DG-300/303 owners...

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?

If so it might be financially viable.

Alan

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

At 17:36 16 April 2007, Marc Ramsey wrote:
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?

I would think that an ultrasonic inspection method

could be developed for much less cost than radiography.
Ultrasonic might be able to look into the layers of
rovings
and see how deep the undulations are. You might want

to check with some companies which make composite
aircraft and composite spars. Cirrus Design, Scaled

Composites, Adam Aircraft etc..., and find out how
they
do NDT on their designs.

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.

Mark

At 17:36 16 April 2007, Marc Ramsey wrote:
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?

I would think that an ultrasonic inspection method

could be developed for much less cost than radiography.
Ultrasonic might be able to look into the layers of
rovings
and see how deep the undulations are. You might want

to check with some companies which make composite
aircraft and composite spars. Cirrus Design, Scaled

Composites, Adam Aircraft etc..., and find out how
they
do NDT on their designs.

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.

Mark

Such a major flaw in a wing spar should be replaced at the
manufacturers expense IMHO.

It is inexcusable for these wings to still be allowed to fly at lower
placarded limits as DG has no knowledge of the condition of the entire
fleet.
DG should sue Elan for screwing up and DG owners should get a free set
of wings to replace the bad ones they bought in good faith.
Its not like you can glue a new spar in the place where its bad!!

Regards

Al



On Apr 16, 11:39 am, Steve Davis
wrote:
At 17:36 16 April 2007, Marc Ramsey wrote:

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?

I would think that an ultrasonic inspection method

could be developed for much less cost than radiography.
Ultrasonic might be able to look into the layers of
rovings
and see how deep the undulations are. You might want

to check with some companies which make composite
aircraft and composite spars. Cirrus Design, Scaled

Composites, Adam Aircraft etc..., and find out how
they
do NDT on their designs.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.

Mark

I have sent a email to the factory, with no reply.

I am guessing that it would cost me $21K USD to get my wings fixed.

Does anyone have any idea on the cost of new wings from the factory?

Would it be cheaper for me?

Regards,

John "XLT"

On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 01:39:59 +0100, John Schaffer
wrote:


I have sent a email to the factory, with no reply.

I am guessing that it would cost me $21K USD to get my wings fixed.

Does anyone have any idea on the cost of new wings from the factory?

Would it be cheaper for me?

How often do you feel the need to fly with more than 450 kg and faster
than 250 kph...?
As long as you don't do that regularly, you can save a lot of money
and simply apply the new restrictions to your airspeed indicator and
POH.

Bye
Andreas

On Apr 17, 3:14 am, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 01:39:59 +0100, John Schaffer

wrote:

I have sent a email to the factory, with no reply.

I am guessing that it would cost me $21K USD to get my wings fixed.

Does anyone have any idea on the cost of new wings from the factory?

Would it be cheaper for me?

How often do you feel the need to fly with more than 450 kg and faster
than 250 kph...?
As long as you don't do that regularly, you can save a lot of money
and simply apply the new restrictions to your airspeed indicator and
POH.

Bye
Andreas

Also, from your April 8 post:

Apart from the max T/O weight (and the prohibition of aerobatics for
the DG-303 Acro) none of this limitations is going to have any
practical influence on aircraft handling, don't you agree?


Andreas, do you own a DG-300? If not maybe you'd like to buy mine.
I'm partly joking and partly serious with that comment. It's still a
nice glider but it's not the glider I bought. Mine is not an acro but
was approved for mild aerobatics and I did those aerobatics. I'll
miss that. Also, I'd like to fly at 9.5 lbs/sq ft. or so sometimes.
525 kg isn't required for that but more than 450 kg is needed. With
450 kg only 9.0 is possible. The reduction in maneuvering speed is
probably a bigger deal than Vne but I know people around here who have
had trouble staying below 18,000 while at Vne. It's not very often
though.

ELAN seems to be the responsible party here. Are they still the same
company? My understanding is they only split off the aviation
division to form AMS but the original ELAN company is still the same.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Bob

On Apr 16, 9:26 pm, "
wrote:
Such a major flaw in a wing spar should be replaced at the
manufacturers expense IMHO.


This would bankrupt DG, which benefits no-one.

It is inexcusable for these wings to still be allowed to fly at lower
placarded limits as DG has no knowledge of the condition of the entire
fleet.

Well, they (and EASA) believe they've tested-to-destruction the worst
case, and under the new placard speeds (which are hardly low; the
DG300 always had a high VNE and rough air max) there's still the big
safety margin demanded by the regulations.

DG should sue Elan for screwing up and DG owners should get a free set
of wings to replace the bad ones they bought in good faith.
Its not like you can glue a new spar in the place where its bad!!

The manufacturing screw-up happened too long ago for DG to sue Elan/
AMS (I get the impression they would if they could).


Dan

On Apr 16, 3:48 pm, "Dan G" wrote:
On Apr 16, 9:26 pm, "
wrote:

Such a major flaw in a wing spar should be replaced at the
manufacturers expense IMHO.

This would bankrupt DG, which benefits no-one.

If Boeing shipped a plane that was discovered to have a flaw in it
because their sub contractor failed to adhere to manufacturing specs
or QA procedures, Boeing would fix the problem then deal with the
sub. After all Boeing owns the paper for the sales contract.

So what is different here?


It is inexcusable for these wings to still be allowed to fly at lower
placarded limits as DG has no knowledge of the condition of the entire
fleet.

Well, they (and EASA) believe they've tested-to-destruction the worst
case, and under the new placard speeds (which are hardly low; the
DG300 always had a high VNE and rough air max) there's still the big
safety margin demanded by the regulations.

No DG would like to think they have found the worst case.
They dont know.

It will only take one crusty in his DG flying the old placard speeds,
making it clap hands and they are in a whole heap of trouble.


DG should sue Elan for screwing up and DG owners should get a free set
of wings to replace the bad ones they bought in good faith.
Its not like you can glue a new spar in the place where its bad!!

The manufacturing screw-up happened too long ago for DG to sue Elan/
AMS (I get the impression they would if they could).

No the DG site says this applies to DG303-Acros too which are recent
production.

This is a nightmare for DG300/303 owners, I almost became an owner
last summer as I was looking at a DG303 acro.

As an aside I posted some DG300 wing cross section shots from the one
that went in at Minden 10 years ago.
you can see the build quality really clearly here.
http://www.gliderforum.com/photos/ph...asp?albumid=55

Regards

Al