Pictures From The Past

FOMOGO

Active User
H-M Platinum Supporter
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
2,113
Great pics. Thanks for sharing. Mike
 

brasssmanget

Active User
H-M Supporter Gold Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
491
I am constantly amazed at what our predecessors did with machinery, and how big the machinery was. Great pics!
 
T

TOOLMASTER

Forum Guest
Register Today
yea you didn't want to get caught up in the chips.
 

JimDawson

Global Moderator
Staff member
H-M Platinum Supporter
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
9,335
I wonder if any of these machines are still in use or even exist anymore. Do we in the U.S.A. still do machining on that scale?
 

FLguy

H-M Supporter - Gold Member
H-M Supporter Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2016
Messages
275
A defense contractor I did contract work for in the Minneapolis area had 4 vertical boring/milling mills and one was 52 ft. in dia.. Boy do you feel small standing beside these when they have a gun turret on the table. Mind the chips !!!
 

brav65

Active User
H-M Supporter Gold Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Messages
925
I have one question, what size indicator do you use on those machines(seriously, what is the accuracy)? As far as current machines in the US I did some work I on a building about 20 years ago that was going to house a mill that would produce fans for large jet engines. The footing for the table went down ove 20 feet into the earth. When they were testing they would pick up vibrations from traffic passing by 100' away. The table was going to be about 25' in diameter. I do not remember the tolerance of the finished machine but is was crazy given the size.
 

tertiaryjim

Active User
H-M Platinum Supporter
Joined
Mar 3, 2014
Messages
629
Given the large footings and heavy tonnage of those machines and parts, stability and rigidity would be much greater than the machines most of us run.
This equates to better accuracy and finish.
Hens: Big is Better
 

Billh50

Active User
H-M Supporter Gold Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2015
Messages
1,922
I remember seeing a lathe that had a 6' dia. chuck and a 20' bed on it. It had a fold out seat on the saddle for the operator to ride along. That was the largest lathe I have ever seen in person. It was at a place where I went to pick up a bridgeport head back in the mid 70's.
 

Silverbullet

Registered
Registered
Joined
May 4, 2015
Messages
3,552
I remember seeing a lathe that had a 6' dia. chuck and a 20' bed on it. It had a fold out seat on the saddle for the operator to ride along. That was the largest lathe I have ever seen in person. It was at a place where I went to pick up a bridgeport head back in the mid 70's.
I ran one like that but bed was I think 60' long, it came from the Philadelphia ship yard. She would peel chips 1" x 1/16 and more all day and night for one cut. They told me it made the prop shafts for the ships in ww11.
 

markba633csi

Registered
Registered
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
4,411
I'm thinking of the machines that MAKE the big machines- whoa- where do they hide those? o_O
Also wondering if there are Guiness records for biggest lathes, mills, etc.
 

Mark_f

Registered
Registered
Joined
Jan 16, 2020
Messages
0
I wonder if any of these machines are still in use or even exist anymore. Do we in the U.S.A. still do machining on that scale?
Yes , we do big machining like that today. When I was working as a service engineer for a machine tool manufacturer , I often serviced a new horizontal milling machine with a 120 foot long bed, the column was 22 feet high. The headstock spindle was 12 inches in diameter with a second 7 inch spindle inside it. The reach of the spindle was 7 feet. The tolerances for this machine was .0002"/ft.
Before I retired, they were building a large planer machine, 100 feet long , 40 feet wide and twenty feet high.
So , yes we still make and use very large machines today. These are also CNC machines and they are awesome to run or watch them run.
 
It can take up to an hour for ads to appear on the page. See our code implementation guide for more details. If you already have Auto ad code on your pages there's no need to replace it with this code
Top