Factory Info: Parts with Laser Cut Holes and Potential for Cracks

[GrahamF]

The company president stood up on opening day of the world's largest aviation gathering and told the whole friggin' world everything they know so far, with data to back it up. Then he told us what they don't yet know, and what they're doing about it.

If I could stick a knife in my heart
Suicide right on stage
Would it be enough for your teenage lust?
Would it help to ease the pain?
Ease your brain?

I don't think anyone wants suicide on stage. What they want is to be reassured that they won't be left out of pocket, and they want some indication of when they can expect to receive good parts. The presentation gave neither.

These are Van's manufacturing and QC errors and their customers should not have to pay for them. Plenty of us are now stuck with laser-cut parts emtombed inside completed assemblies, and changing those parts (which in many cases would entail removing the majority of the rivets in the assembly) is not a reasonable proposition that Van's can expect its customers to embark on in order to correct these errors.

What we want to hear is that an already-complete assembly which contains affected parts will be replaced in its entirety, FoC.

 

[Jonnyb]

What we want to hear is that an already-complete assembly which contains affected parts will be replaced in its entirety, FoC.

I can’t see that happening.

They may send you the parts to complete an assembly, but expecting Vans to build you one is probably a bit much. Plus, how would that sit with the 51% rule if Vans sent you an entire completed assembly? Also, what would you call an entire assembly? A wing? A leading edge?

Given what we know so far from that presentation, laser cut parts are lasting just as long if not longer the the punched parts.

I think the position we will get to is that the laser cut parts are ok, but Vans will replace them at builders request.

 

[Jetmart]

Originally Posted by DanH View Post
The company president stood up on opening day of the world's largest aviation gathering and told the whole friggin' world everything they know so far, with data to back it up. Then he told us what they don't yet know, and what they're doing about it.

This needs a like button.

This is not the certified world - certified expectations do not apply. In the 20 years I've been playing in the experimental world I've seen LOTS of companies make LOTS of mistakes - but I have not yet seen ONE of them that has reacted as quickly or as well as Vans has so far on this one. They are not even finished reacting yet, because they have not yet determined how far it goes - but that too is in process. They've already promised that anyone that is unhappy with the affected parts will get replacement just for asking - what else do you want?

We've already seen more out of Vans than we got with the ECI cylinder mess, or the Superior crankshaft recall, or any handful of other AD's that have been issued in the last 20 years - not to mention the dozens of companies in this line of work who simply folded up their tent and disappeared.

With all due respect - if their response is not at least enough to get you to calm down and wait for more, then perhaps EAB isn't for you.

LIKE!

 

[GrahamF]

I can’t see that happening.

They may send you the parts to complete an assembly, but expecting Vans to build you one is probably a bit much. Plus, how would that sit with the 51% rule if Vans sent you an entire completed assembly? Also, what would you call an entire assembly? A wing? A leading edge?

Given what we know so far from that presentation, laser cut parts are lasting just as long if not longer the the punched parts.

I think the position we will get to is that the laser cut parts are ok, but Vans will replace them at builders request.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'd expect the parts to rebuild the entire affected assembly, I would not expect Van's to put it together for me. In fact, I would not want them to because my ability to QC the build quality would be limited.

I tend to agree with you on the position Van's are heading towards. That said, it does not tally with them recommending replacement of spars. Where that shifts my concern to (and I can see you're in the UK too) is that the LAA might take a more stringent view on the acceptability of laser-cut parts.

 

[deMan]

I can’t see that happening.
Given what we know so far from that presentation, laser cut parts are lasting just as long if not longer the the punched parts.

I’ve started assembling my wings WITH the laser cut ribs that I have.
A high quality laser part is as strong if not stronger than a punched part. That was shown in their initial tests two years ago, again in their current one, by the third party lab, and independent research on the internet. My own, unscientific test of riveting a strip of skin to one of the ribs also showed no cracking.
It’s now up to me to look at my laser parts and do QC if they are good or bad. I have some of both and it’s pretty easy to tell a bad one. And my ribs look good. So I feel comfortable using these ribs.

Based on all the available data a lot of the laser cut parts are fine and a subset that was cut improperly is questionable. Vans is gathering data on that subset right now.
Saying all laser cut parts are “bad” might be easy for us to do and feel appropriate in an emotional way but it’s an oversimplification.
Vans abandoning fiber lasers as a manufacturing technique permanently is probably more based on the emotions of the public than engineering reasons.

-Lars RV-9 in progress

 

[Jonnyb]

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'd expect the parts to rebuild the entire affected assembly, I would not expect Van's to put it together for me. In fact, I would not want them to because my ability to QC the build quality would be limited.

I tend to agree with you on the position Van's are heading towards. That said, it does not tally with them recommending replacement of spars. Where that shifts my concern to (and I can see you're in the UK too) is that the LAA might take a more stringent view on the acceptability of laser-cut parts.

Sorry Graham, I obviously misunderstood.

I do wonder what the LAA position is on this, but I have the feeling they will follow Vans recommendation. I have to say what Vans is doing to address the issue is way beyond what I have seen from any other kit manufacturer.

I suppose I’m in the very fortunate position of not having actually built any laser cut parts in to my airplane yet. So I have a pile of bits to be replaced. I priced them all up yesterday and it’s about $600 worth of parts.

 

[Brantel]

No worries! It’s all good!

Hi Brian,

My apologies, sir! I appreciate the fact that you did your best to record the presentation, and it was not intended as an attack on you.

When I re-read my post, I could see how it could be taken that way,.... that was NOT my intention.

My intention was to mildly disparage Vans for NOT doing a professional-ish recording and promulgate it to all.

Also the fact that my hearing is nearly shot was a major part of the issue.

Again, apologies, and thanks for your participation on this forum.

 

[lr172]

Couldn't agree more! The audio is so bad that I can't understand most of it. (Even with my hearing aids on, and turned up!)

I'll have to wait for a better video. Hopefully one will show up.

It is a bit sad that they will share an hours worth of insight and information about this issue with a crowd at OSH, but won't take the time to put that in word form and post it in this thread that 1000's are watching, speculating, etc. It appears to me that Doug is bending over backwards to help Vans through this and they really should take better advantage of that. They say they intend to be transparent, but this action doesn't support that in any way. It is one thing to hold off on a new product announcement and share it at a show; but this is not one of those cases where you want a dramatic unveiling in front of a crowd.

On one hand, I feel their pain. On the other hand, I see a pretty sub-standard job of managing the customer facing communication related to the problem. Most Marketing experts will tell you that in situations like this, going dark and not communicating is a death blow. Without a stream of communication, folks are left to speculate and let fear drive their perception. It seems threads are getting deleted here to avoid that, but it will happen anyways. It is universally easier to quell fears through ongoing communications than it is to go dark, let romours fester and then try to counter them at the end, once a solution has emerged. Much damage to a brand's reputation can occur when the latter path is followed and I would hate to see that happen to such a good company.

Please don't take this as Van's bashing. The are a top shelf, small company that first got a bit over their ski's trying to keep up with the covid demand bubble and now dealing with an issue that is new to them, at least at this scale. This type of issue is not an easy one to deal with and even large companies routinely handle it poorly. Human nature is to under communicate when you make a mistake. It requires experienced PR and marketing folks that have studied the issue and seen the fall out from doing it the wrong way. Social media just accelerates and amplifies the problem and requires greater speed and diligence on behalf of the company.

And yes, I spent a career in sales and marketing, NOT building engines and airplanes. Much of my expertise was also in Customer Support technology, so quite familiar with issues like this one.

My recommendation to Greg if he is reading this: Create a weekly update video (not a professional marketing video, just a simple fireside chat done in the conference room) and ask Doug if he can find a place here to post it (avoiding the IT complexity of getting it on the Vans site, as I suspect that is not done in house). Create a post here where members can add the questions that they would like addressed and you can pick through which ones you want to cover each week. Given the popularity of this site, you can have something even better than oshkosh literally every week.

Doing a live presentation to a handful of people, with those people relaying it to the masses via social media, is a really bad idea. All sorts of misinformation inter mixed with opinion and bias is what ends up getting to the majority of affected individuals. You really want to control the information content and flow to the larger audience.

Larry

 

[rocketman1988]

This needs a like button.

This is not the certified world - certified expectations do not apply. In the 20 years I've been playing in the experimental world I've seen LOTS of companies make LOTS of mistakes - but I have not yet seen ONE of them that has reacted as quickly or as well as Vans has so far on this one. They are not even finished reacting yet, because they have not yet determined how far it goes - but that too is in process. They've already promised that anyone that is unhappy with the affected parts will get replacement just for asking - what else do you want?

We've already seen more out of Vans than we got with the ECI cylinder mess, or the Superior crankshaft recall, or any handful of other AD's that have been issued in the last 20 years - not to mention the dozens of companies in this line of work who simply folded up their tent and disappeared.

With all due respect - if their response is not at least enough to get you to calm down and wait for more, then perhaps EAB isn't for you.

Well said.

 

[Snowflake]

https://www.youtube.com/live/gO1pKlyPqvk?feature=share

The only problem with the video is that it suffers from Portrait-format disease, while it was filming people and slides happening on a Landscape-format stage. Phone manufacturers really need an on-screen popup that tells the user to rotate the darn phone 90 degrees to capture all the action at once...

(Seriously though, thanks for recording this, either way... My 1996 RV-6 doesn't have any skin in this game but as an aeronautical engineer and project manager i'm learning a lot from the process)

 

[Jonnyb]

The only problem with the video is that it suffers from Portrait-format disease, while it was filming people and slides happening on a Landscape-format stage. Phone manufacturers really need an on-screen popup that tells the user to rotate the darn phone 90 degrees to capture all the action at once...

