Ralph, Thanks for your note. This is a valid question, although I assume that when you say mil specs "never" changed, it's because the numbers didn't change, not the actual contents. After all, MIL-PRF-55110 is now at F revision. I would like to point out that IPC-RB-276 was published in 1992, and not superseded until 1997, and that IPC-D-275, published in 1991, wasn't superseded until 1998. That's a lot of time between revisions. In fact, we frequently hear from industry that the standards don't keep up with the technology. Although IPC doesn't have the resources at this time to draw up lists showing the differences between standards, often, larger OEMs prepare such comparisons. In fact, Boeing prepared a detailed list comparing 276, 55110, and 6012, which it shared with IPC. When such lists are shared with IPC, we typically make them available to the industry on a as-requested basis, although we do not double-check for accuracy. Remember too, that it is the task groups, made up of volunteers from industry, that write these standards and wrestle with the decisions. IPC is a facilitator and publisher, but our technical policy is set by a special committee made up of chairmen of the task groups, and the whole structure operates in (mostly) an autonomous fashion. It's a great discussion point. I'm interested in seeing what others have to say. Mike Buetow IPC Communications Manager >>> "Vaughan, Ralph H" <[log in to unmask]> 05/20/98 03:40PM >>> Greeting, I will be the first to commend ipc for all the good work that they do for us, but I gotta say that the practice of obsoleting specs and replacing with new, renumbered documents is making me long for the old mil-spec days where specs NEVER changed (I never thought I'd say that). Not too long ago, after much spec comparison and analysis, we convinced our government customers that it would be prudent to move from Mil-P-55110 to the IPC-RB-276. In the time it took to get the new drawing callout approved, re-train the pwb designers and revise their guidelines, and bring our stellar board suppliers up to speed (no small task), RB-276 had been superceded by the 6012 document. Now I just learn today that IPC-D-275 is superceded by another document. This kills efforts to streamline and standardize documentation systems. Also, when these continuous changes take place, it would be convenient to have a detailed side paper published explaining all the changes (and maybe why the changes were made). May be a lot to ask, but it would keep every user from doing it individually. Anyone else see this as a problem? That's all the whining for now. Ralph ################################################################ TechNet E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c ################################################################ To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the body: To subscribe: SUBSCRIBE TechNet <your full name> To unsubscribe: SIGNOFF TechNet ################################################################ Please visit IPC web site (http://jefry.ipc.org/forum.htm) for additional information. For technical support contact Hugo Scaramuzza at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.312 ################################################################ ################################################################ TechNet E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c ################################################################ To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the body: To subscribe: SUBSCRIBE TechNet <your full name> To unsubscribe: SIGNOFF TechNet ################################################################ Please visit IPC web site (http://jefry.ipc.org/forum.htm) for additional information. For technical support contact Hugo Scaramuzza at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.312 ################################################################