|
notapplicable
May 22, 2009, 2:59 AM
Post #176 of 747
(8170 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
adatesman wrote: jt512 wrote: I think you should post their correspondence. Jay I've been thinking about that and at this point I think that would be inappropriate (we kicked the idea some in the mod forum a couple hours ago). But that was before Sogdiana was confirmed as Nadia. I suppose it may rest on the nature of this forthcoming response from CCH...?
Does anyone know what (if any) privacy expectations apply to emails? Might be worth looking in to before posting publicly.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
May 22, 2009, 3:08 AM
Post #177 of 747
(8152 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
notapplicable wrote: adatesman wrote: jt512 wrote: I think you should post their correspondence. Jay I've been thinking about that and at this point I think that would be inappropriate (we kicked the idea some in the mod forum a couple hours ago). But that was before Sogdiana was confirmed as Nadia. I suppose it may rest on the nature of this forthcoming response from CCH...? Does anyone know what (if any) privacy expectations apply to emails? Might be worth looking in to before posting publicly.
Ethical questions go deeper though. I would recommend not sharing the contents of private messages sent between two individuals on a message board read by potentially thousands of people.
|
|
|
|
|
patto
May 22, 2009, 3:08 AM
Post #178 of 747
(8150 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
adatesman wrote: jt512 wrote: I think you should post their correspondence. Jay I've been thinking about that and at this point I think that would be inappropriate (we kicked the idea some in the mod forum a couple hours ago). But that was before Sogdiana was confirmed as Nadia. I suppose it may rest on the nature of this forthcoming response from CCH...?
While I would love to see the correspondence, I too don't believe that it would be appropriate to post them online. That correspondence was between you and CCH and probably shouldn't be aired unless CCH makes it necessary.
This thread didn't start off as an attack on CCH and none of us want it seen as such. We were discussing the pull tests that were carried out. It was Sogdiana =CCH that distracted the issue. If CCH want to play shill then that is their issue. That said I would not object to their shill attempt being futher publicized. Let people make up their own minds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
May 22, 2009, 3:11 AM
Post #180 of 747
(8154 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Sogdiana wrote: I am not interesting.
Apparently, that is the first honest statement you've made on this website.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
USnavy
May 22, 2009, 3:21 AM
Post #181 of 747
(8122 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2007
Posts: 2667
|
healyje wrote: - Size Color Coded Wrong
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
May 22, 2009, 3:36 AM
Post #182 of 747
(8100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
patto wrote: adatesman wrote: jt512 wrote: I think you should post their correspondence. Jay I've been thinking about that and at this point I think that would be inappropriate (we kicked the idea some in the mod forum a couple hours ago). But that was before Sogdiana was confirmed as Nadia. I suppose it may rest on the nature of this forthcoming response from CCH...? While I would love to see the correspondence, I too don't believe that it would be appropriate to post them online. That correspondence was between you and CCH and probably shouldn't be aired unless CCH makes it necessary. This thread didn't start off as an attack on CCH and none of us want it seen as such. We were discussing the pull tests that were carried out. It was Sogdiana =CCH that distracted the issue. If CCH want to play shill then that is their issue. That said I would not object to their shill attempt being futher publicized. Let people make up their own minds.
At this point, I think that how CCH is handling the issue is actually more important than the issue itself. Who in their right mind would buy a life-saving device from a company that would pull a stunt like this? I think Nadia has really screwed the pooch.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
May 22, 2009, 3:45 AM
Post #183 of 747
(8089 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
jt512 wrote: patto wrote: adatesman wrote: jt512 wrote: I think you should post their correspondence. Jay I've been thinking about that and at this point I think that would be inappropriate (we kicked the idea some in the mod forum a couple hours ago). But that was before Sogdiana was confirmed as Nadia. I suppose it may rest on the nature of this forthcoming response from CCH...? While I would love to see the correspondence, I too don't believe that it would be appropriate to post them online. That correspondence was between you and CCH and probably shouldn't be aired unless CCH makes it necessary. This thread didn't start off as an attack on CCH and none of us want it seen as such. We were discussing the pull tests that were carried out. It was Sogdiana =CCH that distracted the issue. If CCH want to play shill then that is their issue. That said I would not object to their shill attempt being futher publicized. Let people make up their own minds. At this point, I think that how CCH is handling the issue is actually more important than the issue itself. Who in their right mind would buy a life-saving device from a company that would pull a stunt like this? I think Nadia has really screwed the pooch. Jay
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
May 22, 2009, 5:13 AM
Post #185 of 747
(7993 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
sungam wrote: notapplicable wrote: adatesman wrote: jt512 wrote: I think you should post their correspondence. Jay I've been thinking about that and at this point I think that would be inappropriate (we kicked the idea some in the mod forum a couple hours ago). But that was before Sogdiana was confirmed as Nadia. I suppose it may rest on the nature of this forthcoming response from CCH...? Does anyone know what (if any) privacy expectations apply to emails? Might be worth looking in to before posting publicly. If it was sent to you, you have freedom to share it. Ethical questions go deeper though. I would recommend not sharing the contents of private messages sent between two individuals on a message board read by potentially thousands of people.