(Seriously though, thanks for recording this, either way... My 1996 RV-6 doesn't have any skin in this game but as an aeronautical engineer and project manager i'm learning a lot from the process)

Let’s be honest, it shouldn’t have been left to people like Brian to film.
I’m very very grateful to Brian for filming it, but Vans should have done it and posted it on their website. I would have been an easy win for them.

 

[Brantel]

I actually hate portrait mode as well. The issue was that once I got the stream going, it would not allow me to rotate the phone. Knowing I was lucky to get a livestream going at Osh in the first place, I was afraid to try and restart it.

Most young people and social apps prefer portrait while us old folks prefer landscape.


So we got what we got!

The only problem with the video is that it suffers from Portrait-format disease, while it was filming people and slides happening on a Landscape-format stage. Phone manufacturers really need an on-screen popup that tells the user to rotate the darn phone 90 degrees to capture all the action at once...

(Seriously though, thanks for recording this, either way... My 1996 RV-6 doesn't have any skin in this game but as an aeronautical engineer and project manager i'm learning a lot from the process)

 

[GrahamF]

PR experts will also tell you to ensure that you control the narrative.

I can see arguments for not livestreaming the presentation, namely that the Q&A could have become confrontational. The PR folks would probably tell you to only broadcast/publish carefully scripted material and avoid situations where the discussion cannot be controlled. With my PR hat on I struggle to see the rationale for doing the presentation at all, and I think written communication to customers is more appropriate.

From the somewhat defensive body language and the general vibe of the presentation, I think the Van's team had real fears that the crowd might give them a tough time.

They do need to get something out there to reassure their customers in terms of what they're actually going to do for them to solve the problems. 'Testing is ongoing' is not really enough at the moment.

 

[Bavafa]

I’ve built two RV’s with Synergy’s help (one in Oregon and one in Georgia) and I disagree strongly with your opinion.

That is just the beauty of it, it just an opinion.
However, if I pay the kind of $$ they charge, I would expect a top notch job. I did not see that but I am glad your experience has been better, or it is possible you are standards is not as high as mine?!?!

Edit: However if you are interested, you can reach out and I will be happy to give examples of not so good work.

 

[Bullpup]

I’ve started assembling my wings WITH the laser cut ribs that I have.
A high quality laser part is as strong if not stronger than a punched part. That was shown in their initial tests two years ago, again in their current one, by the third party lab, and independent research on the internet. My own, unscientific test of riveting a strip of skin to one of the ribs also showed no cracking.
It’s now up to me to look at my laser parts and do QC if they are good or bad. I have some of both and it’s pretty easy to tell a bad one. And my ribs look good. So I feel comfortable using these ribs.

Based on all the available data a lot of the laser cut parts are fine and a subset that was cut improperly is questionable. Vans is gathering data on that subset right now.
Saying all laser cut parts are “bad” might be easy for us to do and feel appropriate in an emotional way but it’s an oversimplification.
Vans abandoning fiber lasers as a manufacturing technique permanently is probably more based on the emotions of the public than engineering reasons.

-Lars RV-9 in progress

For what it is worth, I thought I was in the same boat as you - pretty good looking laser-cut ribs without any of the slag or gross asymmetry some have posted. In fact, my left wing, which was drilled, cleaned, primed, then dimpled, looked fine.

After this thread started I cleaned, drilled, and dimpled some of the uninstalled ribs and was able to see a nearly 100% crack rate, but barely visible without magnification. I'm waiting on further guidance from Vans, but the completed work is certainly in question.

I really understand the competing viewpoints about Van's level of responsibility and the whole concept of EAB. I think it is worth mentioning that Vans holds a unique place in the market based on their size and reputation. That is why I chose them for my first build ,and why our aircraft have such great resale value.

I notice that most of the people say "if you can't handle this you shouldn't be building" have previously completed aircraft that were not affected by this issue - I respectfully ask you to put yourself in the shoes of someone 500-700 hours into their first build and dealing with a significant amount of uncertainty.

I am generally happy with the response so far, but do think the presentation could have been better distributed. Only a small fraction of RV builders/owners make it to Oshkosh, and all of us will be impacted (resale, insurability, etc.) if Vans begins to lose their reputation as the best-supported kit manufacturer.

 

[rocketman1988]

PR experts will also tell you to ensure that you control the narrative.

I can see arguments for not livestreaming the presentation, namely that the Q&A could have become confrontational. The PR folks would probably tell you to only broadcast/publish carefully scripted material and avoid situations where the discussion cannot be controlled. With my PR hat on I struggle to see the rationale for doing the presentation at all, and I think written communication to customers is more appropriate.

From the somewhat defensive body language and the general vibe of the presentation, I think the Van's team had real fears that the crowd might give them a tough time.

They do need to get something out there to reassure their customers in terms of what they're actually going to do for them to solve the problems. 'Testing is ongoing' is not really enough at the moment.

How do you “get something something out there” when you do not have all the testing complete? What would you suggest they say? How do you formulate a viable solution without valid data and testing?

