[mstrauss]

Rhetorical question I assume since Vans has a return policy and their own list states which lcp are “acceptable for use”.

Yes it was a bit rhetorical. Point being, if Vans is going to charge to replace LCP for non-LCP, then I will return the LCP for credit. I'll pay the return shipping. With the restocking charge, I should get back about 66%.

I'm just trying to point out the silliness of charging for these parts, if one can return the LCP for credit.

Sorry for the sarcasm all, I guess I'm a bit punchy right now.

 

[jcbarker]

confirmation of no LCPs from Van's

Just received confirmation from Van's stating that my Finish kit has NO LCP parts. Yay! Especially since I've already built my canopy frame.

S/N: 141116
Kit: RV-14A FINISH KIT EXP119
Customer: BARKER, JOHN
Dear Van’s RV Kit Builder,
After further review, we have confirmed that your kit listed above does not contain any of the laser-cut parts produced between January 2022 and June 2023, which Van’s has recently been investigating and reviewing.

Question for Greg Hughes or anyone else that has an answer from HQ:
Will you tell me that my QB assemblies do/don't contain LCPs? I've inspected mine and can't tell with any assurance.

 

[GrahamF]

You don't seem to be able to add SB-00036 as an additional part on emp kits.

Clearly you need a new one of those if you're replacing a rear spar. Would anyone seriously re-use hinge brackets that have been drilled out?

I was pretty irritated at having to pay for SB-00036 the first time around. "We've discovered something and so your kit is not complete - buy extra bits!" is not a nice message to receive while building.

 

[N82VM]

Anyone have a screenshot of the old pdf that said Vans would replace on customer request if cracks are found?

 

[ccarlson]

Anyone have a screenshot of the old pdf that said Vans would replace on customer request if cracks are found?

Screenshot, no; however, the information is available on their website in the LCP updates. I called out the relevant bits in this post.

I've attached a PDF of the updates in case that is helpful.

 

[N82VM]

Lots of “blue” parts that I have to buy now. Dimpled Bulkheads in the tail are “blue”. Great, a place that’s easy to inspect

I think I’ll return all these “acceptable” parts for credit. They can stuff these in the new orders, glad to help with “acceptable inventory”

 

[Tdeman]

Absolutely

2. Also, I want to replace rudder brackets as associated parts since they are riveted to VS-803PP (lcp) and VS-808PP (assoc. part). I am not about to re-use drilled-out flight control brackets.

You don't seem to be able to add SB-00036 as an additional part on emp kits.

Clearly you need a new one of those if you're replacing a rear spar. Would anyone seriously re-use hinge brackets that have been drilled out?

Why not? Universal-head riveted steel brackets are probably the easiest item to reliably drill out of an entire RV kit. Myself, along with several colleagues have reused brackets in airplanes past and present. (For a multitude of reasons including: RV-7 elevator on an RV-6 tail, rebuilding damaged surfaces, re-rigging misaligned/non-prepunched parts, the list goes on.)

I'm not sure why they're not listed as an associated part, but they're absolutely reusable if they're removed properly.

 

[Brantel]

I have the same issue and when I go back to the page, nothing is saved. I emailed Greg.

The list of part for an RV7 fuselage was scant. The good news is that it appears that the part I need are not expensive. It may be easier to forego the process and just order replacements.

As one of the beta tester's, you have to individually enter the qty click add on each and every item you are selecting and then save the page. It will only save that kit's data in the event you have multiple kits, you have to do the same on each one.

At the bottom you should get this message when you click save.

 

[ccarlson]

Why not? Universal-head riveted steel brackets are probably the easiest item to reliably drill out of an entire RV kit. Myself, along with several colleagues have reused brackets in airplanes past and present. (For a multitude of reasons including: RV-7 elevator on an RV-6 tail, rebuilding damaged surfaces, re-rigging misaligned/non-prepunched parts, the list goes on.)

I'm not sure why they're not listed as an associated part, but they're absolutely reusable if they're removed properly.

