New Wing Spar AD

Any DA40 related topics

Moderators: Rick, Lance Murray

User avatar
Keith M
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 9:54 am
First Name: Keith
Aircraft Type: DA40D
Airports: EGNH
Has thanked: 29 times
Been thanked: 46 times

Re: New Wing Spar AD

Post by Keith M »

Steve wrote:I agree that it isn't a major issue, but it would be good PR for them to maybe cover the parts cost for the repair.
When have Diamond ever considered good PR with existing customers is necessary to sell their planes? :scratch: However, on this occasion, I completely understand their stance. The real lifetime of an airframe can only be discovered by extensive testing over a prolonged period, and they've found a weakness before it caused any problems, so I don't mind paying a reasonable amount to have it put right.
User avatar
CFIDave
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:40 pm
First Name: Dave
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N333GX
Airports: KJYO Leesburg VA
Has thanked: 231 times
Been thanked: 1473 times

Re: New Wing Spar AD

Post by CFIDave »

Over the years Diamond has been forced to pay out multiple million $USD for US aircraft crashes that were clearly and obviously the pilot's fault. IMHO a lawsuit over this issue would only add to the overly-litigious "ugly American" stereotype that's been created.

For the benefit of US Diamond aircraft owners, please don't consider a lawsuit over this.
Epic Aircraft E1000 GX
Former DA40XLS, DA42-VI, and DA62 owner
ATP, CFI, CFI-I, MEI
Tommy
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 801
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 10:48 am
First Name: Tommy
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N591CA
Airports: KCGF
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: New Wing Spar AD

Post by Tommy »

CFIDave wrote:Over the years Diamond has been forced to pay out multiple million $USD for US aircraft crashes that were clearly and obviously the pilot's fault. IMHO a lawsuit over this issue would only add to the overly-litigious "ugly American" stereotype that's been created.

For the benefit of US Diamond aircraft owners, please don't consider a lawsuit over this.
I completely agree with everything you have stated. :thumbsup:
User avatar
Charles K
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 308
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 7:46 pm
First Name: Charles
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N5WU
Airports: KCCR
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: New Wing Spar AD

Post by Charles K »

Tommy wrote:
CFIDave wrote:Over the years Diamond has been forced to pay out multiple million $USD for US aircraft crashes that were clearly and obviously the pilot's fault. IMHO a lawsuit over this issue would only add to the overly-litigious "ugly American" stereotype that's been created.

For the benefit of US Diamond aircraft owners, please don't consider a lawsuit over this.
I completely agree with everything you have stated. :thumbsup:
So I understand your point of view and I disagree. All I am seeking is a modest amount from Diamond for all of us - the cost of the parts/materials is probably negligible to them. Even if they covered the labor - they probably pay the lawyers that much money in a year anyway.
Charles
KCCR Based
N5WU - 2004 G1000 DA40 40.400, GTX345R ADS-B, WAAS Upgraded in 2021 via Diamond Upgrade Program
IFR and ME Rated - Advanced Ground Instructor Rated
User avatar
CFIDave
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:40 pm
First Name: Dave
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N333GX
Airports: KJYO Leesburg VA
Has thanked: 231 times
Been thanked: 1473 times

Re: New Wing Spar AD

Post by CFIDave »

Charles K wrote:So I understand your point of view and I disagree. All I am seeking is a modest amount from Diamond for all of us - the cost of the parts/materials is probably negligible to them. Even if they covered the labor - they probably pay the lawyers that much money in a year anyway.
OK, let's try a thought exercise:

Imagine you're Christian Dries owner of Diamond Aircraft and you're considering where to budget limited funding to invest in new aircraft development, improvements to existing models, service and support, etc. You've got customers distributed throughout the world with multiple factories in multiple countries, but the last few years have been pretty lean due to the poor economic environment affecting all GA manufacturers. Lately you've been quite successful in selling lots of diesel DA40s to the Russians, as well as DA42 MPP models to mostly government customers. There are emerging opportunities to sell (and build more) Diamond aircraft in China.

Suppose you continue to get sued by Americans who represent only a small portion of your global market. Would that encourage you to invest in development or support for Lycoming-powered DA40s which are really only viable for the North American market -- where avgas is still widely available and (relatively-speaking) inexpensive?
Epic Aircraft E1000 GX
Former DA40XLS, DA42-VI, and DA62 owner
ATP, CFI, CFI-I, MEI
User avatar
Steve
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1953
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:23 am
First Name: Steve
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N432SC
Airports: 1T7
Has thanked: 81 times
Been thanked: 493 times

Re: New Wing Spar AD

Post by Steve »

I haven't heard of any suits against Diamond (from Americans or elsewhere). Granted, I'm not up on all of the legal news. Can anyone substantiate that Diamond is being sued a lot? Given our litigious society, I would have expected to hear about a few (McDonalds hot coffee burns).

Steve
User avatar
Charles K
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 308
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 7:46 pm
First Name: Charles
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N5WU
Airports: KCCR
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: New Wing Spar AD

Post by Charles K »

I am not aware of any but there could be some.

I accept we don't all agree on this issue but at the cost of these planes - can't the support be at least as good as the auto industry. A safety flaw in a car would be a recall mandated by the government at the cost of the manufacturer. I think litigation is a last resort. I am just getting a bit frustrated with Diamond.