It’s a frustrating situation but making statements without supporting data would likely be worse, in the end. I know waiting for these answers is difficult but that’s what it is.

In other news, P&W just found a manufacturing problem with the engine used on the Airbus NEO. It requires an off wing inspection and potential repair. So in reality, things like this happen, testing and data is accumulated, a valid solution is formulated, a the plan is executed. It’s a process…

 

[GrahamF]

How do you “get something something out there” when you do not have all the testing complete? What would you suggest they say? How do you formulate a viable solution without valid data and testing?

Viable solutions here can only really come in two flavours - either you leave a part in place because it's deemed ok, or replace it because it isn't ok.

What people want to know is that if they have bad parts that need to be replaced inside completed assemblies then they won't be expected to almost completely disassemble that structure to replace it, e.g. a HS front spar. The chances of the average builder being able to do that without ruining most of it are close to nil.

These customers want to hear that, if such component replacement is deemed necessary, Van's will deal with that by providing all the parts to build the assembly again.

Customers also want to hear some ballpark timelines, e.g. if my build is on hold because I can't progress my wing kit due to having laser-cut parts I'm not prepared to use, then roughly how long is it going to be before I get some good parts? A month? Six months? A year? More?

 

[AeroEngineer]

Viable solutions here can only really come in two flavours - either you leave a part in place because it's deemed ok, or replace it because it isn't ok.

There is a third flavor. When you're almost sure (but not quite 100% sure) that a part is ok, and when you're sure that deterioration of that part would be reliably detectable before a catastrophic failure (and you can be sure of that if you know that failure of that part would not be catastrophic)... it's possible to set up an inspection program, e.g. look at it during each condition inspection, and if you see cracks, here is a procedure to repair or replace.

 

[Pelley]

I have a wing kit affected. Most of my parts look like "good" laser cut parts. My fuse which shipped in March is almost entirely punched so i have put up my wings and started work on that. I don't see this holding up my build at all. I suspect if your working on your airframe and have to pause, there is so much other stuff you could work on that if you think 2 months off the airframe is going to significantly delay your build you are not as far as you might think.

I think Vans response is reasonable, and to be honest I think some people wont be happy regardless of what comes out. We live in a world of instant gratification and this isn't one of those times. Give them time, get the data and move forward. We have instruction on what to do in the mean time, they are working on it. What happens from now until then isn't going to change the outcome when we get to the final plan.

Based on Pipers announcement they also use laser cutting so keep in mind its not as "irresponsible" as some are making it out to be.
https://www.piper.com/press-releases/piper-aircraft-announces-new-business-enterprise/

Good luck everyone and build on!

 

[RV7A Flyer]

Based on Pipers announcement they also use laser cutting so keep in mind its not as "irresponsible" as some are making it out to be.

I don't think anyone is saying laser cutting isn't a perfectly fine way to manufacture parts, only that it wasn't done properly.

Which brings another thought to mind, even though it's not really RV-specific.

Did this vendor supply parts to *other* manufacturers with the same sort of defects?

If so, did anyone issue a GIDEP?

 

[GrahamF]

There is a third flavor. When you're almost sure (but not quite 100% sure) that a part is ok, and when you're sure that deterioration of that part would be reliably detectable before a catastrophic failure (and you can be sure of that if you know that failure of that part would not be catastrophic)... it's possible to set up an inspection program, e.g. look at it during each condition inspection, and if you see cracks, here is a procedure to repair or replace.

Surely if the part were located such that an inspection programme (presumably followed by replacement when cracks detected) were practical, then you'd just replace it anyway.

For most of the assemblies I'm referring to, inspection of the shop heads of the rivets is nigh-on impossible once it's all gone together.

 

[dstates]

I attended the presentation and then was part of a circle of about 12 standing around Greg for a 1/2 hour afterwards and then I transitioned to a circle of about 10 standing around Ryan. They both were late to commitments they had afterwards to try to listen and answer our questions. They definitely heard from us that they didn’t mention anything about timeline (other than if you want a “fresh QB it will be a year”) and nothing about replacing more than just a laser cut part if it was already assembled. They were not afraid to answer the questions that they could. Greg said they recorded it and would put it out, but I don’t know if he was talking about if Van’s did the recording or not. It may take them time to post the video (it is Airventure week after all).

Vans has an amazingly difficult and complex problem here, and I’m not talking about just laser cut holes. They have such a variety of customers in different states that they have to work for:
1. Someone who is waiting for a new kit (they will have a delay of some sort)
2. Someone who hasn’t started assembling yet, but has laser cut parts (they will have to wait for replacement parts)
3. Someone who has already completed major assemblies with laser cut parts that may or may not be good (they have to wait till testing is done to know what should be replace and if they do need to replace parts they will have to wait for them)
4. Someone who has completed major assemblies and doesn’t know if parts were laser cut or not (they will have to wait for testing and then decide if they want to replace parts or not)
5. Someone who has received QB kits and might have laser cut parts (who does they repair, how do you repair it, does it need to be repaired, do you just order a new QB and wait, do you switch to slow build)
6. Someone who has ordered a QB kit but hasn’t received it yet (same actions as # 5)
7. Someone who has completed major assemblies with parts that have to be replaced (like spars) that will not be easy to replace (one example is 14 rear elevator spars that are pro sealed to foam ribs and skin). More than just replacement spars will be needed.
8. Other individual circumstances that I haven’t thought of.

