|
Owen Bell - Aviation Enterprises
Howdy, all.
The recent FAA SAIB CE-10-20 released on Tuesday addresses concerns with aircraft that have been fitted with Winglets and/or wing tip extensions. I have both. The SAIB directs operators to contact Owen Bell at Aviation Enterprises in Nashville with any specific questions. I have been trying to contact Mr. Bell by phone, fax, and email concerning the recommended inspection and what I am seeing on my plane. I've even tried the "contact us" form on his website. But I have had no reply to any of my attempts. Does anyone have an alternate method of getting through to him? Thanks, all. Cole |
Cole
Just out of curiosity, what are you "seeing" on your plane? Roger |
Owen can be reached at 615-865-1802 cell
Just talked to him yesterday |
Funny how the SAIB talks about wrinkles in the wing tips....yet Cessna still is pushing ahead with the wing mount inspections.
I received a mailed advertisement from Aviation Enterprises. Did any one else? They're having a winter sale on many of their mods. But I found the "Ultimate Skymaster" they are selling the most interesting. They advertise a 2,500 mile range (no mention if that was nautical or statute)...either way, that will take you to Hawaii without internal tanks...very nice. I just hope he doesn't get sued from that accident. |
I found a few "smoking rivets" at WS-162 and some slightly deformed skin at WS-150.
I can shake the hell out of the whole plane when I do the "Cessna wing rock" and there is NO apparent flexing in the wing...and I mean I can really go to town rocking that sucker...but I am well aware that I am not putting anthing close to flight stresses on the assembly. I'd ask to post photos of what I found, but the target areas are barely visible in a 2mb image and would never show on a small thumbnail. I've scheduled with a local shop to inspect the wing next week. I'll have them try to address my gear horn problem while they are digging around. Given my safety paranoia, it aint flying until I get two (or more) thumbs up I'll let yall know what they find. Wish me luck. Cole |
a thumbnail is just that. We can see the entire image when we click on it.
|
4 Attachment(s)
Okie Dokie...
Here is what I found in my cursory look-see. Left wing: A few smoking rivets (barely visible in image 1406). Warped Metal at/near WS-150. The warps are so shallow that I had to get creative with the lighing to make them show up on the photo. The shop here cant get to it until mid week so I'm on pins and needles for now. I cant wait to hear back if I have an unsafe wing or if I am good to fly (ALWAYS well within placarded limitations). Then I'll be able to start sleeping again. If any of yall have any thoughts / opinions / or similar findings, please share them with me. The FAA is saying that this is apparently becoming a fairly common finding with those plane mounting BOTH the extended tips AND the winglets. It seems like the should be some way of splinting the top and bottom of the wing to give it more linear rigidity....and maybe while they are at it re-vamp the fuel cap interface so we can get Monarch Caps....since they dont think there is enough of us to get their wonderful product approved for out wonderful planes....Grrrrr.... Clear Skies, all.... Cole |
Hi Cole,
I don't think that you have to worry about the smoking rivets at all. Those are where the aileron bellcrank is, and those rivets are not sealed. They are fasteners to attach the bellcrank mounting flanges, and if the mechanic were to spray LPS 2 or WD-40 up in there to lubricate the bellcrank bearings, the excess would naturally bleed out thru the unsealed rivets holes. The same would also be true if the wing was recently sprayed with Corrosion X or similiar treatment. Dave |
The wrinkle does look scary. I'd love to hear what the mechanic has to say. I wonder if Cessna will make new wings for out planes? If so, will that reset the spare inspection clock?
|
Looks kind of ugly
I must however say that I never understood the deal with the extra tanks. It's so 80's Normans Cay and Cat Island. I can run for 6 hours / 900NM with reserve on regular tanks. How much more do you really need? As for the tips, they look cool, but take all that crap off and just put some micro VG's on and make it safe. Just my opinion :) |
The plane came with the extended tanks. But I like having the truely redundant reserve fuel supply. I also like the high altitude performance, the short take off roll, the lower stall speed, the 450# increase in useful load, and the improved ride.
