Jump to content

Flight Design insolvency

adevw

By adevw
in CT in the News

Recommended Posts

FastEddieB

FastEddieB

Posted
Posted

Corey,

 

Thanks for that FAQ document - filed away for future reference.

 

My Operating Limitations only require flight testing after a "Major Change". Will have to see where that is defined.

 

edited to add:

 

§ 21.93 Classification of changes in type design.

(a) In addition to changes in type design specified in paragraph (B) of this section, changes in type design are classified as minor and major. A “minor change” is one that has no appreciable effect on the weight, balance, structural strength, reliability, operational characteristics, or other characteristics affecting the airworthiness of the product. All other changes are “major changes” (except as provided in paragraph (B) of this section).

 

I suppose "appreciable" is a bit subjective, unless defined elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 454
  • Created
  • Last Reply
ralarcon

ralarcon

Posted
Posted

That is the logistics company that is dissolved, not flight design gmbh.

 

On the United States, aircraft may still be S-LSA without a manufacturer. However, when a repair comes up that has no instruction, there is no way to return it to airworthy condition until said instructions are made. That is the responsibility of the manufacturer.

 

Thus, when a manufacturer is no longer available and said repairs are requred, changing to e-lsa becomes necessary, as this now allows the owner or their designees to write their own repair instructions.

So is this good news or bad news ? I find it confusing.

 

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gbigs

gbigs

Posted
Posted

You keep saying "no one" and "nobody" when what you really mean is "I'm not".  Don't confuse yourself with all owners.

 

There are 140 FD owners in the USA.  How many comment on this site?  Less than 10.  How many do you know in real life?  I know a dozen or more...they are not going experimental.  Maybe you need to take a poll of your own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FlyingMonkey

FlyingMonkey

Posted
Posted

There are 140 FD owners in the USA.  How many comment on this site?  Less than 10.  How many do you know in real life?  I know a dozen or more...they are not going experimental.  Maybe you need to take a poll of your own.

 

If 140 is the number you are going by, I'd say I know about a third of them.  Some very well, some less well, some in passing having met them a time or two. 

 

But what does that have to do with you speaking in the royal plural? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gbigs

gbigs

Posted
Posted

If 140 is the number you are going by, I'd say I know about a third of them.  Some very well, some less well, some in passing having met them a time or two. 

 

But what does that have to do with you speaking in the royal plural? 

 

Give them a call....why guess they are going experimental?  No different than me saying they won't, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FastEddieB

FastEddieB

Posted
Posted

It means if push comes to shove, you have a way to still fly your airplane instead of scrapping it due to a company going bankrupt.

 

 

It may be a bit like Brer Rabbit and the briar patch (if that doesn't date me too much).

 

For many, a forced conversion to Experimental will hardly make any difference, and will actually liberate an owner to do lots of things - parts substitutions, repairs, annuals - that SLSA rules prohibit or limit.

 

Unless one is using an S-LSA for rental or flight instruction, it really does not limit one much, if at all. Though admittedly resale value may take a hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doug G.

Doug G.

Posted
Posted

I have two questions about the preceding. First is it FD that has been dissolved? Second, in Germany is that a step toward reorganization?

I guess I would also wonder what FD USA and AeroJones have to say about this. I suspect they are not yet certain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gbigs

gbigs

Posted
Posted

It may be a bit like Brer Rabbit and the briar patch (if that doesn't date me too much).

 

For many, a forced conversion to Experimental will hardly make any difference, and will actually liberate an owner to do lots of things - parts substitutions, repairs, annuals - that SLSA rules prohibit or limit.

 

Unless one is using an S-LSA for rental or flight instruction, it really does not limit one much, if at all. Though admittedly resale value may take a hit.

 

Try selling an experimental...you will take a bath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FlyingMonkey

FlyingMonkey

Posted
Posted

I don't think there has been any conclusive evidence of experimentals as a class selling any worse than certified or SLSA airplanes.  There are awesome RVs selling well into the six figure range, above build cost.  

 

I'd say the biggest way to lose money on any airplane is to buy it brand new (*cough*).  I bought my CTSW that was six years old and in perfect shape with 117hrs on it, for a little more than half of the brand new price.  Now THAT guy took a bath. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FastEddieB

FastEddieB

Posted
Posted

 

I'd say the biggest way to lose money on any airplane is to buy it brand new (*cough*).

 

Let me say someone here reminds me of my dad.

 

For years, finances allowed me to only buy used cars. My dad was highly critical, saying that buying a used car was just buying someone else's headaches.

 

Finally, in the early 1980's I had the wherewithal to buy a new Mazda 626. I proudly called my dad to tell him, and he said, "A NEW car? You know you'll take a beating on depreciation!"

 

May help explain why I am the way I am - "Your Inner Child of the Past" and all that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FlyingMonkey

FlyingMonkey

Posted
Posted

Can't afford new?  Well, that's small reason to be upset at those who can...

 

*You* brought up people "taking a bath" on airplane sales, I simply brought up that purchasing new is the most sure way to do that.  Even if I could afford a new airplane, I would not do it because "new airplane" smell is not worth tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to me.  I guess if you have "more dollars than sense" none of that really matters to you.  

 

I'm not the one on this board scratching my head and lamenting the lack of movement on an airplane sale because of unwillingness to price it to market.  If I went to sell my airplane today, I'm pretty sure I could get what I paid for it or more.  You'll be lucky to get 2/3.    

 

You really *are* the Troll King. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gbigs

gbigs

Posted
Posted

Who is buying high and selling low?  Not me.   Buying new is just as valid as buying used, even more so.  The reasons are many:

 

1. used usually means buying someone else's mistakes - not always, but it's a crap shoot

2. you get what you pay for

3. how much you get on a resale is a function of what you get on the resale (if it's too low then keep the plane)

4. nothing like the smell of a new car or airplane and it is worth it if you can afford it

 

Experimentals are someones hobby...and most are not interested in getting involved in them...neither are insurance companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FastEddieB

FastEddieB

Posted
Posted

Who is buying high and selling low? Not me. Buying new is just as valid as buying used, even more so. The reasons are many:

 

1. used usually means buying someone else's mistakes - not always, but it's a crap shoot

2. you get what you pay for...

Wow! You really are channeling my dad!

 

Experimentals are someones hobby...and most are not interested in getting involved in them...neither are insurance companies.

Status: FALSE

 

My rates actually went down a bit when I converted*. And the same company that insured my S-LSA was just as happy to insure my E-LSA.

 

 

*Probably because they would only insure a slightly lower hull value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
Cluemeister

Cluemeister

Posted
Posted

From the link, what the creditors agreed to.  Still has to be approved by the court:

 

  • The Lindig group will take over Flight Design under an insolvency plan procedure.
  • Aero Jones in an asset-only purchase takes ownership of the C4 project and CT business, where the supply of spare parts and support for all models is ensured.

 

My understanding of an asset sale is that one of the purposes is to limit the new owners liability exposure from past customers.  In essence, Aero Jones gets to start fresh with both product lines.  

 

Not sure what Lindig group gets either.  They take over the Flight Design company, but Aero Jones bought all the assets of the previous company, including rights to the C4.

 

Of course this is all a guess, please feel free to correct!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...