×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

The End of Mil-Hdbk-5
20

The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

(OP)
I was just informed by a local Transport Canada engineer that Mil-Hdbk-5 will soon cease to be the acceptable data accepted by the FAA for material allowables.  The FAA is taking over control of the program, and the new document is called AR-MMPDS.  They say they will eventually incorporate data from ESDU 00932 to make it universal in Europe and N.A.

The announcement:
http://aar400.tc.faa.gov/Programs/AgingAircraft/Structu...

The document itself:
I would strongly suggest downloading this by using your browser's "save-as" and picking a suitable directory for the 75 MB file
http://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/ar-mmpds-01....

"Simplicate, and add more lightness" - Bill Stout
Steven Fahey, CET

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

I found this out while reading page ii of MIL-HDBK-5J.  We are already using the MMPDS-01.  It is no different than MIL-HDBK-5, which is a relief.

Brian

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Thanks for that, I hadn't heard anything about it yet.  Guess I know what I'll be reading through this weekend.:)

So, for the real question:  what are we supposed to call the new handbook?  Seven-letter acronyms never roll of the tongue well in conversation.  Until I hear something better, my vote is "em-pads".

Regards

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

This is huge.  Thanks for the info.

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

9
(OP)
I278,

How about calling it the "mumps"?
I've already flipped through it a bit, and it seems to match up with Mil-Hdbk-5J page for page.  For now.

Where it will go in the FAA's hands, I don't know.

Even better: "armpits"!

"Simplicate, and add more lightness" - Bill Stout
Steven Fahey, CET

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

SparWeb,

Thanks for the update.  It should be interesting to see the many new faces of the MIL-HDBK-5.  Sort of like saying good bye to an old friend.

Best regards,

Brett

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

My vote is for M-pa-dess

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

How about empdness?

Thanks for the heads-up!

Jesus is THE life,
Leonard

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

I've tried downloading the file twice and I keep getting an error. It says "I/O error timeout!" and when I check the file its about 73 MB and its corrupt. What could be the problem?

Is anyone having thesame problem too? Is there any other link to download the file from?

Thanks for reading...

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

I use the fully blown version of DAP on a cable connection and it pulled it in 70secs. Much faster than normal - got lucky with traffic I think.

Check your cache settings - probably not the problem but I've seen it reported lately as a work around.

Sometimes if you pull off multiple servers using a downloader it doesn't assemble correctly.

Other possible causes - AV and firewall programs. Try turning them off temporarily if you can or are allowed to.

Another possible cause is that if you pull from multiplie servers sometimes one will become bogged down and time you out. You are then missing a part of the file which will show up as corrupted.

Does your downloader have a resume function on it?

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

I asked around my office and someone had a copy of it. But thanks for the advice, it maybe my cache settings.

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Hey Brett,
You said, "Sort of like saying good bye to an old friend."

This here is to say hello to and old friend!  Welcome aboard eng-tips.  This is good stuff.  Not?  Congratulations on your nuptials.  I miss you.

leonard@myyellowstone.net

Jesus is THE life,
Leonard

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Several military standard documents are being taken by non-military groups.  Mil-hdbk-5 is just one of the many documents the military is tired of updating and are releasing control of these to other groups.  Typically from what I've seen, the first draft under the new group is a straight copy of the last rev of the mil standard.  There are some exceptions, but this is happening quite often lately.

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Makes sense to start the new document draft as being exactly like the old document final revision.

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

(OP)
The handover of many Mil-specs to either AIAA or SAE makes it more expensive to keep current standards on hand.  Hope the FAA doesn't start charging for copies of "armpits".

"Simplicate, and add more lightness" - Bill Stout
Steven Fahey, CET

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

I just joined your web site recently and find it worth its weight in gold.  I use MIL-HDBK-5 Rev. H, everyday and have two copies one at work and home.  Being in the FAA Inspector myself I did not know about the change until I read your message board.  AC 43.13-1b references MIL-HDBK-5, in referenced several places for mechanics performing repairs.  Thanks for the info.

