DG-200 Life limit?

[Gregg Leslie[_2_]]

Hi guys,

Anyone know if there is a lfie limit on the DG-200?

Gregg

[Nick Hill[_2_]]

At 12:27 12 September 2010, Gregg Leslie wrote:
>
>Anyone know if there is a lfie limit on the DG-200?
>

The current life is 12,000 hours.

Extended by TN 323-15 in 2007

http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/Data/TN-DG/dg-200/dg-200-17/323-15/MM217%20TN323-15.pdf


Nick H

[[email protected]]

On Sep 12, 12:34*pm, " >
wrote:
> On Sep 12, 5:27*am, Gregg Leslie > wrote:
>
> > Hi guys,
>
> > Anyone know if there is a lfie limit on the DG-200?
>
> > Gregg
>
> 1 year unless you pay DG for a new set of manuals every year :)
>
> Al

Word from a DG owner last weekend is that EASA has nixed the new cover
page each year scam.
UH

[brianDG303[_2_]]

On Sep 13, 3:25*pm, " >
wrote:
> On Sep 13, 5:14*am, wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 12, 12:34*pm, " >
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 12, 5:27*am, Gregg Leslie > wrote:
>
> > > > Hi guys,
>
> > > > Anyone know if there is a lfie limit on the DG-200?
>
> > > > Gregg
>
> > > 1 year unless you pay DG for a new set of manuals every year :)
>
> > > Al
>
> > Word from a DG owner last weekend is that EASA has nixed the new cover
> > page each year scam.
> > UH
>
> Thats great news...
>
> Al

Although people were not totally pleased with how DG handled the DG300
wing problem (some thought they should send everyone a new set of
wings) they did spend the money to figure out a workable solution.
Right now I suspect L-13 owners would be happy to pay a yearly fee in
order to get their planes back.

[BTiz]

On Sep 13, 5:14*am, cernauta > wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:34:51 -0700 (PDT), "
>
> > wrote:
> >1 year unless you pay DG for a new set of manuals every year :)
>
> According to the following EASA document (the Type Certificate Data
> Sheet), in Europe the old manuals are as valid as the new ones.
>
> seehttp://www.easa.europa.eu/certification/type-certificates/docs/aircra....
>
> Aldo

The US FAA answered the same thing. They sent out a policy letter
about 2 weeks ago.
What ever inspection criteria and manuals were in effect when
purchased, are what is required.
Not accounting for any ADs that the FAA would publish.

[Grider Pirate]

On Sep 13, 6:32*pm, BTiz > wrote:
> On Sep 13, 5:14*am, cernauta > wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:34:51 -0700 (PDT), "
>
> > > wrote:
> > >1 year unless you pay DG for a new set of manuals every year :)
>
> > According to the following EASA document (the Type Certificate Data
> > Sheet), in Europe the old manuals are as valid as the new ones.
>
> > seehttp://www.easa.europa.eu/certification/type-certificates/docs/aircra...
>
> > Aldo
>
> The US FAA answered the same thing. They sent out a policy letter
> about 2 weeks ago.
> What ever inspection criteria and manuals were in effect when
> purchased, are what is required.
> Not accounting for any ADs that the FAA would publish.

Didn't Herr Weber also mention not selling parts* to those who didn't
pay the annual fee?

*not that they've show that they can actually deliver anything other
than common hardware for say, an LS4.

[Lars Peder Hansen]

Tried to find this policy letter on faa.gov, but no luck. Link, anyone?

Thanks,
Lars Peder


"BTiz" > wrote in message
...
On Sep 13, 5:14 am, cernauta > wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:34:51 -0700 (PDT), "
>
> > wrote:
> >1 year unless you pay DG for a new set of manuals every year :)
>
> According to the following EASA document (the Type Certificate Data
> Sheet), in Europe the old manuals are as valid as the new ones.
>
> seehttp://www.easa.europa.eu/certification/type-certificates/docs/aircra...
>
> Aldo

The US FAA answered the same thing. They sent out a policy letter
about 2 weeks ago.
What ever inspection criteria and manuals were in effect when
purchased, are what is required.
Not accounting for any ADs that the FAA would publish.