Now that is an update! I have a SB not a QB so not anything that helps my situation, but if Vans would actually put out something like this at least I’d know something was happening. The silence is deafening and unbecoming.
Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Factory Info: Parts with Laser Cut Holes and Potential for Cracks
- Thread starter greghughespdx
- Start date
- Status
Now that is an update! I have a SB not a QB so not anything that helps my situation, but if Vans would actually put out something like this at least I’d know something was happening. The silence is deafening and unbecoming.
TenJax
Member
Well, currently I have a completed VS and Rudder. The VS is matched drilled and was not a LCP spar so its construction is good.The rudder has good spars, but LCP stiffeners. Not sure if I will rebuild that.
The horizontal had a good spar, but the ribs were laser cut. While they are on the approved list, I chose to replace them since they were just beginning to be installed.
12 ribs and 6 nose ribs was $178 and gets me building. When I’m done with that, I’ll see where vans is and might end up ordering the next couple parts to keep moving forward. My elevator has lots of LCP so probably won’t go out of pocket for those, but the tail cone maybe.
I think if you have good skins and some good parts for an assembly, ordering a few replacement parts at store price may just get you going again.
I don’t know is ordering the entire kit is necessary.
Good luck
How are you guys getting Van’s to ship out replacement parts? I ordered and paid for the parts I need to remove LCP from my wings and Van’s won’t ship them out. Days later I decided to pay for parts to continue working on my Fuse and they wouldn’t ship those either.
I literally can’t even pay full retail for the new parts.
Last edited:
dmattmul
Well Known Member
Risk reward factor
This builder will have non LCP’s in his fuselage, wings and finishing kit. His empennage is less than 3% of his total build costs. Makes zero since to use any LCP’s in his empennage. Empennages with LCP are literally being given away for penny’s on the dollar. There’s a reason. Buyers and their pre-buy inspectors when reviewing airframes will want to see documented proof if these contain LCP’s. If they have a choice (and they will) what do you think they will do?
“Wings SB started 4/14/22 - 85% done”. By the way if you started your wings April 2022 are you sure you had LCP’s?
The most vocal on this issue are those unwilling to accept LCPs. That does not necessarily make them the majority. I, for one, have decided to accept my wing ribs being LCPs, rather than have to remove every single wing rivet, which would surely be worse.
This builder will have non LCP’s in his fuselage, wings and finishing kit. His empennage is less than 3% of his total build costs. Makes zero since to use any LCP’s in his empennage. Empennages with LCP are literally being given away for penny’s on the dollar. There’s a reason. Buyers and their pre-buy inspectors when reviewing airframes will want to see documented proof if these contain LCP’s. If they have a choice (and they will) what do you think they will do?
“Wings SB started 4/14/22 - 85% done”. By the way if you started your wings April 2022 are you sure you had LCP’s?
Last edited:
100% sure. My bottom skins are not on, so I have access to examine dimpled holes with a jeweler's loupe. Plus I have pictures from my inventory. My batch of LCP ribs was pretty good, but there are still the clear indications of laser cut holes.
I am, of course, concerned about this. It is a problem for 25 years from now, by which point maybe all the worry will have settled. I know it's a bit of a gamble. My alternative is to buy a new wing kit.
Last edited:
Really? You'll insist that your engine baffles, which apparently have been laser cut for a lot longer than any of these hole issues existed, be fabricated with a different method?
Not sure how someone will be able to document that they don't have LCP in the airframe, really. Do you think buyers are going to run down the list of affected parts, and expect microscopic photographic proof that none of the holes had HAZ issues?
I know what they will do….same thing as me….but I keep getting censored….so just guess. I’m the same as you….none will be in my aircraft but I have the option of replacing them as they are not yet fitted….just awaiting the breaking of the deafening silence.
Ok thanks for that - I wasnt sure if you had pulled your finished empennage kit apart and then replaced any affected (LCP) parts but it sounds like you had the opportunity to replace the parts before assembly.
Unfortunately the dilemma I am facing is to what to do now as mine has been assembled and I am certain that I will damage the skins and probably some other parts too should I do it now, as this is my first build.
I did not see any of the signs of LCP parts as demonstrated in the Vans communications when I put the empennage together - ie there was no signs during assembly that I had received the LCP parts and I am in a dilemma as to what to do - order a new empennage at the increased prices or pull mine apart to see if there's an issue I didn't spot when I put it together.
Decisions Decisions eh - the paradox of the builder!!!
