 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 4/24/2022 8:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:56:39 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> (chomp)
> >>>> But Tommy... Japan was not bombed into the stone age. In fact with the
> >>>> exception of fire bombing in Tokyo and the two "atom" bombs there was
> >>>> little bombing done in the rest of the country.
> >>>>
> >>>> And, I do know as I was there.
> >>>
> >>> I beg to differ somewhat.
> >>>
> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan>
> >>> "Much of Japan's industrial capacity was also destroyed by Allied
> >>> bombing. Over 600 major industrial facilities were destroyed or badly
> >>> damaged, contributing to a large decline in production."
> >>>
> >>> There were also raids on the coastal naval bases and some of the major
> >>> cities:
> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Areas_of_principal_Japanese_cities_destoyed_by_US_bombing.jpg>
> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Allied_naval_operations_off_Japan_during_July_and_August_1945_(edit_1).svg>
> >>>
> >>> The target committee had a difficult time finding worthwhile targets
> >>> for the atom bombs because most of the worthwhile (military) targets
> >>> had already been destroyed. The sole exception was Kyoto:
> >>> "Why was Kyoto removed as the prime target for the A-Bomb?"
> >>> <https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/why-was-kyoto-removed-as-the-prime-target-for-the-a-bomb/>
> >>> Kyoto was the first choice for bombing, but was saved by Henry L.
> >>> Stimson. The other cities were thoroughly bombed.
> >>>
> >>> I couldn't find anything on whether the US bombed the smaller towns
> >>> and fields. When Japan decentralized production to small home
> >>> workshops, they might have considered bombing. My guess(tm) is they
> >>> didn't. Bombing isn't very effect against low density targets.
> >>>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> After weeks of firebombing, Curtis LeMay complained in July
> >> 1945 there were not enough targets for his Army Air Corps.
> >>
> >> "Official estimates from the United States Strategic Bombing
> >> Survey determined at least 330,000 killed, 476,000 injured,
> >> 8.5 million people made homeless, and 2.5 million buildings
> >> destroyed. Almost half of 64 Japanese mainland cities were
> >> completely destroyed. The destruction was not lost on LeMay.
> >> He acknowledged that if the Japanese had won the war, he
> >> would have been tried as a war criminal.
> >>
> >> Later he would reveal that dropping the atomic bombs was
> >> totally unnecessary, given the level of destruction he had
> >> already waged on Japan. He said he only dropped them because
> >> of President Truman’s authority. After the war, Japan’s
> >> former Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe confirmed that the
> >> decision to surrender was based on the prolonged bombing
> >> wrought by General LeMay’s Marianas-based air forces. "
> >>
> >> https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/7-awesome-airpower-quotes-general-curtis-lemay/
> >> --
> >> Andrew Muzi
> >> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> >> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> >
> > Knives can kill people. One way is to cut a person multiple times all over their body and they will eventually lose enough blood to die. And suffer enormous pain from all the cuts. Other way a knife can kill someone is if you plunge it directly into a person's heart. Dead in 10 seconds or so.
> >
> > Did LeMay explain why he did not completely destroy the other half of the 64 mainland Japanese cities? Did he not have enough airplanes or bombs? Was he planning to start completely destroying them in mid August 1945? So that by December 1945 all 64 mainland Japanese cities would all be completely destroyed.
> >
> You are not innumerate. The phrasing in the quoted link may
> be inartful but of 64 major cities, half were utterly
> destroyed. The other 32 were drastically damaged and reduced.
>
> p.s. There were administration/general staff limits on
> bombing certain cities and areas such as all of Kyoto and
> the Imperial Palace district in Tokyo. There may well have
> been others of which I am unaware.

Russell who tries to pass himself off as an accountant shows yet again that he understands absolutely nothing about the world around us. The object of the bombing was not to kill people save to terrorize Tokyo and weaken the resolve of the Emperor. The entire idea of bombing is destroy the enemies ability to wage wars. You don't simply bomb cities but the industries that allow the enemy to wage war.

This is why the USA should be supplying the Ukraine with the aircraft and billions of dollar of weapons that Biden left to the Taliban when he deserted American in Afghanistan after ordered by Obama to "correct" Obama's mistake of not getting us out of Afghanistan within six weeks of election.

So the US in WW II bombed all of the industrial sites that made gunpowder, rifles, etc. Because they have already destroyed the industrial zones that made tanks and ships of war.

Now in 2022, we cannot respond to the danger that the Ukraine is in because we left all of those excess weapons in Afghanistan. Let's just say that Biden is not a Harry Truman and Truman was not in charge of the war.

On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 2:37:06 AM UTC-7, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> Am 26.04.2022 um 03:30 schrieb russell...@yahoo.com:
> > On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 7:58:39 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 4/24/2022 8:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:56:39 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> (chomp)
> >>>> But Tommy... Japan was not bombed into the stone age. In fact
> >>>> with the exception of fire bombing in Tokyo and the two "atom"
> >>>> bombs there was little bombing done in the rest of the
> >>>> country.
> >>>>
> >>>> And, I do know as I was there.
> >>>
> >>> I beg to differ somewhat.
> >>>
> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan> "Much of
> >>> Japan's industrial capacity was also destroyed by Allied bombing.
> >>> Over 600 major industrial facilities were destroyed or badly
> >>> damaged, contributing to a large decline in production."
> >>>
> >>> There were also raids on the coastal naval bases and some of the
> >>> major cities:
> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Areas_of_principal_Japanese_cities_destoyed_by_US_bombing.jpg>
> >>>
> >>>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Allied_naval_operations_off_Japan_during_July_and_August_1945_(edit_1).svg>
> >>>
> >>> The target committee had a difficult time finding worthwhile
> >>> targets for the atom bombs because most of the worthwhile
> >>> (military) targets had already been destroyed. The sole exception
> >>> was Kyoto: "Why was Kyoto removed as the prime target for the
> >>> A-Bomb?"
> >>> <https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/why-was-kyoto-removed-as-the-prime-target-for-the-a-bomb/>
> >>>
> >>>
> Kyoto was the first choice for bombing, but was saved by Henry L.
> >>> Stimson. The other cities were thoroughly bombed.
> >>>
> >>> I couldn't find anything on whether the US bombed the smaller
> >>> towns and fields. When Japan decentralized production to small
> >>> home workshops, they might have considered bombing. My guess(tm)
> >>> is they didn't. Bombing isn't very effect against low density
> >>> targets.
> >>>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> After weeks of firebombing, Curtis LeMay complained in July 1945
> >> there were not enough targets for his Army Air Corps.
> >>
> >> "Official estimates from the United States Strategic Bombing Survey
> >> determined at least 330,000 killed, 476,000 injured, 8.5 million
> >> people made homeless, and 2.5 million buildings destroyed. Almost
> >> half of 64 Japanese mainland cities were completely destroyed. The
> >> destruction was not lost on LeMay. He acknowledged that if the
> >> Japanese had won the war, he would have been tried as a war
> >> criminal.
> >>
> >> Later he would reveal that dropping the atomic bombs was totally
> >> unnecessary, given the level of destruction he had already waged on
> >> Japan. He said he only dropped them because of President Truman’s
> >> authority. After the war, Japan’s former Prime Minister Fumimaro
> >> Konoe confirmed that the decision to surrender was based on the
> >> prolonged bombing wrought by General LeMay’s Marianas-based air
> >> forces. "
> >>
> >> https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/7-awesome-airpower-quotes-general-curtis-lemay/
> >>
> >>
> --
> >> Andrew Muzi <www.yellowjersey.org/> Open every day since 1 April,
> >> 1971
> >
> > Knives can kill people. One way is to cut a person multiple times
> > all over their body and they will eventually lose enough blood to
> > die. And suffer enormous pain from all the cuts. Other way a knife
> > can kill someone is if you plunge it directly into a person's heart.
> > Dead in 10 seconds or so.
> >
> > Did LeMay explain why he did not completely destroy the other half of
> > the 64 mainland Japanese cities? Did he not have enough airplanes or
> > bombs? Was he planning to start completely destroying them in mid
> > August 1945? So that by December 1945 all 64 mainland Japanese
> > cities would all be completely destroyed.
> The UK "Bomber Harris" did that to Germany (not only the "64 cities" but
> also the few hundred "towns with industry"), and it did not lead to
> Germany surrendering a few months earlier.
>
> So in 1945, there was no known precedent that carpet bombing a country
> leads to surrender.

Rolf, why would you say that? It isn't as if historical facts are plainly recorded. German soldiers could not throw rocks at the allies who were closing in on all sides. The seizure of Russian industry was a long and hard failure and D-day used up the remaining stores of the German Army. Bravery in the face of the enemy accomplishes nothing without the ability to put a dent in advancing forces. The Germans didn't even have sufficient concentration of force to take the Bulge. And as Patton approached there was nothing in it but to flee.

On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 5:45:06 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 5:38:50 a.m. UTC-4, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> > Am 26.04.2022 um 04:07 schrieb russell...@yahoo.com:
> > > On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 8:41:57 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> > >> On 4/25/2022 8:30 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > >>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 7:58:39 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> > >>>> On 4/24/2022 8:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> > >>>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:56:39 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> (chomp)
> > >>>>>> But Tommy... Japan was not bombed into the stone age. In fact with the
> > >>>>>> exception of fire bombing in Tokyo and the two "atom" bombs there was
> > >>>>>> little bombing done in the rest of the country.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> And, I do know as I was there.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I beg to differ somewhat.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan>
> > >>>>> "Much of Japan's industrial capacity was also destroyed by Allied
> > >>>>> bombing. Over 600 major industrial facilities were destroyed or badly
> > >>>>> damaged, contributing to a large decline in production."
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> There were also raids on the coastal naval bases and some of the major
> > >>>>> cities:
> > >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Areas_of_principal_Japanese_cities_destoyed_by_US_bombing.jpg>
> > >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Allied_naval_operations_off_Japan_during_July_and_August_1945_(edit_1).svg>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The target committee had a difficult time finding worthwhile targets
> > >>>>> for the atom bombs because most of the worthwhile (military) targets
> > >>>>> had already been destroyed. The sole exception was Kyoto:
> > >>>>> "Why was Kyoto removed as the prime target for the A-Bomb?"
> > >>>>> <https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/why-was-kyoto-removed-as-the-prime-target-for-the-a-bomb/>
> > >>>>> Kyoto was the first choice for bombing, but was saved by Henry L.
> > >>>>> Stimson. The other cities were thoroughly bombed.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I couldn't find anything on whether the US bombed the smaller towns
> > >>>>> and fields. When Japan decentralized production to small home
> > >>>>> workshops, they might have considered bombing. My guess(tm) is they
> > >>>>> didn't. Bombing isn't very effect against low density targets.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> +1
> > >>>>
> > >>>> After weeks of firebombing, Curtis LeMay complained in July
> > >>>> 1945 there were not enough targets for his Army Air Corps.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> "Official estimates from the United States Strategic Bombing
> > >>>> Survey determined at least 330,000 killed, 476,000 injured,
> > >>>> 8.5 million people made homeless, and 2.5 million buildings
> > >>>> destroyed. Almost half of 64 Japanese mainland cities were
> > >>>> completely destroyed. The destruction was not lost on LeMay.
> > >>>> He acknowledged that if the Japanese had won the war, he
> > >>>> would have been tried as a war criminal.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Later he would reveal that dropping the atomic bombs was
> > >>>> totally unnecessary, given the level of destruction he had
> > >>>> already waged on Japan. He said he only dropped them because
> > >>>> of President Truman’s authority. After the war, Japan’s
> > >>>> former Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe confirmed that the
> > >>>> decision to surrender was based on the prolonged bombing
> > >>>> wrought by General LeMay’s Marianas-based air forces. "
> > >>>>
> > >>>> https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/7-awesome-airpower-quotes-general-curtis-lemay/
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Andrew Muzi
> > >>>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> > >>>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> > >>>
> > >>> Knives can kill people. One way is to cut a person multiple times all over their body and they will eventually lose enough blood to die. And suffer enormous pain from all the cuts. Other way a knife can kill someone is if you plunge it directly into a person's heart. Dead in 10 seconds or so..
> > >>>
> > >>> Did LeMay explain why he did not completely destroy the other half of the 64 mainland Japanese cities? Did he not have enough airplanes or bombs? Was he planning to start completely destroying them in mid August 1945? So that by December 1945 all 64 mainland Japanese cities would all be completely destroyed.
> > >>>
> > >> You are not innumerate. The phrasing in the quoted link may
> > >> be inartful but of 64 major cities, half were utterly
> > >> destroyed. The other 32 were drastically damaged and reduced.
> > >
> > > From what I have read of history, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were fairly "virgin" cities. Until being annihilated by Little Boy and Fat Man.
> > ISTR that these two cities were "preserved for demonstration" from May
> > 45 onwards or so.
> >
> > Rolf
> There was one Japanese fellow who left Hiroshima, after the atomic bomb hit, and arrived in Nagasaki just in time for the second atomic bomb. Miraculously, he survived both.

Those who were below the blast wave or outside the blast radius survived. Considering that those were cities there were very few in that class. Death to anyone is to be abhorred, but when you start a war you better have the ability to finish it. That is the lesson of history and Putin's posturing about nuclear war is simply that - posturing. He hasn't the ability to fight the allies and his military commanders know it. If he were to order such a suicide, they would kill him for God and country.

