We have been anything but static across the last 16 years. The issue is the result of the flow coat process at the converter.
The original specification for the baseline product controls the methods utilized in its conversion from uncoated to coated
with the adhesive.
You imply we are static, not constantly seeking best priactices to deliver superior product. Due to the converter's primary
customer's specification, we are hamstrung with respect to changing the adhesive application methodology. The intended
use for the primary customer is not effected one way or the other. Expense of proper application methology is exponential.
Occassional, aka inconsistant environmental, physical, and producer best practices contribute to this issue. All of which are
out of our scope of influence. For sixteen years I have sought a parity but have yet to identify one. Weighed against percent
of negative feedback, majority of our customers accept our recommendation to offset this issue as reasonable.
http://004edc4.netsolhost.com/FliteM...n/FMApSeqA.gif