Alan Montague wrote:
Is there any scope for non-destructive testing by industrial
radiology?

X-rays are sensitive in showing up minor ripples in
children's bones? Would they work for the ripples in
my spar?

There may well be alternative approaches, and that is why some of us
(including owners of other legacy DG gliders, like myself) are a bit
disturbed by the response of the DG factory. I don't expect them to pay
for the repair (or even inspection) of a legacy design like the 300, but
given that the original designer and many of the original engineers and
technicians now work for the "new" DG, they have the resources necessary
to find a better solution. In my mind, the reputations of the DG
designers, engineers, and inspectors is at stake here, whether or not
the current DG company feels they are obligated to take on any
responsibility beyond issuing what they consider to be a suitable TN.
If I were to buy a DG-808 now, why should I assume the factory won't
issue a draconian TN and leave me hanging 5 or 10 years down the line?

I again look at the Duo spar inspections as an example, the original
protocol involved cutting holes in the wing skin and visually inspecting
the spars, in short order SH evolved to using a borescope through the
existing inspection ports and a few holes drilled in the root rib and
aileron cutouts, eventually someone figured how to do it with
inexpensive lipstick cameras and long rods.

Marc