Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 59

Thread: Hobby gun to work gun.

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Northern UT
    Posts
    4,023
    Feedback Score
    66 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by TehLlama View Post
    The milspec TDP is intended to be a floor, below which the DoD sees no reason to pay for weapons which will see fielding. In terms of quantities of civilian AR's made, that floor is deemed astronomically high by companies with less than stellar QC/QA, therefore their marketing department steps in with stuff like 'ours is better because it's different', instead of showing large sample size high round count testing set to low statistical P values of MRBF above a certain threshold and improved over the TDP specification.
    To me the perfect example of this is the RRA rifles. They look at the Colt 6920 and look to improve the trigger pull with their 2-stage NM design, while it is a better feel than the standard GI setup, it is a problematic design that is documented to have problems. So while the feel is an improvement to the hobby shooter, there is a sacrifice of reliability which in a hard use/duty gun is not acceptable.

    They also use non CL barrels in most models to improve accuracy over the milspec Colt. Once again they are giving up properties that are valued by the serious shooters to appeal to the hobbyist.
    Last edited by VIP3R 237; 09-29-13 at 11:16.
    I paint spaceship parts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Failure2Stop View Post
    Stippled Glocks are like used underwear; previous owner makes all the difference in value.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    8,420
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by sinister View Post
    ...MILSPEC parts will fit and function whether the M4/M16 was built in Connecticut, South Carolina, Canada, Singapore, the Philippines, or Korea (all on the same drawings and TDP)...
    As far as the TDP goes, it depends. When I was working as a contractor providing maintenance on AH64-A Apaches and AH64-D Longbows, the TDP belonged to the contracting company and it was well guarded from competitors. When a new contract company took over the contract, they used their own TDP. We still provided the same quality maintenance but certain details about how we went about our business changed as a result
    INSIDE PLAN OF BOX
    1. ROAD-RUNNER LIFTS GLASS OF WATER- PULLING UP MATCH
    2. MATCH SCRATCHES ON MATCH-BOX
    3. MATCH LIGHTS FUSE TO TNT
    4. BOOM!
    5. HA-HA!!

    -WILE E. COYOTE, AUTHOR OF "EVERYTHING I NEEDED TO KNOW IN LIFE, I LEARNED FROM GOLDBERG & MURPHY"

    http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n289/SgtSongDog/AR%20Carbine/DSC_0114.jpg
    I am American

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    AZ-Waging jihad against crappy AR's.
    Posts
    24,902
    Feedback Score
    104 (100%)
    In this case your example isn't the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by MistWolf View Post
    As far as the TDP goes, it depends. When I was working as a contractor providing maintenance on AH64-A Apaches and AH64-D Longbows, the TDP belonged to the contracting company and it was well guarded from competitors. When a new contract company took over the contract, they used their own TDP. We still provided the same quality maintenance but certain details about how we went about our business changed as a result



    Owner/Instructor at Semper Paratus Arms

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SemperParatusArms/

    Semper Paratus Arms AR15 Armorer Course http://www.semperparatusarms.com/cou...-registration/

    M4C Misc. Training and Course Announcements- http://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=141

    Master Armorer/R&D at SIONICS Weapon Systems- http://sionicsweaponsystems.com

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NM
    Posts
    3,988
    Feedback Score
    10 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by MistWolf View Post
    As far as the TDP goes, it depends. When I was working as a contractor providing maintenance on AH64-A Apaches and AH64-D Longbows, the TDP belonged to the contracting company and it was well guarded from competitors. When a new contract company took over the contract, they used their own TDP. We still provided the same quality maintenance but certain details about how we went about our business changed as a result
    Yeah, I'd echo IG's comment, that your experience comes from a field where conservative, religiously followed preventative maintenance is the norm, and a lot of the TDP data content which was deemed sensitive had to do with the huge sums of money required to determine the expected mean lifetime, approximate low end 3 sigma lifetime, and testing procedures to ensure that parts fall within spec. It's a completely different QA regime, where there are plenty more correct answers because of the redundancy built into systems as well as the massively improved documentation and PM protocols in place.

    Take those same airframes, give them to a third party nation, with the knowing expectation they'll put crap fuel through it, provide lax PM for it, and you'd start to see that the most conservative TDP far outstrips the more feature laden options. Simply put, firearms are more common, receive poorer documentation, and mostly get ran harder in worse conditions with the expectation that they work above minimum anyway.
    عندما تصبح الأسلحة محظورة, قد يملكون حظرون عندهم فقط
    کله چی سلاح منع شوی دی، یوازي غلوونکۍ یی به درلود
    Semper Fi
    "Being able to do the basics, on demand, takes practice. " - Sinister

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    8,420
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Colt sued when the Army gave Colt's TDP to FN without permission- and won
    Last edited by MistWolf; 09-30-13 at 00:01.
    INSIDE PLAN OF BOX
    1. ROAD-RUNNER LIFTS GLASS OF WATER- PULLING UP MATCH
    2. MATCH SCRATCHES ON MATCH-BOX
    3. MATCH LIGHTS FUSE TO TNT
    4. BOOM!
    5. HA-HA!!

    -WILE E. COYOTE, AUTHOR OF "EVERYTHING I NEEDED TO KNOW IN LIFE, I LEARNED FROM GOLDBERG & MURPHY"

    http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n289/SgtSongDog/AR%20Carbine/DSC_0114.jpg
    I am American

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    AZ-Waging jihad against crappy AR's.
    Posts
    24,902
    Feedback Score
    104 (100%)
    Are you sure about that? I am pretty sure that FN was given the TDP officially.

    Quote Originally Posted by MistWolf View Post
    Colt sued when the Army gave Colt's TDP to FN without permission- and won



    Owner/Instructor at Semper Paratus Arms

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SemperParatusArms/

    Semper Paratus Arms AR15 Armorer Course http://www.semperparatusarms.com/cou...-registration/

    M4C Misc. Training and Course Announcements- http://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=141

    Master Armorer/R&D at SIONICS Weapon Systems- http://sionicsweaponsystems.com

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    8,420
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    There was a discussion awhile back about it. The DoD or the Army gave a package to FN so they could bid on making M4s. Part of that package was the TDP which Colt owned as they are the ones who developed the M4 to begin with. Colt took it to court and as I recall, they settled on having the right to be the sole provider for the M4 (which expired a few months ago) and would be paid a set price for each carbine for the life of the contract.

    A company with a .gov contract must have a set of documents outlining and detailing how they will conduct business. The documents cover just about every aspect of the services to be provided including how the company will assure material, parts & processes used will meet the requirements the .gov has set. Because of the nature of the relationship our contracting company had, it also included pay rates, benefits, training and working conditions of employees. We learned a lot about the TDP we were working under and were not allowed to share any of it because the information would allow a competing company to know how we were doing business and figure out a way to out-bid us.

    Aircraft companies often have a similar agreement with the FAA. It's called a Letter Of Agreement. A company will write a letter outlining how they plan to do business based on the FARs and other FAA regulations and submit it to the FAA. If the FAA agrees, they sign off on it and the company is legally bound to follow it. Sometimes, what's in the LOA doesn't match the regulations (due to unique circumstances and/or outdated regs) but if the FAA accepts it, it's binding. TDPs sometimes have agreements that deviate from the original contract or specifications to streamline and improve services provided

    I don't know if there was a "TDP" back then, but a a good example of a company needing to protect their intellectual property is the story of the jeep. The American Bantam Car Company, on their own initiative, did much of the development work on what was to later become the jeep. Later, when the Army finally recognized the need for such a vehicle, took Bantam's drawings and specifications of the Bantam to Willys-Overland, giving them a leg up in the design process. Bantam laid the groundwork for what was to become a key machine in winning the Second World War and the most iconic automobile in history, yet made no profit from it, simply because the technical data they developed for it was not protected
    Last edited by MistWolf; 09-30-13 at 01:33.
    INSIDE PLAN OF BOX
    1. ROAD-RUNNER LIFTS GLASS OF WATER- PULLING UP MATCH
    2. MATCH SCRATCHES ON MATCH-BOX
    3. MATCH LIGHTS FUSE TO TNT
    4. BOOM!
    5. HA-HA!!

    -WILE E. COYOTE, AUTHOR OF "EVERYTHING I NEEDED TO KNOW IN LIFE, I LEARNED FROM GOLDBERG & MURPHY"

    http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n289/SgtSongDog/AR%20Carbine/DSC_0114.jpg
    I am American

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,438
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    Are you sure about that? I am pretty sure that FN was given the TDP officially.
    He is correct...

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    AZ-Waging jihad against crappy AR's.
    Posts
    24,902
    Feedback Score
    104 (100%)
    I am not referring to the suit, but the fact that it wasn't allowed to be given out. I was under the impression that there are circumstances where the Army was allowed to do this.

    Seems kind of weird since Colt is now making M240's and they would need the TDP to build them.

    Quote Originally Posted by MK18Pilot View Post
    He is correct...



    Owner/Instructor at Semper Paratus Arms

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SemperParatusArms/

    Semper Paratus Arms AR15 Armorer Course http://www.semperparatusarms.com/cou...-registration/

    M4C Misc. Training and Course Announcements- http://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=141

    Master Armorer/R&D at SIONICS Weapon Systems- http://sionicsweaponsystems.com

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    College Station, Texas
    Posts
    1,539
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    The Navy inappropriately gave FN Colt's M4 TDP. Colt sued and won.

    Fast-forward and the Army solicited bids for another M4 contract, as Colt's was at capacity. Remington won it. Colt bitched and asked for a review.

    Colt won the Government review. The M4 contract was bid again, and FN won.

    When the Government solicits a request for bid they send a copy of the TDP to all qualified bidders so they can figure their ability to meet MILSPEC, delivery numbers and rate, and costs and profit margin. If for any reason an outfit wthdraws, or if they lose the bid, they are required (by agreement with the Government) to return the TDP and all data.

    http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...etition-06942/

    The origin of the “M4 Addendum” traces back to the improper release of the M4 TDP by the US Army’s Rock Island Arsenal to the US Navy’s NSWC-Crane in early 1996. NSWC-Crane had requested a copy of the M4A1 TDP to support the solicitation of accessories for the M4 SOPMOD kit. While soliciting an adaptor for training ammunition, NSWC-Crane provided the M4A1 TDP to 21 vendors in August/96. As one of the potential bidders, Colt was very much surprised to receive a copy of their own TDP drawings, and gave notice that the terms of the 1967 Licensing Agreement had been breached. NSWC-Crane quickly attempted to recover all copies of the TDP and sent out non-disclosure agreements (NDA) to the other 20 vendors. All of the vendors except FN Manufacturing complied. FN Manufacturing officials had balked on one of the five terms of the NDA, refusing to state whether they had safeguarded the TDP while it was in their possession. Instead, they provided a letter asserting that they had not improperly used the data.
    Rock River has US Government contracts but the performance metrics are based on the DEA's specs, not military nor the Colt TDP. Those carbines meet the DEA's original requirements and nobody else's.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •