MAKE CHAPTER 288 YOUR AVIATION HOME! E-AB, TYPE CERTIFIED, VINTAGE, WARBIRD, ETC.
Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
MAKE CHAPTER 288 YOUR AVIATION HOME! E-AB, TYPE CERTIFIED, VINTAGE, WARBIRD, ETC.
Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
GARMIN SOUNDED THE WARNING HORN LAST YEAR: UPDATE: MARCH 24
To watch a Garmin Video about this, click here:
By: Larry Anglisano is a regular AVweb contributor and the Editor in Chief of sister publication Aviation Consumer magazine. He's an active land, sea and glider pilot, and has over 30 years experience as an avionics tech.
The forums and news threads went berserk when Garmin sounded the warning horn last year that the parts bins stocked with major components to maintain the world-conquering GNS-series navigators are thinning, and that owners should start planning an upgrade. Garmin Service Advisory (23018 Rev. B) makes it official, saying in part that display repairs for the WAAS and non-WAAS GPS 400, GNC 420 and GNS 430 are no longer available and have been discontinued after 25 years of support.
It’s easy to understand the hysteria because for the masses, it’s tough to imagine flying without one. With over 110,000 GNS units sold, both for retrofit and as an OEM standard, the GNS line could be the most market-saturated avionics ever built. Other than King’s Silver Crown KX155 radios, I can’t think of anything that comes close. Moreover, the GNS 430 and larger GNS 530 are reliable rigs that work well for such a wide variety of applications and flying missions—IFR, VFR and everything in between.
If the product was a turd like some other brand’s offerings of similar vintage, there wouldn’t be nearly the uproar over support issues. Plus, GNS navigators were never cheap. If you spent the money and downtime for installation (around $30K was the magic number for a 430W/530W combo), you can’t be thrilled that a tanked display could send it to the scrap bench. Fair-weather flyers who don’t use more than the Direct To key probably have little motivation to upgrade.
The good news for owners who want to proactively bail out of a good-working GNS is that WAAS units still fetch big dollars—even if there aren’t replacement displays for them. Garmin is doing something it rarely does, offering trade-in value presumably to backfill the parts bins because it says it’s committed to servicing the GNS line for years, or at least those with healthy displays.
I’ve seen only a couple failed displays over the 25 years, and that seems in line with Garmin’s estimation that only around 1 percent of units will be affected, though the units aren’t getting younger, so I predict the percentage will grow. Units that have recently been back to Garmin for a flat-rate repair—and even better, have replacement displays—are priced at the top of the used market.
The GNS 430W flat-rate repair is around $2000, and the typical retail price for a cherry one is around $5500. For years, Avidyne has offered trade allowances for used GNS 430Ws against its mostly slide-in IFD 440, and that feeds the used market with a variety of GNS units. Ask to see service paperwork before striking a deal, and demand that it looks good cosmetically. A common refurbishment on units that go back for repair include replacement bezel keys and a new display lens.
I’ve heard kookie conspiracy theories that Garmin purposely built the display so it times out after so many hours. Garmin doesn’t even make the display, and given the leaps in display technology that happened since the 1990s it’s no surprise there aren’t current third-party suppliers who do. Garmin thinks that dropping in a modern touch display like the ones on the current Garmin navigators, upgrading the memory and going through re-certification would cost more than owners would be willing to spend.
I think King Silver Crown owners voted with their wallets when BendixKing couldn’t source gas displays for existing KX155/165 navcomms; it came up with a simple mod for a replacement LED that was more than four times the cost of the old drop-in display. Shops tell me the majority of owners faced with repairs used the opportunity to upgrade to a new Garmin.
A hangar buddy with an early GNS 430 in his Cherokee told me his unit doesn’t owe him a dime because it’s seen multiple upgrades, and after spending the $2000 last year for a display replacement he hopes to keep it forever, maybe someday moving it to the number two position as a backup. If you’ve owned a GNS 430 from the beginning, you know that it’s gotten several boosts over the years—including a WAAS upgrade and more software upgrades than I can count. But even before the GNS, Garmin had a track record of stretching the life of navigators, at least until it runs out of major components, including displays.
As a blushing-green avionics guy in the early 1990s when ground-based Loran-C was the standard, I remember installing Garmin’s first navigator—the GPS100. The unit got several improvements (including an aviation database and a panel-mount install kit) before morphing into the GPS150 and comm-equipped GNC250, and then the GPS155/GNC300, which were among the first approach-approvable IFR GPS navigators. Later models of these units (the “XL” series, which added stark yellow moving map displays) were still offered in the Garmin lineup and long supported even after the GNS 430 came along in 1998.
Ultimately, Garmin stopped supporting the GPS100/200 series after many years because it couldn’t get replacement displays made by an outside vendor. Of course, the market didn’t complain a whole lot because the GNS line, with an eight-color LCD display, was an immediate success and for many it was a logical and modern step up from the utilitarian 100 and 200-series navigators.
The original $10,000 GNS 430 didn’t have a WAAS receiver and when Garmin added a factory WAAS upgrade in 2003 as it promised, it offered the update for 17 years before dropping it when the ADS-B mandate hit in 2020. At the time, when asked why it was dropping the upgrade, Garmin told me it planned to source enough parts to support WAAS upgrades until the FAA’s mandate hit, which required an approved WAAS GPS position source for connection to the ADS-B Out system. Eventually, WAAS demand fell off, likely because so many GNS units were already upgraded. The replacement GTN series has been in existence since 2011 and updated a couple times, currently to the Xi version.
This isn’t a new story. When I talked with Garmin’s Jim Alpiser at Sun ‘n Fun last spring, he warned that some service parts for the GNS line would become scarce within a year. So one year later, I linked up with Alpiser for a follow-up in this video, where the news isn’t all bad for GNS owners, at least for the foreseeable future.
No matter how you feel about Garmin support, in my estimation there’s really no reason to ditch a GNS if you don’t want to upgrade, but every reason to treat that functioning display right by maintaining the avionics cooling system (heat is a display’s enemy) and having a plan in place for total replacement.
------------------------------------
Garmin To Drop Support of 430/530 Nav/Coms ( Flying Magazine)
When the company runs out of replacement parts, that’s it.
One of the downsides of having the latest aviation technology in your aircraft is that eventually something replaces it, and the factory support you have relied on for years will disappear. The owners of Garmin 430/530 nav/coms are now facing this, as Garmin sent out a service advisory noting that, effective immediately, “display repairs for the WAAS and Non-WAAS GPS 400, GNC 420, and GNS 430 are no longer available and have been discontinued.”
In a statement sent to FLYING, Garmin advised that “due to multiple component availability limitations, comprehensive repair service for Garmin’s GNS 430/530 series is estimated to become limited in the years ahead. This includes all GPS/COM and GPS-only variants, as well as all WAAS models. Initially, these limitations are estimated to impact a small percentage of repairs in 2024.”
The GNS 430/530 was introduced in 1998 and produced until 2011, which included 25 years of repairs.
“We will continue to do so until serviceable components become unavailable,” the company statement said.
Garmin noted that it plans to continue offering repair service when the components required for a specific repair remain available. Database updates and technical support will also remain available.
The company added that products that Garmin must return as unrepairable due to the announced unavailability of repair parts will incur a $500 processing fee per unit.
KOEHLER KORNER March 2024
I teach the EAA SportAir Electricity Workshop all around the country during the fall, winter and spring, having just taught at Lakeland (home of Sun N Fun) in February, and Fremont CA in March, We will be in Norfolk VA in April. Specifically, if you are interested in attending a Workshop, Norfolk over the weekend of April 20-21 we will be offering four courses, Sheet Metal, Fabric Covering, Electrical, and Composites for RV Builders. The facility is a beautiful Tech High School.
Anyway, when I teach the class I give out my e-mail address (rkoehler4@verizon.net) and often get follow-up questions. I would like to share one of those with you this month:
“Hi Dick,
I was a student in your Electrical Systems course in Lakeland, Feb 10-11.
I am flying a Rans S-6 with an ADVANCED AIRCRAFT ELECTRONICS, INC. (http://www.advancedaircraft.com) dipole antenna mounted at a diagonal within the tube and fabric fuselage. It works well even though everything I read seems to point to vertical installation being the best and a curved "C" shape being a runner up.
I am building a Rans S-7 and looking at the AAE comm and transponder antennas. The comm antennas (43” long) would be mounted in a C-shape due to the size of the fuselage, and spaced by 24+ inches. The transponder antenna would is only 5.5” long and would be mounted 6” or so from the first comm antenna.
Do you have any experience with AAE antennas in a tube and fabric aircraft? I appreciate any advice you may offer. I am not opposed to external antennas, but like the idea of a clean aircraft.
Thank you,”
My response follows: “The AAE antenna is a premade dipole antenna designed to be embedded in a composite aircraft. While I have not personally ever worked with an AAE antenna, I have heard nothing bad about them. They have been around for at least 20 years, so I assume they work.
However, putting a dipole antenna in a composite plane requires careful placement. Since VHF comm radio waves are vertically polarized, the antenna should be vertically oriented for best results. Orienting the antenna on a diagonal tilt or bending the ends in a 'C' shape should hurt performance. Also it is usually critically important that the last 1/2 to 2/3 of each pole be away from any metal items such as control cables, hinges, and aircraft structure. Therefore, I am surprised that the antenna in your S-6 works, but I cannot argue with success. If the spacing of the steel tube fuselage formers is greater than the 1/4 wavelength (about 24 inches) of the VHF comm then perhaps the antenna can work, as it seems to be working on your S-6.
Ideally, on most steel tube fuselages, we just externally mount a standard 1/4 wave external antenna on a piece of metal plate or platform attached to the tube fuselage. For these antennas, the metal aircraft structure is ½ of the dipole, and the external antenna is the other half. These antennas work well, and other than the very minor drag, present no particular issues.
Per AC43.13-2B, the drag on the VHF comm antenna on my Mooney at a Vne of 189mph is only 1.3 pounds! On your S-7 at 118mph (normal cruise), the drag calculates as 0.5 pounds! I doubt you can detect it in an on/off flight test.
Ditto this discussion for the transponder antenna, except it should be mounted vertically on the bottom of the fuselage. Do not mount it inside the steel tube fuselage. It will irradiate you! Also, it should be mounted ideally at least 1/4 wave length from the comm antenna, or at least 23.5 inches away. Also, the coaxial cable for the transponder antenna should be no longer than about 8 feet (due to losses), which is why we tend to mount the transponder directly below the box, usually on the forward fuselage on the "boot" cowl area, on the bottom side.
Hope this helps. Get back with any additional questions/issues.”
Hope this little story helps you better lay out the antennas on your plane. The moral is to never mount any antennas on the inside of a metal structure aircraft, such as is shown on the plans of certain metal kit aircraft where the ELT antenna is located in the baggage compartment or in the fairing between the horizontal and vertical tail. They will not work, are in violation of the TSO, and are, hence, an unsafe installation.
Keep building, flying, and maintaining.
