Whirlwind Propellers and what now? - Page 3

TGRV7 · #21 05-11-2007, 11:36 AM

I would like to use the 200RV on my RV7 with an IO-360.
I hope WW gets these issues resolved.
I dont want to invest $$ in prop that turns into a boat anchor.

Jconard · #22 05-11-2007, 11:52 AM

I just got off the phone with Whirlwind, and Bill.

I had a business career before I became a lawyer, and I now serve on the board of an aviation company.

I must say that I am very pleased with the way they are handling this issue, and I found my discussion with Bill to be helpful and informative.

I do believe that the upgrade they are offering represents a fair disposition and I will have no qualms recomending this prop or this company to friends in the future. It was immediately apparent to me when I recieved my Prop, that they do quality work, and now it has become apparent to me that they are willing to do the right thing by their clients.

Everyone will form their own opinion, but for other customers out there I would recomend that you stay calm, wait for your chance to talk to them, and form your opinions at that time. I really think they will work with each builder as best they can.

N62XS · #23 05-11-2007, 04:17 PM

I talked with Bill and John today. While we did not agree on every point, I too feel that we will have an acceptable solution. I am waiting to hear back from John concerning the route/price I will take/pay. Both Bill and John want to work this out to the benefit of all. I will take their word and work with them to solve the issue.

On a related note, I sent the following message to Doug on May 8, hoping to let things die down and let the Whirlwind folks iron out details. As of this writing, my message has not been acknowledged.

Whirlwind Propeller 150/151 Service Letter
Doug:

Just a quick note and request. Whirlwind issued a Service Letter for the 150/151 Series Propeller on May 4th. It will probably result in blade replacement and a bill for over $2200. In talking with XXXX XXXX, I believe it would be in the best interest of all owners of this prop to limit the online chatter concerning the issue and cost, at least until some decisions are made at Whirlwind on the way they plan to deal with this problem. Could you block discussion concerning this matter for a week or so to let the initial wave of frustration pass?

randylervold · #24 05-11-2007, 05:01 PM

Robby,

Yikes, blocking discussion seems a bit draconian, not to mention in violation of the 5th Amendment. Remember that we're in the greatest free-market-economy in the world which is based on the free exchange of information and opinions. It's up to the reader to filter what he/she thinks is credible, then vote with their dollars.

It's Doug's forum and he'll make the call, but I'm a moderator and wouldn't think of blocking discussion on anything as long as it is civil, reasonably respectful, and consistent with the published guidelines. So far I think this thread has been very objective and informative and I commend the contributors for that, especially under the circumstances. You and several others have all articulated some very good points that both WW and other owners should hear. That's why these forums are so valuable and a boon to our free market economy.

FWIW,

flyeyes · #25 05-11-2007, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by randylervold

Robby,

Yikes, blocking discussion seems a bit draconian, not to mention in violation of the 5th Amendment. Remember that we're in the greatest free-market-economy in the world which is based on the free exchange of information and opinions. It's up to the reader to filter what he/she thinks is credible, then vote with their dollars.

It's Doug's forum and he'll make the call, but I'm a moderator and wouldn't think of blocking discussion on anything as long as it is civil, reasonably respectful, and consistent with the published guidelines. So far I think this thread has been very objective and informative and I commend the contributors for that, especially under the circumstances. You and several others have all articulated some very good points that both WW and other owners should hear. That's why these forums are so valuable and a boon to our free market economy.

FWIW,

Randy, well said.

There is an obviously high level of frustration and disappointment, but I agree that nobody has crossed any lines. I can't think of anything that would look worse for WW than an attempt to silence open discussion.
(I do of course realize this request didn't come from them)

To their credit, WW is maintaining dialog, and is willing to discuss things. I remain disappointed, but the dust hasn't settled yet, and they are trying to manage a very bad situation.

People need to vent, and the Whirwind guys didn't create this problem on purpose. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that they find a way out that minimizes everybody's pain.