Am 26.04.2022 um 16:35 schrieb Tom Kunich:
> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 2:37:06 AM UTC-7, Rolf Mantel wrote:
>> Am 26.04.2022 um 03:30 schrieb russell...@yahoo.com:
>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 7:58:39 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 4/24/2022 8:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:56:39 +0700, John B.
>>>>> <sloc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> (chomp)
>>>>>> But Tommy... Japan was not bombed into the stone age. In
>>>>>> fact with the exception of fire bombing in Tokyo and the
>>>>>> two "atom" bombs there was little bombing done in the rest
>>>>>> of the country.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And, I do know as I was there.
>>>>>
>>>>> I beg to differ somewhat.
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan> "Much of
>>>>> Japan's industrial capacity was also destroyed by Allied
>>>>> bombing. Over 600 major industrial facilities were destroyed
>>>>> or badly damaged, contributing to a large decline in
>>>>> production."
>>>>>
>>>>> There were also raids on the coastal naval bases and some of
>>>>> the major cities:
>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Areas_of_principal_Japanese_cities_destoyed_by_US_bombing.jpg>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>>>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Allied_naval_operations_off_Japan_during_July_and_August_1945_(edit_1).svg>
>>>>>
>>>>> The target committee had a difficult time finding worthwhile
>>>>> targets for the atom bombs because most of the worthwhile
>>>>> (military) targets had already been destroyed. The sole
>>>>> exception was Kyoto: "Why was Kyoto removed as the prime
>>>>> target for the A-Bomb?"
>>>>> <https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/why-was-kyoto-removed-as-the-prime-target-for-the-a-bomb/>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>>>
Kyoto was the first choice for bombing, but was saved by Henry L.
>>>>> Stimson. The other cities were thoroughly bombed.
>>>>>
>>>>> I couldn't find anything on whether the US bombed the
>>>>> smaller towns and fields. When Japan decentralized production
>>>>> to small home workshops, they might have considered bombing.
>>>>> My guess(tm) is they didn't. Bombing isn't very effect
>>>>> against low density targets.
>>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> After weeks of firebombing, Curtis LeMay complained in July
>>>> 1945 there were not enough targets for his Army Air Corps.
>>>>
>>>> "Official estimates from the United States Strategic Bombing
>>>> Survey determined at least 330,000 killed, 476,000 injured, 8.5
>>>> million people made homeless, and 2.5 million buildings
>>>> destroyed. Almost half of 64 Japanese mainland cities were
>>>> completely destroyed. The destruction was not lost on LeMay. He
>>>> acknowledged that if the Japanese had won the war, he would
>>>> have been tried as a war criminal.
>>>>
>>>> Later he would reveal that dropping the atomic bombs was
>>>> totally unnecessary, given the level of destruction he had
>>>> already waged on Japan. He said he only dropped them because of
>>>> President Truman’s authority. After the war, Japan’s former
>>>> Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe confirmed that the decision to
>>>> surrender was based on the prolonged bombing wrought by General
>>>> LeMay’s Marianas-based air forces. "
>>>>
>>>> https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/7-awesome-airpower-quotes-general-curtis-lemay/
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
--
>>>> Andrew Muzi <www.yellowjersey.org/> Open every day since 1
>>>> April, 1971
>>>
>>> Knives can kill people. One way is to cut a person multiple
>>> times all over their body and they will eventually lose enough
>>> blood to die. And suffer enormous pain from all the cuts. Other
>>> way a knife can kill someone is if you plunge it directly into a
>>> person's heart. Dead in 10 seconds or so.
>>>
>>> Did LeMay explain why he did not completely destroy the other
>>> half of the 64 mainland Japanese cities? Did he not have enough
>>> airplanes or bombs? Was he planning to start completely
>>> destroying them in mid August 1945? So that by December 1945 all
>>> 64 mainland Japanese cities would all be completely destroyed.
>> The UK "Bomber Harris" did that to Germany (not only the "64
>> cities" but also the few hundred "towns with industry"), and it did
>> not lead to Germany surrendering a few months earlier.
>>
>> So in 1945, there was no known precedent that carpet bombing a
>> country leads to surrender.
>
> Rolf, why would you say that? It isn't as if historical facts are
> plainly recorded. German soldiers could not throw rocks at the allies
> who were closing in on all sides. The seizure of Russian industry was
> a long and hard failure and D-day used up the remaining stores of the
> German Army. Bravery in the face of the enemy accomplishes nothing
> without the ability to put a dent in advancing forces. The Germans
> didn't even have sufficient concentration of force to take the Bulge.
> And as Patton approached there was nothing in it but to flee.

The historical facts are:
1) Germany had no chance in WW2 once the industrial base was destroyed
2) Germany did not surrender until the troops on the ground had set foot
on more than 70% of the country.

The USA wanted to avoid and endless "island war" repeating the expensive
Okinawa battle. From the historical facts it was clear that carpet
bombing would not avoid the need for an invasion to Kyushu.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki did lead to Japan's surrender with lout the need
to set foot on the Japanese main land.

Rolf

On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 8:18:46 AM UTC-7, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> Am 26.04.2022 um 16:35 schrieb Tom Kunich:
> > On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 2:37:06 AM UTC-7, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> >> Am 26.04.2022 um 03:30 schrieb russell...@yahoo.com:
> >>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 7:58:39 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>> On 4/24/2022 8:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:56:39 +0700, John B.
> >>>>> <sloc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (chomp)
> >>>>>> But Tommy... Japan was not bombed into the stone age. In
> >>>>>> fact with the exception of fire bombing in Tokyo and the
> >>>>>> two "atom" bombs there was little bombing done in the rest
> >>>>>> of the country.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And, I do know as I was there.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I beg to differ somewhat.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan> "Much of
> >>>>> Japan's industrial capacity was also destroyed by Allied
> >>>>> bombing. Over 600 major industrial facilities were destroyed
> >>>>> or badly damaged, contributing to a large decline in
> >>>>> production."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There were also raids on the coastal naval bases and some of
> >>>>> the major cities:
> >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Areas_of_principal_Japanese_cities_destoyed_by_US_bombing.jpg>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>
> >>>>>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Allied_naval_operations_off_Japan_during_July_and_August_1945_(edit_1).svg>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The target committee had a difficult time finding worthwhile
> >>>>> targets for the atom bombs because most of the worthwhile
> >>>>> (military) targets had already been destroyed. The sole
> >>>>> exception was Kyoto: "Why was Kyoto removed as the prime
> >>>>> target for the A-Bomb?"
> >>>>> <https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/why-was-kyoto-removed-as-the-prime-target-for-the-a-bomb/>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>
> >>>>>
> Kyoto was the first choice for bombing, but was saved by Henry L.
> >>>>> Stimson. The other cities were thoroughly bombed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I couldn't find anything on whether the US bombed the
> >>>>> smaller towns and fields. When Japan decentralized production
> >>>>> to small home workshops, they might have considered bombing.
> >>>>> My guess(tm) is they didn't. Bombing isn't very effect
> >>>>> against low density targets.
> >>>>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>> After weeks of firebombing, Curtis LeMay complained in July
> >>>> 1945 there were not enough targets for his Army Air Corps.
> >>>>
> >>>> "Official estimates from the United States Strategic Bombing
> >>>> Survey determined at least 330,000 killed, 476,000 injured, 8.5
> >>>> million people made homeless, and 2.5 million buildings
> >>>> destroyed. Almost half of 64 Japanese mainland cities were
> >>>> completely destroyed. The destruction was not lost on LeMay. He
> >>>> acknowledged that if the Japanese had won the war, he would
> >>>> have been tried as a war criminal.
> >>>>
> >>>> Later he would reveal that dropping the atomic bombs was
> >>>> totally unnecessary, given the level of destruction he had
> >>>> already waged on Japan. He said he only dropped them because of
> >>>> President Truman’s authority. After the war, Japan’s former
> >>>> Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe confirmed that the decision to
> >>>> surrender was based on the prolonged bombing wrought by General
> >>>> LeMay’s Marianas-based air forces. "
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/7-awesome-airpower-quotes-general-curtis-lemay/
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>>>
> --
> >>>> Andrew Muzi <www.yellowjersey.org/> Open every day since 1
> >>>> April, 1971
> >>>
> >>> Knives can kill people. One way is to cut a person multiple
> >>> times all over their body and they will eventually lose enough
> >>> blood to die. And suffer enormous pain from all the cuts. Other
> >>> way a knife can kill someone is if you plunge it directly into a
> >>> person's heart. Dead in 10 seconds or so.
> >>>
> >>> Did LeMay explain why he did not completely destroy the other
> >>> half of the 64 mainland Japanese cities? Did he not have enough
> >>> airplanes or bombs? Was he planning to start completely
> >>> destroying them in mid August 1945? So that by December 1945 all
> >>> 64 mainland Japanese cities would all be completely destroyed.
> >> The UK "Bomber Harris" did that to Germany (not only the "64
> >> cities" but also the few hundred "towns with industry"), and it did
> >> not lead to Germany surrendering a few months earlier.
> >>
> >> So in 1945, there was no known precedent that carpet bombing a
> >> country leads to surrender.
> >
> > Rolf, why would you say that? It isn't as if historical facts are
> > plainly recorded. German soldiers could not throw rocks at the allies
> > who were closing in on all sides. The seizure of Russian industry was
> > a long and hard failure and D-day used up the remaining stores of the
> > German Army. Bravery in the face of the enemy accomplishes nothing
> > without the ability to put a dent in advancing forces. The Germans
> > didn't even have sufficient concentration of force to take the Bulge.
> > And as Patton approached there was nothing in it but to flee.
> The historical facts are:
> 1) Germany had no chance in WW2 once the industrial base was destroyed
> 2) Germany did not surrender until the troops on the ground had set foot
> on more than 70% of the country.
>
> The USA wanted to avoid and endless "island war" repeating the expensive
> Okinawa battle. From the historical facts it was clear that carpet
> bombing would not avoid the need for an invasion to Kyushu.
> Hiroshima and Nagasaki did lead to Japan's surrender with lout the need
> to set foot on the Japanese main land.

You are quite correct, MacArthur was itching for a long and protracted war on the islands of Japan. Reportedly he was livid when the Emperor surrendered after Nagasaki. The bombing was supposedly carried out under the advice of General Hap Arnold who understood the Emperor a great deal better than MacArthur.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 05:45:04 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
<i_am_cycle_pathic@yahoo.ca> wrote:

>There was one Japanese fellow who left Hiroshima, after the atomic bomb hit, and arrived in Nagasaki just in time for the second atomic bomb. Miraculously, he survived both.
>Cheers

Trivia: There were perhaps 200 present at both atomic bombings.
"'TWICE BOMBED, TWICE SURVIVED' FILM TO BE SCREEN JANUARY 21 (2012)"
<https://www.janm.org/press/release/twice-bombed-twice-survived-film-be-screen-january-21>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 4/26/2022 12:28 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 05:45:04 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
> <i_am_cycle_pathic@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>> There was one Japanese fellow who left Hiroshima, after the atomic bomb hit, and arrived in Nagasaki just in time for the second atomic bomb. Miraculously, he survived both.
>> Cheers
>
> Trivia: There were perhaps 200 present at both atomic bombings.
> "'TWICE BOMBED, TWICE SURVIVED' FILM TO BE SCREEN JANUARY 21 (2012)"
> <https://www.janm.org/press/release/twice-bombed-twice-survived-film-be-screen-january-21>
>
>

Yes, all sorts of anomalies. Weller interviewed a group of
US POWs who were near the Nagasaki blast center digging a
ditch. They survived.

https://www.alibris.com/booksearch?mtype=B&keyword=first+into+nagasaki&hs.x=0&hs.y=0

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 4/21/2022 6:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>
> Reg Harris not only was World Champion Sprinter in 1947, he set the 1000
> meter record in 1953 on his Reynolds 531 Raleigh and then used the same
> bicycle and his own same old legs to win British Sprint Gold in 1974 (so
> much for 'steel deterioration').

Ah yes! In the old Usenet days, there were plenty of threads arguing
about "steel frames going soft." Or not.

I recall arguments about the bike's hubs supporting loads by hanging
from the top spokes. Or not.

About the danger of hanging a bike by its wheel. Or not.

About dogs chasing cyclists because of the noise emanated by spokes
cutting through the wind. Or not.

It might be fun to peruse a long list of old debates that have gone away.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 07:18:58 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:16:43 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/25/2022 7:36 PM, John B. wrote:
>> > On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:53:30 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>> > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:10:30 PM UTC-7, Lou Holtman wrote:
>> >>> On Thursday, April 21, 2022 at 8:21:33 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> >>>> "Stainless steel is too brittle for high-strength applications..."
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I'm sure there are countless engineers who would be surprised to read
>> >>>> that blanket statement. They might ask "_Which_ stainless steel? How
>> >>>> brittle, under what conditions? What sort of stresses qualify as
>> >>>> 'high-strength'? What sort of applications?"
>> >>>>
>> >>>> https://www.renehersecycles.com/just-a-bunch-of-bolts/
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Jan Heine has some good idea, but IMO he often goes off into the weeds.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I can't remember the last time I broke a stainless steel fastener on a
>> >>>> bike. It may have never happened.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> - Frank Krygowski
>> >>> Pff... as if the bolts on a bicycle are in the high end application category.
>> >>> I read the article and what I came up with is 'what a snob...' YMMV.
>> >>
>> >> Steel is iron with carbon in it. It was originated simply by smelting iron in coal fired ovens. Crying about chromium or molybdenum added to the mixture make pretty minor improvements. (for instance; adding chromium doesn't improve the strength but the hardness or rigidity of the material. Stainless is largely iron with a larger percentage of other materials such as aluminum, nickel, vanadium etc. Stainless is a material you HAVE to know how to work. Overheating and quenching like you would some steels causes it to crystalize and become brittle. You can see this has occurred in the manufacture of screws in particular since they turn these things out so rapidly that they can overheat the material and then it can be quenched coming off of the tool because they are in an oil bath, Then when you tighten the bolt it simply breaks. Its been far too long since I dealt with this but I seem to remember that you can heat it up to something like a thousand degrees F and let it stay there
f >> or
>> >> some time and then allow it to air cool and it forms a different sort of austenitic structure more like steel and so it is much stronger.
>> >
>> > https://www.theworldmaterial.com/aisi-316-ss316-stainless-steel-properties-composition/#Hardening
>> > "Type 316 SS cannot be hardened by heat treating"
>> >
>> OK, fine.
>> But any claim about 'stainless' generally is pointless- it's
>> a big group of wildly different materials. Some examples:
>>
>> https://www.mori2a.com/en/dont-stop/news/prodottiproducts/stainless-steel-200-series-in-cr-mn-a-safe-alternative-to-304/
>>
>> https://www.searchsteel.info/2011/03/stainless-technical-standards-and.html
>
>As I've said before, it is impossible to say absolutely anything without that moron John Googling away and finding an exception to a rule and then passing it off as the rule rather than the exception. He is like having a parrot around the house that only knows a limited number of words. Hey John, I guess I just gave you the bird.

Well, Tommy, I served an apprenticeship as a Machinist and "had my
papers" as a Journeyman Machinist by the time I completed High School.
Now tell us your qualifications,

And of course I "look things up" as does every other competent
individual. The Machinery's Handbook, for example, has more then 4,000
pages of data (the Christian Bible has about 1,500 pages) and is
commonly used as a reference in the metal working trades.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 9:28:31 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:41:57 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> > On 4/25/2022 8:30 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 7:58:39 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> > >> On 4/24/2022 8:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> > >>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:56:39 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> (chomp)
> > >>>> But Tommy... Japan was not bombed into the stone age. In fact with the
> > >>>> exception of fire bombing in Tokyo and the two "atom" bombs there was
> > >>>> little bombing done in the rest of the country.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> And, I do know as I was there.
> > >>>
> > >>> I beg to differ somewhat.
> > >>>
> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan>
> > >>> "Much of Japan's industrial capacity was also destroyed by Allied
> > >>> bombing. Over 600 major industrial facilities were destroyed or badly
> > >>> damaged, contributing to a large decline in production."
> > >>>
> > >>> There were also raids on the coastal naval bases and some of the major
> > >>> cities:
> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Areas_of_principal_Japanese_cities_destoyed_by_US_bombing.jpg>
> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Allied_naval_operations_off_Japan_during_July_and_August_1945_(edit_1).svg>
> > >>>
> > >>> The target committee had a difficult time finding worthwhile targets
> > >>> for the atom bombs because most of the worthwhile (military) targets
> > >>> had already been destroyed. The sole exception was Kyoto:
> > >>> "Why was Kyoto removed as the prime target for the A-Bomb?"
> > >>> <https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/why-was-kyoto-removed-as-the-prime-target-for-the-a-bomb/>
> > >>> Kyoto was the first choice for bombing, but was saved by Henry L.
> > >>> Stimson. The other cities were thoroughly bombed.
> > >>>
> > >>> I couldn't find anything on whether the US bombed the smaller towns
> > >>> and fields. When Japan decentralized production to small home
> > >>> workshops, they might have considered bombing. My guess(tm) is they
> > >>> didn't. Bombing isn't very effect against low density targets.
> > >>>
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> After weeks of firebombing, Curtis LeMay complained in July
> > >> 1945 there were not enough targets for his Army Air Corps.
> > >>
> > >> "Official estimates from the United States Strategic Bombing
> > >> Survey determined at least 330,000 killed, 476,000 injured,
> > >> 8.5 million people made homeless, and 2.5 million buildings
> > >> destroyed. Almost half of 64 Japanese mainland cities were
> > >> completely destroyed. The destruction was not lost on LeMay.
> > >> He acknowledged that if the Japanese had won the war, he
> > >> would have been tried as a war criminal.
> > >>
> > >> Later he would reveal that dropping the atomic bombs was
> > >> totally unnecessary, given the level of destruction he had
> > >> already waged on Japan. He said he only dropped them because
> > >> of President Truman’s authority. After the war, Japan’s
> > >> former Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe confirmed that the
> > >> decision to surrender was based on the prolonged bombing
> > >> wrought by General LeMay’s Marianas-based air forces. "
> > >>
> > >> https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/7-awesome-airpower-quotes-general-curtis-lemay/
> > >> --
> > >> Andrew Muzi
> > >> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> > >> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> > >
> > > Knives can kill people. One way is to cut a person multiple times all over their body and they will eventually lose enough blood to die. And suffer enormous pain from all the cuts. Other way a knife can kill someone is if you plunge it directly into a person's heart. Dead in 10 seconds or so.
> > >
> > > Did LeMay explain why he did not completely destroy the other half of the 64 mainland Japanese cities? Did he not have enough airplanes or bombs? Was he planning to start completely destroying them in mid August 1945? So that by December 1945 all 64 mainland Japanese cities would all be completely destroyed.
> > >
> > You are not innumerate. The phrasing in the quoted link may
> > be inartful but of 64 major cities, half were utterly
> > destroyed. The other 32 were drastically damaged and reduced.
> >
> > p.s. There were administration/general staff limits on
> > bombing certain cities and areas such as all of Kyoto and
> > the Imperial Palace district in Tokyo. There may well have
> > been others of which I am unaware.
> Russell who tries to pass himself off as an accountant shows yet again that he understands absolutely nothing about the world around us. The object of the bombing was not to kill people save to terrorize Tokyo and weaken the resolve of the Emperor. The entire idea of bombing is destroy the enemies ability to wage wars. You don't simply bomb cities but the industries that allow the enemy to wage war.
>

Yes bombing Tokyo was an act of terror against civilians. Not a military target. That has been a part of war since the beginning. Your buddy Putin is bombing a maternity hospital in Ukraine. Pregnant women aren't very good soldiers. No Tommy, the idea of bombing is not only to destroy the ability to wage war. Militaries do bomb cities filled with non combatants. And round up and shoot non soldiers too. War is never ever just soldiers shooting soldiers. Tommy, you should read some history books and learn something. It would help you immensely to have even a little knowledge.

> This is why the USA should be supplying the Ukraine with the aircraft and billions of dollar of weapons that Biden left to the Taliban when he deserted American in Afghanistan after ordered by Obama to "correct" Obama's mistake of not getting us out of Afghanistan within six weeks of election.
>

Tommy, did you forget who was president of the USA from January 20, 2017 until January 20, 2021? Why didn't your hero Donald get the USA out of Afghanistan? He had 4 years to do the job. 4 years. Was he too busy playing golf to devote anytime to that immaterial problem. Before 2016, Trump promised to bring troops home and stop foreign wars. And he talked about it for Afghanistan for four years, but didn't do it.

> So the US in WW II bombed all of the industrial sites that made gunpowder, rifles, etc. Because they have already destroyed the industrial zones that made tanks and ships of war.
>
> Now in 2022, we cannot respond to the danger that the Ukraine is in because we left all of those excess weapons in Afghanistan. Let's just say that Biden is not a Harry Truman and Truman was not in charge of the war.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2021/08/30/what-military-equipment-left-behind-afghanistan-us/5658895001/
Article says armored anti landmine trucks and Humvees and 73 aircraft (planes and helicopters). US also left behind some "Counter-rocket, artillery and mortar systems". These would have been useful in Ukraine.

The story says:
"The U.S. military likely abandoned tens of millions of dollars’ worth of aircraft, armored vehicles and sophisticated defensive systems in the rush to leave the airport in Kabul safely."

Tommy, millions, NOT billions as your lie above states. Again Tommy, millions, not billions. There is a one thousand times difference between millions and billions. One thousand times difference. I am aware you do not have an education so this is impossible for you to comprehend.

Now, as for responding to the war in Ukraine with Russia, the USA, Joe Biden, is providing weapons to Ukraine. Even though some were left and abandoned in Afghanistan. The USA has lots of weapons to send lots of places. No shortage. Just announced were some howitzers going to Ukraine. Previously we, and UK, provided anti tank and anti plane missiles. And we, and other former Soviet countries, are providing rifles and bullets to Ukraine.

And lest you forget, your buddy Trump in 2019 withheld military aid to Ukraine. Funny how you and the Republicans in congress forget that fact.

https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/news/trump-who-was-impeached-for-withholding-nearly-400-million-in-military-aid-from-ukraine-said-this-deadly-ukraine-situation-would-never-have-happened-if-he-were-in-office/articleshow/89817109.cms
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/16/trump-administration-broke-law-in-withholding-ukraine-aid.html
https://publicintegrity.org/national-security/timeline-how-trump-withheld-ukraine-aid/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trump-ordered-hold-on-military-aid-days-before-calling-ukrainian-president-officials-say/2019/09/23/df93a6ca-de38-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/28/trump-ukraine-military-aid-russia-1689531
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/24/20881505/donald-trump-withhold-aid-ukraine-timeline-whistleblower
https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/15/trump-resisted-ukraine-sale-javelin-antitank-missile/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump%E2%80%93Ukraine_scandal

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 05:45:04 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
<i_am_cycle_pathic@yahoo.ca> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 5:38:50 a.m. UTC-4, Rolf Mantel wrote:
>> Am 26.04.2022 um 04:07 schrieb russell...@yahoo.com:
>> > On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 8:41:57 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> On 4/25/2022 8:30 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 7:58:39 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>> >>>> On 4/24/2022 8:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> >>>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:56:39 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> (chomp)
>> >>>>>> But Tommy... Japan was not bombed into the stone age. In fact with the
>> >>>>>> exception of fire bombing in Tokyo and the two "atom" bombs there was
>> >>>>>> little bombing done in the rest of the country.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> And, I do know as I was there.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I beg to differ somewhat.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan>
>> >>>>> "Much of Japan's industrial capacity was also destroyed by Allied
>> >>>>> bombing. Over 600 major industrial facilities were destroyed or badly
>> >>>>> damaged, contributing to a large decline in production."
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> There were also raids on the coastal naval bases and some of the major
>> >>>>> cities:
>> >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Areas_of_principal_Japanese_cities_destoyed_by_US_bombing.jpg>
>> >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Allied_naval_operations_off_Japan_during_July_and_August_1945_(edit_1).svg>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The target committee had a difficult time finding worthwhile targets
>> >>>>> for the atom bombs because most of the worthwhile (military) targets
>> >>>>> had already been destroyed. The sole exception was Kyoto:
>> >>>>> "Why was Kyoto removed as the prime target for the A-Bomb?"
>> >>>>> <https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/why-was-kyoto-removed-as-the-prime-target-for-the-a-bomb/>
>> >>>>> Kyoto was the first choice for bombing, but was saved by Henry L.
>> >>>>> Stimson. The other cities were thoroughly bombed.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I couldn't find anything on whether the US bombed the smaller towns
>> >>>>> and fields. When Japan decentralized production to small home
>> >>>>> workshops, they might have considered bombing. My guess(tm) is they
>> >>>>> didn't. Bombing isn't very effect against low density targets.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> +1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> After weeks of firebombing, Curtis LeMay complained in July
>> >>>> 1945 there were not enough targets for his Army Air Corps.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "Official estimates from the United States Strategic Bombing
>> >>>> Survey determined at least 330,000 killed, 476,000 injured,
>> >>>> 8.5 million people made homeless, and 2.5 million buildings
>> >>>> destroyed. Almost half of 64 Japanese mainland cities were
>> >>>> completely destroyed. The destruction was not lost on LeMay.
>> >>>> He acknowledged that if the Japanese had won the war, he
>> >>>> would have been tried as a war criminal.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Later he would reveal that dropping the atomic bombs was
>> >>>> totally unnecessary, given the level of destruction he had
>> >>>> already waged on Japan. He said he only dropped them because
>> >>>> of President Truman’s authority. After the war, Japan’s
>> >>>> former Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe confirmed that the
>> >>>> decision to surrender was based on the prolonged bombing
>> >>>> wrought by General LeMay’s Marianas-based air forces. "
>> >>>>
>> >>>> https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/7-awesome-airpower-quotes-general-curtis-lemay/
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Andrew Muzi
>> >>>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> >>>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>> >>>
>> >>> Knives can kill people. One way is to cut a person multiple times all over their body and they will eventually lose enough blood to die. And suffer enormous pain from all the cuts. Other way a knife can kill someone is if you plunge it directly into a person's heart. Dead in 10 seconds or so.
>> >>>
>> >>> Did LeMay explain why he did not completely destroy the other half of the 64 mainland Japanese cities? Did he not have enough airplanes or bombs? Was he planning to start completely destroying them in mid August 1945? So that by December 1945 all 64 mainland Japanese cities would all be completely destroyed.
>> >>>
>> >> You are not innumerate. The phrasing in the quoted link may
>> >> be inartful but of 64 major cities, half were utterly
>> >> destroyed. The other 32 were drastically damaged and reduced.
>> >
>> > From what I have read of history, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were fairly "virgin" cities. Until being annihilated by Little Boy and Fat Man.
>> ISTR that these two cities were "preserved for demonstration" from May
>> 45 onwards or so.
>>
>> Rolf
>
>There was one Japanese fellow who left Hiroshima, after the atomic bomb hit, and arrived in Nagasaki just in time for the second atomic bomb. Miraculously, he survived both.
>
>Cheers

I believe that Japanese sources estimate that about 30% of the
population was killed by the blast from the Hiroshima bomb and about
15% of the population in Nagasaki.
The difference, I have read, was because Hiroshima was essentially a
"flat" city while Nagasaki had hills which shielded some portions of
the city from blast effects.