February 2024
I get a lot of questions on regulatory stuff, like “How do I get a Repairman’s Certificate?”, or “I lost the paperwork. What do I do?”, or “How do I register my Homebuilt?” The answers to all the questions are technically in the Federal Aviation Regulations, which used to be abbreviated FARs. However, about 30 years ago when many parts of our federal government had no codified system for buying things, the bureaucracy they finally decided that they needed a standardized process, so they adopted the Defense Acquisition Regulations (DAR) and changed the name to FAR, and then told the FAA to change their acronym. At that time, the FAA FAR became Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, or Title 14 CFR, or simply 14 CFR. These are the actual federal laws that we build and fly by, such as Parts 21 (Certification) and 91 (Operation).
To explain the laws, the FAA issues Advisory Circulars (ACs). These ACs are not mandatory and do not constitute regulations. However they do describe an acceptable means, but not necessarily the only means, to comply with the laws. In our case one of the most useful ACs is 20-27G, titled Certification and Operation of Amateur-Built Aircraft. The first major section lists some fourteen major items in the AC, including “What to do and know before building and amateur-built aircraft...”, to “Identifying and marking…”, to “FAA inspection…”, “Flight testing…”, “Amateur-built aircraft built outside the US…”, and “Becoming a Repairman for your amateur-built aircraft…”. Again, the process laid out is not the only way to do things, but is usually the most expedient.
Another very handy AC is 43-13-1B/-2B. This is actually two ACs bound together, the first being “Acceptable Methods, Techniques, and Practices for Aircraft Inspection and Repair” The second is “Acceptable Methods, Techniques, and Practices for Aircraft Alteration”. I have found both of these to be extremely useful as references when building a homebuilt. There are great explanations for construction and repair, such as installing hoses and tubing, electrical systems, and antennas, just to name a few.
A last thought on ACs is that they do not have indexes and often do not have a table of contents, so sometimes finding exact info takes a bit of time. On the other hand if you follow the process listed, the FAA should not have a problem with your work/product.
Back to documents that explain the paperwork process, one other stands out. It is FAA Order 8310.2J titled “Airworthiness Certification of Aircraft”. Think of FAA Orders as procedure manuals that apply to both us and the FAA personnel we may be dealing with. If you follow the procedures listed in the Order, you have a very high probability of successfully completing the process with the FAA. 8310.2J Chapter 4 covers Special Airworthiness Certificates which includes the Experimental Certificates that covers our Amateur-Built aircraft, the proper term that the FAA uses for our homebuilts. By the way, this order also covers Primary Category and Light Sport Aircraft (LSA). It also covers all the other Experimental categories that you might end-up in such Air Racing, Exhibition, and Market Surveys. Chapter 15 is titled “Experimental Purpose of Operating Amateur-Built Aircraft”, Chapter 16 is “Experimental purpose for Primary Kit Built Aircraft”, and Chapter 17 is “Experimental purpose of Operating Light-Sport Aircraft”. Chapter 18 is “Special Flight Permits” and Chapter 20 is “Import Aircraft”.
I most strongly recommend that you take the time to read the applicable sections of 20-27G and 8310.2J, particularly the section on what to do prior to starting a homebuilding project or buying a used homebuilt. Knowledge can be a powerful tool to help you avoid pitfalls that could become extremely expensive.
Hope this little tutorial helps you better understand the paperwork involved with your plane.
Keep building, flying, and maintaining.
The FAA has extended the comment period on an AD that would require the replacement of rudders on almost 31,000 Piper aircraft made before 1974. The issue is explained in the video above produced by Airframes Alaska. In a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in October, the agency ordered every rudder equipped with a rudder post made of 1025 carbon steel be replaced with rudders that have posts made of 4130N low-alloy steel. Piper switched from 1025 to 4130N in 1974. The estimated cost of the rudder replacement is $3,000. The comment period was extended to Feb. 20, 2024.
The AD was issued in response to rudder post failures in a PA-12 and a PA-14 in Alaska in 2020 and 2021, which caused the rudders to fold over parallel to the horizontal stabilizer. In both cases, the pilots were able to land safely and the FAA determined the cause as fatigue failure. Several commenters on the AD, including the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association and the Short Wing Piper Club, asked for the extension to work on their response, saying “it’s controversial and could drive substantial costs, among other things,” according to the FAA notice.
The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for various airplanes modified with a certain configuration of the Garmin GFC 500 Autopilot System installed per Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) No. SA01866WI. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of an un-commanded automatic pitch trim runaway when the autopilot was first engaged. This proposed AD would require updating the applicable Garmin GFC 500 Autopilot System software for your airplane and would prohibit installing earlier versions of that software. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
Aircraft engines, for obvious reasons, are supposed to be reliable, but having one tank is a recurring nightmare for many pilots. How often does it happen? Often enough, but as AVweb’s Paul Bertorelli reveals in this video, the risk is not really as high as many of us imagine and more than half of engine failures are caused by pilot or mechanic mistakes. In this AVweb rewind, we take a look at a video examining the topic published last year.
By Vic Syracuse, EAA Lifetime 180848
This piece originally ran in the January 2024 issue of EAA Sport Aviation magazine.
In the November 2021 issue of EAA Sport Aviation I wrote a column entitled “Cooling Things Down.” It was meant to help builders solve some of their cooling problems by providing some insight into the causes. From several discussions with pilots and owners of aircraft since that column, it’s become clear that not everyone understands the differences between EGTs (exhaust gas temperatures) and CHTs (cylinder head temperatures), and whether they are or are not a problem.
Click the link below to read the article:
History thru: Dec 19th
(Some from AvWeb and other sources)
Most Van’s Customers Agree To Price Increases
About 60 percent of the first Van’s Aircraft customers contacted have immediately agreed to continue with their orders despite an average 32 percent price increase and reduced flexibility in customizing their aircraft. At a bankruptcy court hearing into the company’s Chapter 11 filing on Tuesday, the company reported about 300 of the first 500 customers on the notification list signed new agreements within 24 hours of receiving formal notification from Van’s. There are about 1,000 more emails to be sent and the deadline for agreeing to the new terms is Jan. 15. Those who agree will have any deposits they paid for kits or parts applied to the final cost of their orders. Those who don’t accept the new deal will lose their deposit to the pool of unsecured creditors and will have to try to recoup their money through the bankruptcy creditor disbursement process.
