View Single Post
  #66  
Old November 7th 03, 07:38 AM
Jake Donovan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Harry,

Not a problem. I post here from time to time but my jobs kind of keep me
from posting too much. Active frowns on speaking too much unless it is
generic. There are a lot who post here know me professionally.

I have been called much worse and it rolled off my back.

No harm done.

Just caught me on a bad day. I was heading to the Blue Angel's Home Coming
show and the aircraft broke. Bad mood. I will arrive in P'cola early in
the Am before the show starts but with out a ride.

Pleasure to meet you.

Jake.

"Harry Andreas" wrote in message
...
In article VDkqb.3057$0d2.1939@lakeread06, "Jake Donovan"
wrote:

"Just to avoid all the conspiracy theorists"

No Conspiracy here. Having flown 2 Grumman product Test Programs, 3

years
at DARPA and more time at DoD then I want to admit, worked under Barton
Strong at Air Warfare, Grumman was not asked, but was told, under
contractual agreement with the DoD to destroy the F-14 tooling.

Plane (no spelling error) and simple.

As an engineering raconteur, please give me a cost analysis on storing

the
Tomcat tooling. Given the prevailing atmosphere at the time, the Tomcat

was
not a dead issue. Grumman had some interesting and very potent ideas on

the
drawing board. DoD made their choice and as it happens way too much in

the
political arena, (Ask Northrop) decision makers do not like to be proven
wrong.


Thanks for taking me to task.
Having been in this industry a very long time, and provided some of the
equipment
you've been lucky enough to operate and fly, I often see simple economic
decisions turned into some kind of nefarious plot by people who don't
know any better (Not you). If you've been on RAM and RAMN for some time
things like the decision to mothball the SR-71 come to mind.
Frankly Jake, I have not seen you post here until recently and of course

have
no way of knowing your experience level. We get all levels here.
I am aware of some of Grumman's interesting and potent ideas, since I was
involved in some of them, but the economics as seen by others spoke
differently.
When dealing with contractual issues, I can easily see that the tooling

could
be ordered destroyed. That doesn't make me wrong as to why, though.

BTW, I didn't call YOU a conspiracy theorist. I though my phrasing was

clear.
Perhaps not.


regards

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur