What this shows
A real build lineage. Trammel is the current company label built on earlier verification work, not a venture invented after the fact.
What improved
The project got better every time it cut scanner drift, bolt-hole sprawl, and broad survey-replacement language, then kept only the strongest dated milestones.
Where it stands
The problem, founder fit, and V1 wedge are clear enough to discuss. The remaining hardware questions are now specific rather than vague.
March 14, 2026
Current production work and design locks
The project shifted into a cleaner production-work posture. Current head research was checked against still-current parts, and the center-first design language was tightened.
What moved forward
- CM5-class compute still looks believable for a per-head embedded Linux path.
- Precision inclinometer candidates in the SCL3300 class still look worth evaluating for plane-related sensing.
- The center-first wording is now cleaner: face seating defines the plane, and controlled jaw convergence recovers the center.
- The competition view is cleaner too: adjacent categories exist, but direct confirmation-tool matches are still much less obvious.
What this did not prove
- It did not lock the final head electronics stack.
- It did not prove the final communications path.
- It did not prove delivered accuracy.
What still matters most
- Seating repeatability
- Centering repeatability
- Rigidity
- Shared transform stability
March 13, 2026
Trammel became the active name and the public package was cleaned up
The naming loop was closed for production purposes. Trammel became the active outward-facing name, and the public material was cleaned up under that one label.
What changed
- Trammel became the active working name going forward.
- Older naming branches were retired in favor of one outward-facing name.
Why it mattered
- The outward-facing story now speaks with one name instead of a split label structure.
- The review site, diary, and proposal material became easier to read and share.
What this marked
- This was the point where the project clearly moved out of naming churn and into production-facing cleanup.
March 12, 2026
The review package replaced the loose attachment flow
The project stopped relying on scattered attachments, rough file drops, and weak promo-style material. A static technical review became the main discussion layer.
What changed
- A static review page became the main public discussion layer.
- The work shifted toward readable diagrams, a cleaner diary, and a more inspectable package.
Why it mattered
- The project became easier to review seriously.
- The outside-facing material stopped underselling the venture.
What it did not mean
- This was a packaging improvement, not a claim that the hardware itself was solved.