When it informed the court of the price increase plan at a hearing two weeks ago, the company said it estimated that about 70 percent of customers would go for the new deal. KITPLANES reported the company began sending out the notices on Monday. Only those with orders for items produced by Van’s got the notices. Those who put money down on engines, avionics and some other third-party-supplied merchandise did not get notices. Van’s is still taking to the vendors of those goods about the offers to customers.
Update: Dec 14th
CREDITOR DEADLINES SET IN VAN'S AIRCRAFT BANKRUPTCY
Click the following link to read the AOPA article and watch a short video
Dec 9th
VAN’S ANNOUNCES NEW KIT PRICING AND CHANGES TO KITS CONTENTS AND ORDERING POLICIES
Van’s Aircraft has long been known for providing excellent aircraft kits at an affordable price. Over the past few years, the cost of producing airplane kits has soared substantially. Candidly, due to a number of factors we found ourselves operating the business at a loss. Thus, to continue providing the best possible airplane designs and kits, we must increase our prices.
Following an intensive internal assessment and cost review, we are increasing most of our kit prices by approximately 32%. Our online order forms will be updated this weekend with the new kit prices. Prices of individual parts and components will also be increasing, some more than 32%, and others less. While these price changes are significant, they are also necessary. Based upon our review of competitive products, even with these changes Van’s continues to be the value and performance leader in light aircraft manufacturing.
In conjunction with these price changes, Van’s has also instituted new policies related to how we package and sell our kits. Moving forward, Van’s is standardizing our kit offerings. We have reviewed what is included (or not included) in each kit and made a number of changes. In addition, we are implementing a no-deletions policy and revising our kit deposit terms and payment schedule.
The changes to our kit prices and policies apply to new orders, as well as orders that were placed before the company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Van’s will soon communicate with customers who had unfulfilled, open orders about these changes, and give them an opportunity to review our modification to their previous order(s) and to accept the new terms, conditions, and pricing.
Some key changes that we would like to highlight:
Deletion or Addition of Parts from Kits
Van’s will no longer allow the deletion or addition of parts to empennage/tail, wing, fuselage, and finish kits. Historically, Van’s allowed customers to make numerous additions, deletions, modifications, and customizations to each kit order (whether a standard or quick build kit). This led to a substantial variance in the number of kits that could be picked, crated, and shipped per day, which ultimately impacted our purchasing, planning, costs, and revenue. Thus, we can no longer continue these practices. Please note that many kits have several options which can be selected on the kit order forms. You can, of course, choose from those options; however, Van’s will no longer allow deletions of individual parts or additions of extra parts in a kit shipment. Customers can always order any additional parts/items they need via our web store or by phone; however, these orders will be packaged and shipped separately from the crated kit. Again, these changes are necessary for efficient warehouse operations and will help ensure that Van’s can deliver kits and parts to all customers in a timely and cost-effective manner.
New Deposit Terms and Schedule
Moving forward for new kit orders, a deposit equal to 35% of the order amount must be received to complete any kit, engine, or propeller order. Until Van’s has received this deposit, an order is considered pending. If Van’s has not received a deposit within 14 days of an order being submitted, the pending order will be canceled without further notice. (Note: Customers who purchase parts or kits from Van’s will need to review, sign, and return our current purchase contract and waiver and release of liability agreements. Van’s must have these on file prior to placing a pending order, or shipping any kits or parts.)
New Customer Deposit Account
Deposits received for kits will be held in our newly established customer deposit account, which is not used for Van’s general operating expenses. Your kit deposit will remain in the customer deposit account until we start to manufacture, source, and or assemble the components of your kit. At that time, we will send you a “Notice of Production Commencement” and thereafter, we will move your deposit from the customer deposit account into Van’s operating account. Approximately 60 days before we crate your kit, we will contact you to let you know that you are within our “Kit Crating Window” and you will be given 14 days to submit the remaining balance due for your order. More details on the timing of deposits and payments are set forth in the purchase agreement that you will need to sign as part of placing your order.
For example:
The goal of implementing these changes is to improve Van’s for both its customers and employees. We appreciate your support and look forward to continuing our mission to provide incredible, achievable, total-performance airplane kits – and helping you fulfill your goal of building and flying the airplane of your dreams.
Updated Dec 7
Van’s Aircraft owes a lot of creditors relatively modest amounts of money, according to legal filings relating to the case. In its bankruptcy petition, the company says it owes from $10 to $50 million, but the top 20 creditors listed on its bankruptcy petition are only owed a combined total of $1.474 million. The balance is owed to 25,000-50,000 creditors. The distribution of the balance of the debt beyond the top 20 isn’t included in the filing. There is some positive news for those owed money. Van’s says on the filing it expects to have funds “available for distribution to unsecured creditors.”
The largest single creditor is Lycoming, which is owed $598,323. Metal supplier Pacific Metal Company, of Tualatin, Oregon, is on the hook for $219,640.62 and Hartzell has $130,056.34 on its books. Number 4 on the list is a legal settlement to an individual in Texas in the amount of $87,500.02. Van’s was required to list the top 20 creditors in its filing and most of the remaining 16 on the list are businesses that provide goods or services to Van’s. The amounts owed range from $63,889.28 for No. 5 to $35,428.90 for the No. 20 creditor.
Van’s Bankruptcy: How Did It Get Here?
(By Marc Cook - Kitplanes/Flying)
The company has been the largest and most successful in its segment.
Van’s Aircraft filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection this week begs the question: How can the largest and most successful company in the kit-aircraft world find itself in this situation? With more than 11,000 RVs flying and record kit sales over the last three years, it seemed Van’s was set for success.
But countering the success of the company’s designs and their unprecedented popularity were challenges compounded by the COVID pandemic, a failure by a key supplier and missteps of its own. Monday’s Chapter 11 filing gives some clues to the situation Van’s faces that pushed the company into a form of bankruptcy that most often precedes a reorganization and recovery. (Van’s is not liquidating. Chapter 11 is designed to give a company some relief from liabilities and enable a reorganization into a sustainable business.)
In the Chapter 11 declaration is this summary: “Until recently Van’s operated successfully without bank loans or other lines of credit, relying on customer deposits and earnings for its working capital.” But then Van’s faced “a combination of unforeseen, significant events occurring over a relatively short period of time increased Debtor’s [Van’s Aircraft’s] costs, doubled its normal inventory levels, slowed deliveries, and strained Debtor’s cash flow to the breaking point.” Support from founder Dick VanGrunsven since September has kept the company afloat.
One could argue that Van’s trouble started with an issue regarding quickbuild kits. The offshore constructor failed to adequately corrosion-proof parts of the assembly, which led Van’s to a time-consuming side project to understand the nature of the problem and its scope, and construct a remedy. The issue is described in the declaration as a “multi-million-dollar setback” for Van’s. Moreover, it contributed to a growing backlog in ordered kits and extended delivery times for customers.
At the same time, there was unprecedented demand for kits during the early stages of COVID. (In fact, the entire homebuilt industry witnessed a surge in popularity, with all major kit manufacturers reporting greatly increased sales in 2020 and 2021.) For Van’s, kit sales rose from 1594 during 2019 (already a very good number for the company) to 2508 in 2020 and 3982 in 2021. According to the filing, revenue actually decreased from $31.5 million in 2019 to $31.1 million in 2020, despite a 1000-unit increase in orders. Van’s didn’t get the bulk of the kit payment until shipment. In 2021, however, the big increases in order began to show up in revenue, increasing to $37.6 million in 2021 and $52.6 million in 2022. Net income, as described in the declaration, was $2.6 million in 2019, $3 million in 2020, but dropped to $2.1 million in 2021 as investments to increase capacity began to appear in the financials. In 2022, Van’s net income turned red, with a loss of $3.3 million; it lost $1 million through the end of August this year against revenues of $43 million.
It’s important to understand that Van’s was already operating at or near capacity in 2019. Along with technical changes to the kits over time that placed more work at the factory (steps the builder would not have to perform, an expectation in the modern kit-aircraft world), Van’s found itself with greatly increased demand and set about finding ways to meet it.
Because the vast majority of the company’s kit parts are known as “pre-punched” parts and the machines that do the punching formed the production roadblock, Van’s looked for ways to increase capacity by outsourcing some of this step. One way was to have the parts normally punched instead have their holes cut by a laser. This is a common method for automating manufacture of sheet metal parts, along with CNC routers, punches and water-jet cutting. In fact, Van’s had been using laser cutting for some parts and then elected to laser-cut more of them.
Builders began to notice that some laser-cut parts would crack during the dimpling process—where the metal is formed for the purpose of installing flush rivets—and that eventually started Van’s engineering department down the path of discovering why this was happening. Many builders felt that Van’s was slow to acknowledge the problem and that by the time it did, there was a significant quantity of laser-cut parts out in the world. Van’s turned its full attention to the problem and identified the parts in question—more recently, they were able to far more accurately predict which specific airplane kits were likely to have the suspect parts. Latest estimates are that some 1800 kits are affected.
These issues would challenge many companies but they were compounded by other events, as the declaration shows. “Van’s order file doubled in the 2020 and 2021 period. At the same time, supply chain issues, and supplier shutdowns slowed productions of key components, increasing back orders and delaying order completions, requiring Debtor to hire and train more staff. Wages increased, and shipping costs rose more than four-fold during this period. Stated simply, without realizing it, Debtor was selling a high volume of aircraft kits below its cost. The combination of all these factors overstressed Van’s workforce, operating support systems and management skills resulting in a series of one-off but very costly errors.” The declaration also notes that, “Some of its senior employees with deep familiarity with both office and manufacturing process workings chose to retire during COVID.”
The picture painted is of a company overwhelmed by overlapping challenges, started by the primer issue with quickbuild kits and followed closely by a global pandemic that simultaneously cut into its manufacturing capacity, dramatically increased costs and, perhaps ironically, also greatly boosted demand. That in the effort to catch up with demand the company also lost track of internal costs and failed to increase kit prices (as one remedy) is one inescapable takeaway from the factual descriptions in the Chapter 11 declaration—and a good indication of the remedies needed to define its path forward.
******
Another viewpoint on Van's problems from AOPA's Dave Hirschman.
“I realize that the term ‘bankruptcy’ is shocking,” Van’s Aircraft founder Richard VanGrunsven said in a videoreleased December 4. “However, the key word here is reorganization, which implies continued operation and improvement. Our doors will remain open and we will continue to work hard to serve our customers.”
The 51-year-old Oregon firm will immediately raise kit prices about 32 percent, and parts prices are likely to rise even more than that, company officials said.
Customers with kits on order will have the option of paying the new higher prices, or canceling their orders and seeking refunds through the bankruptcy court process as unsecured creditors. Such creditors typically receive only partial refunds.
Hamstreet and Associates founder Clyde Hamstreet, the leader of a “team of turnaround specialists,” said in the December 4 video that customers who have placed orders “will be sent an email that will take them to a portal with the details of their existing order, the amount of their deposits, and Van’s proposed modifications. Van’s will apply the full-prior dollar amount of deposits and payments to the modified kit orders. Treatment of deposits made on engines, propellers, and avionics will be determined later.”
