Why does the P-47D have two station 101.625's that are 8" apart?

[rtwpsom2]

I was looking over some drawings for the P-47D and noticed that it has two Sta 101.625's 8 inches apart. Why did they do this? Does this mean the aft one is actually 109.625" from the front and that all the subsequent stations are actually 8 inches behind their station number?

 

[GregP]

Could very easily be a typo. They happened a lot in the days before computers and easy backspace and editing.

 

[Elmas]

Could very easily be a typo. They happened a lot in the days before computers and easy backspace and editing.

And they happen today with the computers as well, Greg.....

 

[rtwpsom2]

In this case it's not a typo. They are two distinct fuselage stations quite clearly marked FWD and AFT and both have dimensions to them 8 inches apart.

 

[drgondog]

looks like the aft bulkhead should be at Sta 109.625 (85. + 24.625)

 

[rtwpsom2]

There is already a station 109.625.

 

[drgondog]

as may be...but the dimensions shown above from 'STA 85' clearly mean that '101.625' and '109.625' are the correct ones..

 

[Clayton Magnet]

I suspect there was a "plug" or fuselage extenstion added at some point in the design, and they didnt want to revise the whole drawings

 

[Shortround6]

You may be right, wasn't the fuselage extended 8in from the "B" to the "C" version?

 

[Clayton Magnet]

I can't answer with any authority on that, but wikipedia says it was 13". I work on Bombardier CRJ900's for a living, and Bombardier added new station number blocks for every subsequent fuselage extension added, from the original 200's, through to the newer 1000's.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

Sweet, I cracked 100 posts

 

[Conslaw]

Since nobody else asked it, I'm going to ask it: what's a Sta 101.625?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Since nobody else asked it, I'm going to ask it: what's a Sta 101.625?

Fuselage station - either 101.625 inches from the nose or a datum point.

 

[razor1uk]

..that design wise are more useful during creation building the jigs with their supporting jig structures that the aircraft eventually will be pieced together in/upon, if my hunch is correct, a practice borrowed from ship and train builders.

 

[rtwpsom2]

Thanks for the help guys, I really appreciate it. I think Clayton is right, it was just an effort to not have to replace the station numbers on thousands of drawings.

 

[drgondog]

If "C" references a note in the Effectivity Block, that is one way to address it but seems a little "off' relative to standard drafting practices.