Tom, Well, I don't blame you for being irritated at my post, I can get
pungent at times, though I do think my post gets at the basic issue:
Jon Issac's account of his difficulties with the 102F6 ia aimply
devastating, and it will therefore be very difficult to persuade the
viewers of saa about the merits of the new scope until it is actually on
the market in quantity.
The confusion engendered by ambiguity as the the role of Tom Back in the
design, adds the the difficulty of persuading people, which difficulty
is what I was alluding to in my post.
I am not accusing you of prevarication or misrepresentation but instead
alleging that your task of persuasion seems hopeless until the new scope
is on the market in quantity. I do not dispute at all your description
of the five scopes you have tested. No one is questioning your veracity
in describing these five scopes. What people are saying is that it is
very tough to convince them that subsequent scopes, in a full
production run, will be consistently as good, because of experiences
like Jon Isaac's.
I do hope the new scope turns out well.
CS,
Bill Meyers