Of course...the newly revealed potential of the wings falling off kinda diminishes the appeal of the "improved ride". As for the winglets....again, the appeal is the improved performance. We'll see what the mechanics say. I've heard Cessna didnt use the best quality aluminum for their skins. Maybe the issue can be addressed by upgrading the skin. Wing Splints.... Spar extensions.... I dunno... Cole |
What? Cessna didn't use good materials for the skins? Sounds like a law suit if it was an act of commission, and not just an act of omission.
|
Cessna uses/used the industry standard for aluminum, 2024-T3, and the standard for construction.
The engineers didn't overbuild it to accomodate future after market modifications that may come along, such as wing tip fuel tanks and extended wing tips. And they certainly did not over engineer the wing that an individual would exceed the structural limitations imposed by the said non factory approved modifications. I'd like to know who has determined that Cessna used non conforming raw materials in its construction? Dave |
What???
I'm not an avid supporter of Cessna's customer support, prices or attitude toward the small airplane owner - especially in regard to the aging fleet.
However, I think it is out of line to accuse them of using substandard materials on hearsay. In our litigeous society that could have far reaching negative implications. I have not seen any evidence in my skymaster that the original construction used anything other than the standard accepted materials. By the way, it looks to me like a pretty solid airframe even though it has been flying for 43 years. |
Everybody relax....
I did not say Cessna used inadequate materials when they built the bird 23 years ago. I said that I had heard that Cessna didnt use the BEST material. We all know that part of the process of engineering is to find the lowest priced material that will meet or exceed the requirement for the job. There is no evil or malice in doing that. Thats simple common sense and makes the plane affordable. All I was saying is that there may be BETTER materials available to address the newly revealed areas in need of improvement....for a few planes. I am not an engineer. I am barely a pilot. I am not second-guessing ANYONE or pointing fingers or accusations as anyone. Thats all I meant. Cole |
.....Oh, and before anybody starts rattling their cages about me not blaming the mods....
I will point out, again, I ain't smart enough to "blame" any of the myriad factors in play. Frankly, I don't really care who's "fault" it is. I'm just kicking around ideas with much more knowledgable folks (yall) in hopes of finding potential corrective action. It could be that all I can do is remove the mods. If that's the case, they'll be off like a prom dress. However, if there is something that can be done which would allow me to SAFELY fly with my hoopty-toys....I'd kinda like to explore those options. Make sense? Cole |
Cole,
I re-read my message and it sounded a little pointed. I apologize. I did not intend to be advesarial. |
Cole
Take attention to the items you discovered with a good IA. Make corrective repairs based on good airframe practices. Fly the airplane within the limitations stated in the STC for the mod's. If you have to do anything it would probably be remove the winglets. The NTSB may find that mixing STC's may be ................, but who knows. There are lots of Skymasters flying with extended wing tanks and lots with winglets but very few with both. Removing the winglets would be the least amount of pain. Just some thoughts. |
No doubt.
I have three a&p's (two are IA's) digging around in her. They started today and the FAA Accident Investigator is already calling to see what they are finding. I have a hunch he may come take a look, himself. I'm a teensy bit surprised Aviation Enterprises hasn't sent a rep to take a peek and get out ahead of this. Oh well, I offered. Yeah, if I gotta choose, I'll lose the winglets and go with some "knots-2-u" tips we shall see what tomorrow brings. As I said, wish me luck. Cole |
Well....
