(status bar message)
Image Placeholder
Log In - Register

Search:
Advanced Search


RE: Differences between early T160 and Late T160
Post a reply | Start a new discussion | Main Index | Help

Posted by Richard Beard (US) on Friday, September 14, 2018 at 16:37
    - in reply to: RE: Differences between early T160 and Late T160 posted by DMadigan on Friday, September 14, 2018 at 11:32

The common practice in UK engineering at the time would be to dual source components of this type.

So Triumph would typically pay 50% of the tooling costs for the component.

The foundry would own the other 50% which would prevent Triumph from shifting the patterns to another foundry.

Triumph could then source from either supplier.

In the day -- when strikes were commonplace -- this enabled supplies to be available from the other supplier if one supplier was on strike.

Also by 75 it was probably useful for Triumph to play one suupplier off against the other in respect of cash being tight --they might have been on stop from one supplier so procured supplies from the other.

BTW---HDA were High Duty Alloys --part of the Hawker Siddeley Group (the Hawker part as in Hawker Hurricane of 1940 Battle of Britain fame) based in Gloucester UK.

AM were Aeroplane ansd Motor Aluminium Castings based in Smethwick Birmingham UK who were part of the AE Group (Hepolite pistons, Glacier bearings etc etc).

When working in the UK engineering industry in the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s I had dealings with all these companies.

Hope I havent bored you!

Replies :

RE: Differences between early T160 and Late T160 AllenGriffiths (AU) on Friday, September 14, 2018 at 17:00