I own a 2004 DA 40 - the first ever plane in the US certified with the G1000. My sales sheet promises an upgradeable GIA 63 to WAAS. The actual solution offered is a 20K replacement. Had that been disclosed up front I may have waited. All my friends with Garmin 430s and 530s sent them in for a modest upgrade fee. They were not told - too bad - purchase a new 430 ? And with the 'upgrade' designation in my sales contract I have been asking Diamond and Garmin to make good on that. And I am not an unreasonable person - I have been asking if they will sell me the units at cost - no loss to them - and a break for me - as an early adopter of the promise of the G1000 suite. So when you add this as well to the 'no life limit' airframe - I just get a bit frustrated. I'll likely just have the AD done at next annual and pay for it - but it does not mean I have to be happy about post sales support from Diamond.
Steve wrote:I haven't heard of any suits against Diamond (from Americans or elsewhere). Granted, I'm not up on all of the legal news. Can anyone substantiate that Diamond is being sued a lot? Given our litigious society, I would have expected to hear about a few (McDonalds hot coffee burns).

Steve
Charles
KCCR Based
N5WU - 2004 G1000 DA40 40.400, GTX345R ADS-B, WAAS Upgraded in 2021 via Diamond Upgrade Program
IFR and ME Rated - Advanced Ground Instructor Rated
Tommy
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 801
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 10:48 am
First Name: Tommy
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N591CA
Airports: KCGF
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: New Wing Spar AD

Post by Tommy »

This is not rocket science. Dave laid it out pretty clear. Give Diamond enough of a hard time and they'll just decide they have had enough. Once your customers start costing you (Diamond) more money than you're making on them they're (Diamond) going to pack up and walk.
For some reason some people think corporations or any business entity for that matter have all kinds of money to throw at disgruntled customers who believe they are wronged. Sometimes they do. However, many times they don't and that's when they tell the customer to go pound salt. The economic malaise we are currently in supports the later.
It's a two way street. Sometimes the customer has to take care of the manufacturer if they hope to have a continued long relationship and support.
Tommy
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 801
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 10:48 am
First Name: Tommy
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N591CA
Airports: KCGF
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: New Wing Spar AD

Post by Tommy »

Charles K wrote:I am not aware of any but there could be some.

I accept we don't all agree on this issue but at the cost of these planes - can't the support be at least as good as the auto industry. A safety flaw in a car would be a recall mandated by the government at the cost of the manufacturer. I think litigation is a last resort. I am just getting a bit frustrated with Diamond.

I own a 2004 DA 40 - the first ever plane in the US certified with the G1000. My sales sheet promises an upgradeable GIA 63 to WAAS. The actual solution offered is a 20K replacement. Had that been disclosed up front I may have waited. All my friends with Garmin 430s and 530s sent them in for a modest upgrade fee. They were not told - too bad - purchase a new 430 ? And with the 'upgrade' designation in my sales contract I have been asking Diamond and Garmin to make good on that. And I am not an unreasonable person - I have been asking if they will sell me the units at cost - no loss to them - and a break for me - as an early adopter of the promise of the G1000 suite. So when you add this as well to the 'no life limit' airframe - I just get a bit frustrated. I'll likely just have the AD done at next annual and pay for it - but it does not mean I have to be happy about post sales support from Diamond.
Steve wrote:I haven't heard of any suits against Diamond (from Americans or elsewhere). Granted, I'm not up on all of the legal news. Can anyone substantiate that Diamond is being sued a lot? Given our litigious society, I would have expected to hear about a few (McDonalds hot coffee burns).

Steve
Charles, if you remember correctly, the U.S. auto industry was ready to stiff every customer they had and essentially did through the gov. bailout. I do remember Diamond approaching the Canadian gov. for a little help and the Canadian gov. telling Diamond to take a hike.
I get tired of getting stiffed also. I don't think Diamond deliberately stiffed you in any of the situations you described. They probably didn't even know what the solutions were to the promises they were making at the time. There still is the old adage "buyer be where." If it sounds to good to be true, it probably is.
User avatar
TimS
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:10 am
First Name: Timothy
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N1446C
Airports: 6B6 Stowe MA
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: New Wing Spar AD

Post by TimS »

The auto industry and the aviation industry are not even close in regulatory structure.
The auto industry has an effective recall period of ten years or so. And even then it is rather limited, general recall notices only go back five to seven years at the most.
The aviation industry the AD process goes back to the first time you built the plane and the holder of the type certificate is responsible for the engineering and potential liability for failed design (in the eyes of the court). GAMA sort of capped this at 18 years, but you make a small change (e.g. change the vacuum pump, add a battery to prevent transient voltage drops) and the 18 year clock starts over. In this environment, the owner of the airplane is responsible for continued compliance with the AD changes that the Type certificate holder has designed with the FAA.

Lastly, from a legal perspective. As long as Diamond demonstrates that there is a fix available the airframe is not life limited. It may be life limited based on economics, but there is nothing in the AD that Diamond has done which mandates the airplane now has a life limit.

So besides the litigious reputation of Americans, I do not see how you have a legal leg to stand on. If you try and change the legal basis/framework to where the manufacturer is responsible for costs associated with an AD you will kill all aircraft production in the USA and sales. They long term liability costs for such a move are to unpredictable and high for what is known; and will likely mean all aviation progress and movement forward will come to a complete stop.

Tim
Post Reply