It is a personal preference. I am willing to drill-out and re-rivet some things, but I am not willing to do so with the rudder brackets since a.) they are flight control brackets, and b.) I need to rework the entire assembly anyway due to LCP VS-803PP.

Said differently... I don't see the sense in spending the time to drill out the 48-odd rivets that hold VS-808PP to VS-803PP plus the 22 rivets that hold on the rudder brackets when I could save myself the aggravation by starting fresh.

 

[Paul Thomas]

As one of the beta tester's, you have to individually enter the qty click add on each and every item you are selecting and then save the page. It will only save that kit's data in the event you have multiple kits, you have to do the same on each one.

At the bottom you should get this message when you click save.

I did... I have a pdf version of what my screen looks like and sent it to Greg. I'm happy to share it with you though (send me a pm with your email if you want to see it). I'd hate to bring up what appears to be an issue with their system if I'm the one misusing it.

Paul

 

[swift12]

Anyone have a screenshot of the old pdf that said Vans would replace on customer request if cracks are found?

Yes I have emails and all the info saved. I have a screenshot of will vans replace…YES……not TBD as they have changed it to now….you cannot walk back on this stuff….no dam way am I paying to have these LCP parts THAT ALL CRACK upon dimpling and OPEN UP upon riveting. This will turn my rv7 into a lemon shaving tens of thousands of value off it not to mention there is no guarantee my parts are as good as the ones they evaluated. They will not go in my aircraft and I’m not paying again for them. I trusted vans to give them time to sort this out and now they have used that time to walk back promises to replace and instead plan for us to use unsuitable parts. Man I hope there is not a crash in the future that can be attributed to one of these parts deemed acceptable for use. And what does TBD mean? We see how many want parts replaced under acceptable for use and come up with a cost then? As in writing a blank check?

I was backing vans and asking everyone to give them time…..that blue acceptable use line better change to vans will replace as they PROMISED previously.

 

[ccarlson]

Looks like these documents got rolled back to prior revs this afternoon.

I am not sure they were rolled back (I may be looking at something different, though... I'm going cross-eyed from scanning parts lists. )... it looks like the parts list document was updated to elaborate on the TBD item.

The doc from late last night just said: "TBD" for the blue and green items.

Now, those TBD items have become: "Yes - timing and cost for production are under review, and prices are TBD"

 

[N82VM]

Yes I have emails and all the info saved. I have a screenshot of will vans replace…YES……not TBD as they have changed it to now….you cannot walk back on this stuff….no dam way am I paying to have these LCP parts THAT ALL CRACK upon dimpling and OPEN UP upon riveting. This will turn my rv7 into a lemon shaving tens of thousands of value off it not to mention there is no guarantee my parts are as good as the ones they evaluated. They will not go in my aircraft and I’m not paying again for them. I trusted vans to give them time to sort this out and now they have used that time to walk back promises to replace and instead plan for us to use unsuitable parts. Man I hope there is not a crash in the future that can be attributed to one of these parts deemed acceptable for use. And what does TBD mean? We see how many want parts replaced under acceptable for use and come up with a cost then? As in writing a blank check?

I was backing vans and asking everyone to give them time…..that blue acceptable use line better change to vans will replace as they PROMISED previously.

Thank you sir, I needed confirmation that it was not previously imagined.

I guess on technicality they are still replacing it…they left out at whose cost….Oooopsie!
This has a bad taste.

 

[rv10builderx]

Portal email not received

Did anyone NOT receive an email with the parts portal link yet?

I got the original email about potential LCPs in my kits from Van's back in July, and my empennage and wing kits definitely have LCPs. However, no email about the parts portal as of yet, although I see others did receive access.

 

[Brantel]

I am not sure they were rolled back (I may be looking at something different, though... I'm going cross-eyed from scanning parts lists. )... it looks like the parts list document was updated to elaborate on the TBD item.

The doc from late last night just said: "TBD" for the blue and green items.

Now, those TBD items have become: "Yes - timing and cost for production are under review, and prices are TBD"

You are correct, it was a browser cache issue. It's 2023 and Chrome still has issues with this?