Denny of Oakland

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Sparweb

Thanks for "the light HBK-5 replacement"
I have already checked out your version and of course, the question of my coleagues are : all the paperwork related with FAA documents (AC43.13B,ACs, etc)will be re edited to get a reference in the new AR-MMPDS-01?

Thanks

Francis

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Hi,

does anyone know what's happening with AR-MMPDS-01 first change notice?

It was expected to be released last spring and replace Mil-hdbk-5 since its publication, but, up to date I've not heard anything about this?  

thanks

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

(OP)
I doubt that the FAA is going to update all of the documents that reference Mil-Hdbk-5E.  Perish the thought that they might spend all their time doing that, instead of, say, pushing through the Sport Pilot licencing like they were supposed to (last year).

As for keeping track of AR-MPDS-01 itself, well, stay sharp: all but one of the links I posted to it are broken now.

Steven Fahey, CET
"Simplicate, and add more lightness" - Bill Stout

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

2
Hi All

The changeover to MMPDS has been coming for quite a while. The main reason of course for it is "money" as usual. As far as I know, the FAA is recognizing the MMPDS as if it were synonimous with Mil-Hndbk-5. So no worries.

As for the reasonsing, basically, the government is looking to industry to start footing the bill for developing material data, what do you think? not very likely and if so only in small amounts. What this might mean is that as new alloys are developed and say funded by a single OEM such as Boeing (examples are 2524 and many others), they may remain proprietary. I think this will end up hurting the industry but may be necessary despite this. Anyways, I think the addition of data and revisions will be far fewer in the future. By the way, always hold on to your old Mil-Hndbk-5 versions (A thru J) because they are the only ones with data for the old nasty materials like 7178, 7079, etc.

Not sure if you guys are aware but the government including the military is moving closer and closer to using the FAA to cover more of the certification burden. In fact, many military projects (transports of course not fighters) are going this way. Basically off-the-shelf commercial aircraft but impressed/modified to military requirements but using the FAA as the certification vehicle via STC. As a side note, the government is still debating who should be overseeing public aircraft (includes VIP, firefighters, etc.). I believe these too will come under the FAA umbrella soon enought.

Anyways, good luck.

James Burd
FAA DER - Structures/Fatigue and Damage Tolerance

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

(OP)
It is cost-effective for a military to retire its old aircraft (and especially heli's) if they can simply make them conform to a civilian Type Certificate.  This is the case for the Canadian Armed Forces Griffons, which I understand are basically a Bell 412CF, as shown on the TC.

As for firefighters, Aviation Week had an amusing comment a month ago about the Department of Forestry creating its own "internal mini-FAA" to deal with the burgeoning issues of continuing airworthiness in the fleet of old war-horses it contracts.

With all the lessons that have been learned from the 50+ year old ex-military aircraft, procuring new military a/c with Type Certificates is wise, especially in the long term.  75+ years, in some cases, like the Martin Mars, Catalinas, and Douglas Invaders.  Many have decades more life left in them.

Steven Fahey, CET
"Simplicate, and add more lightness" - Bill Stout

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

THIS IS MY FIRST LOOK AT THIS SITE.  I HAVE BEEN LOOKING ALL THRU IT.  MAYBE YOU CAN DIRECT ME.  I AM A STRUCTURAL DER IN OKLAHOMA AND AM CURRENTLY OUT OF STATE BUT WORKING AN AIRCRAFT STRUCTURAL PROBLEM AND DO NOT HAVE MY MIL-HDBK(MMPDS) WITH ME AND I NEED THE OLD SPECS FOR 7178 T76 BAR OR EXT.  I KNOW THEY ARE NOT IN THE LATEST STANDARDS AND I HAVE THE OLD DOCUMENTS AT HOME.