So how do you prioritize who gets what parts? They are going to be making Laser Makeup Runs to manufacture these parts on a punch press now, but how do you manage who gets them first. Do you send parts to the QB factories, to new orders, to builders replacing laser parts, etc?

How will they keep track of all these parts on order? I asked Ryan to make sure they consider partial shipments so we can try to keep building something.

Greg said in this discussion that he will be stepping forward to head up a large QC process investigation/improvement. He admitted that they missed the ball there.

I wish I would have recorded these after conversations because there was good info there that I can’t remember now. If I hunk of more later I will add it.

Doug

 

[CizzoPilot]

I notice that most of the people say "if you can't handle this you shouldn't be building" have previously completed aircraft that were not affected by this issue - I respectfully ask you to put yourself in the shoes of someone 500-700 hours into their first build and dealing with a significant amount of uncertainty.

Glad someone said it.

I can appreciate this is experimental AC building, but lets be honest, there is a spectrum to this hobby. Something like the RV14 theoretically should be an easier first build than a second hand earlier RV project. So as a new builder, its honestly a bit disheartening to have experienced builders seemingly dismiss the concerns of new builders, or even going so far as to effectively saying "you're the builder and you should have caught it". This type of attitude really doesnt speak well to the community or to its ability to mentor the next generation.

 

[rocketman1988]

Viable solutions here can only really come in two flavours - either you leave a part in place because it's deemed ok, or replace it because it isn't ok.

What people want to know is that if they have bad parts that need to be replaced inside completed assemblies then they won't be expected to almost completely disassemble that structure to replace it, e.g. a HS front spar. The chances of the average builder being able to do that without ruining most of it are close to nil.

These customers want to hear that, if such component replacement is deemed necessary, Van's will deal with that by providing all the parts to build the assembly again.

Customers also want to hear some ballpark timelines, e.g. if my build is on hold because I can't progress my wing kit due to having laser-cut parts I'm not prepared to use, then roughly how long is it going to be before I get some good parts? A month? Six months? A year? More?

I agree with you; my point is that to answer those questions and provide valid solutions, testing and data are necessary. Testing and data collection take time...and formulating a plan takes time. It sure sounds like there are some folks that just want Vans to just send them a brand new kit and call it a day. Others have even suggested that they be compensated for their labor.

They are working on this as fast as they can; give them some time. They will do the right thing...

 

[rocketman1988]

Glad someone said it.

I can appreciate this is experimental AC building, but lets be honest, there is a spectrum to this hobby. Something like the RV14 theoretically should be an easier first build than a second hand earlier RV project. So as a new builder, its honestly a bit disheartening to have experienced builders seemingly dismiss the concerns of new builders, or even going so far as to effectively saying "you're the builder and you should have caught it". This type of attitude really doesnt speak well to the community or to its ability to mentor the next generation.

Pretty sure most of the "old timers" are saying, "Give Vans the time they need to formulate a plan". They will do the right thing; it is a complex issue and takes time...give them the time they need.

 

[CizzoPilot]

Pretty sure most of the "old timers" are saying, "Give Vans the time they need to formulate a plan". They will do the right thing; it is a complex issue and takes time...give them the time they need.

Apologize if I implied that is what I'm seeing from all experienced builders, because that's not the case. It is what some have seemed to imply. I am confident that although many are frustrated, we understand the complexity of the issue and will listen to Vans as they provide additional guidance.

 

[Tlrguy]

But let me tell you, I am feeling very icky about the prospect of building on when I see that every single dimple in all of my baggage ribs has a very tiny crack in it, or a small notch where a tiny crack is probably going to form upon riveting, even if it does turn out to be a low-stress area. I'm going to be flying my friends and family in this thing some day. What would they think if they knew I built on knowing there were cracks everywhere? I know many wouldn't go up at all. That's the calculus going through my head at this moment.

And for that reason, there must be an option to essentially start over. Or at least rebuild anything not easily disassembled.

 

[gotyoke]

Knowing there are some laser-cut ribs that I absolutely need to replace, I drilled them out of a built sub-assembly. Well, 98% of my rivets I drilled out just fine. But the 2% damaged holes in non-laser-cut parts to the point of needing replacement. Van's has not indicated they would replace such parts in these scenarios, which means I'm anticipating the need to foot the bill myself. Up to nearly $100 so far in ruined, otherwise perfectly good parts while extracting the laser-cut ones. This in a sub-assembly that wasn't even attached to a major component yet, so I feel real bad for those farther along. And now I'm reluctant to do any more disassembling, even when it might be prudent. Goodness, I hate being in this position.

