Al Downs Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Am I the only one that has bad experiences with Flight Design in Ct? This is my latest problem. Tomorrow I am scheduled with an examiner to take my check ride. Going through paperwork, specifically the weight and balance we discovered the numbers in the weight and balance in the airplane do not match up so the examiner said I needed to get it straightened out or cancel the check ride. I called support in Ct and was told there was a document on their website explaining how to to make the corrections. I was also told if I couldn't find it, they would email it to me. Well I looked over the website and could not find anything. I then sent them an email like I was told requesting they send it to me so I could take my check ride tomorrow. As usual when I contact them, they are in no hurry to get back to you. I did tell them I needed it for tomorrow. This is the third or fourth time they have treated me like this. Thankfully we have this forum where help has always been available. Very disappointed with Tom and his crew. Had to cancel check ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 I don't think anyone in the US has the authority to do much of anything besides sell parts and read manuals. I've had three letters of authorization approved for changes to my airplane and they have always taken upwards of 2 weeks. But they always came through. Even for something simple, the response is usually 2-3 days because of time zone differences. Sorry about the checkride cancel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppercity Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Hi Al, Sorry for your checkride cancelation, and can understand your frustration being ready for a checkride but having little things blocking it. I have always had very good service for Tom and his crew, the things they can help with they have been very prompt at taking care of, other things they have to go to Germany for may take a little longer. Can you elaborate on the issue your having, maybe someone here can help you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT2kflyer Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Actually I am struggling with a fuel leak right now. I have had the bird in the shop 3 times with no success, and the answer is always the same; "we're waiting on Flight Design in Germany to tell us how to do an authorized fix". Frankly, unless I can get it fixed so it doesn't leak, I may have to take the plane to an ELSA status and have a bladder, or metal fuel cell manufactured and inserted into an opened wing. I really really don't want to do that, but Flight Design USA appears clueless on this issue. Also, since I bought the plane directly from FDUSA in Connecticut, and they have the money, I get the feeling they really don't give a darn about me any more. I am very very frustrated, somewhat angry, and I regret buying my aircraft.... if I had it to do over again I wouldn't. Finally, I wouldn't recommend a CT as a purchase. I feel there are other LSAs with better value......... though not better performance...... although that's arguable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Safety Officer Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Hi Al, You didn't mention the exact nature of the problem on the W&B. You or your mechanic can change the W&B anytime it is necessary and log it in the logbook and then just send a copy back to FD for their records. You don't need their approval to make a correction or even a change if equipment was added or subtracted. I don't know if this will help with your problem, but I hope so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Safety Officer Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Hi CT2Kflyer, FD has been more responsive than many SLSA MFG's. Look on all the LSA websites and others complain about things to. FD here in the US sometimes needs to write up an issue and send it to Germany for their engineers to look over and try to figure out a good solution. Add that type of time frame and overseas time zones and it can be an issue. There is three areas of possible leaks and they all have fixes whether the person at FD knows or not. One is the fitting where the rubber fuel line slips on (most common). that has been known to leak. It's an easy fix. The second place would be the fuel bulkhead gasket (more rare). That requires just a new gasket and sealant, another easy fix. Yes both take a little time, but they are easily done. The last leak has happened a few times. The wing tank actually develops a pin hole leak which may show up as a wet and or soft spot on the bottom of the wing. This also has a fix. You pull the wing, re-slosh it with Kreem Wisse 2-3 times in a few hours time and let it dry for a few days. I have done it and I know 2 other dealers have done it. This isn't hard either just like the others, just a little time consuming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredG Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Al, One discrepancy had to do with FD conversion from kg to lbs. The document you are looking for may be http://flightdesign.com/files/Service%20Bulletin/PZ01006001_00.pdf. It describes how to fix a discrepancy between FD (1323 pounds gross) and the FAA (1320 pounds gross). Sorry for your hassle. Fred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT4ME Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 CT2KFlyer, 'Sorry about your problems, it has to be frustrating. You've never mentioned anything about your leaks here before... our collective knowledge might be able to help. I'm pretty sure there have been a couple of leaks mentioned here and/or the old forum. I recollect the leaks were fixed by sloshing some sort of sealant around the tank. Your expectations for service on the CT2K may be a bit unreasonable... only a few ever made it into the USA, so parts and expertise could be rare. You must have known that before purchasing. In spite of that, I'm guessing FD-USA will come through for you. I've heard of other LSA owners (from other companies with less than 25 planes in the US) waiting 6-12 months for parts. I shudder to think of what kind of service you'll be able to get from any "value" LSA aircraft out there, many of the companies are gone, or will be soon. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Hi CT2Kflyer, Do you know where the fuel leak is? I have done the fuel leak repairs and know what is approved by FD. I agree with the Safety Officer about the three main areas of leaks and if I can answer any questions or help please just give me a call. There isn't a fuel leak you should not be able to handle. Is the mechanic working on your plane Ed B. from Longmont? If it is have him call me, we are good friends and I'll be happy to help you guys out. Side note: I think FD can do a better job at keeping customers informed even if it is just calling and saying the engineers in Germany are working on it or even possibly giving a time frame so short time solutions expectations aren't an issue. I have been in the same boat so I try really hard to plan and get out in front of maint. items and times and to do preventative maint. and don't adopt the attitude of "Don't fix it until it breaks". That causes damage, more expense in the long run and frustration for sure because it will break at the most inopportune time. When you send some complaints in FD may have already seen the issue before and have a quick reply. If not they have to write it up and send it overseas where it is out of there hands. FDUSA or any other US bound distributor can not ride herd over the overseas MFG. None of them can. If you own another SLSA you may find that FD is a head of others in taking care of customers. If you own a Remos that takes months just to get in contact (if they even stay in business) and Allegro went out of business. The other Mfg's and distributors are time consuming issues to when out of the USA. I'm on several websites and forums and none of them are perfect and not a single site is complaint free of the MFG. p.s. I'm like many. I'm not happy with the system all the time, but I have to work with it so planing is key. You know the saying, "If you fail to plan, you plan to fail". When I complain I try to give them a solution and other times it's out of their hands completely and FD Germany has the last word and even our government at times can be the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Downs Posted August 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 This is the problem I have. These numbers are from the weight and balance as supplied from the factory. Empty weight 789.02 lb CG 13.8 in When you multiply these two numbers, you get 10888.476 inch pounds. The weight and balance sheet shows 10925 inch pounds. Close but not the same. My examiner wants an explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 p.s. That's why we are all here on the forum. This is why owners with other aircraft come to our forum. We are active, informative and we help each other. We help and support each other with not only problems, but how to have fun too. If anyone has an issue that doesn't seem to get immediate help or has a re-occurring problem let us know. We're all in the same boat so there is help here for everyone. There is allot of experience and resources out there for us to tap into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT4ME Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Al, It may be your expectations, Al. A classic "Glass half-empty or half-full" thing. I'm a half-full guy. I appreciate the fact that FD-USA actually still has people answering phones and email. Especially in these tough times where major decades-old aircraft companies are folding left and right. No, they aren't perfect, but who is? It's unfortunate that you had a self-induced short time frame to get the info. I'm sure, given a little bit of time, FD-USA will be able to help you with your problem. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a "homer" or a cheerleader for FD. One reason we created this forum was because, on the old forum, you weren't allowed to mention problems, criticize FD, or even mention the names of competitors. But, in the grand scheme of things, FD support has been pretty good. A few months back, I called Remos numerous times, over a period of 2 weeks. The phone was not answered once, only a machine. I left messages and never received a call back. Now THAT's disappointing. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT2kflyer Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Hi CT2Kflyer, FD has been more responsive than many SLSA MFG's. Look on all the LSA websites and others complain about things to. FD here in the US sometimes needs to write up an issue and send it to Germany for their engineers to look over and try to figure out a good solution. Add that type of time frame and overseas time zones and it can be an issue. There is three areas of possible leaks and they all have fixes whether the person at FD knows or not. One is the fitting where the rubber fuel line slips on (most common). that has been known to leak. It's an easy fix. The second place would be the fuel bulkhead gasket (more rare). That requires just a new gasket and sealant, another easy fix. Yes both take a little time, but they are easily done. The last leak has happened a few times. The wing tank actually develops a pin hole leak which may show up as a wet and or soft spot on the bottom of the wing. This also has a fix. You pull the wing, re-slosh it with Kreem Wisse 2-3 times in a few hours time and let it dry for a few days. I have done it and I know 2 other dealers have done it. This isn't hard either just like the others, just a little time consuming. Safety Officer: I have had the aircraft in the shop for over 8 months over the past 3 years trying to get the leak fixed. Apparently (although I can't prove it), the wing leaked at Flight Design USA in Connecticut and they tried to fix it. They sold the plane to me - it started to leak again. I took it to an authorized repair facility on the east-coast and they fixed it... until I flew it home and it started leaking again. Repaired again - releaked, and repaired again -- releaked in about 3 months. Noww I am working with a major FD dealer, and I'm again in a waiting patter while an approval for an authorized procedure comes back from Germany ... it's been 3 mmonths in the holding pattern with nothing heard from. Even assuming everyone has been working with the best of intentions, it's been an expensive, frustrating, long, unsuccessful process that has been going on for 3 years. I'm not happy..... and frankly I expected better. I still want my plane fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredG Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Al, one plausible reason is a rounding error. If the actual cg is 13.846 in, it would round to 13.8. If you multiply 13.846 by 789.02, you get 10924.8 (rounds to 10925). Given that the precision of the cg is only three places, and that all values are converted from metric (to as few as three places), the "discrepancy" is, in fact, within rounding error. That may be hard to explain to to the examiner, but in fact, the discrepancy is one third of one percent. No one weighs the fuel, cargo, or passengers with precision that comes anywhere close to that tiny difference. In other words, common (and unavoidable) error in estimation of load is much larger than the tiny discrepancy in the