DO YOU HAVE THE STRENGTH SPECS(Ftu--ETC) FOR THIS OR TELL ME WHERE I CAN GET IT.

THANKS

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

I checked MMPDS & MIL-HDBK-5J, no properies listed for 7178.

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

From Mil-Hdbk-5D
7178-T76 Ext
S-values only listed
0.125-0.249
Ftu=76KSI
Fsu=42KSI
Fbru(2.0) = 140 KSI

0.25-0.499
Ftu=77KSI
Fsu=43KSI
Fbru(2.0) = 141 KSI

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Oh s _ _ _.  I pasted the wrong link in my post above.  14COMANCHE had asked for T76 properties and I psoted a link to T6 data.  While 737eng's post is exactly what you were looking for, the "correct" ( but still "unauthoritative") link for the T76 condition is http://asm.matweb.com/search/SpecificMaterial.asp?...;

My apologies for my error.

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

It looks like AMS-QQ-A-200/14 replaced the QQ spec called out in MIL-HDBK-5D.  If you are buying new material for you "fix" here is what the AMS is calling out:

Temper = T76
Thickness (bar and shapes); diameter (rod and wire) = Up thru 0.249
Area Square Inches = Up thru 20
Tensile Strength min ksi = 76.0
Yield Strength at 0.2 percent offset min ksi = 66.0
Elongation in 2 inches or 4 times D minimum percent = 7

Monkeydog

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

(OP)
The FAA is keeping this document a "moving target".  Here's where I found it today:

http://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/ar-mmpds-01.pdf

If anybody finds it got moved again, let me know.

Steven Fahey, CET
"Simplicate, and add more lightness" - Bill Stout

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

(OP)
Or...

from NTIS http://www.ntis.gov/search/product.asp?ABBR=PB2003106632&starDB=GRAHIST

$223.50 for a paper copy.

Note how the preamble goes:

This year, 2003, marks the first year of publication of the MMPDS Handbook and the final year of publication of MIL-HDBK-5. For this year only, MMPDS-01 and MIL-HDBK-5J will be technically equivalent. In the spring of 2004, when the 1st Change Notice of MMPDS-01 is published, MIL-HDBK-5 will be designated noncurrent and MMPDS will become the only government recognized source in the U.S. of published design allowable properties for metallic commercial and military aircraft structures and mechanically fastened joints. In this way, the 65-year legacy of MIL-HDBK-5, and its predecessor ANC-5, will be maintained.

Funny, haven't seen any changes yet...

Steven Fahey, CET
"Simplicate, and add more lightness" - Bill Stout

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Folks...

With my work on very old acft [early/mid-50's designs], I have been forced to maintain digital copies of each MIL-HDBK-5 revision from MIL-HDBK-5 [original] thru ... 5J & MMPDS. Some alloy allowables, and most procurement specs, have changed over time... and the particularly "bad-actor" alloys (SCC & exfoliation corrosion or fatigue-poor etc, such as 7079-T6, 7178-T6, old mag/aluminum casting alloys, etc)... that were liberally used in early designs... have been stripped from the books as usage decreased.

IHS has these older versions as needed... just remember to incorporate current standards for SCC [as needed].
 

Regards, Wil Taylor

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

The .pdf version on the FAA netsite still appears to have a bug in it and repeatedly hangs up during downloading.  While updating such documents is a neccessity, I sure wish the FAA would bring its netsite under control and make these documents "findable."

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Is anyone familiar with the ESDU 00932?  Would it have properties for "newer" aluminum alloys (example:  7136, 7249)?  Are there any reasonbly priced options to get a copy (I was told $1600 purchase price plus $1000/yr for updates)?  

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

From: http://www.faa.gov/certification/aircraft/DraftDoc/CommNotices.htm

This notice announces the availability of and request comments on a proposed plan to manage the Metallic Materials Properties Development and Standardization (MMPDS) Handbook which has replaced the now cancelled “Department of Defense Handbook: Metallic Materials and Elements for Aerospace Vehicle Structures,” (MIL-HDBK-5). The intent is to make the MMPDS Handbook the primary source of metallic materials and fastener allowable properties demonstrated to comply with FAA airworthiness requirements. The proposed plan presents a strategy to secure funding for the MMPDS Handbook technical coordination process from multiple sources. Those include other government agencies, industry stakeholders, the private sector, and from sales of the handbook and related products."

The "plan" is available (as a "Word" document at the above link: http://www.faa.gov/certification/aircraft/DraftDoc/Fed%20Reg%20NOAMMPDS-final3.doc) along with a July 5, 2005 due date for comments...

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

to wktaylor,

I'm interested in these old materials.

I went to IHS and they only list 5G (and then ask $US250).

As MIL-HDBK-5 is not out-of-print, can it be freely copied and circulated ? (not a lawyer)

If it can be, and if you've got the data, how much ?

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

rb1957..

I Just checked with IHS... every version of MIL-HDBK-5 is available for download. This MAY be due to my company's  account set-up. Since You stated You can ONLY get the -5G, I suspect a glitch somewhere since the last version was -5J with the MMPDS as follow-on. NOTE: the following versions are available, in-full, although download times for these LARGE *.pdf files can be very high:

MIL-HDBK-5, -5A, -5B, -5C, -5D, -5D, -5F, -5G, -5H, -5J & the FAA MMPDS [+varients with chg notices].

The older versions contain some really old specs/data... which are unavailable anywhere else, to my knowledge. I have been able to find materials/specs that are way-out-of-date... that would otherwise be lost due being lost in the trash-bin of time.

Regards, Wil Taylor

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

thx wil,

i was on their unsubscribed page ...

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

As detailed at the link in my post above, the current FAA plan is to begin charging for the handbook to help defray the costs of maintaining the docuement.

An excerpt: "Our goal is to start product sales with the next release of the handbook, MMPDS-02, by July 2005."

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Great Link, Nigel.  

Kenneth, the FAA currently does not charge for guidance material, unless you want a paper copy of the 14 CFR or something like that.  Wouldn't charging for the MMPDS be setting a precedent?  I realize with the latest budget cuts the FAA can't even replace engineers that quit or retire, and according to our ACO they are depending on some to do just that so they can make the budget constraints.  It makes sense that they would not have the money to support the constant revisions to the handbook.

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

It looks like the plans to sell the Handbook extend to non-paper copies, including PDF copies from their website. This would appear to be somewhat of a precedent.


"Current MMPDS secretariat activities cost about $500K per year, and we lack the money to support them all."

"We plan to offset government funding with earnings from the sales of handbook and related products, including printed hardcopies, electronic Portable Document Format (PDF) distributed via website or CD-ROM; electronic databases; and updates.  We will use earnings from sales to defray the cost of updating, supplementing and revising the MMPDS.  The modest charge for these handbook products will ensure their availability to small business and individuals."

(quoted excerpts from http://www.faa.gov/certification/aircraft/DraftDoc/Fed%20Reg%20NOAMMPDS-final3.doc)


RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

I am under the Seattle ACO.  They are suffering like everyone else.  I have found that there are some advantages to gained though.  I resently got FAA PMA.  The MIDO just breezed through everything as they have a budget per company to stick too.  So if everything looks ok, they don't really go digging unless they have good reason.  Also with the ACO, I am a heavy user of the Seattle ACO and I have found they are very open to streamlining programs.  This means I am able to get alot more stuff through at the same same time.  I had a meeting with my FAA project engineer, his boss and the ACO manager.  We hashed out a program that will really make thigs move.  This was done through a MOU.

Give your ACO a hug!  It goes a long way.

Nigel Waterhouse
Can-Am Aerospace
www.canamaero.com

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Nigel:

Absolutely nothing personal, but aside from making your life easier, and strictly from a safety standpoint (recognizing that many of the people trying to push/rush things through may not have your same level of expertise) I'm not sure the situation you described is generally a good thing, given the regulatory/oversight misssion of the FAA...

