New Wing Spar AD

[eHotAir]

It's pretty crazy for some Diamond owners considering action over this spar issue. Does every AD issued by the FAA need a lawsuit? If you compare the auto industry to the aviation industry, you need to compare case by case. You are truly comparing apples to oranges. If I felt Diamond truly deceived me, it would be different. But lets face it, no one knows the future. We fly a very unique composite aircraft. I am thankful to have such a great airplane. For those of you that want to stick it to Diamond, be careful what you wish for. Do you have any idea the availability of parts and service from a bankrupt company. Just because they produce airplanes, doesn't mean they have a never ending bucket of cash. Let's all work through this together and keep in mind, we still need the mothership. Keeping Diamond above water protects or investment. I've worked with airplane manufacturers before and most are one or two lawsuits away from folding. Think long and hard before you sue. Like in a divorce, the only winners are the lawyers. A few hundred bucks is not going to break any of us.

Doug

[Charles K]

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.

So buy a 200k-500k airplane and then it is our job to further take care of the manufacturer - I guess I have issue with that premise.

[Antoine]

Watching this debate from the other side of the pond is very interesting. Fo once I will keep my big mouth shut and just listen!

[CFIDave]

So buy a 200k-500k airplane and then it is our job to further take care of the manufacturer - I guess I have issue with that premise.

"You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar."
(proverb traced back to G. Torriano's 'Common Place of Italian Proverbs'. It first appeared in the United States in Benjamin Franklin's 'Poor Richard's Almanac' in 1744, and is found in varying forms...)

[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.

So buy a 200k-500k airplane and then it is our job to further take care of the manufacturer - ...

Yes.

[Tommy]

Chuck, I think you should buy a Cirrus.

[Keith M]

As an owner with a Thielert engine, I've had much reason to be critical of Diamond, but would hold my fire over a few hundred dollars for an unforeseeable safety issue that there's no urgency to fix. Mind you, they deserve it with both barrels for refusing to provide software updates to the G1000 and certification for WAAS. Neither of these would break their bank, so they're just being deliberately obstructive in the vain hope that it will push their customers into buying new aircraft.

[Kurt h]

If I could take this thread back to the AD issue........

In the US, I thought that chapter 4 of the maintenance manual is required for airworthiness while chap 5 is only recommended. If true, the MSI is only covered in chap 5 and it is not an airworthiness requirement??

Clearly the AD language references the MSI as if it is a requirement. I fully intend to have the spar work done to meet the AD, but I never plan to have a local shop pull the wings and horizontal stabilizer off my plane (along with the other exploratory surgery items in chap 5) unless regulatory required.

If all of the above is true does the AD somehow make the full MSI work scope now a requirement (albeit at 6000 hrs)? What about the rest of chap 5?

[Don]

[ 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.

Quite playing the consumer victim role. This is the big boy aviation industry. The simple fact is you will get AD's from time to time. That's just part of the expenses of owning a plane. As others have said here, a class action lawsuit will be a lose/lose for everyone with the exception of the lawyers.

[hoyaj]

I would estimate that for the vast majority, this is a non-issue until ~2022.