Still no word on my bird. But given the established history of fate having a very uncomfortable fetish for doing things to me....I have a hunch it wont hurt to do some contengency planning...just in case I gotta lose my winglets. :( I know I could always put the factory tips back on. I could also put OEM Firestones back on my truck, but that aint gonna happen (Micheline's are sooooo much better). By that same reasoning, I'm looking for the BEST option. I checked out the knots-2-u wingtips. They sound great...but naturally are not available for the 337. I looked into the Met-co-aire Hoerner Tips. They sound great...but naturally are not available for the 337. Anybody have any other suggestions? Again. I dont know that I gotta remove the winglets. Simply planning ahead. It gives me something to do to keep my mind off of the inspection in progress. Cole |
we don't need ostrich management
why is owen bell not posting information? to me that would reduce all the
speculation and rumors. he may not have all the answers; but he is close to the source. he needs to step up and communicate! |
Cole
The only choices I know of are the factory tips or Horton Stol wing tips. The Horton tips are fiberglass and $1600 a pair. If you still have factory tips that would make the most sense until all the smoke clears. Rick Owen is working with the NTSB investigation and probably is best that he doesn't say anything until the smoke clears too. |
It should also be noted that my extended tips and winglets were both installed by Owen, 10 years / 766 flight hours ago.
I told that to the FAA Investigator, but don't recall having mentioned it in any thread. Admittedly, I fly like a rookie scaredy-cat cuz my boss likes smooth rides ( climb at 110, don't touch the gear under 500 agl in climb-out, break-check and gear d/l-green, try to avoid anything more than 10-degree banks, avoid anything more than light turbulance, avoid anything that registers on either of my radars, 500fpm decents, when I turn that's ALL I'm doing, I only fiddle with stuff when I'm wings level, GUMPS checks on approach AND on downwind AND on base AND on final, completely sterile cockpit under 1,000 AGL, and I'm FULLY configured BEFORE turning final. Yeah, flying with me is boring. But I already got my airplane crash merrit-badge and have no use for an oak-leaf cluster. But I have no idea how the previous owner flew it....I've only been involved with it for the past 9 months and it's only been in my possession for the past 2 months. Soooo..... Even with stacked mods and a decade of flying, it seems to have held together. And while there is some deformaty, it's minor enough to warrent further investigation and not merely write it off at a glance. Owens shop has done a LOT of work to my plane. It's actually less of a "Cessna 337" and more of an "Aviation Enterprises 337". Again, much of the work pre-dates me, but we've had them do a LOT since we bought her. Although Owen doesn't over emphasize PR at Aviation Enterprises, the workmanship and attention to detail demonstrated by his crew are commendable. In short, I wouldn't be too hasty to question the value of what Aviation Enterprises does for our rarified fleet. Anybody can have a problem....it's how they respond to the problem that reveals their character. We'll see what happens. Patiently waiting.... Cole |
Quote:
else suggest this (not much more than a rumor). i have had his mods for many years and could not be more pleased. rick |
I wonder if anyone knows if the european phantom 337 with the wing root problem that predicated the entire Cessna SID fiasco, had any tip or tank mods?
|
Quote:
|
Don't forget, Friends, the same basic airplane as the 337 are the O-2s that proved immensley tough in Vietnam! As originally built these planes are tough birds!!
|
Alrighty, then....
I told yall I'd let you know what my tech found out when they inspected my wing. Here is what they said: "Tell everyone you know that has wing mods from this company to get their wings inspected ASAP." They said that you can deal with a bad this or that....but you cant deal with a wing that falls off. So...what did they see? Yall saw the pick I sent. A couple of smoking rivets and some minor disfiguring of the top skin. Inside there were many MANY more smoking rivets. Bent stringers. Cracked mountings. all of which could be attributed to the stacked mods (extensions AND winglets). However, they said that their primary concern was the workmanship (which has nothing to do with stacking mods). They said that 3/4 of the screws that they could see that were holding the extension to the original had no nut and no nut plate. They were simply relying on the threads contacting the skin.....they dit not like that at all. Additionally, the cap-stringer (the last orignial stringer to which the wing extension abuts) didnt quite mate to the extension perfectly, so whoever installed it had used a pair of pliars to rip the "lightning hole" to enlarge it to allow passage of one of the lines. All of which are text-book no-no's and very bad from their point of view. I asked the crew chief what I should do, he said, "Call Carlie Emering at the FAA, he already has the info and is VERY concerned." I called Charlie, and he expressed his concerns very professionally and diplomaticly, but made his point very clear. "Tell everyone you know that they REALLY should take CE-10-20 extremely seriously." I asked him what I should do about my plane. He told me to call Harry Sunderland at Cessna. They are trying to develope a uniform fix as opposed to having A&P's all over the country dream up their own solutions. So thats where I am. Grounded. With very significant safety concerns. Naturally, everyone must choose for themselves how seriously they want to take the issue. I've paraphrased the hour of phone conversations I've had fairly accurately. But I cannot convey their tone very accurately. Suffice it to say, I recommend taking it very seriously. No, the mods didnt cause the crash in NJ. But that crash did shine a light on something we needed to be aware of. Plan accordingly. Cole |
So who installed the wing tips on your 337? Who signed off the FAA Form 337?