 

[2theskyy]

Did anyone NOT receive an email with the parts portal link yet?

I got the original email about potential LCPs in my kits from Van's back in July, and my empennage and wing kits definitely have LCPs. However, no email about the parts portal as of yet, although I see others did receive access.

I believe everyone should’ve by now. But you may not like it, or you might.
Maybe try calling or emailing Vans or one of the moderators can hook you up.

Good luck

 

[dmattmul]

Nothing yet

Did anyone NOT receive an email with the parts portal link yet?

I got the original email about potential LCPs in my kits from Van's back in July, and my empennage and wing kits definitely have LCPs. However, no email about the parts portal as of yet, although I see others did receive access.

I received the original email to both my Vans email addresses they have for me on file and nothing since. Maybe because the only thing that was possibly effected was a QB wing kit. By the way this had been delayed as I was caught up in the corosion issue from several years before.

 

[TX_Flyer]

Originally Posted by rv10builderx View Post
Did anyone NOT receive an email with the parts portal link yet?

I got the original email about potential LCPs in my kits from Van's back in July, and my empennage and wing kits definitely have LCPs. However, no email about the parts portal as of yet, although I see others did receive access.


I have not received an email from Vans. I will be curious if I get one saying my kit has no LCP since it most certainly does..

 

[SwissVolts]

I received an email from Greg:
"After further review, we have confirmed that your kit listed above does not contain any of the laser-cut parts produced between January 2022 and June 2023, which Van's has recently been investigating and reviewing."

I regret to inform you that this is not true!
In my tail kit (RV8) I have 27 laser cut pieces with 100% security!

My luck is that I haven't started building yet and I have been able to check all the parts perfectly.
Now I fear for the QB wing and fuselage kit that I have not yet received! I can't believe they send it without laser cut pieces...

I also do not have access to the portal and have not received a response since July 7. This is no way to treat a customer!

Furthermore, I have paid for the kits 100%. Big mistake on my part!

I would like to cancel my order, get my money back and find another plane. My illusion with Van's Aircraft has completely disappeared.

I don't even want to imagine the situation of other people with advanced constructions...

 

[ccarlson]

F-01405F

Heads up:

RV-14 fuselage kit

F-01405F BRACE,MID FUSE

Part is listed in the LCP sheet, but it does not appear to be an option in the portal.

 

[airguy]

Not to nickel-dime this, but I know others are probably in a similar situation.

1. I had a change made to my wing kit to accommodate ER tanks. The change required two additional L and R tank ribs:

T-1004-L-1
T-1004-R-1

The portal allows me to select up to 5 each, but I need 7. I am guessing this is something I can eventually address with support?

Same here. I sent an email to support.

 

[LittleJon]

It was my understanding that LCP's were produced between Jan '22 and June '23. The RV-12 Tail Kit LCP Parts list shows 16 parts placed in inventory in 2020. Greg, can you verify the dates for these parts? Thanks.

 

[gotyoke]

Based on pictures of my inventory, I think I'll need to replace nose ribs on my ailerons and flaps. Seeing as how I'd have to drill out all the spar rivets to do that, I think my only reasonable course of action, assuming I can confirm it, is to rebuild these components entirely. Yee-haw, what fun times.

 

[ccarlson]

Thank you sir, I needed confirmation that it was not previously imagined.

I guess on technicality they are still replacing it…they left out at whose cost….Oooopsie!

They actually did not leave out who would be paying. They clearly said they would replace LCPs free of charge (and without qualification) in the Sep 6 update:

https://www.vansaircraft.com/update-history-laser-cut-parts-notices

"As we’ve described in the past, laser-cut parts will be replaced with punched parts at no charge if requested."

This has a bad taste.

Indeed, it has a terrible taste. At this point, I feel deceived, lied to, and taken advantage of.

I am willing to continue to wait as parts are produced; however, I am not willing to pay again, especially since I already purchased replacements for all of the vertical stabilizer internals once before due to cracking dimples.

