GECFLY and Enzero/ Zerosum
I am assured that Gecfly's contribution was a performance
and one that included belittling the questions he was asked to
ask and then the misreporting of the answers
I am hoping Zerosum / Enzero that you can clarify the Trans C and AoT
questions/ answers - because it seems that Gec might have got the only specifics right..even if the context is utterly wrong..
Gec's question was apparently 'why TC removed the AOT from its line?'.
The detailed answers given by Gregg must have been non NDA protected..so it is presumably now irrelevant data..?
But - if those details correspond to the same phase as I assume - these details utterly contradict the views held on this board for month after month - eg the total success of tests meaning both a definitive and a positive conclusion..ahead of contract time
it also raises the spectre of Tao's data being irrelevant relative
to the mechanics in the field which involved a great deal more than
just a power supply problem...it involved considerable work and re-design and STWA running out of time in the fixing of the problem...apparently
so,please, big please, I would be grateful to learn the/a chronology of events that could incorporate these old/new details along with the contract time and Rhea's test etc
maybe it is irrelevant now that the AOT came off..maybe it was
irrelevant then...but I cannot grasp the overall narrative..with,
for example, the first hearing about AOT not achieving a high
enough percentage...
and with questions like this ..' If STWA was trying to fix the power
supply problem, why was the contract terminated early, before TC
knew whether the repairs were effective ??
help, please !!
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
