Attention to Detail
WELCOME TO THE NO BS ZONE OF TEDDY JACOBSON
...............................................................................
MUST READ TOP STORY I JUST POSTED AT THE VERY BOTTOM IN BLACK LETTERING 4-30-06 / 2 pm C.T.
..................................................................
I THOUGHT IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO KNOW AND UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE IN SPRING WIRE AS PER ROCKWELL HARDNESS ON THE "C" SCALE.
IF YOU USE MUSIC WIRE OR PIANO WIRE SPRINGS AND THEY ARE ONE AND THE SAME, THE ROCKWELL HARDNESS IS IN THE LOW TO MID 20's (TWENTYS)...
IF YOU USE CHROME SILICON OR STAINLESS STEEL WIRE SPRINGS AS MADE BY http://www.ismi-gunsprings.com 800 773 1940
THE ROCKWELL HARDNESS OF THEIR CHROME SILICON OR STAINLESS STEEL SPRINGS AFTER HEAT TREATING IS IN THE LOW TO MID 50's (FIFTY'S)...
I JUST THOUGHT I OWED YOU THAT EXPLANATION.
...........................................................................
STEPHEN CAMPS LIST OF BOOKS FOR SALE
http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Products5.html
.............................................................................................Please Note:
I felt it was important to add this opinion of mine which is as follows. I personally believe that many of the people that post opinions of items and about specific details about specific brands and models of handguns are using an assumed name and they are working in the upper management of that particular company. These are positive comments that are designed to find favor with the product they are talking about.
I have had this opinion for a very long time. I do not believe its the $10.00 per hour employee but it is the upper management of their respective company. I believe this is all designed to show you how satisfied they are with the with their product to increase sales. I have always believed all this. Of course it is my opinion only and if you think about what I am saying it all makes sense.
I believe the actual factory worker knows how really screwed up their factory operation is but they are in no position to discuss this on an open forum because they have to support their families and they must keep their income.
I HAVE DECIDED TO FINALLY STATE MY OPINION ABOUT THE BS ON THESE FORUMS AND THESE CHAT ROOMS. IT IS VERY EASY FOR A COMPUTER PERSON TO USE A FICTICOUS NAME, CHECK THEIR PROFILES AND THEY TELL YOU NOTHING. THIS IS MY OPINION ONLY. See Disclaimer below...
.......................................................
MUST SEE NOW
ALLEN MOSS VS. BRILEY
http://www.truthaboutparts.blogspot.com/
..........................................................
I am going to write about my field of expertise which is Attention to Detail. Most current Gunsmiths and or Pistolsmiths do not have a clue what I will discuss here and now. The older generation of craftsmen all knew about attention to detail and like me it became an obsession. Think of a watch maker and or a jeweler or a draftsman who practiced writing the alphabet a thousand times and writing each and every letter over and over and over until every letter was perfect. This has become a lost art with the current generation as everything is either a throw away or is guided by profits.
For example if you look at the executives of the larger gun companies like Smith and Wesson as an example their President and CEO has a background totally unrelated to guns of any kind. These type of people are in marketing and sales in order to be able to steer the company in the right direction down Benjamin Franklin Blvd. where they keep the green money rolling in. They not only do not know about guns and or quality, its questionable if they even care about a gun. I am not trying to single out Smith and Wesson because I see all these companies going down the very same road.
When I look at the internals of any handgun I see every mark made by hand and or by machines, sometimes I use magnification. When some of these wannabbeee gunsmiths work on your handgun or rifle they may be using a Norton medium stone, well they just do not have what it takes to understand that they are doing more damage using a stone like this that leaving the parts or frame with its original finish. If you take a 30 power micro scope and look at a part that your genius gunsmith has just stoned you will be horrified to see the damage he or she has done. This is not always detectable by the naked eye.
Can this be fixed, not hardly. These people that are working on guns and gun parts have no idea what severe damage that these inferior stones can and are doing. They would not spend the kind of money for very high quality stones like I have in the past. Many people go hog wild not only with their cheap stones but also with their dremel tools and they are counting on the fact that no one will ever scrutinize their interior work. Working on actions like I have always done is totally different than using a milling machine or even a lathe.