 

[wirejock]

Drilling rivets

Knowing there are some laser-cut ribs that I absolutely need to replace, I drilled them out of a built sub-assembly. Well, 98% of my rivets I drilled out just fine. But the 2% damaged holes in non-laser-cut parts to the point of needing replacement. Van's has not indicated they would replace such parts in these scenarios, which means I'm anticipating the need to foot the bill myself. Up to nearly $100 so far in ruined, otherwise perfectly good parts while extracting the laser-cut ones. This in a sub-assembly that wasn't even attached to a major component yet, so I feel real bad for those farther along. And now I'm reluctant to do any more disassembling, even when it might be prudent. Goodness, I hate being in this position.

I'm sure you know but just in case someone else doesnt...
Drilling Rivets Tips
1. Center punch the head. Preferably with a bar held on the shop side. If not punch ot a few times with an auto punch.
2. Drill with a bit 10 smaller than the hole. Carefully start and make sure it stays centered. Don't go all the way. 75% is a good target. It weakens the shank enough to allow the rivet to be removed
3. Set a drill bit in a stop no deeper than the head of the rivet. You want the bit to stop before it can hit precious metal.
4. Drill. Resist the urge to go deeper. Totally unnecessary.
5. Grab a bit the same size. Use the non business end to snap the head off.
6. Punch. Preferably with a bucking bar behind with a relief hole for the shop head. Like these.
7. If the back side is accessible, the shop head may be removed with a pair of pliers but don't damage trying to pry it off.
8. Don't fight the few that won't cooperate. Go back. Chances are they will pop off when the rest of the assembly lets go.

To those with lots of disassembly required... Do not drill rivets if tired or moody. It's just like assembly. You have to be in the mood. Walking away is ok. So sorry, this happened, but it can be fixed with time and patience. And yes, I've made some errors that retired days of stepping away. I drilled apart my HS because I egg shapped one hole installing the SB and now I probably have to drill it apart again for the new SB. That was the easy one. I've had some bad months. Just another day in the shop.

 

[DanH]

Well, 98% of my rivets I drilled out just fine. But the 2% damaged holes in non-laser-cut parts to the point of needing replacement.

That's going to be an issue for quite a few builders. Maybe we can improve the percentage. And don't forget about oops rivets.

Download this draft of a short Kitplanes piece from 10 years ago:

https://www.danhorton.net/Articles/Flush Rivet Removal.doc
.

 

[KRviator]

The "other" elephant in the room is not even on the horizon for many of the affected builders....yet...

Resale value.

In years to come, even if Van's ultimately Ok's the inclusion of laser-cut parts there is the better-than-even risk of a decline in resale value caused by the stigma of this kerfuffle. Two RV's identical in all respects, except that one can prove, by kit shipping date, that it doesn't contain any such parts, another that was shipped during this period that may or may not. Which one would you buy? Even if the seller says "Nope, none in this kit, trust me!" can you? Really?

Do QB-buyers wait another year or more to get a LC-part-free QB kit, or just accept their lot in life and build with what they have, given they've already waited 18+ months for their kit and don't want to/can't wait another year+ just to start building?

 

[TX_Flyer]

I think much of the resale value can be managed as long as the builder maintains detailed records of part replacement orders and thoroughly document the build process and parts used down to pics of date stamps and blue plastic. That will be harder if not impossible for QB kits.

 

[Jonnyb]

I do wonder about the resale bit. The problem is how do you conclusively prove a negative?
My fuse kit has shipped with laser cut parts, but I will be replacing them. I will keep detailed records and photos to prove it. But will you be convinced?
How about a kit that shipped with no laser cut parts, how do we know a part hasn’t had to be replaced during build?
Even flying RVs might have needed a new rudder/elevator (OSH damage?) that contains a laser cut spar.
There are many permutations to this.
The only way to be really sure is to have kits with dates later than the end of this year, and QBs later than end of 2024.

 

[lr172]

Glad someone said it.

I can appreciate this is experimental AC building, but lets be honest, there is a spectrum to this hobby. Something like the RV14 theoretically should be an easier first build than a second hand earlier RV project. So as a new builder, its honestly a bit disheartening to have experienced builders seemingly dismiss the concerns of new builders, or even going so far as to effectively saying "you're the builder and you should have caught it". This type of attitude really doesnt speak well to the community or to its ability to mentor the next generation.

Sorry for going deeper on an off topic item, but I was one of the guys that said builders need to be able to do stuff like de-riveting and disassembly, IF they are required to. Not touching the issue of responsibility and whether or not we should have to. Can't speak for others, but I was definitely not dismissing or minimizing the issue for new builders. Clearly this will be a tough "curve ball" for you guys to deal with. BUT, it must be dealt with none the less and you can expect both Vans and this community to help you to learn the skills necessary to do it. We may be harsh in our expectations, but generally as a group are generous in knowledge sharing.

