Re: Dynafiber booms

From: Jon Peterson (jon@oilsystems.com-DeleteThis)
Date: Mon Nov 14 1994 - 10:59:19 PST


Received: from hplabs.hpl.hp.com by opus.hpl.hp.com with SMTP (1.37.109.8/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA15800; Mon, 14 Nov 1994 11:07:22 -0800
Return-Path: <jon@oilsystems.com-DeleteThis>
Received: from durian.oilsystems.com by hplabs.hpl.hp.com with SMTP (1.37.109.10G/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1SU) id AA106220038; Mon, 14 Nov 1994 11:07:18 -0800
Message-Id: <199411141907.AA106220038@hplabs.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>
Received: by durian.oilsystems.com (1.38.193.5/16.2) id AA20895; Mon, 14 Nov 1994 10:59:19 -0800
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 10:59:19 -0800
From: Jon Peterson <jon@oilsystems.com-DeleteThis>
To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
Subject: Re: Dynafiber booms


> > Are the latest models of FiberSpar booms still prone to failure?

> Apparently the 94s are fine. ASD (the largest Fiberspar dealer on the
> West Coast, I think John said) says they have gotten no '94 returns. By
> contrast, they think they replaced most of the '93s under warranty.

I just got off the phone with the Nor-Cal Fiberspar rep (Jim Johnstone).
They had less than 1% returns on booms sold in the bay area. Most of the
failures could be attributed to big slams. None of the failures involved
breaking the carbon tubes; most were front ends.

Jon Peterson



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:28:21 PST