Hamstreet said he is optimistic the court will approve a reorganization plan, which the company expects to file in the next 90 days. “This is expected to be a short, quick case.”
The current interim management team headed by Mikael Via, former CEO of kit manufacturer Glasair, will remain in place at Van’s Aircraft. Via headed Glasair from 2001 to 2011 when the firm was sold to a Chinese conglomerate, and he has worked as an independent consultant since then. Via is credited with turning Glasair around with the Two Weeks to Taxi program that brought customers to the company’s Washington factory to build airplanes rapidly under expert supervision. Since then, the program has been emulated by other kit aircraft firms.
Van’s was founded in 1972 by VanGrunsven, a plain-spoken and widely respected pilot and engineer who designed and flew a series of all-metal, low-wing aircraft with unmatched versatility. More than 11,250 Van’s “RV” kits have been finished, registered, and flown around the world, and the company’s latest model, the high-wing RV–15 made for backcountry flying, has created a great deal of interest among potential builders and pilots.
Van’s seemed poised to grow rapidly during and after the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic when kit orders surged by 250 percent. The company hired many new employees, purchased new equipment, and enlarged its network of subcontractors around the world to meet surging demand. But quality control appears to have suffered.
First, many Van’s quick-build kits assembled in the Philippines had to be recalled when a new type of primer was found to cause corrosion. Then a switch from physically drilling holes in metal parts to cutting them with lasers led to cracking in some instances and a crisis in confidence among builders—many of whom demanded refunds or replacement kits.
The famously conservatively managed firm faced an unprecedented cash crunch as it doled out massive refunds while its costs ballooned, its backlog swelled, and new kit deliveries languished.
VanGrunsven, who had long since retired from day-to-day management, personally loaned the company money in an effort to get it through the crisis. But on October 27, the founder announced more drastic steps had to be taken to put the company back on a path to profitability. The new Van’s management team made a two-week assessment of its financial position, held a companywide meeting on December 4, and announced its Chapter 11 reorganization plan.
The Chapter 11 filing is sure to be a bitter disappointment to its founder, employees, customers, suppliers, and creditors. But if bankruptcy protection works, as it has for many other aviation firms, Van’s Aircraft can gain breathing room, attract new investors, and survive and even prosper.
Several Van’s Aircraft models are likely to fall under the FAA’s proposed new
CLICK BELOW FOR SHORT VIDEO:
Van's Internal Assessment Update - Monday November 20
A brief update regarding the company's internal assessment and review and progress made.
Update: November 10, 2023
Laser Cut Parts List updated; Service Letter SL-00091 published
Van’s Aircraft has published an updated Laser Cut Parts List (R6), which reflects further analysis on parts manufacturing dates and reclassifies certain parts.
Tom Scott is a well known blogger. He recently rode in our new Wright B Flyer. Here is the video he put together. I have been working the project for about 8 years and just finished the flight test program last month.
SB 00036 has a new Rev, Rev 3 (2/28/2023)
Van's has issued a a newer Service Bulletin SB-00036 - Rev 3 for virtually all Van's aircraft. Inspection or repair is MANDATORY in the next 25 flight hours or the next annual inspection whichever is earlier.
Thanks to years of EAA’s advocacy efforts, the FAA has unveiled a new program for the use of off-the-shelf parts in type-certificated aircraft. This is the first approval granted under the new Vintage Aircraft Replacement and Modification Article (VARMA) program, the next big step in keeping vintage aircraft flying.
Anyone who owns and operates vintage aircraft knows that finding parts can be a major challenge. This situation is especially frustrating when perfectly safe and functional alternatives are readily available, but can’t be used because there’s been no legal way to install them in a type-certificated aircraft. With VARMA in place, some aspects of vintage aircraft ownership and operation are about to get a lot simpler.
Notably, VARMA uses several existing FAA policies to create a program that requires no new regulations, orders, or advisory circulars. It applies to small (less than 12,500 pounds) type-certificated aircraft built before 1980. The program allows ordinary maintenance personnel to validate that certain low-risk replacement parts are suitable for installation on aircraft, without the need for extensive engineering analysis or complex and time-consuming design and production approvals from the FAA.
"This is great news for those of us who own and fly vintage aircraft,” said Jack Pelton, EAA’s CEO and chairman of the board. “There could easily come a time when a classic airplane that would otherwise be grounded for want of a part that’s no longer available will fly again thanks to the parts substitution enabled by VARMA.”
The program applies to parts whose failure would not “prevent continued safe flight and landing.” While this means that safety-critical components are not subject to this program, there are plenty of hard-to-find parts that meet VARMA’s criteria.
For the trial, EAA chose to apply for an off-the-shelf starter solenoid used as a substitute part in a Cessna 150, as the failure of the starter system is generally irrelevant to flight safety. The FAA granted the first Form 337 approval under the program several weeks later. Since that time, we’ve also been granted approval for alternators and voltage regulators in VFR aircraft.
There are many more parts that are eligible under VARMA. For the time being, the FAA will be primarily managing the program through its Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, which can be reached at 847-294-7357, but VARMA is supported all the way to the highest levels of the agency. At this time approvals will be considered on an individual basis, although type clubs and ownership groups are encouraged to keep track of substitute parts that have gained approval.
“EAA has had a longstanding commitment to maintainability and modernization in the legacy aircraft community,” said Tom Charpentier, EAA’s government relations director. “Our EFIS and autopilot STCs broke new ground in affordable avionics, and it is our hope that VARMA opens many new doors for easily found replacement parts. As with the STC programs, we blazed the trail with the first application. Now we’re excited to see the program grow in the GA community.”
