![]() |
Quote:
|
I think one of the things that worries me the most is the wording of the release. Like prices significantly increase, spares MAY be available, and delivery times of two years. If I hit a bird and need a couple of wing ribs that are now 20 bucks and they go to 200 bucks and it takes two years to get them, it renders my plane un-repairable. Or someone that just started the wings, buys the other kits now but messes up a former in the fuse two years down the road, and can't get a new one. If find the release lacking in details as to what over 4000 owners might be facing. I don't have a problem with long lead times for a new kit, or even discontinuing a kit, but not being able to get parts that are hard to make, such as hydro formed parts and heat treated parts, is a bit scary.
Bob burns |
Being a Lancair builder, I'd like to add a different perspective. When Lance started selling the model 235 kits in the late eighties, they were really inexpensive. My kit cost only $15,975 (not including engine, panel, interior, and paint). In retrospect, it's clear that Lance grossly underestimated the costs of "after-care": engineering updates, customer service and spare parts (and probably liability insurance). Lance designed some great airplanes but (IMHO), was a poor businessman. The company continued to support the original customers for almost 30 years, but they were hemorrhaging money at the end and finally had to give it up.
All I am saying is that it's important to all RVers that the company stay in business. If Vans has to raise prices on certain older designs in order to cover their costs, then I see that as reasonable and necessary. Flame away! |
Quote:
Bob I don't think it's too much of a concern - the skills to hand make these parts are easily acquired should it ever come to that, or it would be easy enough to find someone else who could do them. You won't be tied to the factory if repairs are ever needed. |
This is one of those topics that immediately fell victim to "Forum Fever".
Nowhere does it say anything was being discontinued, if anything, it was a letter of ongoing commitment but just putting those models on notice that after many decades it's time to wind them down. How long should Vans support a kit? What is reasonable? I think I'll start a separate vote thread on that. |
I can't speak to the 3, but for the -4 and 6, there is not a single part that you cannot fab yourself. All the info is in the plans, materials, heat-treat, dimensions. Parts like gear legs would be expensive, but a bird strike? You can make a couple ribs faster than the current shipping time from Vans. A piece of MDF, a jigsaw, ruler, mallet, and you are in business. Yes, it would be more work, but if the lead time turned into months, then you have time. Except for the ribs and bulkheads, most everything is flat or a couple straight bends. I'm not too concerned. The only part that sucks is the end of -3 kits for the most part.
|
It seems that some want to conflate "support" with "timing". My only issue is timing. Of course, you can't support a product forever, but to put builders in a corner with less than two months notice? If they had said that the price increases (undefined, but "significant") were effective a year from now or even July 1, 2018, I'd completely support that. That gives a reasonable amount of time to plan the remaining build, cash flow, etc.
|
Quote:
1971 RV-3 (46 years) 1980 RV-4 (37 years) 1986 RV-6 (31 years) It's a gift of reassurance that they issued a statement of continuing commitment to these kits. |
Last year I was essentially told by insurers to "look elsewhere" for insurance for my plans-built homebuilt airplane. Their rationale was that lack of "factory" support for parts would make ANY incident that bent the airplane a write-off event.
From reading all the posts in this thread I get the feeling the -3 and -4 builders/owners are a far cry from being in this predicament. Having some or all parts available, albeit perhaps at increased price and lead times, keeps the designs alive and viable. |
Quote:
There are a lot of RV-6's out there that need insurance, somebody would step up. Anybody in the insurance industry have an opinion? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
View it from that perspective and it makes sense. They can not support last year's model forever any more that GM supports old classic cars they've produced and sold over the years. |
Luckily for me my RV3 is almost done and I have all the parts already purchased.
In my opinion, most of the parts from VANs are the basic aluminum pieces that can be fabricated by just about anyone who can build a 3, 4 or 6. My three already has a few RV8 parts in it and I?m sure a lot of the current kit parts can be modified for the older kits. The hard to make parts, like canopies, weldments and cowling are made by third party suppliers anyway and I?m pretty sure they would be happy to sell you one of their parts if VANs no longer makes them available. At any rate, business is business and if it keeps VANs going I?m all for it. You never know, I might want to build an RV16! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Regardless, you can fabricate a rib less lightening holes with a simple MDF form block. There are a few EAA videos on how to do it. You can cut and flange the lightening holes if you feel the need. The plans show the rib profiles. Although they fabricate them out of "O" or "W" (not sure) and then temper, there is no reason you can't form them directly out of T3 Sheet. An MDF form should hold up for at least a few ribs if not more. |
Me thinks we are seeing a bright line being drawn between aircraft assemblers and aircraft builders....... ;)
|
Quote:
For many of those people, they don't have the full set of skills that assemblers or builders have. So they have no idea how to form a rib or cut the lightening holes but are willing to learn. For them, having one or two on hand is a tremendous help. I own an -8 which is not part of the change in Van's business. Still, I think it might be very helpful to have a spare or two on hand. |
Agree
I was thinking the same thing Sam. Profit margin for assemblers is obviously a lot higher.
