At 22:06 19 September 2003, Slingsby wrote:
John Galloway wrote in message news:...
At 22:48 18 September 2003, Slingsby wrote:

The price of these costly toys may indeed go up but
something bad has
just happened to the value of Shemp Hirth products.


This is unlikely to happen as glider buyers and sellers
are not fools. Buyers are unlikey to avoid gliders
that are perfectly airworthy and sellers are unlikely
to give them away. If they aren'r aware already bofore
long they will be that:

The opinion that 'Safety doesn't sell' which is discussed
on the DG
website might provide an argument to your statement
that buyers and
sellers are not fools. The concept of a Czech manufactured
Duo Discus
or Discus being 'perfectly airworthy' is in the eye
of the beholder.
As I ponder whether or not to buy a used Discus, which
is the better
log book entry, 'AD complied with and no voids in the
wing spars were
found,' or 'AD complied with and a sufficient amount
glue was squirted
into the wing spar so that they can never fall apart.
Wings are now
perfectly airworthy.'

That's not the full repair . I agree that I would
prefer one that didn't need a repair - but mainly because
it didn't have holes cut in the wing skins to do the
work. I was also very pleased that ours were OK.


The airworthiness of passed or repaired wings is not
in the eye of the beholder - unless you have some technical
information to show otherwise - or perhaps you think
the factory, the LBA and the local airworthiness organisations
are incompetent or part of a conspiracy?


Firstly, only spars built at the Czech factory were
built incorrectly using an simple error in the technique
which has been identified and we can be pretty sure
it has been eliminated.

Right, a 'simple error in the technique' lead to wings
breaking off in
normal flight. We can be 'pretty sure' it has been
eliminated because
we sent our best German craftsmen to the Czech factory
to, once again,
show them how to spread glue on a spar cap. The problem
is eliminated,
Murphys Law will not rear its ugly head around here
again.

I am not sure what point is being made in the above.
As far as I am aware Murphy's Law is spread evenly
throughout human activity. I thought that's what it
was about. And are you suggesting that retraining
cannot possibly correct a production error?

Secondly, therefore, the bulk of the German built
SH
fleet are unnaffected and I think the glider buying
public are informed enough to be able to figure that
out.
The glider buying public will also be informed whenever
a Shemp-Hirth
glider breaks apart in flight.


How could it be otherwise?



Thirdly, all the SH gliders that could possible be
affected (i.e. Discus and Duo with Czech wings) have
been or will be inspected and, if necessary, repaired
and brought up to full airworthiness.

Right, and the German built gliders couldn't possibly
be affected because
none of them have broken apart, yet. Until then, they
are fully airworthy.

Are you accusing Schemmp-Hirth of lying when they say
that only Czech wings were built by the faulty technique?
Or are you suggesting that properly built spars are
not airworthy? If so back it up - and remember that
this is a public forum.


As an inspected Duo owner I have made it my business
to be certain in my own mind that an inspected or
repaired
glider will be at full design spar strength - for
example
that there have been no post manufacturing new delaminations
in the Czech wings, that wings that pass the visual
inspection actually are strong.

I have no particular sentimental attachment to Schemmp-Hirth
and no business relationship with them. Like most
affected owners I was pretty upset but now I know
the
facts I feel no need to be concerned about the strength
or value of our Duo. I have also just ordered a new
Schempp-Hirth glider.

Lastly, there is no reason to think that the cost
of
new gliders will go up. There is nothing wrong in
principle with the way that they are built - as long
as they are built as intended.

John Galloway

They weren't built as intended, and the blind method
of assembling
the spar as the wing is being assembled is wrong in
principle. You
should be pretty upset, THEY DIDN'T GLUE THE SPAR TOGETHER.
Not just
one, THEY DIDN'T GLUE THE SPAR TOGETHER ON A WHOLE
BUNCH OF WINGS. Oops!!!

This is simply stating what we already know. That
is the starting point of the whole problem. Things
have moved on from there and the wings are being checked
and repaired if needed. It is self evident that this
is the biggest manufacturing error in modern gliding
history but it is being sorted - not without a lot
of inconvenience and irritation for the owners but
it is happening.

As regards the 'blind' construction method for the
spars - if you have knowledge to suggest that passed
or repaired Czech wings, or German built wings, or
any SH wings built from now on are not airworthy please
state it. This is, as you are shouting out, a pretty
serious matter and would benefit from information rather
than assertion or insinuation.

'now I know the facts I feel no need to be concerned
about the
strength or value of our Duo. I have also just ordered
a new Shemp-Hirth
glider' Nice sales pitch, how much are you asking
for your Duo?

It would not have been proper for me not to have declared
my relevant interests in this matter and why it has
been important to me to be sure of the situation.
Weather permitting, tomorrow (like all the other inspected
owners) I will be betting my life that our Duo spar
is sound and then, in the future, I will also be betting
a bigger chunk of the value of my house than I like
to think about that the next glider will also be sound.


Our confidence in the structural integrity of a composite
aircraft comes from our confidence in the integrity
of of the constructor. That isn't a complete defence
against a mistake being made and when it does we then
have to judge whether the constructor has shown the
integrity to learn from the problem, make good the
consequences of it, make sure it can't happen again,
and then extend the audit process to prevent other
types of error occuring in the future.

Your feelings about this problem are much milder than
mine were a few weeks ago. As far as I was concerned
I had to get all the facts I could and then judge whether
(as said before) I was being told the truth or whether
several agencies were being simultaneously incompetent
and/or dishonest because that would be the only other
logical conclusion.


John Galloway