An linear adaptation of a piece designed by Emile-Jacques Ruhlman.

"For me, I had problems drawing parallel to the red, green or blue axes until I turned on "display crosshairs" on the cursor, and it took forever to realize that all I had to do was type to make something appear in the measurements window-I kept trying to click and highlight before typing."

I tutor woodworkers on the design aspect of furniture making. When SU was incorporated into that process the idea of just typing the measurement into the measurement window was the most significant impediment. For something that is so important SU has not provided either a detailed narrative description or a tutorial that is visually illuminates that process.

The inference is rather elementary and the color connection between the axes and the inference lines does not seem to elude those I have worked with.

SU is simple to use as it is so simplistic; that is, rendering anything complex, and making comprehensive changes, is not productive, particularly if the end result is going to a G-code conversion program for use with a CNC router.

For drawings that are complex, and where comprehensive changes will be needed, a 3-D parametric program should be used. I use Alibre, which provides a free version for trial use. After using Alibre for two-months, I purchased it and am quite pleased with it. Alibre takes more effort to learn, but it is much more sophisticated as it is 3-D and parametric.

In my instance: SU took about 50-hours to be competent with [which included one marathon 10-hour session]; Alibre took about 150-hours [which included several 6-hour session and a couple 10-12-hour sessions.].

The marathon sessions are, of course, the most productive, though in terms of the cost in husband bonus points, very very expensive.

""The Second thing that can be frustrating for beginners is getting lines, and thus constructions, parallel to the red, green, and blue axis. ""

This is a difficulty with envisioning the object in three-dimensional space.

The manner in which to overcome the lack of experience of envisioning is:

First: Obtain [or make] a relatively simple object, like a shoe box with a pipe through it and one-half of an old tennis ball placed on the box.

Second: Draw this object from several points of view. Remember to draw what you see not what you think you see.

Third: Draw the object with SU.

Do this two or three times with more and more complex shapes.

After three or four times though this process, the ability to envision will be greatly enhanced.

Also, if difficulty is encountered drawing a complex object [something with a significant number of parts or numerous surfaces that intersect at unusual angles], draw with pencil and paper first.

Also, break the object down to its constituent parts and assemblies, then draw each one of those. Use groups even on simple parts; this limits surprises.

There is a tactile sense to drawing that cannot be replicated when drawing with a CAD program, and, though the nerds loath it when its said, a pencil in one's hand still can solve more problems faster and more elegantly than any combination of hardware and software. Something about consciousness and intuition; analytical thought in a word; that is: substance not flash.

Before saying that "its all legal", the first few pages of the document the scans came from should be scrutinized. It is doubtful that Ford Motor Company published any intellectual property without restriction.