Let's remember that you are building an airplane that will fly passengers and you must do WHATEVER is required to complete that airplane correctly. Sometimes that is easy and some times that is hard, but you must in the end get the knowledge and tools or assistance necessary to get the job done. I recently inspected an RV. Several of the spar attach nuts are quite difficult to get a tool on to tighten. Each one was loose. That is just not acceptable. Some times difficult challenges will arise and if the builder isn't of the mindset to address those challenges, they shouldn't be building. Possibly harsh words, but we need to protect the EAB community by each doing are part to insure we make safe airplanes.

Larry

 

[lr172]

The "other" elephant in the room is not even on the horizon for many of the affected builders....yet...

Resale value.

In years to come, even if Van's ultimately Ok's the inclusion of laser-cut parts there is the better-than-even risk of a decline in resale value caused by the stigma of this kerfuffle. Two RV's identical in all respects, except that one can prove, by kit shipping date, that it doesn't contain any such parts, another that was shipped during this period that may or may not. Which one would you buy? Even if the seller says "Nope, none in this kit, trust me!" can you? Really?

Do QB-buyers wait another year or more to get a LC-part-free QB kit, or just accept their lot in life and build with what they have, given they've already waited 18+ months for their kit and don't want to/can't wait another year+ just to start building?

While I agree that the marketplace is pretty finicky, it is quite short sighted to walk away from an RV with laser cut parts and move on to one that isn't. How do you know that the airframe with non laser cut parts had each hole de-burred before riveting? Just because it is in the manual and you did it, DOES NOT mean the builder of every plane did it. You would not believe some of the stuff that I have seen in the inspections that I have done! Skipping the de-burring step also encourages cracks. The list goes on. I have all confidence that this will all resolve itself without impacting resale value.

 

[DanH]

Based on current information, I agree with Larry. The mere inclusion of laser parts won't hurt resale. Value will continue to be driven by build quality, a factor individual to each builder, and installed equipment.

Bad re-work could be a factor, and I understand why some builders fear it. Again as Larry said, there will be help, with new skills to learn.

 

[airguy]

I think much of the resale value can be managed as long as the builder maintains detailed records of part replacement orders and thoroughly document the build process and parts used down to pics of date stamps and blue plastic. That will be harder if not impossible for QB kits.

There you go - keep the replacement part records along with the original inventory lists, it becomes part of the aircraft build log.

 

[Snowflake]

I'm sure you know but just in case someone else doesnt...
Drilling Rivets Tips
1. Center punch the head. Preferably with a bar held on the shop side. If not punch ot a few times with an auto punch.
2. Drill with a bit 10 smaller than the hole. Carefully start and make sure it stays centered. Don't go all the way. 75% is a good target. It weakens the shank enough to allow the rivet to be removed
3. Set a drill bit in a stop no deeper than the head of the rivet. You want the bit to stop before it can hit precious metal.
4. Drill. Resist the urge to go deeper. Totally unnecessary.
5. Punch. Preferably with a bucking bar behind with a relief hole for the shop head. Like these.
6. Grab a bit the same size. Use the non business end to snap the head off.
7. Don't fight the few that won't cooperate. Go back. Chances are they will pop off when the rest of the assembly lets go.

I think #5 and #6 are reversed here. Snap the head off *first*, then punch?

 

[Freemasm]

I'm sure you know but just in case someone else doesnt...
Drilling Rivets Tips
1. Center punch the head. Preferably with a bar held on the shop side. If not punch ot a few times with an auto punch.
2. Drill with a bit 10 smaller than the hole. Carefully start and make sure it stays centered. Don't go all the way. 75% is a good target. It weakens the shank enough to allow the rivet to be removed
3. Set a drill bit in a stop no deeper than the head of the rivet. You want the bit to stop before it can hit precious metal.
4. Drill. Resist the urge to go deeper. Totally unnecessary.
5. Punch. Preferably with a bucking bar behind with a relief hole for the shop head. Like these.
6. Grab a bit the same size. Use the non business end to snap the head off.
7. Don't fight the few that won't cooperate. Go back. Chances are they will pop off when the rest of the assembly lets go.
.......

I think #5 and #6 are reversed here. Snap the head off *first*, then punch?

The following is an option, not a debate, Everyone has different preferences.

Consider pulling the rivet tail/shank out with flush pliers versus driving them out when accessibility allows. This is especially helpful on thin materials/structures where associated damage is more likely with a drift/hammer.

Anything cooler than slapping the back of the drill with your hand after drilling to drive out the tail? This on reduced head rivets makes anyone look like a pro.

 

[rvbuilder2002]

The following is an option, not a debate, Everyone has different preferences.

Consider pulling the rivet tail/shank out with flush pliers versus driving them out when accessibility allows. This is especially helpful on thin materials/structures where associated damage is more likely with a drift/hammer

Exactly as described in Section 5 of the construction manual.

 

[bobnoffs]

of course it is going to affect resale. if i am looking at 2 airplanes and the workmanship on both is equal of course i am going to consider the one with laser cut holes of less value.