My only concern was/is for Arics security from legal repercussions. If there are non to be had, then I agree with Jay on this.
Full disclosure is the only way for this matter to be handled going forward. Ideally CCH will step to the plate and address these matters including documentation of there current QC protocols and an extensive report on product testing results. If they refuse to do so then people with information need to make it public so long as it does not expose them to legal hazard.
edit for spelling and in light of IP mix up
(This post was edited by notapplicable on May 22, 2009, 3:20 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
May 22, 2009, 5:21 AM
Post #186 of 747
(7978 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
notapplicable wrote: Ideally CCH will step to the plate and address these matters including documentation of there current QC protocols and an extensive report on product testing results...
We are now years into this sad, lamentable drama - if that were going to happen it would have happened long ago. At this point in the game it's sort of like saying, "ideally my wife will step up to the plate and stop sleeping around and address these issues including her plan for being faithful and an extensive report on her STD testing results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
May 22, 2009, 5:26 AM
Post #188 of 747
(7969 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
healyje wrote: notapplicable wrote: Ideally CCH will step to the plate and address these matters including documentation of there current QC protocols and an extensive report on product testing results... We are now years into this sad, lamentable drama - if that were going to happen it would have happened long ago. At this point in the game it's sort of like saying, "ideally my wife will step up to the plate and stop sleeping around and address these issues including her plan for being faithful and an extensive report on her STD testing results.
I agree but they say a statement is forthcoming so I was just trying to be fair in the way I phrased things.
|
|
|
|
|
hafilax
May 22, 2009, 5:28 AM
Post #189 of 747
(7964 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 12, 2007
Posts: 3025
|
I think they should be more worried about a class action lawsuit than losing sales.
|
|
|
|
|
tfs6755
May 22, 2009, 6:21 AM
Post #190 of 747
(7905 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 11, 2006
Posts: 2
|
Well Kathy, I do not see where your speculation is any more valid than mine, and I actually believe yours to be a bit wild eyed. To think that there are no factory rejected braze joints is what is silly. I think it is also silly to think that the rejects/[seconds ?] might possibly be sold in an outlet store. As I stated before it is troubling to me that a fully assembled reject could leave the factory, but I can surmise a couple of scenarios where this could happen.
|
|
|
|
|
adatesman
May 22, 2009, 1:06 PM
Post #191 of 747
(7808 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479
|
|
|
|
|
|
gimmeslack
May 22, 2009, 1:06 PM
Post #192 of 747
(7804 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2006
Posts: 136
|
All of this is based on trust and is really an act of faith given that a statistical sample hasn't been tested, it's the internet, I don't know Aric personally, etc. But the issues are serious enough that once the flag has been raised, it would be hard to doubt that further inquiry is warranted. My intuition tells me the concerns are real, but that's not relevant really.
Pragmatically, I see the current situation as two-fold: First, it appears that CCH needs to step up and address QC concerns, so that future buyers/users of Aliens can be confident of product quality and certification. If there are real issues with product quality, then the second issue is how existing product can be tested (assuming that we don't all want to throw away our Aliens). If pull testing is destructive, then that would not be a viable solution, and I doubt CCH wants to replace everyone's cams with independently certified new cams.
So, is it in fact possible to test cams? Is there perhaps some non-destructive method such as xray or some other imaging?
|
|
|
|
|
adatesman
May 22, 2009, 1:24 PM
Post #193 of 747
(7773 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wunderkind
May 22, 2009, 1:25 PM
Post #194 of 747
(7770 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 7, 2008
Posts: 120
|
IP or no, I'd say the evidence that nadia=sogdiana is strong to very strong.
FWIW, I will pass on Aliens. Was going to buy three for the memorial day trip and went Metoliius instead. That was not due to the product itself so much as the company's response to your testing.
Thanks for doing this. Hope they either do the right thing or go bust soon.
|
|
|
|
|
mikes
May 22, 2009, 1:31 PM
Post #195 of 747
(7757 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 35
|
Aric,
thanks for posting the pics of the endfittings. Clearly, the one in the middle does not have enough penetration - you can see it easily when you look at the bottom (fill side) of the joint. Since most of these units do not have a weep hole the operator has to introduce the fillet material from the bottom of the joint. This is a very difficult process and overheating the cable is pretty much a given unless you have good control of the brazing temperature. The joint can even look O.K, when inspecting the bottom side of the joint, but there is no telling what the penetration inside the endfitting cable joint looks like.
MS
|
|
|
|
|
adatesman
May 22, 2009, 1:38 PM
Post #196 of 747
(7741 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479
|
|
|
|
|
|
adatesman
May 22, 2009, 2:09 PM
Post #197 of 747
(7687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479
|
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
May 22, 2009, 3:06 PM
Post #198 of 747
(7616 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
Way to take it on the chin. good work.
Damnz those proxies - always messing with the thundering hammer of online law!
|
|
|
|
|
|