|
owen bell
October 24, 2000 |
Thanks for keeping the information coming Cole. I have been watching this thread carefully and the story gets more amazing everyday. It really makes me wonder what was going on inside that wing in New Jersey. I feel badly that you have to deal with all this. Hang in there!
Ed |
Quote:
Quote:
|
No biggie.
I'm glad to be alive and dealing with it. But to calm the waters a bit I'd like to point out that while there are problems, it can be argued very effectively that the mods didnt cause the accident in NJ. The pilot exceeded limitations. Its that simple. If I mount a C-5 wing on my skymaster (that's would be fun to see...I gotta try that on photoshop) and I exceed the limitations....they're gonna break. If the wing failure in NJ happened at ...3000 agl.....it might have been survivable. If he hadnt pulled up so sharply... If he hadnt gone so fast... If he hadnt overstressed it in the past... If the air density had been lower.... If he had fuel in the tips... If he hadnt had a full-boat.... There's a LOT of factors involved. They all came together at one point in space and time to create a tragedy which fortunately has made us take a deeper look at our wings and go.... "Hmmmm...." Owen just sent out an email 20 minutes ago, reminding folks to be sure their placards are installed, and he included copies of the SAIB, so he is starting to surface. If I were him, I'd put on my Captain Proactive cape and start driving this beast instead of getting drug by it. If ya let go of a horse's raigns and spur him in the flank, your gonna have a hell of a ride. But if you manage it along the way, ya just might not get bucked off. (now imagine I said all that with a twang) He has a PMA fab-shop (for now). He should use the Cessna factory engineering diagrams to manuafacture fiberglass replacement wings. Lighter and stronger than the factory wing and incorporate all the latest bells and whistles. AND Circumvent the damn SID in the process. Chump to champ in a heartbeat. This is all still pretty fresh. Like Herb says, we're still waiting for the dust to settle. Patience is a virtue (but I aint no saint) :cool: Cole |
It seems that Owen, Chris (Owen’s Son) and Dave (Owen’s brother) are getting thrown in the ditch because some competing mechanics do not agree with the way the FAA Designated Engineering Reviewer approved the wing extension STC, and because Owen has not returned calls in several days.