The stories that I can tell you are endless with what I see. When a person stones a part of any kind that does not mean he is smoothing it out or refining it, it can all be seen starting with 20 power magnification and go up to 30 at times. I have seen countless revolvers butchered because they were stoned by a person that just did not understand anything about Attention to Detail. They just do not get it, they are from this current generation of throw aways. Very few stones made in this world are even capable of holding a 90 degree angle.
Sadly most of the old world craftsmen are either in cemetaries or nursing homes, their era is over. My era is coming to a slow end also as I do limited trigger work at this time. My work and my attention to detail is better now than ever, I just can not do very much each weak because of declining health. Just to show you how these gun companies really deserve what they get, I offered to tell the owner of a specific company whose product has become third rate, all I said to him was call me and I will help you for "FREE" - I am still waiting for his call that will most likely never come. But when he goes out of business he will be crying the blues, he really deserves what he has gotten himself into.
There is no way to explain to people of the kids coming up what Attention to Detail really means. I can just watch a person fold a letter before stuffing it into an envelope and learn how careful they are. You can look at a persons handgun and see how they keep it and understand that they simply do not get it. I can watch a person sharpen their knife and see how badly they scratch the blade. You can watch some one put stamps on a letter and see if they are really careful and they take some pride in what they do with their prized possessions. You can watch a person prepare cases for reloading and learn a great deal, or look at the finished bullet.
I do not want to get off track here as I want to stay with the people that actually work on your guns. Its your choice who you allow to do that. There is no licensing criteria to become a gunsmith, any schmuck that gets an FFL (federal firearms license) that is class 01 can hang out a shingle and declare him or her a master gunsmith, its all BS. The problem lies when you entrust your life to a schmuck that does not have a clue what he is doing, as long as he gets your money. NEVER LET ANY COMPANY EMPLOYEE WORK ON YOUR GUN WHEN HE GETS PAID BY COMMISSION ONLY. This is my personal opinion
I am going to tell you a true story that happened about 20 years ago. I was in a gun shop and I was friends with the (owner) gunsmith. He put a SW revolver in my left hand and told me that that was his $75.00 trigger job. He then put an identical revolver in my right hand and he said this was his $45.00 trigger job. I looked at both very carefully and they were identical in feel and pull. I asked the gunsmith (owner) what the difference was and he laughed and took both revolvers away. I knew his worker there very well, also another gunsmith and I am the one that worked on the internals of this hired gunsmith's personal handguns.
I got him alone and asked him what was the difference between those two revolvers the owner placed in my hands. This man looked around to make sure no one was looking and said "THE KIND OF CAR THE CUSTOMER DRIVES" meaning if the customer drove up in a Cadillac it was $75.00 but if he drove up in an old beat up truck it was $45.00 - This is a true story..
CONTINUATION
I personally believe that you can not teach a person to have the attention to detail as in the old world. In this computer age people just do not have the hand skills that are required to do superb detailed work anymore like an engraver or a manual draftsman. That era is long gone, now its get thru the job as quickly as possible and if these current gunsmiths take in work they can not perform, they just sub it out WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE. They will most likely never tell you that the barrel you wanted was installed by another person. They just don't care, they only care about the money.
FOLLOW THE MONEY TRAIL AND YOU WILL LEARN MORE THAN YOU EVER WANTED TO KNOW. Most everyone in this current world is just interested in either oil, power or money. The craftsmen we have always admired are almost gone to the next world. Gone are the wonderful S&W revolvers of the 60's, gone are the excellent Walthers that were made in Germany, gone are all the people that cared. OF COURSE there are a few left but they are getting older and their time is almost up. DO NOT BELIEVE THE BS IN THE PUBLICATIONS, ITS ALL ABOUT ADVERTISING MONEY AND FUTURE SALES.
DO YOU THINK A FACTORY WILL ALLOW A WORKER TO SPEND 8 HOURS FINE TUNING YOUR HANDGUN OR STIPPLING YOUR FRAME, ITS ALL BS, TIME IS MONEY. GET REAL. THE FACTORY OWNERS AND MANAGERS WATCH THE WORKERS AND THE TIME THEY SPEND. IF YOU ARE LIMITED IN TIME TO A LOW WAGE BEGINNER SMITH, WHAT CAN YOU EXPECT ?? THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT ATTENTION TO DETAIL EVEN MEANS.
