Well.... seneca2e, (It would be nice to know your real name), you should re-read my note. At the risk of being redundant, I'll say it again...
I didn't see those cracks without the aid of the 10x. My personal
very close up vision isn't the best. I need reading glasses and the crack was buried, covered, disguised...whatever you want to call it.... under the paint. Using the 10x lens brought the crack line to my attention and then AFTER stripping off the paint, I was able to define the crack line. That
would not have happened if I hadn't been forced to do it by the SB111. Could I have found the crack? sure.
Would I have? Highly unlikely. Human nature is to do the very best to sidestep or ignore a potential problem instead of addressing it, expecially when it costs money. They made me do it, I found the problem, I'm glad they did. So, as far as I'm concerned, it was a good thing that it was issued. You're entitled to your opinions, and I'm entitled to my safety. I'll take confirmed safety over opinions any day.
Your comment about the "HUGE" blade purchase problem is incorrect. I have purchased one with a yellow tag with 371 hours on it and it's practically brand new. Proactive instead of being negatively reactive usually works best.
The SB is issued to warn you to protect yourself and contains all of the information needed to do so. it is written because of prior events that have occured. People don't sit around and make this stuff up for the fun of it.
AD's are issued because people in general are the problem, and are issued because historically people have not had the technical knowledge, the desire, the incentive, and the good sense to address a problem directly and proactively. That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.... but I don't think so. The evidence supporting that observation has forever been in front of us...hence the existence, the requirement, of AD's. Re-skin blades in the field? You've got to be kidding. General guidance? It's a LOT more complicated that that. Go back and read Bryan Cobb's attempt at it. He gave up over .005 tolerance variation and was smart to do so. How much does anyone of us know about the technical aspects of a fling wing. Would YOU want to fly in a machine with a blade reskinned by anybody who thinks they can do it ?
The AD is coming, you can count on that. You will have every opportunity to express your considered written opinions to the FAA as an owner when they solicit commentary before issuance; which
may influence their directive. The comments from the Brantly Owners will have to be considered, factual, and contain solid direction for them to have any effect. I suggest that you take your time to put together a well thought out written response to their solicitation when it arrives, instead of commenting with disdain upon my suggestion that you follow the SB for your own good.
It was simply what I considered to be good advice. You don't have to use it and you can choose to ignore me. That's easy to do. However, if you want to continue to debate this entire unfortunate situation, I am quite capable of and willing to do so.....item by item, one at a time. Public discourse in the pursuit of a resolution is always good for all involved. Pick the subject matter. Chinese conspiracy? field re-skinning? costs? personal safety? They're all fair game for discussion.
btw....before you assume that i'm some kind of a flake.....go to
http://www.infratech-mfg.com and
http://www.portaconstructures.com and
http://www.ezventmfg.com and take a good look. I started, developed, and own all three. Solid companies based upon thought and careful consideration. I'm applying the same consideration to this situation also.
Cordially, Randy Strock