I am partners with Owen in a 337B. We have worked together on airplanes and his workmanship is top notch, along with his understanding of complex issues and his attention to detail. He was an OB/GYN doc until he retired and went to work on airplanes full time, bringing his surgeon's skills into the hangar. I am a mechanical engineer and flight instructor (and that means slightly more than nothing in this conversation). Owen has been in New Jersey this week, working with the FAA and the NTSB. He probably doesn’t have much time to be posting on message boards right now. The plane that crashed was loaded 500 lbs over zero fuel weight and at least that much over gross weight when it was doing an ‘airshow’ while operating more than 60 kts over Va for zero fuel in the tip tanks. The wing broke off in the middle of the aileron, making the aircraft uncontrollable. It is a tragedy. Since five people died I expect the plantiff’s lawsuit will name Cessna, Aviation Enterprises, Riley, Continental, Alcoa, Garmin, Goodyear, the mechanics, the flight instructors, the local FBO, the airport authority, the weather man, Exxon, anyone who has ever breathed out CO2, and any politician who has ever tried to pass tort reform. Hopefully Owen will survive the inevitable lawsuit and I can keep my airplane for trips with my wife and four young daughters. We like the winglets, the pod and the air conditioning. I don’t think they would like a Baron as much, and I would get pushed harder toward flying Southwest. I have flown around 20 hours in 5ZX with the tip tanks and winglets, mostly dealing with icing and endurance in winter months, and not much turbulence penetration. I took it to FL 210 with the old engines and got around 200 kt TAS on trips from Nashville to upstate New York. The Va with empty tip tanks is down around 125kt though, and since that plane does not have air brakes or power pac spoilers that makes it really tough to descend into rougher air at the end of a long trip. Just when you want to be slowly retarding the throttles and taking advantage of going downhill, you have to really pull back on them and slow your descent to get below VA. I would always fly with the tip tanks full unless I needed to use the gas on a long trip. Before Owen, 5ZX was owned by a guy in South Florida. I expect he flew in rough air, but I also expect he kept IAS below the appropriate Va. Also, I think 5ZX had a CorrosionX treatment within the last two years. The FAA said to look for look for loose rivets at the aileron hinge attach points, not everywhere. I think the mechanics are referring to the screws that attach the winglet to the carbon fiber wingtip extension. The carbon fiber layup is around 3/16” to ¼” thick in that location and the engineering calculations showed that machine screw threads could be tapped into the layup and give appropriate strength. Owen may need a PR guy, and he may need a lawyer, or maybe he could just retire and let someone else come up with the captal and energy to build a bunch of good mods for a good airplane. Randy Hurt |
Thanks Randy and well said.
I think we all need (myself included), to be careful about what we say here because few, if any, of us has all the information. We need to save our opinions until after the final report of the investigation is published. Let the people who are gathering info and analyzing it do their work. Just my thoughts! Ed |
hummm
this is not about throwing someone in a ditch! this is about basic communications and supporting your loyal customers. over the past seven years as i stated before i could not be more please with the mods owen has produced !! i believe at the very least he should have sent his customers an e-mail letting them know his take on what is going on. if one shrouds themselves in secrecy, you only get rumors and feed the "i can win the lottery litigation crowd". from my own experience his mods have held up way beyond what was advertise.
in heavy turbulence toooooooooo many times i care to remember and the wiglets fine ( no wrinkled skin). going east one time went into very heavy rains for about 1/2 hour. notice the right winglet was rocking back and forth, i'd guess maybe swaying at least six inches back and forth. slowed down; however it still persisted but at a slower rate. later found out that the winglet drain hole was plugged and the tip was full of water (2 gal +-). what i'm getting at is the attachment with screws have held up under a few extreme times ( would much rather had nut plates in lieu of the screws; but that is probably way overkill) rick |
Quote:
|
I personally believe that blind advocacy is as unwarranted as rampant villification. Neither are supported. Neither are deserved.