 

[rvbuilder2002]

of course it is going to affect resale. if i am looking at 2 airplanes and the workmanship on both is equal of course i am going to consider the one with laser cut holes of less value.

I disagree..... Sort of.

I agree that it will likely reduce marketability by making some people just not consider a particular airplane for purchase but I do not think it will have much effect on the price the airplane would ultimately sell for.

Side comment...
These type of conversations amuse me greatly.

After rebuilding one accident damage RV and now being in the middle of rebuilding a second one, the errors that I have found on both airplanes are eye opening.

So many people talk about looking to purchase an RV that has no damage history
If these two airplanes had been purchased "before accident" the majority of the issues I have found would never have been detected in even the most thorough pre-purchase inspections.

The finished airplanes are/will be as good as any of the best RV's because they were/will have been stripped down to nothing and rebuilt with everything that wasn't as it should be, but they will have the "previously damaged" black mark on them when compared to other RV's available for sale.
Even though all of the others could have nasty things hiding in there bones that no one will know about just by looking at the complete airplane.

Something to think about........

 

[Mel]

So many people talk about looking to purchase an RV that has no damage history
.......

The term "no damage history". Really gets to me. I have inspected so many airplanes, including factory built Cessnas, Pipers, etc. with "no damage history" that have patches and other obvious repairs all over the place.

Often the owner seems to understand that if it's not in the logs, then there is no "history".

 

[wirejock]

Instructions

I think #5 and #6 are reversed here. Snap the head off *first*, then punch?

Yep. That's what I get for using a cell phone. Good catch.
The post has been edited.

The following is an option, not a debate, Everyone has different preferences.

Consider pulling the rivet tail/shank out with flush pliers versus driving them out when accessibility allows. This is especially helpful on thin materials/structures where associated damage is more likely with a drift/hammer.

Anything cooler than slapping the back of the drill with your hand after drilling to drive out the tail? This on reduced head rivets makes anyone look like a pro.

Please use whatever method preferred. It's your airplane
I was just sharing a technique to help other avoid the egg shaped hole.

 

[Crash-Down]

Has Van's communicated if you order a kit today it will not include any of these laser-cut parts on delivery?

I've already come to terms with essentially rebuilding my entire empennage. I'm not upset about it, however, I do want to know if it is safe to put in an order.

 

[Jonnyb]

Has Van's communicated if you order a kit today it will not include any of these laser-cut parts on delivery?

I've already come to terms with essentially rebuilding my entire empennage. I'm not upset about it, however, I do want to know if it is safe to put in an order.

From what I understand they will still ship laser cut parts that are on the list in green. So that’s cover plates, or parts with no dimples. That’s until stocks of these parts have run out. Vans in no longer manufacturing laser cut parts, unless those parts have always been laser cut.

 

[calvid]

Has Van's communicated if you order a kit today it will not include any of these laser-cut parts on delivery?

My understanding is that it will not contain laser-cut parts. Greg said this back on page 15 of this thread: "If your kits have not yet been crated and shipped, they will not contain laser-cut parts."

 

[Jonnyb]

My understanding is that it will not contain laser-cut parts. Greg said this back on page 15 of this thread: "If your kits have not yet been crated and shipped, they will not contain laser-cut parts."

3:30 into Brian’s YouTube.
Some parts are still shipping if they are low stress until stocks run out.

 

[jjmanton]

I disagree..... Sort of.

I agree that it will likely reduce marketability by making some people just not consider a particular airplane for purchase but I do not think it will have much effect on the price the airplane would ultimately sell for.

Side comment...
These type of conversations amuse me greatly.

After rebuilding one accident damage RV and now being in the middle of rebuilding a second one, the errors that I have found on both airplanes are eye opening.

So many people talk about looking to purchase an RV that has no damage history
If these two airplanes had been purchased "before accident" the majority of the issues I have found would never have been detected in even the most thorough pre-purchase inspections.

The finished airplanes are/will be as good as any of the best RV's because they were/will have been stripped down to nothing and rebuilt with everything that wasn't as it should be, but they will have the "previously damaged" black mark on them when compared to other RV's available for sale.
Even though all of the others could have nasty things hiding in there bones that no one will know about just by looking at the complete airplane.

Something to think about........

Can you share any info on the errors you found? I am curious what sorts of things can be hidden that well, and need close attention.

 

[rvbuilder2002]

Can you share any info on the errors you found? I am curious what sorts of things can be hidden that well, and need close attention.

Ok, here is one example -

A large majority of the 3/32 rivets used to rivet the side and upper tail cone skins to the main longerons were AN426A3-6.

For anyone not aware, this is a soft rivet. It is not typically used for structural load applications.
The builder must have run out and ordered some from Aircraft Spruce (I found the opened, partially used bag in with all of the extra parts and hardware that came with the project when I bought it.

This error would likely never be detected on a painted aircraft because even a light paint job has enough paint applied that it flows over rivets enough to hide the dimple in the manufactured head indicates an AD rivet. "A" (soft) rivets have no dimple.