(Cars) First new Bently Blower in 90 years ...

eugeneandresson

Using CT to reverse engineer mechanical functional models is apparently a well accepted and highly accurate modern technique (and certainly has many benefits). Why is it so wrong for a business that has the know-how let it be known? To draw a parallel : you are a business, and you advertise all your best practices and techniques here (and likely elsewhere) : you market yourself and all the cool and correct things you do (and certainly that draws customers). So, why the grudge with Bently (or in your case, Omega)? (thats a rhetorical question good Sir, please dont answer 😉 ).

MRC

I too started on a drawing board but in early 1970s got into CAD program development. In the 1970s and well into the '80s the costs of computer, graphics terminal, pen-plotter and programs were several tens of the cost of employing just one draughtsman. In a very small number of cases the CAD system could pay for itself but for most of our customers the value was in showing to their customers how progressive they were. Marketing in other words.

Archer

Yes, the old mainframe based systems were very expensive, so when my company adopted CAD, it wasn’t until there was a reasonably good PC based system. I recall opening a 1 mb file of a Geneva drive, and it taking 30 minutes just to open the file...those were the days.

rob#1

Thanks for posting this, very interesting. I was lucky enough to work on and around similar cars in the 80s; here’s a similar, non-supercharged, original Bentley.

eugeneandresson

Fair enough. Please note : the only reason for my continued dialog in this thread is not to do with Omega per se, but rather to do with the fact that whenever anyone uses CT to reverse engineer 70~100 year old mechanical things, and mentions it, it gets panned as 'marketing gobbledygook' by default. I have not mentioned the 321 at all...thats something that you still bring up for some reason.

eugeneandresson

Here

eugeneandresson

it was used to look into an almost rotted-to-powder 2000 year old mechanical model (much like a watch) to see the inner mechanisms and symbols not able to be seen normally.

eugeneandresson

Maybe, maybe not. As far as we have been told, Breguet(and not Omega) had swallowed Lemania and were producing 321 movements(and parts?), and where and in what form the IP for old movements exists is not clear, I see no point to speculare here. I do not claim to know the inner workings of the swatch group and their separate entities/politics within/etc etc etc and I dont see the point to speculate on that either.

eugeneandresson

Regardless of that, on the topic of Omega flaunting this technology just for marketing : if you recall they did use this method to recreate the Trilogy watches (the teaser adverts were timelapsed videos moving through the 'slices' of a CT scan, from bottom to top if the watch were laid on a table, of each watch). They also used this to recreate the 105.012-65 case/pushers/caseback(/dial?) used in the Apollo 50th watches and the platnum 321, and soon-to-be-new-moonwatch, and most likely the same for the steel 321 (new Ed White). But they undoubtedly had all the old handdrawn engineering drawings for all these parts from the 50s/60s so by this logic, they must have done this repeatedly on several occasions for several watches unnecessarily 'just for marketing'. I also don't recall anyone complaining about that then.

eugeneandresson

Anyhow. This horse is dead. Back to cars!

eugeneandresson

Your argument is based on marketing knowing better how to do specific engineering than the engineers themselves, and forcing engineering to engineer accordingly (for marketing sake).

eugeneandresson

...the outcome is actually reader-base-dependent only...and said reader-base consists of the same +- 2000 die-hard fans who have voted all along through every round...and it’s this group of die-hards who are the victims of the brainwashing-plot-of-evil of the omega-scanning-gobbledygook, hence loving the new 321 only 😝 😝😝

eugeneandresson

Seriously though, I voted 321 because I’m tired of the stupid dog, the platinum 321 was excluded from the polls (the bastards),

eugeneandresson

and most people have no clue how lovely the moonshine goldielocks is and have not had the luck of handling it in the flesh to allow them to get over their gold-phobia. Plus Ed Whites are simply nice watches great on wrist 👍

pdxleaf

Engineers! We non-engineers always suspected you talked like this in your off hours. To think you guys are doing this for fun. 😀