But hey, it could be worse folks. My other plane was orphaned after only 5yrs by a flood. It didn't help that the surviving tooling was buried. After 50yrs, she's still flying. One thing to consider is that when a company decides to vacate a market, it opens up an opportunity for others who may not need the profit margins nor have the overhead costs. In this case Vans isn't vacating, just increasing lead time and cost while reducing inventory. Sounds like a smart business decision to me. Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I have no idea, but which models have the same NACA 4 or 5 digit profiles? I believe the 7 and 8 are the same IIRC, but what about the 3, 4 or 6? Are they the same 23013.5? |
For anyone who doesn't spend a lot of time in the Forums, the discussion is interesting but there's no detail or link to what people are talking about. Can someone post the actual release?
[ed. Bob, it's on the front page of VAF for the next few days... v/r,dr] |
@LettersFromFlyoverCountry https://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/letters/RV-3-4-6P1.pdf
|
This new policy is not to be misconstrued as a faltering in our commitment or willingness to support our customers whether an order was placed yesterday or forty-six years ago. We will produce a singular part if need be to make certain the reason an RV doesn?t fly is not due to us. But the economic reality to perpetuate this level of dedication compels us to make hard choices. Any model we produce must generate enough revenue to at least keep it from being subsidized. This was our only path to keep these models viable, old ones flying and hopefully new ones to finally take to the air.
|
Thanks for stepping in Mitch its great to hear your reasoning and commitment to support. I totally understand Vans' position!
|
Good to hear your commitment Mitch but I have to point out that your public announcement says parts MAY be available not WILL be. Expressing a commitment to parts for these kits would have alleviated many of the concerns expressed in this thread.
|
Let's look at subsidized..... Isn't it true that the RV8, and then the RV7 was heavily subsidized by the RV6/6A?
In fact, the main reason to discontinue RV6 parts is so the 7 can catch up and claim to be the most popular kit aircraft in the world....... That still won't happen for a long time. OK, just kidding. I think Van's just made a good business choice but was a little short on relaying the information. In 1999 I was excited about all of the glass kits. And then some dropped out. I did airframe repair in the AirForce. Aluminum aircraft are very repairable in the field. I headed towards the RV6A for that reason. It has been said before, the PLANS that come with your RV6 kit has all of the information needed to fabricate any part of the airframe. If I remember correctly back then, Van said they were an airframe company, not an aircraft company. |
Thank you Mitchell for chiming in. Maybe a little more infowould put some of us more at ease. As I have said a few times, the wording has me worried. It uses some very wide open terms. Since this new pricing is in effect in less than 2 months, I would assume you know what those numbers are. Are we talking 20%, 60%, 500%? Given past sales how long do you anticipate the current parts stock to be depleted? Any estimates as to the percent rise once it becomes a custom one off operation? 50%,100%, 1000%? It's kind of scary not knowing what screwing up a part could cost farther into the build.
Bob burns Rv-4 |
Those of us that have built and are flying an RV for more than 20-years that we built have drawings for each part and can make the part from our own sourced materials. When I messed up a part while building, I made some of my own replacement parts and some I purchased from Van's. It cost me the same or more in material to make the part as if I purchased the part ready made from Van's.
So Van's will now not be making large batches of parts for our older model airplanes. I would not be afraid to bet that the new parts pricing structure is the same cost or less than for me to pay myself to make the part and pay for the material. Those that do not want to pay Van's for the part can take their drawings to an A&P and pay the A&P for his time to make the part. Van's has the tooling. It is only fair that they make a profit on the time and material that they use to sell us parts. It one spends some time price shopping, one finds that when Van's does not have the lowest price on an item, they are very close to the lowest price. This is from being a Van's Aircraft Customer for more than 28-years and price shopping on many items. |
Quote:
|
It might just knock the heck out of the resale value of the earlier models as well??
|
I doubt resale will be affected. Most parts can be made from scratch. I made a wing leading edge skin, rudder skin, stiffeners, tail tips, hinge brackets, instrument panel, half my canopy frame, glass canopy skirt and tail fairing from raw stock. I've made wing ribs from form blocks too. I screwed up some of my Vans parts and just made new ones from scrap. Anything you get from Vans has to be trimmed, adjusted and drilled to your airframe anyhow. Its usually cheaper and quicker than ordering Van's parts.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
If it were today I would have a completed aircraft due to the fabrication Van has done since my kit. |
So The Mothership has released the updated prices for th RV-3...total has gone from $16,230 last year to $21,750. It isn't as bad as I had initially feared, but still a big chunk of change, with lead times listed as 2 months for all subkitw bar the empennage.
Anyone want to buy a low-time -9A? :-P |
Thats really not bad at all. Two month lead time is nothing, takes me longer than that to clean the work shop sometimes.... Well maybe thats a slight exagguraton but still not a long wait.
Alex |
Yikes
Quote:
Wow, that's a 34 percent increase! For two grand more, you can have an RV-7 kit with all the extra work done for you. |
Quote:
This is what people don't think about when looking at RV-3's. They figure "half the seats, half the airplane, half the price....." Nope - kit price is overwhelmed by the rest of what you need to make an airplane. A single-seater isn't that much less expensive than a two-seater...which is why so many people go with two-seaters. More bang for the buck. Unless you really savor the handling and performance of the single seater, and are in a situation where you can justify it. |
the love
we are all in this for our own reasons and will do what ever we(as individuals) will do and to do what we want, be it build or fly and basically follow our free will... it really is pointless to ponder THEIR move.. I will build on.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:03 AM. |