An Expert Introduction to Airworthiness Directives
FAA ADs are ‘legally enforceable rules’ that every pilot should pay attention to.
By Richard Scarbrough (from Flying Magazine)
September 15, 2022
There is no escaping the airworthiness directive. If you are associated with aircraft in any manner, it will affect you. Sam pulls the white plastic lid off his cup of coffee, and the aromatic vapors hit him with full force. As is customary, he will gripe about the quality of FBO breakroom coffee but drink it anyway. It continues to baffle him how some of the younger staff stops at that Java ‘n Juice boutique joint, plunk down seven bucks for a mocha-jingo-whatever, and then leave it half consumed all around the hangar. Not him, only strong black coffee in Styrofoam cups will do. As maintenance manager, he needs the caffeine to face the daily tasks before him. He hears the owner, Ms. Chambers, coming down the hall; her unmistakable heels clack on the ceramic tile floor. She finds him leaning against the breakroom doorframe and says, “I need to see you in my office, please.” Great, what now? Slowly making his way upstairs, he finds his boss pacing behind her large desk and pressing her fingers to her lips in deep thought. He sits and crosses his legs.
“The FSDO called. They may want to stop by and talk to us,” she finally says. “There has been an incident.” A Beechcraft Baron had an engine shutdown in flight after coming out of a competing repair station across the field. The magnetos seized, and the engine lost the ignition spark. Thankfully, the pilot could feather the prop and get the aircraft to an airport, landing safely. After inspecting the logbooks, it appeared that the shop returning the airplane to service missed an airworthiness directive (AD). With concern on her face, the owner looks at her maintenance manager and says, “How can you be sure we catch all the ADs and that nothing slips through the cracks?” He can tell she’s serious. Sitting upright in the chair, Sam leans forward on his elbows and returns a confident look to his boss. “Because I make it mission critical that every applicable AD gets actioned,” he says. “Diane, I have staked my entire career on it.”
The 30,000-Foot View
Please permit me a bit of housekeeping before we get too deep into today’s lesson. This column introduces some of you to aircraft maintenance theories, practices, and techniques. It is a 30,000-foot view of a shop, hangar, and line operations. Others who have worked in the business for a long time may also benefit from these discussions by refreshing their skills, recalling similar experiences, or even learning a new trick or two. See “continuous improvement” in the policies and procedure handbook. Many of the topics may be familiar to you, and some you could be seeing for the first time.
There is usually more to the story. With each article, I provide links to enable you to take a deeper dive into the content I present here. Please take the time to click them and glance over the material. It is an excellent backup to our discussion. Again, we are here to chat about aircraft maintenance. This space is a discussion, not a one-sided conversation. If you have questions or comments, please email me at editorial@flying.media. Thank you, now, let’s return to your regularly scheduled programming.
Three Types of ADs
The FAA issues ADs whenever there is an unsafe condition with an aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance. The three types of ADs are:
1. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), followed by a Final Rule
2. Final Rule; Request for Comments
And yes, everything we discuss in “Maintaining Your Airplane” is grounded in the federal aviation regulations (FARs). I bet you are dying to know which one covers airworthiness directives. The section of the Code of Federal Regulations that encompasses the FARs in question is none other than Title 14 / Chapter I / Subchapter C / Part 39. Would you like to know what it says? A summary: “FAA’s airworthiness directives are legally enforceable rules.”
ADs are constantly in the news. Earlier this year, FLYING’s technical editor Meg Godlewski penned a piece concerning vintage Piper models. Just last month, editor-in-chief Julie Boatman made everyone aware that the FAA has opened the comment period on a nose-gear AD for the Tecnam P2006T. There is no escaping the airworthiness directive. If you are associated with aircraft in any manner—new or old—it will affect you.
An Art Form
Diane had good reason to be concerned. Researching, pulling, and clearing ADs is somewhat of an art form. The FAA decommissioned the Regulatory and Guidance Library (RGL) on August 16, 2022. The information transitioned to the new web space Dynamic Regulatory System (DRS), which includes access to ADs. I will reserve judgment for now, but please try it out and let me know your thoughts.
The FAA also allows you to sign up for a subscription to ADs and other airworthiness information. The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) tracks and distributes ADs as well, such as the one covering certain Continental magnetos: AD 2022-16-03.
The FAA is not the sole source when pulling ADs. A service like Tdata.com can help you stay abreast of them as well. President/CEO Jim Thomas states that his product references applicable service bulletins to streamline the action of clearing ADs. That certainly could have helped the maintenance provider across the field. Let’s check with Diane and Sam and see what they found out.
Missing a Service Bulletin?
So, what caused all the drama earlier? A neighboring maintenance provider serviced a Beechcraft Baron equipped with IO-550-C powerplants and a Continental ignition system. During the visit, they missed Continental Critical Service Bulletin CSB673C. Missing a service bulletin is not good, especially when that CSB becomes an AD. According to Continental Aerospace CSB673C, “The supplier of Continental Part No. 10-400561, Bearing, Roller, has identified one lot of the roller bearings was delivered to Continental with a light corrosion preventive lubricant rather than the specified translucent white grease. Affected magnetos assembled without the properly lubricated roller bearing have a potential to overheat, causing accelerated wear in the contact and cam follower.” That would not be fun if a magneto overheats in flight. The feds felt that the Continental Aero CSB addressing the magneto bearing situation was dire enough to issue an AD. On July 29, 2022, AD 2022-16-03, Project Identifier AD-2022-00614-E, went live on the Federal Register. The AD became effective on August 15, 2022. My Tdata subscription alerted me to this AD on July 28, 2022, the day before the notice went live.