Lets review, shall we: I offered to fly Owen, Chris, Dave, or anyone they liked to inspect my plane, themselves since they know far more about SkyMasters than ANYONE else I know (thats a compliment). Owen eventually replied that I should take it to any local A&P since a "wing is a wing" and anybody should be able to perform the inspection. That kinda implies that common wisdom and common practices are in effect. Hold that thought.... So when I have three different A&P's (two are AI) look at it and they dont like what they see...I gotta wonder. And in case anyone is doubting their veracity because they think the Tech's might be trying to make work for themselves...they refused to do anything beyond the inspection....before I asked them. It further complicates that particular aspect when the FAA inspectors and Engineers are so concerned that they are investigating if the STC was approved for stacking, if the mods are installed in compliance with the STC, as approved, and exactly how the STC(s) were revied and approved to begin with. In short....there's a lot going on behind the scenes. A WHOLE lot more than merely the issue of "to nut or not to nut". So it might just be a bit more than mere semantics or a difference in opinions. The next point Randy Makes is that the accident plane "was loaded 500 lbs over zero fuel weight and at least that much over gross weight". Let's do the math: I looked at a Super Skyrocket before I bought N5ZX. It had a useful load of 2000#. So in theory the accident A/C had a useful load of 2000# If we assume the plane had full fuel (and thus eliminate the zero fuel weight arguement) then we subtract 190 gallons (150 in mains, 40 in tips) which is 1140# leaving us with 860# payload. Divide that by the 5 passengers on board and you come out to 172# per person. Bearing in mind that three of the passengers were children, I have trouble imagining the A/C being 500# over gross.....that would require EACH passenger to average of 272#....that's a lot of tater-chips! I dont think the cabin has enough volume to fit that much meat without the copious application of vasceline. And that's based on the assumption that they had full fuel. It can be deduced that they did NOT have full fuel. They put on 90 gallons immediately prior to their take-off. In order to support the "full fuel theory", that means they had 100 gallons on board prior to adding the 90 gallons. Since the witnesses (family of the deceased) say that the flight was supposed to be a short sight seeing flight....it is difficult to imagine why he would add an additional 3 hours of fuel the 3.3 hours of fuel already on board...for a short sight seeing flight. it is much more likely that he would add 45 per side in the mains and leave the tips empty since they are less convenient to fill (precisely why I try to leave mine full). That, and the lack of a giant fireball, makes me think the tanks probably were not topped off. Basically, its really REALLY hard to overload a SkyMaster...part of the appeal. There is no question...no doubt...no debate...that AIRSPEED caused the wing to fail. I think that point has been made MANY times and I dont recall reading any arguement against that fairly apparent conclusion. But as has been repeatedly cautioned...it is not our place to make a decision of any sort on a matter in which we have minimal information. Which is a perfect segue into the topic of needing/having/wanting information. After many attempts to reach Owen, I finally received a reply to one of my private messages (sent via this board) saying that Owen hadn't replied because he was ill. Thats understandable. Then I hear that Owen is in NJ helping with the investigation. Thats understandable. What is more difficult to understand is that according to a Linkedin reference on Owen's "Aviation Enterprises: in Whites Church, TN.....he reports having 50 employees. Based on the reply to my forum message, at least one of those employees is monitoring these threads. Seems like it would be helpful to all if ONE person were to give us a standard line of non-committa,l hand-holding BS and just let us know that they aren't just hoping this all blows over. At issue is Managing Expectations. They could easily abate perceptions by creating the impression of doing something proactive AND MAKING THEIR EFFORTS WELL KNOWN. People, by nature, are lazy. If they see that someone else is "handling" a problem, they are far less likely to want to do it themselves. By failing to keep the stakeholders marginally informed, it makes us want to take matters into our own hands so that we can SEE something being done. While it is likely not the case....it APPEARS that Owne's approach has been, "Let them eat cake.".....and I think that ended badly. People like to feel involved. Especially when their investments (or lives) are in the balance...it kinda makes them feel important...and valued. The FAA SAIB said to pay particular attention to Smoking Rivets at the Aileron mount....they didnt say ignore everything else. Since in my wing the smoking rivets were a few inches from the aileron mount, I thought it was worth mentioning. Since the mechanics found many more smoking rivets on the inside, I thought that was worth mentioning. And since I personally have never seen an airplane that did NOT have smoking rivets somewhere, I left it as a comment and not a complaint. Merely something of note. But when I supplied my findings and photos of the various problems to the FAA and they said "That is exactly