Knowing the details of the technical issues around why they didn't come out when expected ( and it really was an issue about not being "perfect" because I'm pretty sure many manufacturers would have just started selling them ) I imagine that when they corrected the issues encountered during preproduction testing - and they did correct them - that this then meant all the original testing had to be carried out again, which most likely prevented them from hitting their target dates.

So, it really does seem to be a case of TNVC never accepting anything that's not perfect - either from their vendors and definitely not in-house.

That said, some units did go out - the issues were very predictable and working units weren't likely to develop future problems - either the issue was there at manufacturing or it wasn't - so the functional units that are in the field should be pretty much fine - and the modifications could be retrofitted to a unit anyway -

I can't second-guess TNVC's position on this ( I only spoke with the engineers who developed it to any extent ) and so if there are specific reasons for not releasing the WASP, they would rest with Vic. Personally, I thought it was a very good product and most manufacturers would have simply gone into production with the view to fixing the issues as they went along via a warranty program - But TNVC are one company I can't imagine doing that.

And I can respect Vic's position on this - I imagine the delay is costing TNVC significantly in terms of missed sales opportunities and development costs - And commercially, it's possible that these costs may rise to the point that it no longer makes sense to release the WASP and the exercise gets written off, though I do hope the WASP makes it to market eventually.  But it takes a lot of integrity to hold back on selling a product that you're not completely happy with when those costs start to mount up - and the "Tactical" in TNVC isn't there for show.

So I guess we wait and time will tell.

David.