In both cases hospital and medical facilities were located in the
blast area and destroyed which increased casualty deaths considerably.
This targeting appears to he unplanned as the Hiroshima bomb missed
the aiming point, the Aioi Bridge, by approximately 800 ft.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 16:48:28 -0700 (PDT), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 9:28:31 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:41:57 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> > On 4/25/2022 8:30 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> > > On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 7:58:39 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>> > >> On 4/24/2022 8:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> > >>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:56:39 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>> (chomp)
>> > >>>> But Tommy... Japan was not bombed into the stone age. In fact with the
>> > >>>> exception of fire bombing in Tokyo and the two "atom" bombs there was
>> > >>>> little bombing done in the rest of the country.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> And, I do know as I was there.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I beg to differ somewhat.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan>
>> > >>> "Much of Japan's industrial capacity was also destroyed by Allied
>> > >>> bombing. Over 600 major industrial facilities were destroyed or badly
>> > >>> damaged, contributing to a large decline in production."
>> > >>>
>> > >>> There were also raids on the coastal naval bases and some of the major
>> > >>> cities:
>> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Areas_of_principal_Japanese_cities_destoyed_by_US_bombing.jpg>
>> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Allied_naval_operations_off_Japan_during_July_and_August_1945_(edit_1).svg>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> The target committee had a difficult time finding worthwhile targets
>> > >>> for the atom bombs because most of the worthwhile (military) targets
>> > >>> had already been destroyed. The sole exception was Kyoto:
>> > >>> "Why was Kyoto removed as the prime target for the A-Bomb?"
>> > >>> <https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/why-was-kyoto-removed-as-the-prime-target-for-the-a-bomb/>
>> > >>> Kyoto was the first choice for bombing, but was saved by Henry L.
>> > >>> Stimson. The other cities were thoroughly bombed.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I couldn't find anything on whether the US bombed the smaller towns
>> > >>> and fields. When Japan decentralized production to small home
>> > >>> workshops, they might have considered bombing. My guess(tm) is they
>> > >>> didn't. Bombing isn't very effect against low density targets.
>> > >>>
>> > >> +1
>> > >>
>> > >> After weeks of firebombing, Curtis LeMay complained in July
>> > >> 1945 there were not enough targets for his Army Air Corps.
>> > >>
>> > >> "Official estimates from the United States Strategic Bombing
>> > >> Survey determined at least 330,000 killed, 476,000 injured,
>> > >> 8.5 million people made homeless, and 2.5 million buildings
>> > >> destroyed. Almost half of 64 Japanese mainland cities were
>> > >> completely destroyed. The destruction was not lost on LeMay.
>> > >> He acknowledged that if the Japanese had won the war, he
>> > >> would have been tried as a war criminal.
>> > >>
>> > >> Later he would reveal that dropping the atomic bombs was
>> > >> totally unnecessary, given the level of destruction he had
>> > >> already waged on Japan. He said he only dropped them because
>> > >> of President Truman’s authority. After the war, Japan’s
>> > >> former Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe confirmed that the
>> > >> decision to surrender was based on the prolonged bombing
>> > >> wrought by General LeMay’s Marianas-based air forces. "
>> > >>
>> > >> https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/7-awesome-airpower-quotes-general-curtis-lemay/
>> > >> --
>> > >> Andrew Muzi
>> > >> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> > >> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>> > >
>> > > Knives can kill people. One way is to cut a person multiple times all over their body and they will eventually lose enough blood to die. And suffer enormous pain from all the cuts. Other way a knife can kill someone is if you plunge it directly into a person's heart. Dead in 10 seconds or so.
>> > >
>> > > Did LeMay explain why he did not completely destroy the other half of the 64 mainland Japanese cities? Did he not have enough airplanes or bombs? Was he planning to start completely destroying them in mid August 1945? So that by December 1945 all 64 mainland Japanese cities would all be completely destroyed.
>> > >
>> > You are not innumerate. The phrasing in the quoted link may
>> > be inartful but of 64 major cities, half were utterly
>> > destroyed. The other 32 were drastically damaged and reduced.
>> >
>> > p.s. There were administration/general staff limits on
>> > bombing certain cities and areas such as all of Kyoto and
>> > the Imperial Palace district in Tokyo. There may well have
>> > been others of which I am unaware.
>> Russell who tries to pass himself off as an accountant shows yet again that he understands absolutely nothing about the world around us. The object of the bombing was not to kill people save to terrorize Tokyo and weaken the resolve of the Emperor. The entire idea of bombing is destroy the enemies ability to wage wars. You don't simply bomb cities but the industries that allow the enemy to wage war.
>>
>
>Yes bombing Tokyo was an act of terror against civilians. Not a military target. That has been a part of war since the beginning. Your buddy Putin is bombing a maternity hospital in Ukraine. Pregnant women aren't very good soldiers. No Tommy, the idea of bombing is not only to destroy the ability to wage war. Militaries do bomb cities filled with non combatants. And round up and shoot non soldiers too. War is never ever just soldiers shooting soldiers. Tommy, you should read some history books and learn something. It would help you immensely to have even a little knowledge.
>
>
>
>
>
>> This is why the USA should be supplying the Ukraine with the aircraft and billions of dollar of weapons that Biden left to the Taliban when he deserted American in Afghanistan after ordered by Obama to "correct" Obama's mistake of not getting us out of Afghanistan within six weeks of election.
>>
>
>Tommy, did you forget who was president of the USA from January 20, 2017 until January 20, 2021? Why didn't your hero Donald get the USA out of Afghanistan? He had 4 years to do the job. 4 years. Was he too busy playing golf to devote anytime to that immaterial problem. Before 2016, Trump promised to bring troops home and stop foreign wars. And he talked about it for Afghanistan for four years, but didn't do it.
>
>
>
>
>> So the US in WW II bombed all of the industrial sites that made gunpowder, rifles, etc. Because they have already destroyed the industrial zones that made tanks and ships of war.
>>
>> Now in 2022, we cannot respond to the danger that the Ukraine is in because we left all of those excess weapons in Afghanistan. Let's just say that Biden is not a Harry Truman and Truman was not in charge of the war.
>
>https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2021/08/30/what-military-equipment-left-behind-afghanistan-us/5658895001/
>Article says armored anti landmine trucks and Humvees and 73 aircraft (planes and helicopters). US also left behind some "Counter-rocket, artillery and mortar systems". These would have been useful in Ukraine.
>
>The story says:
>"The U.S. military likely abandoned tens of millions of dollars’ worth of aircraft, armored vehicles and sophisticated defensive systems in the rush to leave the airport in Kabul safely."
>
>Tommy, millions, NOT billions as your lie above states. Again Tommy, millions, not billions. There is a one thousand times difference between millions and billions. One thousand times difference. I am aware you do not have an education so this is impossible for you to comprehend.
>
>Now, as for responding to the war in Ukraine with Russia, the USA, Joe Biden, is providing weapons to Ukraine. Even though some were left and abandoned in Afghanistan. The USA has lots of weapons to send lots of places. No shortage. Just announced were some howitzers going to Ukraine. Previously we, and UK, provided anti tank and anti plane missiles. And we, and other former Soviet countries, are providing rifles and bullets to Ukraine.
>
>And lest you forget, your buddy Trump in 2019 withheld military aid to Ukraine. Funny how you and the Republicans in congress forget that fact.
>
>https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/news/trump-who-was-impeached-for-withholding-nearly-400-million-in-military-aid-from-ukraine-said-this-deadly-ukraine-situation-would-never-have-happened-if-he-were-in-office/articleshow/89817109.cms
>https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/16/trump-administration-broke-law-in-withholding-ukraine-aid.html
>https://publicintegrity.org/national-security/timeline-how-trump-withheld-ukraine-aid/
>https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trump-ordered-hold-on-military-aid-days-before-calling-ukrainian-president-officials-say/2019/09/23/df93a6ca-de38-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html
>https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/28/trump-ukraine-military-aid-russia-1689531
>https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/24/20881505/donald-trump-withhold-aid-ukraine-timeline-whistleblower
>https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/15/trump-resisted-ukraine-sale-javelin-antitank-missile/
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump%E2%80%93Ukraine_scandal
>
>Tommy, I frequently wonder if you have any intelligence at all. Despite your incessant calls of superiority.

On 4/26/2022 6:01 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 07:18:58 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:16:43 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 4/25/2022 7:36 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:53:30 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:10:30 PM UTC-7, Lou Holtman wrote:
>>>>>> On Thursday, April 21, 2022 at 8:21:33 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>> "Stainless steel is too brittle for high-strength applications..."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm sure there are countless engineers who would be surprised to read
>>>>>>> that blanket statement. They might ask "_Which_ stainless steel? How
>>>>>>> brittle, under what conditions? What sort of stresses qualify as
>>>>>>> 'high-strength'? What sort of applications?"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.renehersecycles.com/just-a-bunch-of-bolts/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jan Heine has some good idea, but IMO he often goes off into the weeds.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can't remember the last time I broke a stainless steel fastener on a
>>>>>>> bike. It may have never happened.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>>> Pff... as if the bolts on a bicycle are in the high end application category.
>>>>>> I read the article and what I came up with is 'what a snob...' YMMV.
>>>>>
>>>>> Steel is iron with carbon in it. It was originated simply by smelting iron in coal fired ovens. Crying about chromium or molybdenum added to the mixture make pretty minor improvements. (for instance; adding chromium doesn't improve the strength but the hardness or rigidity of the material. Stainless is largely iron with a larger percentage of other materials such as aluminum, nickel, vanadium etc. Stainless is a material you HAVE to know how to work. Overheating and quenching like you would some steels causes it to crystalize and become brittle. You can see this has occurred in the manufacture of screws in particular since they turn these things out so rapidly that they can overheat the material and then it can be quenched coming off of the tool because they are in an oil bath, Then when you tighten the bolt it simply breaks. Its been far too long since I dealt with this but I seem to remember that you can heat it up to something like a thousand degrees F and let it stay there

> f
>>> or
>>>>> some time and then allow it to air cool and it forms a different sort of austenitic structure more like steel and so it is much stronger.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.theworldmaterial.com/aisi-316-ss316-stainless-steel-properties-composition/#Hardening
>>>> "Type 316 SS cannot be hardened by heat treating"
>>>>
>>> OK, fine.
>>> But any claim about 'stainless' generally is pointless- it's
>>> a big group of wildly different materials. Some examples:
>>>
>>> https://www.mori2a.com/en/dont-stop/news/prodottiproducts/stainless-steel-200-series-in-cr-mn-a-safe-alternative-to-304/
>>>
>>> https://www.searchsteel.info/2011/03/stainless-technical-standards-and.html
>>
>> As I've said before, it is impossible to say absolutely anything without that moron John Googling away and finding an exception to a rule and then passing it off as the rule rather than the exception. He is like having a parrot around the house that only knows a limited number of words. Hey John, I guess I just gave you the bird.
>
> Well, Tommy, I served an apprenticeship as a Machinist and "had my
> papers" as a Journeyman Machinist by the time I completed High School.
> Now tell us your qualifications,
>
> And of course I "look things up" as does every other competent
> individual. The Machinery's Handbook, for example, has more then 4,000
> pages of data (the Christian Bible has about 1,500 pages) and is
> commonly used as a reference in the metal working trades.
>

Good comparison.
I was once deeply engaged with a chart in my Machinery's
Handbook when my bookkeeper walked in and asked, "Are you
reading the Bible?"

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 7:50:42 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 16:48:28 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 9:28:31 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:41:57 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >> > On 4/25/2022 8:30 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> > > On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 7:58:39 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> >> > >> On 4/24/2022 8:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >> > >>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:56:39 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
> >> > >>> wrote:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> (chomp)
> >> > >>>> But Tommy... Japan was not bombed into the stone age. In fact with the
> >> > >>>> exception of fire bombing in Tokyo and the two "atom" bombs there was
> >> > >>>> little bombing done in the rest of the country.
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>> And, I do know as I was there.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> I beg to differ somewhat.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan>
> >> > >>> "Much of Japan's industrial capacity was also destroyed by Allied
> >> > >>> bombing. Over 600 major industrial facilities were destroyed or badly
> >> > >>> damaged, contributing to a large decline in production."
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> There were also raids on the coastal naval bases and some of the major
> >> > >>> cities:
> >> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Areas_of_principal_Japanese_cities_destoyed_by_US_bombing.jpg>
> >> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Allied_naval_operations_off_Japan_during_July_and_August_1945_(edit_1).svg>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> The target committee had a difficult time finding worthwhile targets
> >> > >>> for the atom bombs because most of the worthwhile (military) targets
> >> > >>> had already been destroyed. The sole exception was Kyoto:
> >> > >>> "Why was Kyoto removed as the prime target for the A-Bomb?"
> >> > >>> <https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/why-was-kyoto-removed-as-the-prime-target-for-the-a-bomb/>
> >> > >>> Kyoto was the first choice for bombing, but was saved by Henry L..
> >> > >>> Stimson. The other cities were thoroughly bombed.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> I couldn't find anything on whether the US bombed the smaller towns
> >> > >>> and fields. When Japan decentralized production to small home
> >> > >>> workshops, they might have considered bombing. My guess(tm) is they
> >> > >>> didn't. Bombing isn't very effect against low density targets.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >> +1
> >> > >>
> >> > >> After weeks of firebombing, Curtis LeMay complained in July
> >> > >> 1945 there were not enough targets for his Army Air Corps.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> "Official estimates from the United States Strategic Bombing
> >> > >> Survey determined at least 330,000 killed, 476,000 injured,
> >> > >> 8.5 million people made homeless, and 2.5 million buildings
> >> > >> destroyed. Almost half of 64 Japanese mainland cities were
> >> > >> completely destroyed. The destruction was not lost on LeMay.
> >> > >> He acknowledged that if the Japanese had won the war, he
> >> > >> would have been tried as a war criminal.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Later he would reveal that dropping the atomic bombs was
> >> > >> totally unnecessary, given the level of destruction he had
> >> > >> already waged on Japan. He said he only dropped them because
> >> > >> of President Truman’s authority. After the war, Japan’s
> >> > >> former Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe confirmed that the
> >> > >> decision to surrender was based on the prolonged bombing
> >> > >> wrought by General LeMay’s Marianas-based air forces. "
> >> > >>
> >> > >> https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/7-awesome-airpower-quotes-general-curtis-lemay/
> >> > >> --
> >> > >> Andrew Muzi
> >> > >> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> >> > >> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> >> > >
> >> > > Knives can kill people. One way is to cut a person multiple times all over their body and they will eventually lose enough blood to die. And suffer enormous pain from all the cuts. Other way a knife can kill someone is if you plunge it directly into a person's heart. Dead in 10 seconds or so.
> >> > >
> >> > > Did LeMay explain why he did not completely destroy the other half of the 64 mainland Japanese cities? Did he not have enough airplanes or bombs? Was he planning to start completely destroying them in mid August 1945? So that by December 1945 all 64 mainland Japanese cities would all be completely destroyed.
> >> > >
> >> > You are not innumerate. The phrasing in the quoted link may
> >> > be inartful but of 64 major cities, half were utterly
> >> > destroyed. The other 32 were drastically damaged and reduced.
> >> >
> >> > p.s. There were administration/general staff limits on
> >> > bombing certain cities and areas such as all of Kyoto and
> >> > the Imperial Palace district in Tokyo. There may well have
> >> > been others of which I am unaware.
> >> Russell who tries to pass himself off as an accountant shows yet again that he understands absolutely nothing about the world around us. The object of the bombing was not to kill people save to terrorize Tokyo and weaken the resolve of the Emperor. The entire idea of bombing is destroy the enemies ability to wage wars. You don't simply bomb cities but the industries that allow the enemy to wage war.
> >>
> >
> >Yes bombing Tokyo was an act of terror against civilians. Not a military target. That has been a part of war since the beginning. Your buddy Putin is bombing a maternity hospital in Ukraine. Pregnant women aren't very good soldiers. No Tommy, the idea of bombing is not only to destroy the ability to wage war. Militaries do bomb cities filled with non combatants. And round up and shoot non soldiers too. War is never ever just soldiers shooting soldiers. Tommy, you should read some history books and learn something. It would help you immensely to have even a little knowledge.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> This is why the USA should be supplying the Ukraine with the aircraft and billions of dollar of weapons that Biden left to the Taliban when he deserted American in Afghanistan after ordered by Obama to "correct" Obama's mistake of not getting us out of Afghanistan within six weeks of election.
> >>
> >
> >Tommy, did you forget who was president of the USA from January 20, 2017 until January 20, 2021? Why didn't your hero Donald get the USA out of Afghanistan? He had 4 years to do the job. 4 years. Was he too busy playing golf to devote anytime to that immaterial problem. Before 2016, Trump promised to bring troops home and stop foreign wars. And he talked about it for Afghanistan for four years, but didn't do it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> So the US in WW II bombed all of the industrial sites that made gunpowder, rifles, etc. Because they have already destroyed the industrial zones that made tanks and ships of war.
> >>
> >> Now in 2022, we cannot respond to the danger that the Ukraine is in because we left all of those excess weapons in Afghanistan. Let's just say that Biden is not a Harry Truman and Truman was not in charge of the war.
> >
> >https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2021/08/30/what-military-equipment-left-behind-afghanistan-us/5658895001/
> >Article says armored anti landmine trucks and Humvees and 73 aircraft (planes and helicopters). US also left behind some "Counter-rocket, artillery and mortar systems". These would have been useful in Ukraine.
> >
> >The story says:
> >"The U.S. military likely abandoned tens of millions of dollars’ worth of aircraft, armored vehicles and sophisticated defensive systems in the rush to leave the airport in Kabul safely."
> >
> >Tommy, millions, NOT billions as your lie above states. Again Tommy, millions, not billions. There is a one thousand times difference between millions and billions. One thousand times difference. I am aware you do not have an education so this is impossible for you to comprehend.
> >
> >Now, as for responding to the war in Ukraine with Russia, the USA, Joe Biden, is providing weapons to Ukraine. Even though some were left and abandoned in Afghanistan. The USA has lots of weapons to send lots of places. No shortage. Just announced were some howitzers going to Ukraine. Previously we, and UK, provided anti tank and anti plane missiles. And we, and other former Soviet countries, are providing rifles and bullets to Ukraine.
> >
> >And lest you forget, your buddy Trump in 2019 withheld military aid to Ukraine. Funny how you and the Republicans in congress forget that fact.
> >
> >https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/news/trump-who-was-impeached-for-withholding-nearly-400-million-in-military-aid-from-ukraine-said-this-deadly-ukraine-situation-would-never-have-happened-if-he-were-in-office/articleshow/89817109.cms
> >https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/16/trump-administration-broke-law-in-withholding-ukraine-aid.html
> >https://publicintegrity.org/national-security/timeline-how-trump-withheld-ukraine-aid/
> >https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trump-ordered-hold-on-military-aid-days-before-calling-ukrainian-president-officials-say/2019/09/23/df93a6ca-de38-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html
> >https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/28/trump-ukraine-military-aid-russia-1689531
> >https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/24/20881505/donald-trump-withhold-aid-ukraine-timeline-whistleblower
> >https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/15/trump-resisted-ukraine-sale-javelin-antitank-missile/
> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump%E2%80%93Ukraine_scandal
> >
> >Tommy, I frequently wonder if you have any intelligence at all. Despite your incessant calls of superiority.
> When the U.S. left Vietnam they left considerable equipment behind and
> there were the usual Head Lines about "U.S. leaves Umpteen Billion of
> Dollars Behind".
>
> Some years after the war my company, working for the Caterpillar
> dealer in Singapore, undertook a survey of CAT equipment left in
> Vietnam with the thought that it might be salvageable.
>
> What we found was that the equipment we were shown was literally
> "junk" and not worth the cost of repair and refurbishing. I was shown
> a large warehouse full of CAT parts, for example... but the roof
> leaked and hardly anything was usable.
>
> In short it does seem that many of the "Lurid" Head Lines are really
> recounting the purchase cost of some battered old junk left behind.
>
> Which is not to say that there aren't "Losses in Combat" I once came
> across a brand new, still in the crates, ice making plant in the
> salvage yard at Cam Ranh Bay Air Base. But what would it have cost to
> ship it back to the States?
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:09:27 -0700 (PDT), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 7:50:42 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 16:48:28 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
>> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 9:28:31 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:41:57 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> > On 4/25/2022 8:30 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >> > > On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 7:58:39 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> > >> On 4/24/2022 8:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> >> > >>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:56:39 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>> >> > >>> wrote:
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> (chomp)
>> >> > >>>> But Tommy... Japan was not bombed into the stone age. In fact with the
>> >> > >>>> exception of fire bombing in Tokyo and the two "atom" bombs there was
>> >> > >>>> little bombing done in the rest of the country.
>> >> > >>>>
>> >> > >>>> And, I do know as I was there.
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> I beg to differ somewhat.
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan>
>> >> > >>> "Much of Japan's industrial capacity was also destroyed by Allied
>> >> > >>> bombing. Over 600 major industrial facilities were destroyed or badly
>> >> > >>> damaged, contributing to a large decline in production."
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> There were also raids on the coastal naval bases and some of the major
>> >> > >>> cities:
>> >> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Areas_of_principal_Japanese_cities_destoyed_by_US_bombing.jpg>
>> >> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Allied_naval_operations_off_Japan_during_July_and_August_1945_(edit_1).svg>
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> The target committee had a difficult time finding worthwhile targets
>> >> > >>> for the atom bombs because most of the worthwhile (military) targets
>> >> > >>> had already been destroyed. The sole exception was Kyoto:
>> >> > >>> "Why was Kyoto removed as the prime target for the A-Bomb?"
>> >> > >>> <https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/why-was-kyoto-removed-as-the-prime-target-for-the-a-bomb/>
>> >> > >>> Kyoto was the first choice for bombing, but was saved by Henry L.
>> >> > >>> Stimson. The other cities were thoroughly bombed.
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> I couldn't find anything on whether the US bombed the smaller towns
>> >> > >>> and fields. When Japan decentralized production to small home
>> >> > >>> workshops, they might have considered bombing. My guess(tm) is they
>> >> > >>> didn't. Bombing isn't very effect against low density targets.
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >> +1
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> After weeks of firebombing, Curtis LeMay complained in July
>> >> > >> 1945 there were not enough targets for his Army Air Corps.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> "Official estimates from the United States Strategic Bombing
>> >> > >> Survey determined at least 330,000 killed, 476,000 injured,
>> >> > >> 8.5 million people made homeless, and 2.5 million buildings
>> >> > >> destroyed. Almost half of 64 Japanese mainland cities were
>> >> > >> completely destroyed. The destruction was not lost on LeMay.
>> >> > >> He acknowledged that if the Japanese had won the war, he
>> >> > >> would have been tried as a war criminal.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Later he would reveal that dropping the atomic bombs was
>> >> > >> totally unnecessary, given the level of destruction he had
>> >> > >> already waged on Japan. He said he only dropped them because
>> >> > >> of President Truman’s authority. After the war, Japan’s
>> >> > >> former Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe confirmed that the
>> >> > >> decision to surrender was based on the prolonged bombing
>> >> > >> wrought by General LeMay’s Marianas-based air forces. "
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/7-awesome-airpower-quotes-general-curtis-lemay/
>> >> > >> --
>> >> > >> Andrew Muzi
>> >> > >> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> >> > >> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Knives can kill people. One way is to cut a person multiple times all over their body and they will eventually lose enough blood to die. And suffer enormous pain from all the cuts. Other way a knife can kill someone is if you plunge it directly into a person's heart. Dead in 10 seconds or so.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Did LeMay explain why he did not completely destroy the other half of the 64 mainland Japanese cities? Did he not have enough airplanes or bombs? Was he planning to start completely destroying them in mid August 1945? So that by December 1945 all 64 mainland Japanese cities would all be completely destroyed.
>> >> > >
>> >> > You are not innumerate. The phrasing in the quoted link may
>> >> > be inartful but of 64 major cities, half were utterly
>> >> > destroyed. The other 32 were drastically damaged and reduced.
>> >> >
>> >> > p.s. There were administration/general staff limits on
>> >> > bombing certain cities and areas such as all of Kyoto and
>> >> > the Imperial Palace district in Tokyo. There may well have
>> >> > been others of which I am unaware.
>> >> Russell who tries to pass himself off as an accountant shows yet again that he understands absolutely nothing about the world around us. The object of the bombing was not to kill people save to terrorize Tokyo and weaken the resolve of the Emperor. The entire idea of bombing is destroy the enemies ability to wage wars. You don't simply bomb cities but the industries that allow the enemy to wage war.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Yes bombing Tokyo was an act of terror against civilians. Not a military target. That has been a part of war since the beginning. Your buddy Putin is bombing a maternity hospital in Ukraine. Pregnant women aren't very good soldiers. No Tommy, the idea of bombing is not only to destroy the ability to wage war. Militaries do bomb cities filled with non combatants. And round up and shoot non soldiers too. War is never ever just soldiers shooting soldiers. Tommy, you should read some history books and learn something. It would help you immensely to have even a little knowledge.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> This is why the USA should be supplying the Ukraine with the aircraft and billions of dollar of weapons that Biden left to the Taliban when he deserted American in Afghanistan after ordered by Obama to "correct" Obama's mistake of not getting us out of Afghanistan within six weeks of election.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Tommy, did you forget who was president of the USA from January 20, 2017 until January 20, 2021? Why didn't your hero Donald get the USA out of Afghanistan? He had 4 years to do the job. 4 years. Was he too busy playing golf to devote anytime to that immaterial problem. Before 2016, Trump promised to bring troops home and stop foreign wars. And he talked about it for Afghanistan for four years, but didn't do it.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> So the US in WW II bombed all of the industrial sites that made gunpowder, rifles, etc. Because they have already destroyed the industrial zones that made tanks and ships of war.
>> >>
>> >> Now in 2022, we cannot respond to the danger that the Ukraine is in because we left all of those excess weapons in Afghanistan. Let's just say that Biden is not a Harry Truman and Truman was not in charge of the war.
>> >
>> >https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2021/08/30/what-military-equipment-left-behind-afghanistan-us/5658895001/
>> >Article says armored anti landmine trucks and Humvees and 73 aircraft (planes and helicopters). US also left behind some "Counter-rocket, artillery and mortar systems". These would have been useful in Ukraine.
>> >
>> >The story says:
>> >"The U.S. military likely abandoned tens of millions of dollars’ worth of aircraft, armored vehicles and sophisticated defensive systems in the rush to leave the airport in Kabul safely."
>> >
>> >Tommy, millions, NOT billions as your lie above states. Again Tommy, millions, not billions. There is a one thousand times difference between millions and billions. One thousand times difference. I am aware you do not have an education so this is impossible for you to comprehend.
>> >
>> >Now, as for responding to the war in Ukraine with Russia, the USA, Joe Biden, is providing weapons to Ukraine. Even though some were left and abandoned in Afghanistan. The USA has lots of weapons to send lots of places. No shortage. Just announced were some howitzers going to Ukraine. Previously we, and UK, provided anti tank and anti plane missiles. And we, and other former Soviet countries, are providing rifles and bullets to Ukraine.
>> >
>> >And lest you forget, your buddy Trump in 2019 withheld military aid to Ukraine. Funny how you and the Republicans in congress forget that fact.
>> >
>> >https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/news/trump-who-was-impeached-for-withholding-nearly-400-million-in-military-aid-from-ukraine-said-this-deadly-ukraine-situation-would-never-have-happened-if-he-were-in-office/articleshow/89817109.cms
>> >https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/16/trump-administration-broke-law-in-withholding-ukraine-aid.html
>> >https://publicintegrity.org/national-security/timeline-how-trump-withheld-ukraine-aid/
>> >https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trump-ordered-hold-on-military-aid-days-before-calling-ukrainian-president-officials-say/2019/09/23/df93a6ca-de38-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html
>> >https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/28/trump-ukraine-military-aid-russia-1689531
>> >https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/24/20881505/donald-trump-withhold-aid-ukraine-timeline-whistleblower
>> >https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/15/trump-resisted-ukraine-sale-javelin-antitank-missile/
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump%E2%80%93Ukraine_scandal
>> >
>> >Tommy, I frequently wonder if you have any intelligence at all. Despite your incessant calls of superiority.
>> When the U.S. left Vietnam they left considerable equipment behind and
>> there were the usual Head Lines about "U.S. leaves Umpteen Billion of
>> Dollars Behind".
>>
>> Some years after the war my company, working for the Caterpillar
>> dealer in Singapore, undertook a survey of CAT equipment left in
>> Vietnam with the thought that it might be salvageable.
>>
>> What we found was that the equipment we were shown was literally
>> "junk" and not worth the cost of repair and refurbishing. I was shown
>> a large warehouse full of CAT parts, for example... but the roof
>> leaked and hardly anything was usable.
>>
>> In short it does seem that many of the "Lurid" Head Lines are really
>> recounting the purchase cost of some battered old junk left behind.
>>
>> Which is not to say that there aren't "Losses in Combat" I once came
>> across a brand new, still in the crates, ice making plant in the
>> salvage yard at Cam Ranh Bay Air Base. But what would it have cost to
>> ship it back to the States?
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John B.
>
>The USA Today link I posted above listing the equipment left in Afghanistan totaling millions of dollars. It also said BILLIONS and BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars, USA dollars, not cheap Canadian or Australian or New Zealand or Jamaican dollars, were spent on equipment and supplies and training for the Afghanistan military in the 10 or 15 or 20 or however long the US was in Afghanistan. So the piddly pennies of equipment left or destroyed at the pullout in Afghanistan were nothing. For anyone who thinks anyway.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:03:45 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 4/26/2022 6:01 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 07:18:58 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:16:43 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 4/25/2022 7:36 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:53:30 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:10:30 PM UTC-7, Lou Holtman wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 21, 2022 at 8:21:33 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Stainless steel is too brittle for high-strength applications..."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm sure there are countless engineers who would be surprised to read
>>>>>>>> that blanket statement. They might ask "_Which_ stainless steel? How
>>>>>>>> brittle, under what conditions? What sort of stresses qualify as
>>>>>>>> 'high-strength'? What sort of applications?"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.renehersecycles.com/just-a-bunch-of-bolts/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jan Heine has some good idea, but IMO he often goes off into the weeds.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I can't remember the last time I broke a stainless steel fastener on a
>>>>>>>> bike. It may have never happened.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>> Pff... as if the bolts on a bicycle are in the high end application category.
>>>>>>> I read the article and what I came up with is 'what a snob...' YMMV.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steel is iron with carbon in it. It was originated simply by smelting iron in coal fired ovens. Crying about chromium or molybdenum added to the mixture make pretty minor improvements. (for instance; adding chromium doesn't improve the strength but the hardness or rigidity of the material. Stainless is largely iron with a larger percentage of other materials such as aluminum, nickel, vanadium etc. Stainless is a material you HAVE to know how to work. Overheating and quenching like you would some steels causes it to crystalize and become brittle. You can see this has occurred in the manufacture of screws in particular since they turn these things out so rapidly that they can overheat the material and then it can be quenched coming off of the tool because they are in an oil bath, Then when you tighten the bolt it simply breaks. Its been far too long since I dealt with this but I seem to remember that you can heat it up to something like a thousand degrees F and let it stay there
>
>> f
>>>> or
>>>>>> some time and then allow it to air cool and it forms a different sort of austenitic structure more like steel and so it is much stronger.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.theworldmaterial.com/aisi-316-ss316-stainless-steel-properties-composition/#Hardening
>>>>> "Type 316 SS cannot be hardened by heat treating"
>>>>>
>>>> OK, fine.
>>>> But any claim about 'stainless' generally is pointless- it's
>>>> a big group of wildly different materials. Some examples:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.mori2a.com/en/dont-stop/news/prodottiproducts/stainless-steel-200-series-in-cr-mn-a-safe-alternative-to-304/
>>>>
>>>> https://www.searchsteel.info/2011/03/stainless-technical-standards-and.html
>>>
>>> As I've said before, it is impossible to say absolutely anything without that moron John Googling away and finding an exception to a rule and then passing it off as the rule rather than the exception. He is like having a parrot around the house that only knows a limited number of words. Hey John, I guess I just gave you the bird.
>>
>> Well, Tommy, I served an apprenticeship as a Machinist and "had my
>> papers" as a Journeyman Machinist by the time I completed High School.
>> Now tell us your qualifications,
>>
>> And of course I "look things up" as does every other competent
>> individual. The Machinery's Handbook, for example, has more then 4,000
>> pages of data (the Christian Bible has about 1,500 pages) and is
>> commonly used as a reference in the metal working trades.
>>
>
>Good comparison.
>I was once deeply engaged with a chart in my Machinery's
>Handbook when my bookkeeper walked in and asked, "Are you
>reading the Bible?"