what we are looking for and is the same as what's being reported by many other operators..." I think perhaps it is pertenant. and not limited to my planes past or present operation. I'm selfish. I dont want anything negative to happen to Owen or "Aviation Enterprises". About half of my airplane was built by them and I'd like for someone to be around to support the work (key phrase being SUPPORT). Owen, and Chris, and Dave are all remarkably knowledgable. Chris did a damn good job teaching me how to fly the 337. Dave allowed me to watch over his shoulder when they installed the new engines and props and taught me a great deal along the way. My only complaint about "Aviation Enterprises" has been the perception of inaction. And having been an investigator, I can say without question, that perceptions of the parties involved are what drives the intensity of the investigation. If you look like you are doing the right thing, odds are they wont dig too deep. If you look like you are trying to do the right thing, odds are they will poke at it with a shovel and try to get you headed the right direction. If you look like you are oblivious, they'll dig deep enough to take you out of the game. And if you look deceptive....they'll being in a back-hoe. Hopefully he has given the investigators a better impression than he has given those who have commented in a variety of threads on this forum. Personally, I just hope for an early, easy, and affordable solution to this mess. I'd love to have Cessna or someone say: "Oh, that little thing? No worries. Get the (heck) outta here and go fly!" Because, again, I'm selfish. All I want to do is fly. I invested a lot of time and effort into finding THE one, perfect plane for our purposes. I love my plane and I want it out of the shop and in the air. But now I'm unemployed because the plane's owner is so enraged at having spent $160k to buy the plane, $100k on the best avionics package imaginable, $70k on engines, and $25k on props. And with this latest drama he's told me to part it out, and scrap the rest. He's had it. And while my tone has struggled to remain objective and moderating....it can be very fairly said that, "The Emporer is not as forgiving as I am." So.... I'd really like this all to get better PDQ so that we can all live happily ever after and go back to bitching about the SID. Ahhh... those were the good ole days... Later, yall Cole |
Cole - Sorry for your problems. Really.
1) I can't imagine Aviation Enterprises (regardless or who owns or manages that company) coming to you to pinpoint "problems" with the aircraft. After all they would essentially be harming themselves with every discrepancy they find. Then what, they argue against themsevles in court? I think you are far better off just keeping them out of it on the inspection side, as I belive you will be safer flying with an independant inspection, and also have protection in case you need it in court. 2) Your owner/boss does not need to scrap a perfectly good airplane just because he/you are unhappy or unsure about these mods. Just have an AI take them off, convert the wings back to normal, and quit sweating it. Document everything with protographs, etc and if it ever get into a court battle (which by the way I would imagine is nothing more than a product liability insurance issue) then you will be ready to fight that battle. I can tell by your threads that even if AE says "It's ok, just fly it like we said, you and your owner are not going to feel happy and safe, so you might want to consider my suggestion. After all the aircraft as originally certified with your new engines, avionics, etc should be a wonderful ride. I would be pissed also, but I would rather be safe and out a little cash, than let it eat me up. This reminds me of when I put racing turbo chargers on my 993TT and while it was fast as hell, it immediately snapped both axels and tore the rear end up. You can only "improve" the design of a perfectly designed piece of machinery so far, before you start detracting from its original brilliance. |
Yup.
Suffice it to say that scrapping a damn nice plane wasnt my recommendation. hasnt been my preference. And isnt my choice. Thats why I dont want any part of it. As for inviting them to come down and do the SAIB inspection, I was hoping the prevent the "that's wrong/that's normal" debate. I understand the wisdom behind having independant and objective eyes inspect and certify airworthyness. But I was trying to give them an opportunity to be proactive and be involved. I'd be happy to fly it as-is....no correction. Cuz I'm young, dumb and full of (ambition). Actually...because the plane seems to have held together pretty well for 10 years...and cuz I fly like a sissy. But a lot of folks who know a lot more about whats going on than I do have suggested that it might be good to wait for a review of the data. My boss....is not a patient man...and after waiting 9 months for this thing to come home from upgrades, this SAIB hit at the worst possible time. Waiting equates to loosing, in his mind. Again, I dont have to agree. But my agreement is not a requirement. This is the specific point that has made a relative inconvenience into a virtual crisis. Rampant speculation. Very little information. Even less cooperation. Sounds like the ingredients for trouble. If you're in a spin, and you dont do SOMETHING...you're done. Cole |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:51 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.