Aircraft blueprint reading

[MiTasol]

For those who want to understand aircraft technical drawings. During WW2 different companies (and countries) had different approaches. I do not have any Brit or Axis equivalent manuals on this subject.

To develop a basic understanding of how to read blueprints you must remember that the British and Americans use different datum points for their drawings so first you need to read a reference like

7 Difference Between First Angle And Third Angle Projection - Viva Differences to get a handle on the differences.

For the periods we are looking at the British and Europeans used first angle and Americans and Asians used third angle.

 

[Crimea_River]

Good stuff. Here's a de Havilland Drawing Office Handbook dating to the mid 50's but the content is very much a wartime derivative: http://vhjet.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/DHA-Drawing-Office-Handbook-OCR.pdf

 

[MIflyer]

Different companies have their own approaches. Boeing's was different from most others. I can recall an engineer in our office unfolding a drawing and saying, "Oh, God! It's from Boeing!" and then going to get a fresh cup of coffee. He knew he was going to be at that task for a while.

For sheet metal parts Boeing would put things like "BUP" on the drawing. I asked a highly experienced engineer what that meant. He replied, "It means Bend Up." That meant that flat drawing representing the layout of a sheet metal part indicated that part of the metal should be bent upwards along the bend line. He could handle understanding it with no problem, which meant that drawings needing engineering review prior to procurement actions got stacked up around his desk, since few others could make heads or tails of them. He also asked for First Article review of the parts that were to be delivered, because he had seen far too many cases where a part that "Joe's Screen Door Repair and Airplane Parts" should have been able to build per the drawing but would screw up in some way.

General Dynamics and Grumman used the same approach for their drawings. They standardized when they were both going to be building F-111's and Grumman kept the GD approach after the Navy part of the program was cancelled.

 

[MiTasol]

Good stuff. Here's a de Havilland Drawing Office Handbook dating to the mid 50's but the content is very much a wartime derivative: http://vhjet.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/DHA-Drawing-Office-Handbook-OCR.pdf

Thanks.
I did not have that one but I have the DH Australia one somewhere and a CAC one also. I will have to find.
I also have a UK DH one on part numbering practices that will drive you absolutely crazy - worse than Boeing by far. I will track it down and post.
I would love to find a Curtiss one or a Bell one as they used very logical systems.

 

[Crimea_River]

I'd love to see that DH part numbering practice. In working on our Mosquito I have found the system to have SOME logic in that part numbers start with a letter that signifies a structure or system followed by a two or three numeral model number (98 for Mosquito). So a part beginning with N98 is a part in the Mosquito electrical system. It's the numbers after the first 3 or 4 digits that seem quite random.

 

[MiTasol]

dH AUS and the total I have of the CAC manual. It was based on the NAA one.

The dH numbering one I cannot find but I will keep searching. It was dated in Dove days.

 

[fshort]

Hi all:

A slight drift in subject matter...

I don't remember where i found the following about Luftwaffe Part Numbering Systems in WWII.

A Google Translation follows the German version.

Regards,
James

 

[MiTasol]

Interesting. It would be nice to find the original and to get a proper translation as Google can be good or completely misleading.

 

[Snautzer01]

It is good. It is however not only for blue prints but also for spare parts ordering.

 

[MiTasol]

I'd love to see that DH part numbering practice. In working on our Mosquito I have found the system to have SOME logic in that part numbers start with a letter that signifies a structure or system followed by a two or three numeral model number (98 for Mosquito). So a part beginning with N98 is a part in the Mosquito electrical system. It's the numbers after the first 3 or 4 digits that seem quite random.

Found one - pages 15 to 19 of the manual you linked to in post 2 tho that manual is more Hornet orientated than Dove.

 

[MiTasol]

Here are two Boeing manuals on the subject from 1987/88 when they were still using paper for a lot of stuff. They only go back to 707 but they cover all the basics for most ww2 US blueprints although the Boeing numbering system feels like it has changed "monthly" since ww1 and bears little resemblance to other companies.

The second manual contains a section on Blueprint terminology and starts with Some words and phrases convey different meanings when applied to blueprint reading than when used in everyday conversation. It then goes on to cover those meanings so is an ideal primer for those who are new to the subject.

 

[Wurger]

 

[spanishbuddha]

Different companies have their own approaches. Boeing's was different from most others. I can recall an engineer in our office unfolding a drawing and saying, "Oh, God! It's from Boeing!" and then going to get a fresh cup of coffee. He knew he was going to be at that task for a while.

For sheet metal parts Boeing would put things like "BUP" on the drawing. I asked a highly experienced engineer what that meant. He replied, "It means Bend Up." That meant that flat drawing representing the layout of a sheet metal part indicated that part of the metal should be bent upwards along the bend line. He could handle understanding it with no problem, which meant that drawings needing engineering review prior to procurement actions got stacked up around his desk, since few others could make heads or tails of them. He also asked for First Article review of the parts that were to be delivered, because he had seen far too many cases where a part that "Joe's Screen Door Repair and Airplane Parts" should have been able to build per the drawing but would screw up in some way.

General Dynamics and Grumman used the same approach for their drawings Blueprint reading. They standardized when they were both going to be building F-111's and Grumman kept the GD approach after the Navy part of the program was cancelled.

Anybody have any suggestions on how to learn to read blueprints better. I am somewhat weak in that area and my job responsibilities are about to change. My employer has no problem with them but he does not have very much time to teach me what I should know. I was hoping for a website or a book or something I could study. I took some electrically related classes a while back but they just glossed over reading prints. Any ideas? Thanks

 

[ThomasP]

Try the local vocational school (if there is one anywhere near you). The school will usually have fairly comprehensive drafting classes. Talk to the instructor(s), one or more of the books they use in their classes should be helpful.

 

[MiTasol]

IF no local tech you could search for on line tutorials on reading blueprints (these days more often called technical drawings or CAD drawings). If your need is only reading electrical blueprints look for tutorials on reading circuit diagrams. Look for a reputable school that charges for their lessons but have a hard look at their curriculum for the module(s) you are interested in to see if they cover your needs.

If you are looking on youtube be careful as some self proclaimed experts are full of **** and are only guessing - often very wrongly.

 

[MIflyer]

Anybody have any suggestions on how to learn to read blueprints better.

I gather you never took any Mechanical Drawing classes in high school? That was standard when I went to school and I also had a rather less valuable course in it in college. I was never very good at making drawings, at least according to the kind of people who think they should be like artwork, but I could sketch something well enough to enable it to be manufactured. In fact, in some cases I would make an engineering sketch and some bureaucrat would insist that it be turned into an Official USAF Drawing by a real draftsman, usually imposing a significant delay. Then I would get a call from the shop asking what the thing was. I'd take them my crummy engineering sketch and they'd say, "Oh! That's better! I see!" Of course, it did not help that every bureaucrat along the way would unfold the official drawing and look at it, so that it was worn out by the time it got to the shop.

There are books on how to read building drawings, but I know of none for sale that teach how to read aircraft or automobile mechanical drawings.

Here is a US Army manual on reading construction prints: TM 5-704 Construction Print Reading in the Field : United States. Department of the Army and Department of the Air Force : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

A 1914 mechanical drawing manual: A manual of mechanical drawing : Dales, John Handsley : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Another manual on engineering drawing: Manual of engineering drawing : Simmons, C. H. (Colin H.) : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Another one: https://archive.org/details/engineeringdrawi0000mads_v0k5

A 1919 book on blueprint reading: https://archive.org/details/blueprintreading00fair/page/n7/mode/2up

A 1941 book on aircraft drawings: https://archive.org/details/manualofaircraft00sven

USN Book on drafting: https://archive.org/details/Draftsman210473

 

[MIflyer]

Anybody have any suggestions on how to learn to read blueprints better.

I gather you never took any Mechanical Drawing classes in high school? That was standard when I went to school and I also had a rather less valuable course in it in college. I was never very good at making drawings, at least according to the kind of people who think they should be like artwork, but I could sketch something well enough to enable it to be manufactured. In fact, in some cases I would make an engineering sketch and some bureaucrat would insist that it be turned into an Official USAF Drawing by a real draftsman, usually imposing a significant delay. Then I would get a call from the shop asking what the thing was. I'd take them my crummy engineering sketch and they'd say, "Oh! That's better! I see!" Of course, it did not help that every bureaucrat along the way would unfold the official drawing and look at it, so that it was worn out by the time it got to the shop.

There are books on how to read building drawings, but I know of none for sale that teach how to read aircraft or automobile mechanical drawings.

Here is a US Army manual on reading construction prints: TM 5-704 Construction Print Reading in the Field : United States. Department of the Army and Department of the Air Force : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

A 1914 mechanical drawing manual: A manual of mechanical drawing : Dales, John Handsley : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Another manual on engineering drawing: Manual of engineering drawing : Simmons, C. H. (Colin H.) : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Another one: Engineering drawing and design : solutions manual : Madsen, David A : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

A 1919 book on blueprint reading: Blueprint reading; a practical manual of instruction in blueprint reading through the analysis of typical plates with reference to mechanical drawing conventions and methods, the laws of projection, etc : Fairfield, Howard Parker, 1858- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

A 1941 book on aircraft drawings: A manual of aircraft drafting : Svensen, Carl L. (Carl Lars), 1884- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

USN Book on drafting: Draftsman 2, NAVPERS 10473 : Bureau of Naval Perosnnel : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

And on ebay someone has this book for sale and it looks pretty good: US Navy NAVPERS 10077-B Blueprint Reading and Sketching training manual 1963

 

[cvairwerks]

Here's one series that is pretty good:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht9GwXQMgpo

Here's on on Zenith aircraft:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6YYHtgcc8Q

A NASA primer on engineering drawings: https://s3vi.ndc.nasa.gov/ssri-kb/static/resources/Engineering+Working+Drawing+Basics.pdf


A word of caution: If you are wanting to learn to read aircraft drawings, they can get pretty complicated in a hurry. Often, information is split between both detailed parts drawing and assembly drawings. It takes time to learn how each company implemented their drawing standards and conventions. A good example, was when I was a lead in my area of F-16 production. It took me about 3-4 weeks to bootstrap a new assembler to where they could reliably and correctly read our drawings and chase down all the relevant information about a particular job. Most of the "new" kids I had, were assemblers with anywhere from 7 to 15 years experience already in aircraft assembly work.

 

[MIflyer]

If you want to look at some actual aircraft manufacturing drawings you can download from here: Ercoupe Info | Main / Drawings

 

[spanishbuddha]

Here's one series that is pretty good:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht9GwXQMgpo

Here's on on Zenith aircraft:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6YYHtgcc8Q

A NASA primer on engineering drawings:


A word of caution: If you are wanting to learn to read aircraft drawings, they can get pretty complicated in a hurry. Often, information is split between both detailed parts drawing and assembly drawings. It takes time to learn how each company implemented their drawing standards and conventions. A good example, was when I was a lead in my area of F-16 production. It took me about 3-4 weeks to bootstrap a new assembler to where they could reliably and correctly read our drawings and chase down all the relevant information about a particular job. Most of the "new" kids I had, Discover the perfect harmony of comfort and convenience - Rent an apartment in Metn and unlock a lifestyle tailored to your desires check this Rent an apartment in Metn. were assemblers with anywhere from 7 to 15 years experience already in aircraft assembly work.

thank you so much for your suggestion.