Bob Axtell wrote:
> Pearce, AB (Alan) wrote:
> 
>>>So do we talk with them again to try to instill quality or jump out of 
>>>the frying pan and into the fire?  Will the next place be better or 
>>>worse?  I need a new crystal ball!
>>>    
>>
>>Often it is worth talking to them to explain the problem. Maybe they
>>have a new operator they need to get properly up to speed ?
>>
>>  
> 
> Look, I'm an ole guy from an old school- if it can't be seen, it can't 
> be inspected- and if it
> can't be reliably inspected, then is doesn't need to be designed into 
> the F22 Raptor. Just
> my 4cents (with inflation).
> 
> --Bob

Alan is correct of course.  And I believe he has hit on the problem in 
my case: a new set of production people.  We are already trying to get 
this straightened out with them.

I would also agree with Bob except that the design has no alternatives. 
It must use this part.  All other comments aside, success here does 
indeed depend on the procedure being followed 100%; there is no way to 
tell afterwards if it was done right.  These looked good, they worked 
well, then they began to fail due to the flux contamination.  But flux 
does not show up in x-rays.  Life goes on...

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist