C'mon guys, could you take one moment out of your busy schedule of shit posting in battlestation threads to help me out?

>>52247108
go to http://www.osalt.com/

>>52247108
Heeks or Brl-cad. There's a lot of CAD solutions for Linux. CAM is where things are very sparse.

>>52247650
>>52247687
Cheers, I'll check them out when I get home.

it depends on your CAD needs. I'm a big fan of FreeCAD

>>52247727
Designing a firearm concept.
I can't physically make one due to the legal butt fucking I would receive, bit I can make a CAD file and send it to a firearms manufacturer who has the licensing to make an automatic firearm.
I could also design a semi-automatic version and then any American could make one, shame I'm in Australia.
If it works I might try to get a manufacturers license, but it's probably obscenely expensive, so I'd have to try and make money off selling the design or just release it as open source, so that anyone who has the tooling could make one.

Nx8, solidworks, catia, inventor, creo

Your choice highly depends on the Plattform your first CAD program you started your learning curve... Pick one and get started and get good, you can switch later if you want to

I started with solid edge. But i would considered it a stepping stone to NX or catia.
Solid edge is still a hodgepodge of badly implemented features.

>>52247995
I have experience in AutoCAD, if that helps.

>>52247108
>what's an accessible, but powerful CAD package?
SolidWorks3D

>>52247108
AutoCAD 2015. If you can't afford it, then pirate it.

>>52248122
Is there a good private tracker for Warez?
I have a dedicated tracker for everything else, just not programs (I use IPT for programs, since it's barely better than Google for finding shit.)

>>52248015
If you know how to use autocad you'll get the hang of any CAD Software.

Well as you're looking for commercial CAD program, it really doesn't matter with which one you get started. I personally can recommend NX and solidworks. But you'll get as many answers to this as you ask people.

People i talked to are as religious about their choice oft CAD Software like people are about using wangblows, loonix and 'it just works'-osx

>>52248333
Torrentleech maybe?

>>52248359
I had a torrentleech account, but I abandoned it as it was just another general tracker.

>>52247908
Quick tip.
Whatever it is. It has been done hundreds of times before, it didn't work, and it was dropped.
I would highly recommend looking through patents to see if there is anything similar to your design.

If on the off-chance that it is something new and useful and innovative. Patent it. Patent different versions of it. Stripped down, prettied up. Anything similar. Cover your own ass.

If need be, move to the outback or somewhere out of the way and try to make the parts, just to see if it really does work in reality. CAD can do a lot. But simulating the stresses of a firing gun might be beyond it.

>>52248343
I remember back in high school there was a CAD class using G4 iMacs.
You can probably guess how well that went.

>>52248460
LeL, sounds really horrific.
i never saw a release of a serious CAD software for mac's. Do they even exist?
Anyway good luck finding you poison anon!

>>52248458
The main core of the idea is very left of centre - it's mainly about sidestepping the US NFA definition of machine gun. It wouldn't be useful to me, but it may have an application as it would reduce the overall length, without resorting to a bullpup design.

And no, there is no way I'm going to risk my life over some backyard gunsmithing; I have a good job, a beautiful wife and I'm moving houses soon.
The most I'll have to do with guns in person is shooting range trips and, in the coming months, I'm getting my licenses and I'm going hunting with my brother (who is getting his license again soon).

>>52248458
You can allways put the design in a fea sim. But remember, your results are just as good as your ability to properly model the conditions

>>52248527
I think it was called PowerCAD, but it was meant for Power Macs, it did not do well with laptop hardware.

>>52248617
Oh i've never heard about that! Anyway if a company forces me to ever use a mac, i'm resigning.

>>52248669
This was back in the PPC days.
Nowadays doing CAD on a Mac wouldn't be an issue besides the fact that all the conventions are arse about face.
I mean, I wouldn't do any detailed simulation on a Mac due to the limited hardware, but I would use one if I had to.

I have experience with SolidWorks and Autodesk Inventor, and recommend SolidWorks.

It feels more intuitive to use, has a ton of features, and is the most widely used so it has a lot of support.

Thank you /g/; for once you weren't all complete cool gobblers.

>>52247108
Any links?