![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Another design approach | Charles Buckley | Policy | 2 | July 22nd 04 01:54 PM |
Space Calendar - September 28, 2003 | Ron Baalke | History | 0 | September 28th 03 08:00 AM |
Pre-Columbia Criticism of NASA's Safety Culture in the late 1990's | Greg Kuperberg | Space Shuttle | 68 | September 18th 03 02:35 PM |
Space Calendar - August 28, 2003 | Ron Baalke | History | 0 | August 28th 03 05:32 PM |
Space Calendar - July 24, 2003 | Ron Baalke | History | 0 | July 24th 03 11:26 PM |