Reverse pages have a gauge tick against mounting-foot flatness. No gauge identity. The restrained note has a hand-drawn arrow at the upright instead

Then those observations concern different features. Quality may still be able to recover a meaningful released check, but you cannot calculate a before-and-after change from that pair.

Cameron, which drawing revision do the travellers specify?

Revision D on all three, matching the archived job pack. Current proposal uses E, and quality is checking what changed

We priced an old correction into a new job and only later found the drawing change had removed the offending feature. Not saying that happened here. But yes, that comparison needs doing before you buy tooling around an old workaround.

Felix, did you remove the cost straight away, or wait for a new-job check?

Waited. Our new job still had to meet its own drawing, and we hadn't demonstrated it yet. Removed the claim that the old operation was definitely required; kept a visible allowance for the remaining uncertainty. Buying disliked the untidy total ... but it was less fictional.

Anika's operator question is worth pursuing, but recollection needs something to tie it to these brackets. Three similar travellers are an invitation to remember the wrong one.

Would the old gauge list help quality identify that flatness tick, if it was issued against this job?

Yes, provided the list links to these inspections; thank you Luca, that is a specific thing to ask for rather than another request for all the paperwork

And if it cannot be recovered, leave the old result limited. The new inspection plan can name the released features and method properly without pretending the old tick has become a measurement.

Cameron, interested in what revision E changed when quality comes back. Was it related to that mounting foot?