What is wrong with the NOC?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Madnorton said:
Ken, your posts make Les look like a saint. Owners got fed up with Les and his attitude, no doubt they are getting fed up with your's.
Can't believe I have wasted the time typing this for you to read.
I am still amazed that you are still allowed to post after calling me and one other assholes.
Click to expand...

If the cap fits, Ashley. Maybe there's more support for my ideas out there than you imagine.
 
Fast Eddie said:
Well Ken, I did not accuse you of writing bullshit. I said that you frequently tell other people that they are talking bullshit, especially when they are expressing views that are different to your own.

Neither do I recall repetive use of the phrase “well, I’ve never tried it, but I would think....” certainly not enough to make you wealthy at a dollar a time Ken! Although, to be frank, I see nothing wrong in that phrase, it is simply making clear that someone is posting a thought / idea / opinion and that they make clear, up front, that it is not based on first hand experience.
Click to expand...

It's not a repetitive phrase, but a general line in your posts. Always the ideas man.
 
Any word from the front, I have to wonder what those '5000 drawings are subject wise, maybe one is of that stick that got jammed into the drilling machine quill.
 
swooshdave said:
This is still a fallacy that some of you have, reverse-engineering isn't the same as engineering. Would you rather fly in a Boeing B-29 or a Soviet copy?
Click to expand...

The Boeing! ;) But, as I said, making Norton parts is not at quite the same level of precision...Are all the Norton parts currently being supplied for these bikes based on the original drawings? From what I understand, they are not yet they (mostly) fit/function properly.

BASED ON WHAT I HAVE READ IN THIS THREAD, ;) I can see the thinking that "back in the day" these drawings were just going to be thrown away and that the NOC "saved them." I realize I'm no lawyer but it seems to me that does make them theirs. To me it's like I pulled something out of a dumpster before it was emptied and then, years afterward, someone demanded I give that item to them because they later bought the building the trash came from. It would be nice if the parties could just play nice together and work things out but that's not something that seems to readily occur nowadays...:(
 
I know the US Navy maintains the ownership of all its stuff even at the bottom of the sea. Always have wondered just how they can do
this but if you raise one of their WW2 airplanes it isnt yours.
Im on the side of the dumpster divers, once in the skip it is yours for the taking as far as I can see.
Legally who the hell knows...
 
MexicoMike said:
The Boeing! ;) But, as I said, making Norton parts is not at quite the same level of precision...Are all the Norton parts currently being supplied for these bikes based on the original drawings? From what I understand, they are not yet they (mostly) fit/function properly.

BASED ON WHAT I HAVE READ IN THIS THREAD, ;) I can see the thinking that "back in the day" these drawings were just going to be thrown away and that the NOC "saved them." I realize I'm no lawyer but it seems to me that does make them theirs. To me it's like I pulled something out of a dumpster before it was emptied and then, years afterward, someone demanded I give that item to them because they later bought the building the trash came from. It would be nice if the parties could just play nice together and work things out but that's not something that seems to readily occur nowadays...:(
Click to expand...

It was not the NOC who saved the drawings but Joe Francis Motors who acquired them in 1966 and as far as is known in good faith . What a mess.
 
oldmikew said:
It was not the NOC who saved the drawings but Joe Francis Motors who acquired them in 1966 and as far as is known in good faith . What a mess.
Click to expand...

1966 ? but that would mean nothing relating to the Commando (Most likely)
Some of the lustre has gone for me but wonder where they are and how they are stored given their age.
 
That was when AMC went.. Joe Francis were a nearby dealer. Well known and very reputable. The actual factory was demolished in 1969 to make way for a road. The first commandos used an earlier parts number designation , whether the 5000 drawings include Commando ones under that designation or just earlier ones I do not know. But the requested drawings which supposedly kick this into touch were for Dommie barrels.
 
1966 is wrong. There are some early Commando drawings contained, so it was about 1969/1970. These drawings were, in one way or another, "acquired" and saved when Plumstead was subject of a compulsory purchase order. Norton then moved to Andover helped by subsidies from the government, and the Plumstead factory was torn down.

This thread has now been hijacked by people more desperate to discuss their own ego than being interested in the original subject matter. I will now stop commenting. If anybody is interested in my views- and some factual information I have documentary proof for- wait for the next "Source".
 
Onder said:
I know the US Navy maintains the ownership of all its stuff even at the bottom of the sea. Always have wondered just how they can do
this but if you raise one of their WW2 airplanes it isnt yours.
Im on the side of the dumpster divers, once in the skip it is yours for the taking as far as I can see.
Legally who the hell knows...
Click to expand...

Military wrecks allways remain property of the state .
That is why Spain can claim the gold found in a 17th century gallion , if they can prove it was not a commercial , but military vessel , even if they stole the gold from the Incas in the first place .
(off topic , but maybe there is some analogy here ..? )
 
Last edited:
ZFD said:
1966 is wrong. There are some early Commando drawings contained, so it was about 1969/1970. These drawings were, in one way or another, "acquired" and saved when Plumstead was subject of a compulsory purchase order. Norton then moved to Andover helped by subsidies from the government, and the Plumstead factory was torn down.
Click to expand...

The AMC / N-V factory was intact at least until the summer of 1969, as evidenced by photos of the machine shop taken in June that year. My guess is that drawings were disposed of in the autumn of 1969 during the factory clear-out.

-Knut
 
True Ludwig, plenty of treasure ships have been raised and division of the results made as you say.
Next thing we will see is ownership of the drawings part of the Brexit deal! :)
 
So, if I have understood well ,there was the drawings of a 17th spanish galion , that Sir Francis drake had stolen , but that galion sunk , he was the grand grand father of joe Francis and gave him the precious map of the wreck , the map of the treasure is somewhere now in the hands of the NOC ???? and the Brexit , what will happen with the territorial waters ......?
 
marinatlas said:
So, if I have understood well ,there was the drawings of a 17th spanish galion , that Sir Francis drake had stolen , but that galion sunk , he was the grand grand father of joe Francis and gave him the precious map of the wreck , the map of the treasure is somewhere now in the hands of the NOC ???? and the Brexit , what will happen with the territorial waters ......?
Click to expand...

Yes it is looking that way, but there is also the Russians in the fake B29.
 
"So, if I have understood well ,there was the drawings of a 17th spanish galion , that Sir Francis drake had stolen , but that galion sunk , he was the grand grand father of joe Francis and gave him the precious map of the wreck , the map of the treasure is somewhere now in the hands of the NOC ????"

I think you've got it!!! :) LOL

"If anybody is interested in my views- and some factual information I have documentary proof..."

C'mon, when have facts ever mattered if they contradict opinion! ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top