TeddyINTERESTED IN NAA GUARDIAN - MUST SEE
www.gun-tests.com A Trio of Pocket .380 ACPs: Steer Clear of NAA’s GuardianInstead, depending on your needs, pick the slightly larger but fully functional Beretta Cheetah. Also, we loved aspects of S&W’s PPK, but it didn’t work during some parts of our test.
www.defensereview.com/article326.html
DISCLAIMER: THIS COMMENTARY AS WELL AS ALL (6 Bloggers) MY PREVIOUS COMMENTARIES ARE MY PERSONAL OPINION AND MY PERSONAL VIEWPOINT ONLY. WHEN I QUOTE SOME ONE IT IS COPIED AND PASTED FROM A PUBLIC DOMAIN OF ONE KIND OR ANOTHER. I DO PAY FOR SOME DETAILED INTELLIGENCE REPORTS THAT I SHARE WITH YOU. IF YOU CAN NOT DEAL WITH REALITY, PLEASE LEAVE NOW.
www.tacticalknives.blogspot.com/
www.tjofsugarland.blogspot.com/
www.truthaboutparts.blogspot.com/
www.handgunpartsforsale.blogspot.com/TOP STORY
| |||
| Publishing Date: 29.04.06 18:02 | |||
| MI6, Britain's secret intelligence service, has identified six Pakistani scientists working in Iran's nuclear bomb program who have been "advising al-Qaida on how to weaponize fissionable materials it has now obtained." MI6 and the International Atomic Energy Agency believe the scientists have played a major role in enabling Iran to be "well advanced in providing uranium enriched materials for nuclear bombs," said Alexander Cirilovic, a nuclear terrorism expert in Paris. Both high-level MI6 and CIA sources have confirmed the scientists would only have been allowed to assist al-Qaida with the authority of Iran's unpredictable President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The revelation comes at a time when Washington has increased pressure on Tehran to give up its nuclear weapons program.
The scientists worked for Dr. A.Q. Khan, the "father of the Islamic bomb," who is now under house arrest in Pakistan after confessing he had provided both Iran and North Korea with details of how to make their own nuclear bombs.
Mafia helped al-Qaida smuggle uranium Destinations for ‘dirty bombs' said to be London, Paris
He says the military head of al-Qaida, Saif Al-Adil, and a former spokesman, Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, the oldest son of bin Laden, Saad, are currently staying in Iran. Mir says he's certain bin Laden is planning new attacks and suspects they will be coordinated around any action directed against Iran by the U.S., Israel and other western nations.
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's president said on Friday his country would pay no attention to international calls to halt its nuclear work, hours before the U.N. atomic watchdog reports on whether Tehran has met U.N. Security Council demands.Photo: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad greets the crowd as he begins his speech in city of Zanjan in this April 27, 2006 file photo. Ahmadinejad said on April 28 that his country would pay no attention to international calls to halt its nuclear work. (REUTERS / IRNA) "Those who want to prevent Iranians from obtaining their right, should know that we do not give a damn about such resolutions," Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a rally in northwest Iran, the official IRNA news agency reported. Mohamed ElBaradei, chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is expected to tell the council and the agency's board on Friday that Iran has not stopped enriching uranium or fully answered IAEA queries as the U.N. body asked a month ago.The West accuses Iran of pursuing a civilian nuclear programme as a cover to acquire atomic bombs. Tehran denies it. "Enemies think that by ... threatening us, launching psychological warfare or ... imposing embargos they can dissuade our nation to obtain nuclear technology," Ahmadinejad said in the town of Khorramdarreh, in Zanjan province."Whether enemies like it or not, Iran is a nuclear state. Obtaining nuclear technology is a national demand," he said.Iran said this month it had for the first time enriched uranium to the level used in power stations and vowed to pursue large-scale enrichment.Ahmadinejad also said the Islamic Republic's nuclear programme posed no threat to international peace and security, as Western leaders contend."If this technology is bad, why do you (Western countries) not give it up? ... We think it is good and all nations should have it.""CONSEQUENCES"Influential former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani urged the West to think twice before seeking a U.N. resolution on Iran."They should be careful and think about its consequences," Rafsanjani told worshippers at Friday prayers at Tehran University. "I am saying seriously: do not create problems for us, the region and others."Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's most powerful figure, said on Wednesday Iran would strike at U.S. interests worldwide if it was attacked by the United States.Washington is keeping military options open in case diplomacy fails to curb Tehran's nuclear programme. Rafsanjani, a key adviser to Khamenei, said dialogue was the best way to resolve the dispute."Surely Iranians want to build confidence. This issue should be resolved through talks," he said in his speech, broadcast live on state radio.France, Britain and Germany tried unsuccessfully in 2-1/2 years of talks with Iran to persuade it to drop its nuclear fuel-making programme in return for economic incentives. TOP STORY How U.S. will hit Iran British sources say Bush ‘significantly closer' to attack Publishing Date: 29.04.06 18:36 LONDON -- A secret crisis meeting of Britain's military and political chiefs has been told President Bush has moved "significantly closer" to launching attacks on Iran's nine nuclear plants. Both Washington and the International Atomic Energy Agency believe the facilities are now "advanced in providing uranium enrichment and plutonium materials which will be used to provide nuclear bombs." The time frame for this to happen "is within three years at the outside," the meeting was told. The Pentagon battle plans for the attack were revealed to the meeting.
U.S. Air Force B2 stealth bombers, each equipped with eight 4,500-pound bunker-busting bombs, would fly from Diego Garcia, the isolated US Navy base in the Indian Ocean, the Whiteman USAF base in Missouri, and the USAF base at Fairford in Gloucestershire. Each meter-long bomb of hardened steel can penetrate 6 meters of concrete. There would be no ground-force follow-up attacks. The meeting was called after Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told Foreign Secretary Jack Straw during her recent "feel good" visit to England that "if all else fails, we are prepared to go it alone or with the assistance of our good friend, Israel." In Tel Aviv, officials of Israel's new centrist-left coalition government, led by Ehud Olmert's Kadima Party, said they remained committed to supporting a U.S. attack. For Straw, Rice's privately-delivered blunt warning undermined his own reported public statements that an attack on Iran was "not going to happen - now or probably ever." An official who was with Straw at the time of Rice's warning said: "She made it very clear military action was inevitable unless Tehran backed down." Held in the monolithic Ministry of Defense building in Whitehall, the meeting had been ordered by Prime Minister Tony Blair to establish the level of Britain's own military involvement in such an attack. It was also asked to assess the political consequences the strike would have for the United Kingdom - including the increased threat of terrorist attacks on the country - its relationship with the European Union and the effect on the role of Coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. The last time such a meeting was held was in March, 2003, on the eve of the war with Iraq. The meeting was chaired by General Sir Michael Walker, the chief of the defense staff. Lt. General Andrew Ridgeway and the chief of army defense intelligence and Major-General Bill Rollo, the assistant chief of the general staff, flanked Walker. Senior Foreign Office officials were led by William Ehram, director-general of the FO defence office, and David Landesman, head of the nuclear counter-proliferation department, Sir John Scarlett, head of MI6 and Eliza Manningham-Buller also had seats around the mahogany conference table. Senior officials from Downing Street completed the group. Effectively they were the core of the Blair government "War Cabinet." Before the meeting, Straw had flown with Rice to Baghdad to try and resolve another crisis which could affect when an Iran attack happened: the pressing issue of who governed Iraq. In Baghdad Rice had said that "we need to get this settled as soon as possible." The words at the end of her press conference were not developed. But in London they were seen as an indication, a senior Foreign Office source said, "that Washington wants to get the Iraqi agenda off the top spot so it can concentrate on dealing with Iran. Bush is determined to destroy those nuclear sites." The Whitehall meeting was given the latest intelligence on Iran's current ballistic missile capability: •· A total of 85 S-300 air defence missiles. Provided by China, they would be effective against U.S. fighter-bombers. Less so against the multi-defense systems of the Tactical Tomahawks. •· X-55 cruise missiles. Numbers believed to be no more than 40. Estimated range of over 1,000 miles. Situated close to the border with Turkmenistan. •· Shabtai-3. A version of rocket provided by China. Exact numbers unknown. But believed to be no more than 26. Based in sites in southern Iran. Well within range of Israel. •· Shahab-4. Currently being developed near Natanz, south of Tehran. Will not come on line until 2008. Each will have a range of 18,000 miles - able to strike against anywhere in Europe and the United States. The present missiles can be adapted to fire from Iran's 25 missile craft and its three frigates. None can be launched from Iran's air force of 200 hundred old aircraft: Tomcats, MIG-29 Fulcum and Phantoms. Iran's 500,000 army of regular and conscripts are poorly led and trained. Most of their equipment comes from the former Soviet Union. The Blair "War Cabinet" meeting concluded: •· Apart from the Blair Government who else will support attack on Iran? Definitely Israel. Its three Dolphin Class nuclear submarines are in the Gulf to help target Iran's air defences at the nuclear facilities. The submarines are currently linked by satellite to naval HQ at Tel Aviv. In turn that is linked to the Pentagon. •· Who else would support the attack? Diplomatic support would probably come from Australia, Poland and possibly Germany, France and Spain. Less certain is the role of other European countries. •· How high-risk is the attack strategy? It could trigger devastating reprisals against 8,500 British troops based in Iraq and the 3,500 troops due to arrive in Afghanistan by May, 2006. Both countries have strong religious and political links to Iran. It could also see Washington having to re-plan withdrawal of its troops from Iraq. It would also certainly lead to Iran cutting off oil supplies to the West. It could bring about confrontation with China and Russia that would inevitably destabilise the region - and probably beyond. It would increase the probability of suicide attacks against Israel - and all nations that supported the attack. •· Finally, there is no guarantee that the U.S.-led attack would destroy all the country's facilities. MI6 told the meeting that, apart from the known eight identified targets, there are other secret facilities in Iran that have yet to be fully identified. Given all this, when will the attack take place? No date yet fixed. But if Iran continues to maintain its bellicose attitude and ignores demands made by the UN, the Bush administration will launch military action, either later this year or early in 2007. But certainly not later than the run-up to Bush's final year in office in 2008. What are the present mission plans? It is two-phased. First U.S. and probably Israeli cruise missiles will destroy defenses around targets. Second, B2 Stealth bombers will hit nuclear plants with bunker-busting bombs. Total mission time in target areas: probably eight hours. What are the present targets? Saghand: Mining operation set to begin later this year, yielding 50-60 tonnes of uranium annually. Ardkan: Ore is purified to produce uranium ore concentrate known as yellowcake. Gehine: Mine and milling facility. Isfahan: Yellowcake cleansed of impurities and converted to uranium hexafluoride gas. Natanz: Enrichment site which can be used to produce weapons grade uranium. Tehran: Research reactor and radioactive waste storage. Bushehr: Russian-built light water reactor. Arak: Heavy water research reactor. Anarak: Nuclear waste storage site. Apart from its own intelligence briefing, what external analysis did the meeting consider? Professor Paul Rogers, author of the Oxford Research Group's report on Iran: "A real possibility of military conflict. The immediate consequence could do serious damage to Iran's nuclear program, but that would be deceptive. The Americans do not have the troops for a regime change and an attack would strengthen the Iranian regime, spark another oil crisis and could encourage the Iranians to go hell for leather for nuclear weapons." Dr. Rosemary Hollis, the research director at the Chatham House think-tank: "There is so much opposition that I don't see an attack as imminent." Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon's Defence Policy Board from 2001 to 2003: "Whether Iran's nuclear weapons program ends with a whimper or a bang is up to the Iranians. If the UN does its job, by blocking Iran's nuclear weapon ambitions, it may be possible to avoid a more kinetic solution." Dr. Olivia Bosch, a former weapons inspector in Iraq: "The rhetoric is disproportionate to the capability that Iran has." Maryam Rajavi, the president-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran: "I do not agree with foreign military intervention. However, if the international community and the Security Council hesitate in adopting a firm policy on Iran, the regime would obtain the only thing it needs to acquire nuclear weapons, namely time. Then we would be facing an Islamic fundamentalist regime, the leading state sponsor of terrorism, armed with nuclear weapons. This would make war inevitable." --G2B contributor Gordon Thomas | |||
posted by Teddy Jacobson at 5:15 PM
<< Home