If it had have been the "bible" we'd know how long the nails were :-0
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 8:03:53 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/26/2022 6:01 PM, John B. wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 07:18:58 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:16:43 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >>> On 4/25/2022 7:36 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:53:30 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> >>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:10:30 PM UTC-7, Lou Holtman wrote:
> >>>>>> On Thursday, April 21, 2022 at 8:21:33 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>>> "Stainless steel is too brittle for high-strength applications..."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'm sure there are countless engineers who would be surprised to read
> >>>>>>> that blanket statement. They might ask "_Which_ stainless steel? How
> >>>>>>> brittle, under what conditions? What sort of stresses qualify as
> >>>>>>> 'high-strength'? What sort of applications?"
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://www.renehersecycles.com/just-a-bunch-of-bolts/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Jan Heine has some good idea, but IMO he often goes off into the weeds.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I can't remember the last time I broke a stainless steel fastener on a
> >>>>>>> bike. It may have never happened.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
> >>>>>> Pff... as if the bolts on a bicycle are in the high end application category.
> >>>>>> I read the article and what I came up with is 'what a snob...' YMMV.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Steel is iron with carbon in it. It was originated simply by smelting iron in coal fired ovens. Crying about chromium or molybdenum added to the mixture make pretty minor improvements. (for instance; adding chromium doesn't improve the strength but the hardness or rigidity of the material. Stainless is largely iron with a larger percentage of other materials such as aluminum, nickel, vanadium etc. Stainless is a material you HAVE to know how to work. Overheating and quenching like you would some steels causes it to crystalize and become brittle. You can see this has occurred in the manufacture of screws in particular since they turn these things out so rapidly that they can overheat the material and then it can be quenched coming off of the tool because they are in an oil bath, Then when you tighten the bolt it simply breaks. Its been far too long since I dealt with this but I seem to remember that you can heat it up to something like a thousand degrees F and let it stay there
>
> > f
> >>> or
> >>>>> some time and then allow it to air cool and it forms a different sort of austenitic structure more like steel and so it is much stronger.
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.theworldmaterial.com/aisi-316-ss316-stainless-steel-properties-composition/#Hardening
> >>>> "Type 316 SS cannot be hardened by heat treating"
> >>>>
> >>> OK, fine.
> >>> But any claim about 'stainless' generally is pointless- it's
> >>> a big group of wildly different materials. Some examples:
> >>>
> >>> https://www.mori2a.com/en/dont-stop/news/prodottiproducts/stainless-steel-200-series-in-cr-mn-a-safe-alternative-to-304/
> >>>
> >>> https://www.searchsteel.info/2011/03/stainless-technical-standards-and.html
> >>
> >> As I've said before, it is impossible to say absolutely anything without that moron John Googling away and finding an exception to a rule and then passing it off as the rule rather than the exception. He is like having a parrot around the house that only knows a limited number of words. Hey John, I guess I just gave you the bird.
> >
> > Well, Tommy, I served an apprenticeship as a Machinist and "had my
> > papers" as a Journeyman Machinist by the time I completed High School.
> > Now tell us your qualifications,
> >
> > And of course I "look things up" as does every other competent
> > individual. The Machinery's Handbook, for example, has more then 4,000
> > pages of data (the Christian Bible has about 1,500 pages) and is
> > commonly used as a reference in the metal working trades.
> >
> Good comparison.
> I was once deeply engaged with a chart in my Machinery's
> Handbook when my bookkeeper walked in and asked, "Are you
> reading the Bible?"

I no longer have my machinists manual since it is so far outdated. If John got one in high school that is is essentially useful only for older materials. I too was a machinist in high school and in several early jobs after getting out of the Air Force. If he is believing himself to be plausible after his claims that I was never in the Air Force after his line of crap about his assignments (Uh - he was in Japan in 1954 so he is absolutely positive that Japan wasn't heavily bombed - and this from a supposed Air Force crew chief who worked for men who bombed Japan) So he wants us to believe that he was a machinist as a youth. Well, were he a qualified machinist they would have a job for him in the Air Force a great deal more responsible than crew chief on a dead-in-the-water obsolete bomber. You don't take a qualified machinist and make him a paper shuffler.

One would think that after comments from Frank who at least taught materials technology he couldn't try passing BS off as information.