Sure you can document it.
1) order is outside the date range of the entire issue
2) order within range and invoice of all parts replaced
If I were buying from someone that had paperwork showing a decent amount of parts replaced that would suffice.
Although to be completely neurotic about it, I suppose the builder could include photos of parts with blue plastic in addition to the invoices.
Entirely doable.
I have only a fuselage in the affected range. I will make a build log entry with part numbers and attach the invoice for the extra parts.
That's an interesting point - I personally will pass the airplane on to my family when I have snuffed it so the resell situation does not concern me personally.
However for those that build and then want to build another they will (presumably) sell the current kit to fund the next - in this scenario there is legitimate concern about what questions the buyer may have and how the builder can assuage the buyer of any FUD that they may have.
I think you may be right - I don't know how how any builder can convince a buyer of the approach taken and prove that there are no affected parts in the build.
Maybe the answer is to wait to and purchase kits after this time to use the date stamp of purchase as the method of veracity.
I too am fibrillating on my decision as to whether to just order another empennage section - not because I am thinking of selling it in the future but as a safety concern, which may be a flawed thought process but that's humans for you eh!
On another note,
I spoke with Avemco this last week re the points other builders have raised regarding the insurability of the airplane if LCP parts are used in the build (red / amber / blue or green).
They said they did not take anything other than an airworthiness certificate and your personal experiences etc into consideration when offering to insure so I think that may be a moot point going forward.
Build on peeps
dmattmul
Well Known Member
Well, my 10’s baffles were all coated with blue film so I’m pretty sure not LCP’s. Read earlier post of the picture I submitted.
And yes, they will insist to see documented proof when you received your kits. (I would as part of my due diligence) right after I see proof of SB’s completed. Can visually check after that SB’s on inspection. If you received a kit outside the date range I think that would suffice even if by chance LCP’s were used for some non structural application. Not rocket science.
I really don't think this will be the issue you guys think it will be several years down the road. I have done quite a few pre-buys and some of the stuff that I see is WAYYYY worse than a microscopic crack that the manufacturer says is benign. Saw one with slosh peeling and upon remediation found the vent line was completely blocked (blew a hole in the new proseal once put in the sun). Fortunately for the builder and pilot there were so many leaks that were acting as vents that they never had a dead stick event
If you have seen some of the scarry stuff that I have seen, you too would feel that LCP parts are WAY DOWN on the prebuy risk chart. Just the other day I saw a pic in a thread here showing NO BOLTS holding the H stab spar to the longerons. There are some really nasty builder errors lurking out there that are FAR more likely to injure a new owner than LCP parts and that stuff will always be top of list on prebuys.A few years down the road when all of this blows over, who do you think the buyers are going to trust? Vans with their stellar reputation and scientific evidence saying it is no issue or the handful of folks on this thread who say it is a pre-packaged death warrant. "This too shall pass."
Larry
Last edited:
dmattmul
Well Known Member
You’re going to need to verify red and probably yellow parts have been replaced
If you don’t check “in the future” red and yellow LCP’s have been replaced you are doing your client a serious disservice. That can only be done by insuring the airframe has proper documentation. I’m sure there have been many gross errors flying maybe now maybe later. I don’t like maybe with myself or my family at stake. I won’t purchase an experimental with crappy workmanship, why accept LCP’s for structural applications, just as potentially an issue. I prefer to minimize potential issues or better yet eliminate.
Whatever you decide airframes with LCP’s will be selling at a deep discount (as kits are now) just as airframes with crappy workmanship are doing now and in the future.
I really don't think this will be the issue you guys think it will be several years down the road. I have done quite a few pre-buys and some of the stuff that I see is WAYYYY worse than a microscopic crack that the manufacturer says is benign. Saw one with slosh peeling and upon remediation found the vent line was completely blocked (blew a hole in the new proseal once put in the sun). Fortunately for the builder and pilot there were so many leaks that were acting as vents that they never had a dead stick event
A few years down the road when all of this blows over, who do you think the buyers are going to trust? Vans with their stellar reputation and scientific evidence saying it is no issue or the handful of folks on this thread who say it is a pre-packaged death warrant. "This too shall pass."
Larry
If you don’t check “in the future” red and yellow LCP’s have been replaced you are doing your client a serious disservice. That can only be done by insuring the airframe has proper documentation. I’m sure there have been many gross errors flying maybe now maybe later. I don’t like maybe with myself or my family at stake. I won’t purchase an experimental with crappy workmanship, why accept LCP’s for structural applications, just as potentially an issue. I prefer to minimize potential issues or better yet eliminate.
Whatever you decide airframes with LCP’s will be selling at a deep discount (as kits are now) just as airframes with crappy workmanship are doing now and in the future.
Last edited:
I get that and don't challenge your approach here. I was referring to what new buyers would be concerned with, as that was the factor in the post that I was replying to.
Larry
Yes, this is a real sticky wicket! As I mentioned, I find many things on many planes that were not done according to what was supposed to be done or how it was supposed to be done. Just because there is a logbook entry say red and yellow parts were replaced, in my experience that doesn't mean they were. I gav the slosh example above. Logbook stated all SBs complied with, yet there is an SB for slosh removal. Sorry, but humans are human. Some lie, some lazy, some incompetent, etc.
I frankly don't know how this gets inspected down the road. It's not like you can pull out thousands of rivets and get a microscope into the dimple area. My approach is one of red flags and yellow flags. You examine a large number of visible areas and take note of mistakes, craftsmanship, short cuts, etc. Once you get to a fairly large number, you get a sense of the mindset and discipline, or lack thereof, of the builder and this guide your assessment. The reality is that you can only get eyes on a limited number of things and there will ALWAYS be a possibility of Unseen issues lurking. I also have a long list of relatively typical mistakes and short cuts that get priority. For example, 75% of all planes that i have inspected have blown edge distance limits on the holes in the longeron where the H stab spar attaches. Not easy to see, as it requires mirrors. None show cracks and none have created an issue. While I recommend remediation, the fact of the matter is that the design has PROVEN to be tolerant of less than perfect assembly and less than perfect parts. I always tell them to fix this particular issue versus moving on to another plane because the next plane has a 75% chance of having the same issue. The guy with no bolts on the H stab attachment is another example. I was shocked when I saw it and even more shocked when I heard it had 400+ hours.
Another example I saw here. Guy buys a 6. Takes the wings off for transport and finds the wings spar looks like it was literally attacked by a mad man with a runaway die grinder. Absolutely frightening to see the pics. Yet, no one knew as that area is completely covered by the plates on either side of it. I don't care who does the inspection, there IS NEVER a guarantee that problems aren't buried in there somewhere.
Last edited:
Jonnyb
Well Known Member
I would love to know how, 10 years from now, you would prove your RV is LCP free? Especially if it’s changed hands more than once. Some dodgy photos and an invoice downloaded off the internet?
People can make paperwork say anything they want. In the certified world it’s a major issue with fake parts in airliners. This will be no different, and very easy to fake.
People can make paperwork say anything they want. In the certified world it’s a major issue with fake parts in airliners. This will be no different, and very easy to fake.
TenJax
Member
*
TenJax
Member
It is a dilemma. I’d imagine try and take it apart. Do your best to avoid damaging it, and if you do, you had considered total replacement anyway. Sorry to hear that you have completed all components. Some will be very tricky to get apart.
Best of luck either way
I fail to see what all these stories about others' errors, intentional or not, has to do with my willingness to accept cracked parts in MY aircraft without much clearer guidance than has been provided so far. I know I'm a broken record, but until Vans issues updated guidance they are willing to stand behind about what cracks are acceptable on what parts, there is only a choice of which Vans document do we follow, and which one(s) we ignore. It took until the 2nd revision of the engineering assessment to even mention crack features present at the start of testing.
No one is claiming an aircraft is going to fall out of the sky because of LCP - can we dismiss that strawman? Prior to this spring these forums were a great place to get advice on building an award winner. These kits will always be marked short of that ideal, without the knowledge or consent of the builders. All many of us are advocating for was what Vans offered until the last update - replace dimpled LCP.
Finally, there are a lot of thoughts about what future builders will think - [ed. Removed one sentence RE: moderation. dr]
Edit: My apologies Doug, more than fair and won't happen again. But when we speculate on what future builders/buyers will think, the closest we have right now are those who are dealing with the problem, and the evidence in the marketplace that LCP are already demanding a steep discount. I'd argue that the conservative opinions are the most useful - it usually does no good to plan for the best case scenario!
Last edited:
I didn’t do anything special. Just ordered them through the online store. ��*
That has been stopped, apparently. I looked a week ago today with the same thing in mind, and the webstore said "Call to order" for all affected parts. I called on Monday, tried to order from a live warm body, and was told "I don't think we can do that, I'll have to refer it to management." Called back Tuesday morning, got the same answer again, asked her to search for my previous correspondence - "I'm sorry, I don't see anything... I will have to ask our management."
Legitimate kit builders just wanting to order new parts - at full list - to fix their mistake - and "I don't think we can do that..."
Not looking good for the home team.
Last edited:
IANAL, but I think they call that "forgery" and "fraud".
Jonnyb
Well Known Member
It certainly is, but it won’t stop people doing it.
How many times have we seen people say an SB has been done, just to find out it hasn’t?
It’s hard enough to prove a negative anyway. Throw in a significant amount of time, and a few changes of owner, and it’s going to be nearly impossible to prove anything with any certainty.
It has nothing to do with your decision. This was a simple response to another poster talking about how future buyers would be turned away from and unwilling to buy Vans planes with LCP parts. I was simply replying with examples of why I believe that LCP parts is fairly low on the list of things that a future buyer needs to be worried about and I have some experience in working to find those problems. I passed no judgement on any decisions made by you or any other poster on the LCP issue; Only provided a counter argument to the claim made that LCPs are going to be a problem with resale value in the future. We simply don't know that. There are plenty of SBs issued by Vans for parts cracking and failing. Logic says that this should impact value, yet the net effect has been a 50-75% increase in resale value over the last three years. We can speculate all we want, but the future will be what the future will be and it cannot be predicted today. If I could predict the future, I would be far too rich to be spending time here.
I still believe that forums like this are best when all points of view are heard. This provides a broader set of view points for the casual member to consider when formulating their own opinion. I make NO claim that my view point is any better than yours or that yours is wrong. It is just a different view point.
Last edited:
Many SBs have the option of recurrent inspections or replace parts. If the owner opts to do the inspections, then he/she has complied with the SB.
rocketman1988
Well Known Member
Many things are nearly impossible to prove.....
Each inspection gets a logbook entry. Do you take photos of your annual condition inspection?.....of your ELT inspections?
Each inspection gets a logbook entry. Do you take photos of your annual condition inspection?.....of your ELT inspections?
rocketman1988
Well Known Member
Actually
Actually I have been taking photos of SB inspections and such. I put them in a MX binder that I keep. Also took some photos of the cylinders and valves with the borescope. It’s more for me than anyone else as I will likely never sell my -10, though I’ve had a few really nice offers…
Actually I have been taking photos of SB inspections and such. I put them in a MX binder that I keep. Also took some photos of the cylinders and valves with the borescope. It’s more for me than anyone else as I will likely never sell my -10, though I’ve had a few really nice offers…
Mike S
Senior Curmudgeon
I sign my name to the inside of all inspection covers and panels along with the date each year, just to prove at least I opened them. Perhaps some will think I took the trouble to open them , sign them and not look inside and inspect. That’s their prerogative, I can’t worry about them. Document, show invoices and pictures of your work and you should be good with most people.
I made a list of all my parts that are LCP, by category and kit. I will be able (eventually) to show invoices and shipping documentation for re-orders of those components that will match my affected LCP list. Photos of a completed wing alongside a pile of LCP parts will help show they were not included. If a future purchaser chooses to argue that I just made that all up and they don't trust me, then they can move on to the next airplane, not my problem.
No, we can't absolutely prove that we replaced everything we say we replaced. What we can do, though, is to reasonably document it and keep that with the airplane records. The belief (or not) of the person reviewing those documents some years down the road is not under our control. I'm not responsible for others, nor shall I try.
No, we can't absolutely prove that we replaced everything we say we replaced. What we can do, though, is to reasonably document it and keep that with the airplane records. The belief (or not) of the person reviewing those documents some years down the road is not under our control. I'm not responsible for others, nor shall I try.
Last edited:
PilotjohnS
Well Known Member
Timing
Just curious, when do we expect the replacement parts to start showing up?
Has Vans started shipping replacement parts yet for QB kits?
Just trying to plan on when we all are going to get together and start helping to rebuild these quick builds.
Just curious, when do we expect the replacement parts to start showing up?
Has Vans started shipping replacement parts yet for QB kits?
Just trying to plan on when we all are going to get together and start helping to rebuild these quick builds.
A few people that were able to put in a standard parts order at full list price before Vans shut that down have reported receiving parts in the 2-3 week time frame. Nobody that I am aware of has had a portal list converted into an order.
tenacious9
Member
Been out of the loop for sometime. Someone got a summary for those of us with QB kits? I got 2 QB of the LCP variety never touched. Anyone attempting to tackle that with a rebuild? Or is it a complete write off? You guys think we could claim this as a loss on taxes?
There is no official word from Van's re: QB kits and LCP's
bkc3921
Well Known Member
Finally someone said it
Exactly. I’m sick up to my eyeballs with people worried to death about the “future value” of their RV, 25 years down the road! Hate to say it, but an RV is NOT an “investment”. It’s a machine subject to aging, tech changes, and inevitable depreciation. If you built it thinking its a good place to park your money, I would submit you made a grave mistake.
I built my RV’s for ME. If that makes me a greedy son of a ….., so be it. Worrying about its condition 25 years from now is like sending your wife to a spa every week so she can be pretty for the next guy. Who gives a rat’s posterior about the next guy…??
Build it for YOU, fly it, and have fun. If you want to make changes, do it. If you don’t want to change it then DON’T…! These things are an enjoyable money pit …and NONE of us are getting out of here alive anyway… Let the stoning begin if you must, as I’m too old and cranky to care…
Exactly. I’m sick up to my eyeballs with people worried to death about the “future value” of their RV, 25 years down the road! Hate to say it, but an RV is NOT an “investment”. It’s a machine subject to aging, tech changes, and inevitable depreciation. If you built it thinking its a good place to park your money, I would submit you made a grave mistake.
I built my RV’s for ME. If that makes me a greedy son of a ….., so be it. Worrying about its condition 25 years from now is like sending your wife to a spa every week so she can be pretty for the next guy. Who gives a rat’s posterior about the next guy…??
Build it for YOU, fly it, and have fun. If you want to make changes, do it. If you don’t want to change it then DON’T…! These things are an enjoyable money pit …and NONE of us are getting out of here alive anyway… Let the stoning begin if you must, as I’m too old and cranky to care…
ccarlson
Well Known Member
Exactly. I’m sick up to my eyeballs with people worried to death about the “future value” of their RV, 25 years down the road! Hate to say it, but an RV is NOT an “investment”. It’s a machine subject to aging, tech changes, and inevitable depreciation. If you built it thinking its a good place to park your money, I would submit you made a grave mistake.
I built my RV’s for ME. If that makes me a greedy son of a ….., so be it. Worrying about its condition 25 years from now is like sending your wife to a spa every week so she can be pretty for the next guy. Who gives a rat’s posterior about the next guy…??
Build it for YOU, fly it, and have fun. If you want to make changes, do it. If you don’t want to change it then DON’T…! These things are an enjoyable money pit …and NONE of us are getting out of here alive anyway… Let the stoning begin if you must, as I’m too old and cranky to care…
I am not stoning (I am not a stoner, literally or figuratively
), just observing... you said you don't care, but then took the time to post about it? These things do not compute for me. I think it is a mischaracterization to say people are "worried to death" about it just as much as it is foolish to think it doesn't matter at all. Said differently, absolutism does few favors.
The future monetary value (marketability) of my aircraft certainly does matter to me, but it is not the only (or the first) "-ability" I consider. I have been (mostly*) smart with my finances precisely so I might participate in the aviation lifestyle. Building an RV is, and long has been, a primary objective that has taken me 25+ years to realize. I know my labor will have no value in the final tally, but the machine will have some non-zero value in (hopefully) 25-30 years when I decide to part with it. In other words, I am not looking at my airplane as a way to make money - that is fiscally foolish; however, I am considering its future with an emphasis on maintaining its future value because that seems fiscally wise (insofar as such words may be associated with airplanes).
* I did buy a Piper Cherokee 10.5 years ago... smart sometimes gives way to temptation.
Walt
Well Known Member
As far as future value is concerned, I think I'd prefer an airframe with LC parts installed and deemed ok by Van's, to one that has been totally rebuilt to remove all of them. Chances are the damage done during removal process will be worse than just leaving them.
This is why an aircraft with a damage history generally has a lower value.
And an aircraft may not be a good investment, but it's a large asset for most of us.
This is why an aircraft with a damage history generally has a lower value.
And an aircraft may not be a good investment, but it's a large asset for most of us.
Last edited:
I find this to be 100% true. Every time I drilled out parts that were rivet together, the resultant holes were never 100% the same. The rivet holes I drilled out when I had low build hours compare to the recent drilled out are world apart. You build up the skills after you spent 4-5 years doing it. For the people who want to drill out rivets now only have a few months of experience, weight all the risk factors before drilling. There is a reason they sell the "oops rivets". You make a lot of oops drilling out parts. Practice a lot on test parts. If you find your test drill out holes are not better than the undrilled Vans parts, you aren't doing your airplane any good by removing good parts.
I know of a builder who was very worry about the airworthiness of his part even though his craftsmanship was excellent. He ended up selling the project. Unfortunately, we don't often hear of "build-on" anymore because of the low SNR of late.
Final thought. I am still renting airplanes while waiting to get my RV8 for first flight. All the rental airplanes in my club are considered to be JUNK standards compare to the RV world yet we still use them to crank out PPLs by the hundreds. Just a perspective for those who have trouble sleeping at night.
This is no different than SB for the horizontal. Holes too large for Cherrymax but its in the SB kit and was used and not enough sense to use an oversize Cherry. SB done to be complied with but worse than it was before because the rivet holes aren't to spec. Better off inspecting it every year to comply instead of tearing it apart and repairing to remove the inspection.
Valid point.
ccarlson
Well Known Member
This is the main reason I feel for the folks with QB kits. Depending on the ultimate resolution, it seems like they could face a choice of "bad or worse" based on present markets and market history. I hope that is not the case.
I think of my airplane as an investment in my quality of life. I would have saved some money if I had not bought it, but then I would have missed the adventures, the stories, and the friendships that owning it has brought into my life. The decision to build an RV seems like a natural progression to my aviation affliction... er, um... story.
Exactly. I’m sick up to my eyeballs with people worried to death about the “future value” of their RV, 25 years down the road! Hate to say it, but an RV is NOT an “investment”. It’s a machine subject to aging, tech changes, and inevitable depreciation. If you built it thinking its a good place to park your money, I would submit you made a grave mistake.
I built my RV’s for ME. If that makes me a greedy son of a ….., so be it. Worrying about its condition 25 years from now is like sending your wife to a spa every week so she can be pretty for the next guy. Who gives a rat’s posterior about the next guy…??
Build it for YOU, fly it, and have fun. If you want to make changes, do it. If you don’t want to change it then DON’T…! These things are an enjoyable money pit …and NONE of us are getting out of here alive anyway… Let the stoning begin if you must, as I’m too old and cranky to care…
Love it... As I get older (and more cranky, so says the wife), I find it liberating, not worried about speaking my mind. Don't get me wrong, I still keep clear of politics and religion.
Last edited:
KatanaPilot
Well Known Member
What about an airplane where the builder took the ultra-conservative approach and built new components without any LCP?
How do you feel about reworked QB wings and/or fuselages done at Van's, since that is what they've indicated they are going to do? One has to question how much experience anyone in Aurora has rebuilding QB components.
It doesn't really matter - because he's not buying that airplane right now.
You have someone better in mind?
We are back to hypothetical situations now - this is not helping and will get this thread shut down. [ed. That is correct. v/r,dr]
Last edited by a moderator:
KatanaPilot
Well Known Member
Would have preferred that Walt answer, but OK.
Just asking how much practical and/or recent experience anyone at Van's has (or Exemplar or Flyer) with what is essentially a repair. And this is not hypothetical. It is what has been proposed by Van's.
Well its common practice for manufacturers to rework assemblies before shipping and sell them as new. If car manufacturers discarded every car that needed rework when it comes of the assembly line cars would be much more expensive. Lycoming did that to me on a new engine. It’s annoying if you know about it but most times you don’t …. .
So in this cases you have two kind of affected qb kits. The ones that shipped already to the customer and the once that haven’t.
Oliver
Ask someone taking possession of a new Gulfstream if they accept and pay full price for reworked components of their jet.
I'll side with the folks who said they paid full price for a QB fuse or wings that were made a certain way with a certain kind of parts, and they're entitled to a full refund or a replacement fuse or wings. They didn't get what they paid for...
RV8JD
Well Known Member
As does Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, and yes, even Gulfstream!
Walt
Well Known Member
Not really the case, I've been around manufacturing and repair for a long time, (I was heavily involved with G5 wing manufacturer) and although mistakes do happen, they were/are taken care of on a case-by-case basis with an engineering order for a specific problem, ie: an oversized hole. Never saw a case or situation where the entire assembly was made with defects and covered by a 'blanket' EO.
- Status