LifeofReiley · #26 05-11-2007, 05:44 PM

First Robby states "BTW: Doug, thanks for the prompt reply."

Then he states he never got a reply?

What's up with that?

This issue needs to be discussed. If I was spent $7500.00, I would be very upset too.

tin man · #27 05-11-2007, 06:55 PM

Its my impession that the only reason Whirlwind is addressing this issue is because of the "outing" of the problem on this forum. Why would anyone want to censor it

DeltaRomeo · #28 05-11-2007, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hard Knox

snip...As of this writing, my message has not been acknowledged. ...snip

As long as the rules are followed there's no need to delete anything. (Darrell, I think the "thanks for the prompt reply" was when I shot a quick reply to Robbie in an email saying that I'd look into it").

(9pm Friday night) I'm just in the door from a week in Pittsburg doing some contract photography work and haven't have the usual amount of time to devote to VAF. I have quite a pile of correspondence to go through (literally just walked in the door - left for Pittsburg last Monday at 0600). Dog tired...or is that Doug tired <g>.

I think this thread is VERY helpful and, if handled right by the folks at WW, could be some of the best PR they could ever get (if the problems are fixed of course). At least this has been the case with other companies....

Best,
Doug

LifeofReiley · #29 05-11-2007, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeltaRomeo

As long as the rules are followed there's no need to delete anything. (Darrell, I think the "thanks for the prompt reply" was when I shot a quick reply to Robbie in an email saying that I'd look into it").

(9pm Friday night) I'm just in the door from a week in Pittsburg doing some contract photography work and haven't have the usual amount of time to devote to VAF. I have quite a pile of correspondence to go through (literally just walked in the door - left for Pittsburg last Monday at 0600). Dog tired...or is that Doug tired <g>.

I think this thread is VERY helpful and, if handled right by the folks at WW, could be some of the best PR they could ever get (if the problems are fixed of course). At least this has been the case with other companies....

Best,
Doug

Doug,

You always take the High Road... that's why you are so respected in this arena!!

Glad you had a safe trip!

N62XS · #30 05-11-2007, 10:40 PM

First, I never advocated censorship. Due to recent personal experiences with slams on this board from Bob Shendaker and slams from Darrell Reiley and Bob Shendaker on the Matronics list, I requested that an issue with the possibility of evoking emotional responses without all of the facts be delayed for a week or so to allow facts, not subjective opinion populate this type of thread.

Not to throw stones and to prove the point, when this first broke, Randy put his prop up for sale, only to pull it after discussions with WW that changed the his mind.

When I received my letter, I called several contacts at WW. Even after the letters were mailed, these discussions revealed that the possible solutions were still fluid and may very well be handled on a case-by-case basis. At that point, I made the request of Doug that I made public earlier this evening. Not to insult anyone, but when I received no acknowledgement of my message, I posted my concerns that were discussed with WW Wednesday and yesterday. These posts were only to elicit answers I had already received from WW before the posts and that I felt would be better received if answered by Bill, not me.

My discussion with Bill and John this morning reinforced my previous experiences with WW and gave me assurances in the viability of this product, the support of the product by WW and factual information concerning the safety of this prop.

For the record, Bob Shendaker, unlike others, took the "high road" by posting an apology on the Matronics List. It did not appear on VAF. He and I have no issues and I will do business with him again, as I will with WW. Both companies are manufacturers of quality products, with good people supporting the products. Everyone makes mistakes, as we are all human and can only strive to reach a goal called perfection. People like Bob, Bill and John are not perfect, but I believe the all have the goal of delivering a safe, quality product to us, at a fair price.

This issue is emotional enough for those of us with this prop on our RVs for many reasons. Relevant, objective opinions and facts are needed and helpful. My intent was to request that anything else not fuel an unnecessary fire.

As always, thanks to DR for the effort and the forum.

FWIW and IMHO