moment. Fred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Meade Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 This is the problem I have. These numbers are from the weight and balance as supplied from the factory. Empty weight 789.02 lb CG 13.8 in When you multiply these two numbers, you get 10888.476 inch pounds. The weight and balance sheet shows 10925 inch pounds. Close but not the same. My examiner wants an explanation. I'd get the manual out and refigure the weight an balance and make the entry. Don't worry about the past, just fix it and go on. If you look at the formula for W&B, there seem to me to be some areas where an error could be interjected, but if there is no obvious fix I'd still refigure it and go on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT4ME Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Al, one plausible reason is a rounding error. If the actual cg is 13.846 in, it would round to 13.8. If you multiply 13.846 by 789.02, you get 10924.8 (rounds to 10925). Given that the precision of the cg is only three places, and that all values are converted from metric (to as few as three places), the "discrepancy" is, in fact, within rounding error. That may be hard to explain to to the examiner, but in fact, the discrepancy is one third of one percent. No one weighs the fuel, cargo, or passengers with precision that comes anywhere close to that tiny difference. In other words, common (and unavoidable) error in estimation of load is much larger than the tiny discrepancy in the moment. Fred Great Catch! And a good dose of common sense... Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Safety Officer Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Hi Al, It's a catch most would never have found. You don't need FD's approval to fix the numbers. Just fix it, send as copy to FD and put it in the logbook and move on to the check ride. There doesn't need to be an explanation other than a math error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Safety Officer Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Hi CT2KFLYER, Where is the leak? Is it from a small hole in the tank itself? If it is get some Kreem Wisse from FD and slosh the tank 3 times. You can do that with in a few hours of each other. Do a good job with the slosh moving the wing around. It only takes two people. This should not have gone on for this long. Sounds like the other 2 attempts weren't done with good quality control The Kreem would have sealed just about anything if done properly and for the most part impervious to just about any liquid. It should have taken only one week to fix and all, but one day is allowing it to set. I need to double check, but I thought there may be a service letter already set up for this procedure because it has been done several times around the country. Even though you have it at a dealer make sure they do a good job this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 You don't need FD's approval to fix the numbers. Would it not technically require an A & P or LS repairman to officially make any change to the W & B? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Would it not technically require an A & P or LS repairman to officially make any change to the W & B? I'm watching this with interest.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Hi Al, This is a revision to my first post. After I posted this my FAA contact called me, wow what service since they were out of town and OK staff had to call him. I made a few calls this morning. My contact at the FAA for LSA is out of town and the other LSA personnel didn't have an answer. I talked to EAA and they didn't have a definitive answer either. So here is the deal. Here is what was suggested by both parties in the interim. First I want to say Fred G. hit the nail on the head and there is nothing wrong with your W&B. First you're only off 37 in/lbs which is nothing in this particular problem. The FAA ran into this early on and now have some standards at their office about calculator use, but others in the field do not do the math all the same. Some do a W&B and only carry the decimal one place which is all you really need. Some carry it out 3 decimal places which like in your case and Fred pointed out changes the answer some. So the FAA says both are right and correct. If you can go back like Fred did and show the difference then nothing needs to be done. Looks like the examiner over reacted and he cost you the check ride. I'm sure FD will be glad to hear from you there was no problem. Tell the examiner never stop on a path just because there is a bump, but to follow it to the end to enlightenment. If you just can't live with it or there was a real mistake the FAA would like to see an LSRM-A or an A&P do the correction. Have any A&P or LSRM-A do the correction , document it in the logbook and send a corrected copy to FD. Either of these are allowed to do W&B on SLSA aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 If the examiner is this anal retentive over this W&B issue I'd hate to see him in the air on the flying portion of the exam! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 If the examiner is this anal retentive over this W&B issue I'd hate to see him in the air on the flying portion of the exam! I don't fault the examiner - his license could be on the line. I have had just over 50 signoffs as an instructor. Only two failures, both on the oral portion. The first was a multi-engine applicant. He was an A & P and worked on the Apache used in the test. I assumed he understood the intricacies of the fuel system and cross-feed. Apparently not. The second was a fellow with his own Mooney going for Commercial. When we sat down the day before the test to go over W & B, he pulled out his owner's manual and began to use the "Sample Airplane" data. I said we needed to use the actual W & B for his plane. He said, "What do you mean?". Apparently he had never been in possession of actual W & B on his plane. Rather than cancel the exam, I advised to go ahead and explain the situation to the examiner and that he would get the plane weighed or get the info from the factory ASAP. Examiner (rightfully) refused to fly and gave him a pink slip. So it goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngpilot Posted August 11, 2012 Report Share Posted August 11, 2012 Glad it was not a corporate failure but only a rounding error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted August 11, 2012 Report Share Posted August 11, 2012 Rounding errors can easily happen from one country to another. Use more than one decimal place and then go from Kg's to lbs. and a few in/lbs can show up. There are other overseas aircraft Mfg's that have aircraft in the US that have the same issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.