 

[swift12]

They actually did not leave out who would be paying. They clearly said they would replace LCPs free of charge (and without qualification) in the Sep 6 update:

https://www.vansaircraft.com/update-history-laser-cut-parts-notices

"As we’ve described in the past, laser-cut parts will be replaced with punched parts at no charge if requested."



Indeed, it has a terrible taste. At this point, I feel deceived, lied to, and taken advantage of.

I am willing to continue to wait as parts are produced; however, I am not willing to pay again, especially since I already purchased replacements for all of the vertical stabilizer internals once before due to cracking dimples.

This…..I totally agree. I will absolutely turn anyone I know off RV’s in general if this terrible response is allowed to continue. Good god just a deep scratch is enough to render a part unserviceable but every dimple cracked….no that’s ok. Like **** it is. Now the site has changed again and they are not listening to us! I am hating this experience. Here you go….we won’t replace your faulty parts…you can and pay for them without any idea of when you can get them or the cost. Then you will also get to ship them. At your cost. This was supposed to be an RV grin…..well it’s far from that….it’s a stressful rubbish experience.

 

[bertschb]

I was trying really hard to be supportive of Vans - mainly because of the statement below from the Vans website from September 6th:

Now the rules have changed mid-game. Not a happy camper.

 

[mstrauss]

Survey Link?

Has anyone gotten the email invitation to take the survey?

Vans stated :
"In addition, when you access the parts portal for the first time we will send you a survey link via email."

I have started entering my replacement part, but never got an email for the survey.

 

[bertschb]

Has anyone gotten the email invitation to take the survey?

Yes, I got it

 

[ccarlson]

Has anyone gotten the email invitation to take the survey?

Vans stated :
"In addition, when you access the parts portal for the first time we will send you a survey link via email."

I have started entering my replacement part, but never got an email for the survey.

I have entered all of my part data into the portal, but I have not received the survey yet.

 

[bmellis11]

I have entered all of my part data into the portal, but I have not received the survey yet.

I didn't get the survey link either, even though it said it was sent.

 

[Tlrguy]

I am hating this experience.. This was supposed to be an RV grin…..well it’s far from that….it’s a stressful rubbish experience.

I‘m right there with you my fellow builder.

Doing business with Vans has turned out to be my second worst decision to date. The worst decision I’ve ever made was to put my buddy into a newly acquired airplane to pilot a short ferry flight home. Unbeknownst to me, the airplane had an engine issue resulting in loss of power and forced landing over a tree line.

My buddy walked away, not a scratch. The airplane, not so lucky.

 

[swift12]

Let’s share this again. This is what I was told over and over. Incredible.

 

[gasman]

Let’s share this again. This is what I was told over and over. Incredible.

Also post the changes to that agreement.

 

[KeithO]

Its all very unfortunate. Had they chosen to water jet cut, it may have been a total non issue. The only potential problem being a bad CNC path, which was part of the problem with the laser cutting, but then adding the heat affected zone and recast layer "on top".

I worked on a refinery project for a few years and one of the factories that supplied pre-welded pipe spools (to reduce the number of field welds - seemed like a good idea) used automated mig welding with fake qualifying parts which resulted in the wrong parameters being used on tens of thousands of pipe spools. Then add some corruption to the QC department to cover up the horrendous repair rate found when "sampling" the welds by xray (once past a certain % of repairs one instantly goes to 100% inspection) and the result was that I ended up re-radiographing the pipe spools in the yard where they were delivered and then after that tracking them down all over the refinery, up 200 ft in the air on the side of towers columns and stacks and getting them repaired and re-tested.

It ended up employing a full time team of more than 10 people just to audit the documentation and probably 18 people per day to repair welds. I remember that the films created from the first long weekend in the pipe spool yard, when they were on the ground (every radiographer on site working near 24/7 on the job) made a backlog that took over 6 months to work through by those individuals who were qualified to interpret the radiographs. The bill for the weekends work alone was a few million and lord knows how much it was for working through interpreting all of that film. Of course since those guilty of the fraud were free mason brothers, no-one was fired, demoted, they smugly kept their high $ jobs until the completion of the project.

