Reasons LS-4 delayed

This posting is primarily for Peter,

Firstly, thanks for all the good work. Ok, what i'm saying next is just out of curiosity. It's not intended to be a flame. As you know, I've been supportive of your lights and your work. I do own the LSH-P and I'm quite eager to purchase the LS-4.

I'm just curious if there're some other big reasons why the LS-4 is delayed by 6 month quite suddenly other than due to the amount of required coding. A few weeks before the announcement of the delay, we were informed things were going ok and that Henry was progressing fine with the coding.

You mentioned in your posting that the delay is caused by the amount of coding required for the LS-4. Yes, i can understand the coding is quite a bit, but i do not think it requires such a long period. From inception to April 2004, that would be more than 12 months of coding.

I understand most projects, if not all, do have some delays. So my question is not so much as to how come there's a delay but more to why the sudden announcement of a 6-month delay. I'm curious what the other big reasons are. If the reasons are too sensitive for this forum, it is prefectly understandable. Again, i want to make it crystal clear that if the reasons are not meant for this forum, it will be completely acceptable to me.

On the brighter side, delaying the LS-4 to second quarter next year means there's a higher chance of seeing R-bin LS in the LS-4. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Much thanks, Peter.

- LLL

I'm gonna try to relate this situation to something more familiar....or make a fool of myself.

I kind of see the manufacturing process (especially one as refined as Arc's) similar to turning in college English papers. (uugh..) Most professors require a rough draft before submission of a final draft for the final grade.

A few weeks ago Peter mentioned that the coding wasn't even done/refined yet. If that wasn't done...i'm sure prototypes weren't even sent out for beta testing. If Peter were to release his light at his previously stated date (Oct/Nov), the release would have been equivilant to a paper submitted without a rough draft, last minute, and rushed... something similar to my own English papers. And if they are anything like my last minute writing...the Ls4 would have surely have gotten a grade of "C" or "B" but definately not an "A." /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

I think Peter's main goal with this decision is to minimize the need for future revisions because of a mistake that should have been caught and solved at the R&D stage from the start.

I know that this doesn't answer your question as to what other problems have surfaced to cause this delay, but i believe Peter didn't hold back from any details. I think the delay is due to assure that it isn't a rushed-to-sell light. But i'm just assuming at this point. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif In any case, just like you, i congratulate Peter in everything he has done for CPF and the flashlight industry. As i see it, his company pioneered the use of the Luxeon based flashlight.

Hello LLL.

The short answer is that we under estimated the amount of things that need to be done to make this light a reality.

I mentioned that the porting from the old chip to the new chip took about 3 times longer than we anticipated. Other major delays are the reflector (now in the 4th gen), PCB (coming up on the 3rd gen), retail packaging (2-3 months out), tail button (still in the duck tape stage), etc.

The reason I suddenly bumped the delivery date by 6 months is because Henry and I sat down and took another close look at our calender. Originally, the calender said somethign like, "allow 3 weeks for porting". In reality is took over 2 months. So everything else got pushed back. And this wasn't an isolated occurance either.

Btw, the whole reason we ported to the new chip was the new chip uses less power and has a wider operating voltage.

Again, the porting was just one of the factors.

Peter

I want to see a ready-to-go product produced without the need for a quick revision to it because of something that was overlooked in the design phase. I'm fine with the delay if that is the result. We've got the LS now to hold us over, so we'll be OK until the LS-4 arrives.

P.S. I'll take mine without retail packaging if it gets it to me sooner. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Regardless of the reasons, good or bad, Engineering projects can always run into unforseen glitches. Famous phrase around where I work is "if it was so damned easy, we would hire cheerleaders to do your job, and they'd be much better looking than you". Venturing into something new technically *always* involve unforseen risks. Peter is to be commended for taking these kinds of risks, especially since he's operating on a shoestring budget and extremely limited resources. He doesn't have the budget or cash flow of huge companies like Mag. Another thing to remember is Peter has been gracious enough to share his schedule with us. I don't see ANY other manufacturer who's willing to share this kind of information. Personally, if I was doing something like this, I wouldn't say anything. But then again, I wouldn't get any input and you would have to accept what I deliver in the end which may not be what you wanted.

Peter, keep up the great work and hold your head up high. Good things come to those who wait. (Stole this from Alan Hsu /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif)

Cris

I like Zip-Loc packaging /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinser2.gif

Engineering projects (my current one at work is a trainwreck ) always follow Murphy's Law whose 1st correllary is "If nothing can go wrong, you've overlooked something!" (And Murphy was an optimist!!) You can have it on time, on budget, or done right- choose any one. (Thanks Tomas!- so true!) The engineer is typically forced to commit to a sched, with too many critical path items over which he/she has no control! Bean Counters rule corporate America today, and the professional workplace gets uglier and uglier. Fortunately, Arc is a sole propriatorship(sp?), and he gets to call the shots! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif Peter, make it happen!

Larry

LS-4 delayed,
Sounds like a perfect time to start eyeballing those LuxeonIII LEDs for the LS4. When you throw it in boost mode, it will drive the LED at spec with all other modes the Luxeon will be underdriven. With the LIII in the mix, the LED will last much longer and probably be brighter at the same time.

[ QUOTE ]
onelight said:
I like Zip-Loc packaging /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinser2.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes and no. For us hard core flashaholics, it makes no difference but when presenting as a gift, particularly when wanting to make an impression on a significant other, it does make a difference and the zip-loc cosmetically cheapens the product. I sure wish I could buy a current LS product in a nice Surefire like packaging for gift giving purposes.

Peter could offer the econo-zip lock packaging for standard pricing, or the Cartier-style gold trimmed box with President Bush's signature as well as a certificate of authenticity for a nominal surcharge. I know my wife would *love* to get President Bush's autograph with her brand new LS4 and a copy of Arc LS4 For Dummies /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Peter,

Much thanks for your reply. It was satisfactory and as i said before, i was just curious about the reasons and not the delay itself. Thanks for all the work and candid responses. Will patiently wait for the LS-4 release .....

- LLL