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

I am getting the same message from the Fort Worth ACO.  They are using buzzwords like "maximimum delegation" in the project meetings.  

I would have to disagree with Kenneth - I believe that the FAA will have to start using the delegation system to perform what it is supposed to do.  Often the DER approved data I submit is reanalyzed at the ACO, resulting in no savings in time for them, and a waste of money to us hiring the designees.  I have found over the years that any items found by the ACO are very minor in nature, and the risk vs rewards ratio is extremely low.  The FAA is responsible for the safety of the air transportation system, but is immune from penalty for errors.  As private companies and individuals, we are open to prosecution and civil penalty for any unsafe conditions that we create.  

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Knowing what to give the FAA and in what format it is to be presented is sometimes half the battle.  Aslo, don't forget the FAA is made up of people.  These people are human and respond in human ways with in the rules of the FAA.  If you get the reputaion of a FAA time waster, your projects will rarely see the light of day.  If you generate and maintain a good working relationship with the FAA and the people you work with producing high quality and reliable documents and be extremely diplomatic, picking your battles carefully the FAA (in my experience) will be as accomodating as possible.

True, the FAA are responsible for safety and regulation, but so are we professionals.  We can make it easy for the FAA to do their job or we can be a hinderance to them.  Make it easy and reap the rewards.  That is all I am saying.

Nigel Waterhouse B Eng (Hon's)
Can-Am Aerospace,LLC, Canadian Aircraft Certification Centre
www.canamaero.com

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

P.s  The same applies to Transport Canada.

Nigel Waterhouse B Eng (Hon's)
Can-Am Aerospace,LLC, Canadian Aircraft Certification Centre
www.canamaero.com

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Anyone know when MMPDS-02 will be available (the advertised July 2005 date didn't happen)?  

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Yeah, its now ~$500 !!

And to make matters worse, my understanding from an infromed source within a large aerospace company is that the CD version (and presumably a downloaded PDF) is set up so you cannot print the document!

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

how about copying the CD ?

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

(OP)
How about ignoring the difference between versions.  As an exercise (if you're really bored some day) try comparing several tables of allowables data from different versions of the text.  There are 10 versions of Mil-Hdbk-5, 2 now of Armpits, and let's not forget the original ANC-5.  See how closely they compare.

Just because there's a new version out, it doesn't mean new batches of every alloy and temper of aluminum, mag and steel have been tested all over again.

There is only one (1) allowable, that I regularly use, that has moved between Mil-Hdbk-5E and Armpits.  Its the shear strength of a MS20470AD4 rivet.  It changed by 0.3%.  Wo-ee.

Steven Fahey, CET

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

let's hear it for BJ4s ...

obviously we're not boeing (or douglas, or airbus) people

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

hey, that .3% may be huge, when you're hangin on by a head, and have a short grip... hahahaha (I couldn't resist)

Wes C.
------------------------------
There are no engineers in the hottest parts of hell, because the existence of a 'hottest part' implies a temperature difference, and any marginally competent engineer would immediately use this to run a heat engine and make some other part of hell comfortably cool.  This is obviously impossible.

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

i was just at ...
http://www.mil-hdbk-5.org/

they have MM-PDS-02 for review ...

maybe it's just the version they have online, but when you read the sections, it reads like an addendum to -01 (only 2026 in Al, no Steels, no fasteners)

other opinions ?

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

forget that ! ...
i was looking at a document called "Preliminary Materails ..." dated 2000, so obviously a work in progress.

still i can't find any link to AR-MMPDS-01 or -02 (tried FAA and Battelle)

any ideas ...

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

thx qwertyuiop,

nice looking link, another to my favourites.

i had yahoo'd AR-MMPDS-01 (and got 40 hits)  googled and got 173 ! ... but a quick scan didn't show any going back to the FAA or Battelle (who i thought had taken on this job).  pretty much the hits went to copies of -01, or refs to -01 (as in references)

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Guys..

Anyone have a clue about FAA position on the use of CINDAS Aerospace Structural Metals Handbook [ASMH, 5-volume set]?? The ASMH has VERY detailed/authoriatative structural metals data that is supported by USAF and NASA.

Regards, Wil Taylor

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

(OP)
I'm still trying to keep track of what's going on with Armpits, too.  Seems an effort is afoot to remove the document from the public distribution.

Also, I noticed this in the Mil-Hdbk-5J cancellation document:

  • MIL-HDBK-5J, dated 31 January 2003, is hereby cancelled. Future acquisitions may refer to DOT/FAA/AR-MMPDS-01, “Metallic Materials Properties Development and Standardization (MMPDS),” but users are cautioned to evaluate this document for their particular application before using it as a replacement document.
Regarding my statement from 30 September, has anybody evaluated the document, as the military suggests?  Has anyone found any differences in allowable numbers, or the procedures used to determine them?  I haven't.


PS, Wil, I haven't met "Cindy" yet.  Is she related to ESDU?

Steven Fahey, CET

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Excellent site, Kmerk.  Thanks for the info.

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

I just noticed that version 02 of the MMPDS is available from  http://www.mmpds.org/  - a snip at $499. Seems a bit harsh. Anyone know where a free copy might be available? They've even removed the 01 version from the web as far as I can tell.

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Will:

Re CINDAS ASMH -- By Cindas' own disclaimer, the data presented is 'typical' and not 'statistically derived design data' (ie, A- or B-basis data) and as such is a complement/supplement to the likes of MIL-HDBK-5.  And while they also attempt to provide references to testing methods, etc., they also state some sources may be non-verifiable.

In my opinion, there is a considerable amount of data contained in the volumes usable for initial material selection, but mechanical properties data for detailed safety-of-flight design analysis is lacking.  

As a DER I would highly prefer use of MIL-HDBK-5, MMPDS or ANC-5 before approving structure based on ASMH.

Russ Royal

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

A great place to get MIL-HDBK-5 and other MS, AN and other specs is the following website:
http://assist.daps.dla.mil/quicksearch/
This opens a search page, insert a number and only a number in the Document Number block, ie "5" for MIL-HDBK-5 and all kinds of Mil Specs can be downloaded.

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

MMPDS-02 is only available by purchasing at http://www.mmpds.org/ or 3rd party sites like matereality. Free copies are no longer available since this document is now copyrighted as detailed on the MMPDS website and in FAA notices.

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Hi:

I have received an e-mail from the documentation people at my workplace that MMPDS-02 is not presently available for purchase because "it is confidential now". Is some of the content suspect/classified? I don't know; I have no further info.

Regards,
Louis

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

(OP)
It's not a secret, it's not confidential, it's proprietary.  You're supposed to pay for it now, where it used to be free.  (Just like air, water and ***).

Steven Fahey, CET

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Hi Steven:

Our documentation man stated clearly that it is not available for purchase and he used the word "confidential". Perhaps he's under pressure to restrict purchases and is bull*****ing me...

Louis
 

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

I will, Kenneth, I will...

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Is anyone going to protest by purchasing it and making it available for download?

Nigel Waterhouse B Eng (Hon's)
Can-Am Aerospace,LLC, Canadian Aircraft Certification Centre
www.canamaero.com

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

(OP)
Are you volunteering?

Steven Fahey, CET

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

Nigel:

While I'm not a lawyer, I think the legal name for what you propose is "copyright infringement"..

RE: The End of Mil-Hdbk-5

I have Mil-Hdbk 5 you can download it for free. Does anybody know where we can download ESDU 00932?
I also have to compute B-basis allowables. I did it on my side based on Chap. 9 of Mil-Hbdk 5. Does anybody if there is preexiting spreadsheet available?

Thx.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources