Hakim responds

Mr. Blackburn`s letter in the May 1997 issue of Military & Aerospace Electronics that represents the Air Force Rome Laboratory opinion on the Army "Commercial Insertion Study" was vicious but not unexpected, considering Rome Lab`s position on Mil-HNBK-217, QML, etc. Let me address his statements one by one:

To The Editor:

Mr. Blackburn`s letter in the May 1997 issue of Military & Aerospace Electronics that represents the Air Force Rome Laboratory opinion on the Army "Commercial Insertion Study" was vicious but not unexpected, considering Rome Lab`s position on Mil-HNBK-217, QML, etc. Let me address his statements one by one:

1. The December 1996 article in Military & Aerospace Electronics did not have my inputs. It was researched and written by the M&AE staff. It did have mistakes. The February 1997 article corrected those errors and presented more detail of the survey. This article had inputs from me!

2. The added cost to the user of Mil Approved microcircuits was between 6 percent and 100 percent, the average dditional cost being 37 percent over the user of commercial PEMs. These are the cost savings by using PEMs.

3. Mr. Blackburn knows, since I provided his staff with these data, that the respondents to the questionnaire were from over 60 companies solicited, including; Alliant Techsystems, Group Technologies, Honeywell, Hughes Aircraft, ITT, Litton, NFT-Ericsson, Rockwell International, and Texas Instruments.The savings in size, weight, and cost, as well as improvements in reliability, are facts.

4. The complete survey results will be published in a paper entitled "Why Use PEMs In Military Equipment - Users Response" in an upcoming issue of Microelectronics And Reliability.

Unfortunately, Mr. Blackburn is reinforcing the poor opinion many have of the Air Force Rome Laboratory!

Edward B. Hakim

The Center For Commercial Component Insertion

Spring Lake Heights, N.J.

jim_wojciehowski@wssagw.chinalake.navy.mil

More in Home