 

[gotyoke]

I would recommend not jumping the gun and whipping yourself (and others) into a frenzy about the blue and green boxes that say the prices are TBD. I'm inclined to believe this is a miscommunication, and will be rectified quickly. Greg has made the statement about replacing LCPs on their dime emphatically and multiple times, which means that decision was made and accepted within the company long ago, and I have faith they will stick to it. I also believe they will not charge us shipping, just as they don't charge shipping when sending out backordered parts.

33% off punched parts damaged during disassembly is not great, I admit, but that very well could be at-cost. Part of me says Van's should eat the cost of all assemblies damaged during my disassembly, but that would incentivize me to do a sloppy job of disassembly, which would not be fair to Van's. At-cost replacement for such parts is, IMHO, a fair middle ground.

 

[ccarlson]

I would recommend not jumping the gun and whipping yourself (and others) into a frenzy about the blue and green boxes that say the prices are TBD. I'm inclined to believe this is a miscommunication, and will be rectified quickly. Greg has made the statement about replacing LCPs on their dime emphatically and multiple times, which means that decision was made and accepted within the company long ago, and I have faith they will stick to it. I also believe they will not charge us shipping, just as they don't charge shipping when sending out backordered parts.

I appreciate what you said, but I don't think the blue and green boxes are driving the concern at this point. Have you seen the attached message in the parts portal?

If what you suggested was accurate, I think a Van's rep would have been all over the forums and socials today to calm nerves and make sure the message was clear. Instead, the kit aircraft world has been absolutely on fire and raging all day in response to the latest update with nary a peep from Van's.

 

[ccarlson]

You have got to be kidding me. I’m confused how sloppy disassembly requiring additional parts is not fair to Van’s?

I think what gotyoke means is that without some additional buy-in from the builder, there could be a tendency to abuse discounted pricing. If there is a cost for replacements, builders would probably be more careful and inclined to avoid damaging parts during disassembly.

 

[gotyoke]

Heads up:

RV-14 fuselage kit

F-01405F BRACE,MID FUSE

Part is listed in the LCP sheet, but it does not appear to be an option in the portal.

I was just about to post the same. Unfortunately, I neglected to mention it in my survey response.

 

[gotyoke]

I think what gotyoke means is that without some additional buy-in from the builder, there could be a tendency to abuse discounted pricing. If there is a cost for replacements, builders would probably be more careful and inclined to avoid damaging parts during disassembly.

That is indeed what I mean. Still, if Tlrguy still doesn't agree with this perspective, that's okay with me. As I said, IMH (as in humble) O.

 

[gotyoke]

I appreciate what you said, but I don't think the blue and green boxes are driving the concern at this point. Have you seen the attached message in the parts portal?

If what you suggested was accurate, I think a Van's rep would have been all over the forums and socials today to calm nerves and make sure the message was clear. Instead, the kit aircraft world has been absolutely on fire and raging all day in response to the latest update with nary a peep from Van's.

Perhaps you are right and I am wrong, and that would indeed be messed up. That said, Van's has already shown a tendency toward slow delayed/communication over contentious things, so it would not at all surprise me if this is another one of those cases. If this doesn't eventually get corrected, I'll join you with a pitchfork as I have quite a few greenbacks riding on this too

 

[swift12]

I appreciate what you said, but I don't think the blue and green boxes are driving the concern at this point. Have you seen the attached message in the parts portal?

If what you suggested was accurate, I think a Van's rep would have been all over the forums and socials today to calm nerves and make sure the message was clear. Instead, the kit aircraft world has been absolutely on fire and raging all day in response to the latest update with nary a peep from Van's.

No way are those sub standard parts going in my plane. For gods sakes EVERY SINGLE DIMPLE IS CRACKED!…..I have riveted some and drilled them out to reveal even larger cracking! And they say acceptable for use!

 

[PCHunt]

Insurance?

I think I have read every post on this thread so far........

I don't remember any discussion or question about Van's Aircraft having any insurance to cover something like this. I would think that a company producing a large volume of parts for assembling/building an airplane and some Quick Build kits, would hedge their bets with some form of insurance to cover situations like this.

No, I'm not an insurance salesman.........

Just wondering??

 

[ccarlson]

Perhaps you are right and I am wrong, and that would indeed be messed up. That said, Van's has already shown a tendency toward slow delayed/communication over contentious things, so it would not at all surprise me if this is another one of those cases. If this doesn't eventually get corrected, I'll join you with a pitchfork as I have quite a few greenbacks riding on this too

I hope you are right and I am wrong. They have indeed slow played in the past, and perhaps that is what we see here as well. Hahahaha... I appreciate your lightheartedness. For what it is worth, I don't own a pitchfork. Instead, I wield a keen keyboard and a wicked pen.

 

[N82VM]

I contacted kits dept and asked about return policy. They referred me to shipping due to the estimate of needing to return 100+ parts.

I figure they are "acceptable" and therefor good enough to be returned. I emailed shipping to ask about sending in a large return.

The response from shipping... It was forwarded to the Ops Mgr and the VP.

Right now the only thing that is shipping is their pants.

If I have to pay for good parts you can have these "acceptable" ones back. I'll take the credit.

I can't imagine a 1000 customers sending 100 parts back for credit is ideal, but I can play reindeer games too.

 

[sophie]

I’m really hoping Van’s aircraft will change their mind. I really want them to survive but sent them a lengthy letter that I’m not accepting to continue building with all these burn marks and uneven holes.

Has anyone else paid the deposit / full amount of the kit(s) with a credit card? I’m not saying we should demand money back, but it could be useful to facilitate communication. They did not deliver the product that was ordered, it would a lot cheaper for them to solve this themself. But I want to give Van’s time to change their mind. (If these parts were truly okay to use they would right now still be producing laser cut parts)

Their survey even asks whether you’re planning to replace the parts they think are acceptable. (Why ask, I thought they were “acceptable”)

I even placed an order last month for a new fuselage kit (thinking Van’s was going to do the right thing) to support their business. But it sounds like that the manager who is in charge of PR/communication is damaging their own business. Just simple communication and replying to email would go a long way.

 

[lr172]

Here you go….we won’t replace your faulty parts…you can and pay for them without any idea of when you can get them or the cost.

To provide some balance to this argument, Vans just spent a whole lot of time and $ with some material science experts who say that many of the parts you want to replace ARE NOT faulty. Why should Vans provide them for free just because you feel uncomfortable with them. I realize that you think they are faulty, but the experts disagree. IMHO, Vans effort here could save a lot of time and effort for those that have already assembled a lot of parts. They could have spent the $ on shipping all new parts, but instead chose to spend the $ to collect a real assessment of the risk these marginal parts would create. This seems to me to have been the better choice.

I get the frustration of the position reversal, but we need to look at the big picture here. They jumped out too early with their promises and this is just another communications blunder in a seemingly long list of them. I'll state one last time, if you don't trust the engineers desisgning these things, you are insane to fly in one as they have made thousands of decisions just like the one above on your kit.

Larry

 

[2theskyy]

To provide some balance to this argument, Vans just spent a whole lot of time and $ with some material science experts who say that many of the parts you want to replace ARE NOT faulty. Why should Vans provide them for free just because you feel uncomfortable with them. I realize that you think they are faulty, but the experts disagree. IMHO, Vans effort here could save a lot of time and effort for those that have already assembled a lot of parts. They could have spent the $ on shipping all new parts, but instead chose to spend the $ to collect a real assessment of the risk these marginal parts would create. This seems to me to have been the better choice.

I get the frustration of the position reversal, but we need to look at the big picture here.

So Vans engineers say they past the tests. This does not make lcp airworthy. They are deemed airworthy via the builder installing and the DAR inspection. I’m not saying the DAR knows all. And then they are deemed airworthy each year via A&P. Let’s not confuse what the engineering tests are vs who deems them airworthy.

I’ve opted to not put 1 lcp into my plane and I’ve chosen to pay twice for that. I don’t think this is what anyone should do but I’ve also been around aviation long enough to not get bullied by any company nor engineer. My signature is what makes it airworthy and stays in the logs and my butt in the plane. It’s not a matter of trusting Vans design, they have a great design. This is bad decisions followed by financial based decision covered by lawyers.
I wear many hats and I’ve chosen this path for myself for many individual reason just as others choose for them and their plane.

 

[N82VM]

To provide some balance to this argument, Vans just spent a whole lot of time and $ with some material science experts who say that many of the parts you want to replace ARE NOT faulty. Why should Vans provide them for free just because you feel uncomfortable with them. I realize that you think they are faulty, but the experts disagree. IMHO, Vans effort here could save a lot of time and effort for those that have already assembled a lot of parts. They could have spent the $ on shipping all new parts, but instead chose to spend the $ to collect a real assessment of the risk these marginal parts would create. This seems to me to have been the better choice.

I get the frustration of the position reversal, but we need to look at the big picture here. They jumped out too early with their promises and this is just another communications blunder in a seemingly long list of them.

Whether or not experts disagree does not change the fact that the kit is advertised as prepunch and we got laser. This was done without notification or informing the buyer that a different process was used. An argument can be made that parts were not delivered as advertised and the buyer was not able to make an informed choice.

Simply put I did not get the item that was advertised. Not to mention if these laser parts are good why stop making them that way?

 

[deMan]

Has anyone else paid the deposit / full amount of the kit(s) with a credit card? I’m not saying we should demand money back, but it could be useful to facilitate communication. They did not deliver the product that was ordered, it would a lot cheaper for them to solve this themself. But I want to give Van’s time to change their mind. (If these parts were truly okay to use they would right now still be producing laser cut parts)

I think requesting a chargeback on your credit card will be quite an uphill battle.
The bank won’t get involved in judging what makes a part acceptable or not. From their perspective Vans I think will be able to provide documentation that it was a valid purchase and that they delivered the goods. As far as the objective paper trail goes, Vans has a report that says these blue parts are fit for purpose. So to an outsider it looks like your word against their data. Not a very strong position for you.
I’d be very cautious filing such a large chargeback that might get seen as frivolous. Don’t ruin your relationship with your bank.

Similarly, purchase protection on the credit card will want proof of damage. It probably hard to make that argument plus purchase protection is usually limited to 90 or 120 days, so no luck there.
Extended warranty excludes motorized vehicles. Arguing that your aluminum parts from a company called Vans Aircraft don’t fall under that exclusion will be rather hard.

Bottom line, your bank probably won’t be able to help you.

As to why they aren’t making laser cut pets again, do you really think engineering is the deciding factor here? Or is it maybe the negative opinion customers have about these parts?
Look at this thread. LCP are non-viable because customers won’t want them anytime soon. There are hundreds of comments on here showing that.
Taking the stop of LCP production as a sign of the parts being unfit in a technical way is probably confirmation bias.

 

[lr172]

So Vans engineers say they past the tests. This does not make lcp airworthy. They are deemed airworthy via the builder installing and the DAR inspection. I’m not saying the DAR knows all. And then they are deemed airworthy each year via A&P. Let’s not confuse what the engineering tests are vs who deems them airworthy.

I

Actually, it was a material science firm that specializes in analysis of metal parts and assemblies. This has nothing to do with DARs. Airworthiness inspections simply don't go to this level of detail and if they did, we should not be trusting DARs to be assessing issues like these; The FAA has Engineers for that. It is the builder that has to make these decisions and for us that do not understand material engineering and stress testing, we need to trust the designer of the kit. This is pretty binary. You either trust the thousands of material decisions that they made on your behalf or you don't. Don't get the logic of focusing in on just one of those decisions and declaring it was wrong, but trusting the other 999. If yoiu truly think that the designers are getting it wrong on this issue, how do you not go back and second guess the 999 other design decisions that they made for you?

I'll stop now.