On 4/27/2022 9:12 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 8:03:53 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/26/2022 6:01 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 07:18:58 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:16:43 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 4/25/2022 7:36 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:53:30 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>>>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:10:30 PM UTC-7, Lou Holtman wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 21, 2022 at 8:21:33 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "Stainless steel is too brittle for high-strength applications..."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm sure there are countless engineers who would be surprised to read
>>>>>>>>> that blanket statement. They might ask "_Which_ stainless steel? How
>>>>>>>>> brittle, under what conditions? What sort of stresses qualify as
>>>>>>>>> 'high-strength'? What sort of applications?"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.renehersecycles.com/just-a-bunch-of-bolts/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jan Heine has some good idea, but IMO he often goes off into the weeds.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I can't remember the last time I broke a stainless steel fastener on a
>>>>>>>>> bike. It may have never happened.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>> Pff... as if the bolts on a bicycle are in the high end application category.
>>>>>>>> I read the article and what I came up with is 'what a snob...' YMMV.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Steel is iron with carbon in it. It was originated simply by smelting iron in coal fired ovens. Crying about chromium or molybdenum added to the mixture make pretty minor improvements. (for instance; adding chromium doesn't improve the strength but the hardness or rigidity of the material. Stainless is largely iron with a larger percentage of other materials such as aluminum, nickel, vanadium etc. Stainless is a material you HAVE to know how to work. Overheating and quenching like you would some steels causes it to crystalize and become brittle. You can see this has occurred in the manufacture of screws in particular since they turn these things out so rapidly that they can overheat the material and then it can be quenched coming off of the tool because they are in an oil bath, Then when you tighten the bolt it simply breaks. Its been far too long since I dealt with this but I seem to remember that you can heat it up to something like a thousand degrees F and let it stay the
re
>>
>>> f
>>>>> or
>>>>>>> some time and then allow it to air cool and it forms a different sort of austenitic structure more like steel and so it is much stronger.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.theworldmaterial.com/aisi-316-ss316-stainless-steel-properties-composition/#Hardening
>>>>>> "Type 316 SS cannot be hardened by heat treating"
>>>>>>
>>>>> OK, fine.
>>>>> But any claim about 'stainless' generally is pointless- it's
>>>>> a big group of wildly different materials. Some examples:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.mori2a.com/en/dont-stop/news/prodottiproducts/stainless-steel-200-series-in-cr-mn-a-safe-alternative-to-304/
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.searchsteel.info/2011/03/stainless-technical-standards-and.html
>>>>
>>>> As I've said before, it is impossible to say absolutely anything without that moron John Googling away and finding an exception to a rule and then passing it off as the rule rather than the exception. He is like having a parrot around the house that only knows a limited number of words. Hey John, I guess I just gave you the bird.
>>>
>>> Well, Tommy, I served an apprenticeship as a Machinist and "had my
>>> papers" as a Journeyman Machinist by the time I completed High School.
>>> Now tell us your qualifications,
>>>
>>> And of course I "look things up" as does every other competent
>>> individual. The Machinery's Handbook, for example, has more then 4,000
>>> pages of data (the Christian Bible has about 1,500 pages) and is
>>> commonly used as a reference in the metal working trades.
>>>
>> Good comparison.
>> I was once deeply engaged with a chart in my Machinery's
>> Handbook when my bookkeeper walked in and asked, "Are you
>> reading the Bible?"
>
> I no longer have my machinists manual since it is so far outdated. If John got one in high school that is is essentially useful only for older materials. I too was a machinist in high school and in several early jobs after getting out of the Air Force. If he is believing himself to be plausible after his claims that I was never in the Air Force after his line of crap about his assignments (Uh - he was in Japan in 1954 so he is absolutely positive that Japan wasn't heavily bombed - and this from a supposed Air Force crew chief who worked for men who bombed Japan) So he wants us to believe that he was a machinist as a youth. Well, were he a qualified machinist they would have a job for him in the Air Force a great deal more responsible than crew chief on a dead-in-the-water obsolete bomber. You don't take a qualified machinist and make him a paper shuffler.
>
> One would think that after comments from Frank who at least taught materials technology he couldn't try passing BS off as information.
>

Outdated? WTF?

When did cutting speeds, material composition, tap drill
sizes and weight per square foot for various gauges of steel
change?? I must have missed that.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 4/27/2022 10:12 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 8:03:53 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>> I was once deeply engaged with a chart in my Machinery's
>> Handbook when my bookkeeper walked in and asked, "Are you
>> reading the Bible?"
>
> I no longer have my machinists manual since it is so far outdated. If John got one in high school that is is essentially useful only for older materials. ...

If Tom thinks the Machinery's Handbook is outdated, it proves he has
never made enough use of the book to know what it contains.

Perhaps he's confusing the Machinery's Handbook with some other
unspecified "machinists manual." If so, that's yet another example of
him speaking authoritatively from a position of ignorance.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/26/2022 11:03 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/26/2022 6:01 PM, John B. wrote:
>>
>>
>> And of course I "look things up" as does every other competent
>> individual. The Machinery's Handbook, for example, has more then 4,000
>> pages of data (the Christian Bible has about 1,500 pages) and is
>> commonly used as a reference in the metal working trades.
>>
>
> Good comparison.
> I was once deeply engaged with a chart in my Machinery's Handbook when
> my bookkeeper walked in and asked, "Are you reading the Bible?"

While we're on the topic of reference books, am I the only one with a
well-worn copy of "Mark's Handbook," AKA the _Standard Handbook for
Mechanical Engineers_?

If I could save only two books from the zombie apocalypse, I think those
two would be my choices.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 7:49:44 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/27/2022 9:12 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 8:03:53 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 4/26/2022 6:01 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 07:18:58 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> >>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:16:43 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>> On 4/25/2022 7:36 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:53:30 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> >>>>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:10:30 PM UTC-7, Lou Holtman wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 21, 2022 at 8:21:33 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> "Stainless steel is too brittle for high-strength applications...."
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I'm sure there are countless engineers who would be surprised to read
> >>>>>>>>> that blanket statement. They might ask "_Which_ stainless steel? How
> >>>>>>>>> brittle, under what conditions? What sort of stresses qualify as
> >>>>>>>>> 'high-strength'? What sort of applications?"
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.renehersecycles.com/just-a-bunch-of-bolts/
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Jan Heine has some good idea, but IMO he often goes off into the weeds.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I can't remember the last time I broke a stainless steel fastener on a
> >>>>>>>>> bike. It may have never happened.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
> >>>>>>>> Pff... as if the bolts on a bicycle are in the high end application category.
> >>>>>>>> I read the article and what I came up with is 'what a snob...' YMMV.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Steel is iron with carbon in it. It was originated simply by smelting iron in coal fired ovens. Crying about chromium or molybdenum added to the mixture make pretty minor improvements. (for instance; adding chromium doesn't improve the strength but the hardness or rigidity of the material. Stainless is largely iron with a larger percentage of other materials such as aluminum, nickel, vanadium etc. Stainless is a material you HAVE to know how to work. Overheating and quenching like you would some steels causes it to crystalize and become brittle. You can see this has occurred in the manufacture of screws in particular since they turn these things out so rapidly that they can overheat the material and then it can be quenched coming off of the tool because they are in an oil bath, Then when you tighten the bolt it simply breaks. Its been far too long since I dealt with this but I seem to remember that you can heat it up to something like a thousand degrees F and let it stay the
> re
> >>
> >>> f
> >>>>> or
> >>>>>>> some time and then allow it to air cool and it forms a different sort of austenitic structure more like steel and so it is much stronger.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://www.theworldmaterial.com/aisi-316-ss316-stainless-steel-properties-composition/#Hardening
> >>>>>> "Type 316 SS cannot be hardened by heat treating"
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> OK, fine.
> >>>>> But any claim about 'stainless' generally is pointless- it's
> >>>>> a big group of wildly different materials. Some examples:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.mori2a.com/en/dont-stop/news/prodottiproducts/stainless-steel-200-series-in-cr-mn-a-safe-alternative-to-304/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.searchsteel.info/2011/03/stainless-technical-standards-and.html
> >>>>
> >>>> As I've said before, it is impossible to say absolutely anything without that moron John Googling away and finding an exception to a rule and then passing it off as the rule rather than the exception. He is like having a parrot around the house that only knows a limited number of words. Hey John, I guess I just gave you the bird.
> >>>
> >>> Well, Tommy, I served an apprenticeship as a Machinist and "had my
> >>> papers" as a Journeyman Machinist by the time I completed High School..
> >>> Now tell us your qualifications,
> >>>
> >>> And of course I "look things up" as does every other competent
> >>> individual. The Machinery's Handbook, for example, has more then 4,000
> >>> pages of data (the Christian Bible has about 1,500 pages) and is
> >>> commonly used as a reference in the metal working trades.
> >>>
> >> Good comparison.
> >> I was once deeply engaged with a chart in my Machinery's
> >> Handbook when my bookkeeper walked in and asked, "Are you
> >> reading the Bible?"
> >
> > I no longer have my machinists manual since it is so far outdated. If John got one in high school that is is essentially useful only for older materials. I too was a machinist in high school and in several early jobs after getting out of the Air Force. If he is believing himself to be plausible after his claims that I was never in the Air Force after his line of crap about his assignments (Uh - he was in Japan in 1954 so he is absolutely positive that Japan wasn't heavily bombed - and this from a supposed Air Force crew chief who worked for men who bombed Japan) So he wants us to believe that he was a machinist as a youth. Well, were he a qualified machinist they would have a job for him in the Air Force a great deal more responsible than crew chief on a dead-in-the-water obsolete bomber. You don't take a qualified machinist and make him a paper shuffler.
> >
> > One would think that after comments from Frank who at least taught materials technology he couldn't try passing BS off as information.
> >
> Outdated? WTF?
>
> When did cutting speeds, material composition, tap drill
> sizes and weight per square foot for various gauges of steel
> change?? I must have missed that.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

In the early 50's what did they know about the cutting speeds for Beryllium or alloyed Titanium or even carbon fiber exist? Hasn't the business mostly moved on from Cromor? My good friend is a machinist at a large machine shop in Santa Cruz and over half of the work he does is steel alloys and stainless alloys that weren't even invented in the early 50's when John claims to have been a certified machinist. Not to mention aluminum alloys that are now extremely sensitive to heat and therefore cutting speed.

And the point is that if John were a machinist they would have a hell of a lot more responsible job in the Air Force than mothering an obsolete propeller driven aircraft as a crew chief.

John simply Googles something and then claims to be an expert on it.

On 4/27/2022 11:19 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 7:49:44 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/27/2022 9:12 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 8:03:53 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 4/26/2022 6:01 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 07:18:58 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:16:43 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/25/2022 7:36 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:53:30 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>>>>>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:10:30 PM UTC-7, Lou Holtman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 21, 2022 at 8:21:33 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> "Stainless steel is too brittle for high-strength applications..."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sure there are countless engineers who would be surprised to read
>>>>>>>>>>> that blanket statement. They might ask "_Which_ stainless steel? How
>>>>>>>>>>> brittle, under what conditions? What sort of stresses qualify as
>>>>>>>>>>> 'high-strength'? What sort of applications?"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.renehersecycles.com/just-a-bunch-of-bolts/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Jan Heine has some good idea, but IMO he often goes off into the weeds.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I can't remember the last time I broke a stainless steel fastener on a
>>>>>>>>>>> bike. It may have never happened.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>>>> Pff... as if the bolts on a bicycle are in the high end application category.
>>>>>>>>>> I read the article and what I came up with is 'what a snob...' YMMV.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Steel is iron with carbon in it. It was originated simply by smelting iron in coal fired ovens. Crying about chromium or molybdenum added to the mixture make pretty minor improvements. (for instance; adding chromium doesn't improve the strength but the hardness or rigidity of the material. Stainless is largely iron with a larger percentage of other materials such as aluminum, nickel, vanadium etc. Stainless is a material you HAVE to know how to work. Overheating and quenching like you would some steels causes it to crystalize and become brittle. You can see this has occurred in the manufacture of screws in particular since they turn these things out so rapidly that they can overheat the material and then it can be quenched coming off of the tool because they are in an oil bath, Then when you tighten the bolt it simply breaks. Its been far too long since I dealt with this but I seem to remember that you can heat it up to something like a thousand degrees F and let it stay the
>> re
>>>>
>>>>> f
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>> some time and then allow it to air cool and it forms a different sort of austenitic structure more like steel and so it is much stronger.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.theworldmaterial.com/aisi-316-ss316-stainless-steel-properties-composition/#Hardening
>>>>>>>> "Type 316 SS cannot be hardened by heat treating"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK, fine.
>>>>>>> But any claim about 'stainless' generally is pointless- it's
>>>>>>> a big group of wildly different materials. Some examples:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.mori2a.com/en/dont-stop/news/prodottiproducts/stainless-steel-200-series-in-cr-mn-a-safe-alternative-to-304/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.searchsteel.info/2011/03/stainless-technical-standards-and.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I've said before, it is impossible to say absolutely anything without that moron John Googling away and finding an exception to a rule and then passing it off as the rule rather than the exception. He is like having a parrot around the house that only knows a limited number of words. Hey John, I guess I just gave you the bird.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, Tommy, I served an apprenticeship as a Machinist and "had my
>>>>> papers" as a Journeyman Machinist by the time I completed High School.
>>>>> Now tell us your qualifications,
>>>>>
>>>>> And of course I "look things up" as does every other competent
>>>>> individual. The Machinery's Handbook, for example, has more then 4,000
>>>>> pages of data (the Christian Bible has about 1,500 pages) and is
>>>>> commonly used as a reference in the metal working trades.
>>>>>
>>>> Good comparison.
>>>> I was once deeply engaged with a chart in my Machinery's
>>>> Handbook when my bookkeeper walked in and asked, "Are you
>>>> reading the Bible?"
>>>
>>> I no longer have my machinists manual since it is so far outdated. If John got one in high school that is is essentially useful only for older materials. I too was a machinist in high school and in several early jobs after getting out of the Air Force. If he is believing himself to be plausible after his claims that I was never in the Air Force after his line of crap about his assignments (Uh - he was in Japan in 1954 so he is absolutely positive that Japan wasn't heavily bombed - and this from a supposed Air Force crew chief who worked for men who bombed Japan) So he wants us to believe that he was a machinist as a youth. Well, were he a qualified machinist they would have a job for him in the Air Force a great deal more responsible than crew chief on a dead-in-the-water obsolete bomber. You don't take a qualified machinist and make him a paper shuffler.
>>>
>>> One would think that after comments from Frank who at least taught materials technology he couldn't try passing BS off as information.
>>>
>> Outdated? WTF?
>>
>> When did cutting speeds, material composition, tap drill
>> sizes and weight per square foot for various gauges of steel
>> change?? I must have missed that.
>> --
>> Andrew Muzi
>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
> In the early 50's what did they know about the cutting speeds for Beryllium or alloyed Titanium or even carbon fiber exist? Hasn't the business mostly moved on from Cromor? My good friend is a machinist at a large machine shop in Santa Cruz and over half of the work he does is steel alloys and stainless alloys that weren't even invented in the early 50's when John claims to have been a certified machinist. Not to mention aluminum alloys that are now extremely sensitive to heat and therefore cutting speed.
>
> And the point is that if John were a machinist they would have a hell of a lot more responsible job in the Air Force than mothering an obsolete propeller driven aircraft as a crew chief.
>
> John simply Googles something and then claims to be an expert on it.
"The irony is strong with this one!" - Darth Vader, on reading Tom's posts.
--
- Frank Krygowski

On Wed, 27 Apr 2022 10:57:43 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 4/27/2022 10:12 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 8:03:53 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> I was once deeply engaged with a chart in my Machinery's
>>> Handbook when my bookkeeper walked in and asked, "Are you
>>> reading the Bible?"
>>
>> I no longer have my machinists manual since it is so far outdated. If John got one in high school that is is essentially useful only for older materials. ...
>
>If Tom thinks the Machinery's Handbook is outdated, it proves he has
>never made enough use of the book to know what it contains.
>
>Perhaps he's confusing the Machinery's Handbook with some other
>unspecified "machinists manual." If so, that's yet another example of
>him speaking authoritatively from a position of ignorance.

Well, in a sense some portions of the Machinery's Handbook are out of
date as it does provide information on practices not very often used
today. Babbeted bearings for example. But on the other hand it did (I
no longer have a copy to hand) provide information on things rarely
used at the time. Clearance for "air bearings" for example was in the
last copy I owned.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 27 Apr 2022 07:12:38 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 8:03:53 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/26/2022 6:01 PM, John B. wrote:
>> > On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 07:18:58 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>> > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:16:43 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> >>> On 4/25/2022 7:36 PM, John B. wrote:
>> >>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:53:30 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>> >>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:10:30 PM UTC-7, Lou Holtman wrote:
>> >>>>>> On Thursday, April 21, 2022 at 8:21:33 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> >>>>>>> "Stainless steel is too brittle for high-strength applications..."
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I'm sure there are countless engineers who would be surprised to read
>> >>>>>>> that blanket statement. They might ask "_Which_ stainless steel? How
>> >>>>>>> brittle, under what conditions? What sort of stresses qualify as
>> >>>>>>> 'high-strength'? What sort of applications?"
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> https://www.renehersecycles.com/just-a-bunch-of-bolts/
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Jan Heine has some good idea, but IMO he often goes off into the weeds.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I can't remember the last time I broke a stainless steel fastener on a
>> >>>>>>> bike. It may have never happened.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>> >>>>>> Pff... as if the bolts on a bicycle are in the high end application category.
>> >>>>>> I read the article and what I came up with is 'what a snob...' YMMV.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Steel is iron with carbon in it. It was originated simply by smelting iron in coal fired ovens. Crying about chromium or molybdenum added to the mixture make pretty minor improvements. (for instance; adding chromium doesn't improve the strength but the hardness or rigidity of the material. Stainless is largely iron with a larger percentage of other materials such as aluminum, nickel, vanadium etc. Stainless is a material you HAVE to know how to work. Overheating and quenching like you would some steels causes it to crystalize and become brittle. You can see this has occurred in the manufacture of screws in particular since they turn these things out so rapidly that they can overheat the material and then it can be quenched coming off of the tool because they are in an oil bath, Then when you tighten the bolt it simply breaks. Its been far too long since I dealt with this but I seem to remember that you can heat it up to something like a thousand degrees F and let it stay
>there
>>
>> > f
>> >>> or
>> >>>>> some time and then allow it to air cool and it forms a different sort of austenitic structure more like steel and so it is much stronger.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> https://www.theworldmaterial.com/aisi-316-ss316-stainless-steel-properties-composition/#Hardening
>> >>>> "Type 316 SS cannot be hardened by heat treating"
>> >>>>
>> >>> OK, fine.
>> >>> But any claim about 'stainless' generally is pointless- it's
>> >>> a big group of wildly different materials. Some examples:
>> >>>
>> >>> https://www.mori2a.com/en/dont-stop/news/prodottiproducts/stainless-steel-200-series-in-cr-mn-a-safe-alternative-to-304/
>> >>>
>> >>> https://www.searchsteel.info/2011/03/stainless-technical-standards-and.html
>> >>
>> >> As I've said before, it is impossible to say absolutely anything without that moron John Googling away and finding an exception to a rule and then passing it off as the rule rather than the exception. He is like having a parrot around the house that only knows a limited number of words. Hey John, I guess I just gave you the bird.
>> >
>> > Well, Tommy, I served an apprenticeship as a Machinist and "had my
>> > papers" as a Journeyman Machinist by the time I completed High School.
>> > Now tell us your qualifications,
>> >
>> > And of course I "look things up" as does every other competent
>> > individual. The Machinery's Handbook, for example, has more then 4,000
>> > pages of data (the Christian Bible has about 1,500 pages) and is
>> > commonly used as a reference in the metal working trades.
>> >
>> Good comparison.
>> I was once deeply engaged with a chart in my Machinery's
>> Handbook when my bookkeeper walked in and asked, "Are you
>> reading the Bible?"
>
>I no longer have my machinists manual since it is so far outdated. If John got one in high school that is is essentially useful only for older materials. I too was a machinist in high school and in several early jobs after getting out of the Air Force. If he is believing himself to be plausible after his claims that I was never in the Air Force after his line of crap about his assignments (Uh - he was in Japan in 1954 so he is absolutely positive that Japan wasn't heavily bombed - and this from a supposed Air Force crew chief who worked for men who bombed Japan) So he wants us to believe that he was a machinist as a youth. Well, were he a qualified machinist they would have a job for him in the Air Force a great deal more responsible than crew chief on a dead-in-the-water obsolete bomber. You don't take a qualified machinist and make him a paper shuffler.
>
Gee Tommy, going on about the Machinery's Hand book I had in High
School. Sorry Tommy I didn't have a Handbook in those days, they were
too expensive. The Shop had a copy.

As for being in Japan in 1954? Why ever not" Being a licensed airplane
mechanic when I enlisted I never went to Tech School but was assigned
to Randolph Field where the B-29 crews were trained and subsequently
sent to Japan to the 98th Bomb wing about January 1954 and when the
Bomb Wing rotated back to the U.S., in mid 1954, I volunteered to stay
in Japan and was re-assigned to the 91st Recon Squadron.

As for the Machine shop. After some 8 years in Japan I came back to
the U.S. and ended up in what I believe was the last KC-97 tanker wing
left in the Air force, at Bangor, Maine, where we worked day and night
to try and keep those things flying so they could refuel B-52's. 6 - 7
hours at METO power to have enough airspeed for a Recip Tanker to
refuel a jet does cause considerable strain on engines. When the KC's
were phased out I'd had enough of that 24 hour stuff and hauled out my
Machinists Papers and asked for reassignment as a Machinist and
luckily the base machine shop was undermanned and of course with no
airplanes the aircraft maintenance shop was over manned so became a
Machinist for my last years.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 27 Apr 2022 14:17:49 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 4/27/2022 11:19 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 7:49:44 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 4/27/2022 9:12 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 8:03:53 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 4/26/2022 6:01 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 07:18:58 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>>>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:16:43 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/25/2022 7:36 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:53:30 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
>>>>>>>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 1:10:30 PM UTC-7, Lou Holtman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 21, 2022 at 8:21:33 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Stainless steel is too brittle for high-strength applications..."
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sure there are countless engineers who would be surprised to read
>>>>>>>>>>>> that blanket statement. They might ask "_Which_ stainless steel? How
>>>>>>>>>>>> brittle, under what conditions? What sort of stresses qualify as
>>>>>>>>>>>> 'high-strength'? What sort of applications?"
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.renehersecycles.com/just-a-bunch-of-bolts/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan Heine has some good idea, but IMO he often goes off into the weeds.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I can't remember the last time I broke a stainless steel fastener on a
>>>>>>>>>>>> bike. It may have never happened.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>>>>> Pff... as if the bolts on a bicycle are in the high end application category.
>>>>>>>>>>> I read the article and what I came up with is 'what a snob...' YMMV.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Steel is iron with carbon in it. It was originated simply by smelting iron in coal fired ovens. Crying about chromium or molybdenum added to the mixture make pretty minor improvements. (for instance; adding chromium doesn't improve the strength but the hardness or rigidity of the material. Stainless is largely iron with a larger percentage of other materials such as aluminum, nickel, vanadium etc. Stainless is a material you HAVE to know how to work. Overheating and quenching like you would some steels causes it to crystalize and become brittle. You can see this has occurred in the manufacture of screws in particular since they turn these things out so rapidly that they can overheat the material and then it can be quenched coming off of the tool because they are in an oil bath, Then when you tighten the bolt it simply breaks. Its been far too long since I dealt with this but I seem to remember that you can heat it up to something like a thousand degrees F and let it stay
>the
>>> re
>>>>>
>>>>>> f
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>> some time and then allow it to air cool and it forms a different sort of austenitic structure more like steel and so it is much stronger.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.theworldmaterial.com/aisi-316-ss316-stainless-steel-properties-composition/#Hardening
>>>>>>>>> "Type 316 SS cannot be hardened by heat treating"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OK, fine.
>>>>>>>> But any claim about 'stainless' generally is pointless- it's
>>>>>>>> a big group of wildly different materials. Some examples:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.mori2a.com/en/dont-stop/news/prodottiproducts/stainless-steel-200-series-in-cr-mn-a-safe-alternative-to-304/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.searchsteel.info/2011/03/stainless-technical-standards-and.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I've said before, it is impossible to say absolutely anything without that moron John Googling away and finding an exception to a rule and then passing it off as the rule rather than the exception. He is like having a parrot around the house that only knows a limited number of words. Hey John, I guess I just gave you the bird.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, Tommy, I served an apprenticeship as a Machinist and "had my
>>>>>> papers" as a Journeyman Machinist by the time I completed High School.
>>>>>> Now tell us your qualifications,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And of course I "look things up" as does every other competent
>>>>>> individual. The Machinery's Handbook, for example, has more then 4,000
>>>>>> pages of data (the Christian Bible has about 1,500 pages) and is
>>>>>> commonly used as a reference in the metal working trades.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Good comparison.
>>>>> I was once deeply engaged with a chart in my Machinery's
>>>>> Handbook when my bookkeeper walked in and asked, "Are you
>>>>> reading the Bible?"
>>>>
>>>> I no longer have my machinists manual since it is so far outdated. If John got one in high school that is is essentially useful only for older materials. I too was a machinist in high school and in several early jobs after getting out of the Air Force. If he is believing himself to be plausible after his claims that I was never in the Air Force after his line of crap about his assignments (Uh - he was in Japan in 1954 so he is absolutely positive that Japan wasn't heavily bombed - and this from a supposed Air Force crew chief who worked for men who bombed Japan) So he wants us to believe that he was a machinist as a youth. Well, were he a qualified machinist they would have a job for him in the Air Force a great deal more responsible than crew chief on a dead-in-the-water obsolete bomber. You don't take a qualified machinist and make him a paper shuffler.
>>>>
>>>> One would think that after comments from Frank who at least taught materials technology he couldn't try passing BS off as information.
>>>>
>>> Outdated? WTF?
>>>
>>> When did cutting speeds, material composition, tap drill
>>> sizes and weight per square foot for various gauges of steel
>>> change?? I must have missed that.
>>> --
>>> Andrew Muzi
>>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>>
>> In the early 50's what did they know about the cutting speeds for Beryllium or alloyed Titanium or even carbon fiber exist? Hasn't the business mostly moved on from Cromor? My good friend is a machinist at a large machine shop in Santa Cruz and over half of the work he does is steel alloys and stainless alloys that weren't even invented in the early 50's when John claims to have been a certified machinist. Not to mention aluminum alloys that are now extremely sensitive to heat and therefore cutting speed.
>>
>> And the point is that if John were a machinist they would have a hell of a lot more responsible job in the Air Force than mothering an obsolete propeller driven aircraft as a crew chief.
>>
>> John simply Googles something and then claims to be an expert on it.
>
>"The irony is strong with this one!" - Darth Vader, on reading Tom's posts.

Now Frank, don't be picking on poor old Tommy as I'm sure that he
believes everything that he says. He really, in his own mind, is the
great man that he portrays here.

After all, the fact that he couldn't capable of finishing high school,
that he lives in a cheap house in a slum and drives a second hand
jalopy and exists on Social Security payments and the sale of second
hand junk, can be over looked.

No, TOMMY IS WONDERFUL!

In polite circles it is refereed to as " demented", or as my Granny
used to say, "Batty as a Bedbug".

I recently read something that probably applies:

There is a bloke laying there on the side of the street, all beat and
battered with blood dripping out and two sociologists walk by, and one
comments, "Goodness, the chap that did that really needs our help" and
this applies equally to Tommy... He needs our help.
--
Cheers,