I hope you’ve enjoyed this introduction to ADs. Please join me in sending a big thank you to our fictional characters, Sam and Diane, for being good sports about the FSDO calling. A visit from the FAA is nothing to be scared of if you are all squared away. Keep abreast of airworthiness directives, and manage your business—or your airplane—accordingly.
About the Author: Richard Scarbrough
Richard is a US Navy Veteran, A&P Mechanic, and Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University graduate. His experience ranges from general and corporate aviation to helicopters, business jets, and commercial airliners. Former owner of a 145 repair station, he's currently a Technical Analyst for a major airline and MRO in Atlanta, Georgia. Send your thoughts and questions to: editorial@flying.media.
After reading the previous article, do you think ADs Apply to Homebuilts? Yes or No? Because you have an E-AB aircraft and you don't think you need to comply AD's you just might be wrong. Please read this article from Kitplanes Magazine. It's an excellent analysis of what needs to be considered.
Among the many effects of the supply chain problems in the summer of 2022, aviation discovered that it was having a difficult time functioning without a simple commodity—the oil filter. Lycoming and Continental engines everywhere needed spin-on, disposable oil filters to keep flying, and the supply was extremely limited. KITPLANES research found that Champion had effectively stopped production—though it is now ramping back up—while Tempest was going at their normal production rate and trying mightily to increase it to meet demand. But Tempest simply couldn’t double its production overnight, so suppliers’ shelves emptied as aircraft owners quickly bought up every filter they could find. Remember the toilet paper shortages in the early days of COVID? Yeah, it was sort of like that.
Click below to read the entire article
The FAA has signed supplemental type certificates to allow General Aviation Modifications Inc.’s 100-octane unleaded fuel (G100UL) to be used in every general spark-ignition engine and every airframe powered by those engines. The move was hailed by the GA industry as a major step in the transition to an unleaded future. The FAA’s approval of the use of G100UL fuel in all piston aircraft directly addresses the industry's long-standing goal of finding unleaded solutions that can be used for the entire GA piston fleet.
“Congratulations to GAMI on this achievement, which is another initial step toward a goal we all want – an unleaded fuel for general aviation,” said Jack J. Pelton, EAA CEO and Chairman of the Board. “This is a significant accomplishment that opens the door to the hard work that remains to create a commercial pathway and acceptance across the broad spectrum of GA aircraft.”
In 2021 the FAA approved STCs for GAMI covering a smaller number of Cessna 172 engines and airframes, and then expanded those STC approved model list (AML) to include essentially all lower-compression engines. Though that was seen as an encouraging step forward in the years-long path to supply unleaded aviation fuel to the piston aircraft fleet, the STC’s did not include aircraft needing the higher-octane fuel that accounts for approximately two-thirds of avgas consumption. Today’s announcement by the FAA addresses the needs of those higher-compression engines.
GAMI co-founder George Braly said, “This is a big day for the industry. It means that for a lot of our general aviation communities, and especially for a high fraction on the West Coast, relief is on the way. And it means that our industry will be able to go into the future and prosper, and provide the essential infrastructure for this country for everything from Angel Flights to critical training of our future airline pilots.”
Braly thanked the GA community for its support through this long process. “Without it we couldn’t have gotten this done,” he said. GAMI’s Braly has said that Ann Arbor, Michigan-based fuel supplier AvFuel is standing by to manage the logistics and distribution of G100UL, and said he is open to partnerships. “Our arrangement is that any qualified refiner or blender of existing aviation fuels will be eligible to produce and sell it subject to the quality assurance requirements that the FAA has approved,” he said.
The timing for when G100UL will reach airports is still uncertain. “It’s going to take a while to manage the infrastructure including manufacturing and distribution," Braly said. The supply chain “is still a very wounded infrastructure and that’s not going to make the process any easier, but we have a handle on how to do this, and with the support of the major players I think we can do that. It’s going to be limited to begin with, but it can be ramped up rapidly,” he said.
Pelton noted that certain regions, such as the West Coast, are priorities to receive approval as soon as practical. Some California municipalities, for instance, prematurely banned the sale of leaded avgas and threatened a safe and smart transition to unleaded. “There is a process in place for a safe transition to unleaded fuel for the GA fleet,” Pelton said. “Let’s keep forging ahead on that path in a unified fashion, rather than a patchwork of local ordinances that will only set political hurdles in front of the ultimate goal.”
While the cost of the fuel has not been determined, Braly said the small batch production process that will initially mark the arrival of G100UL at airports means that the fuel will cost slightly more than leaded avgas. “Small volume batches cost money,” he said. “Until we can get [production] revved up that we’re making millions of gallons at a time, there will be an incremental cost," he said.
“It’s not going to be unreasonable,” Braly added. “Pilots in America will not be paying what they’re paying for avgas in Europe today.” Owners can also expect to see engines that operate more efficiently. “I think the days of cleaning spark plugs every 50 hours are going to be behind us for good,” Braly said.
Swift Fuels Inc., an Indiana based company, has received FAA approval for its 94-octane unleaded fuel, and has expanded its distribution, particularly to the West Coast. Swift Fuels’ 94-octane fuel meets some, but not all, of the demand of aircraft with lower-compression engines. The company is developing a 100R unleaded fuel with more than 10 percent renewable content.
In addition, two fuel candidates are currently in the EAGLE/PAFI testing process.
All fuel manufacturers continue to be encouraged to follow through with their own formulations, Pelton said. “Innovation and multiple options have always been a key to ultimate success, so we welcome any and all ideas to bring unleaded fuel to the marketplace for general aviation.”
Care and feeding of the only things between you and the ground.
While generally round and black in color, that’s almost all the characteristics aircraft tires have in common with their automotive siblings. In fact, a major difference is the construction and materials used in their manufacture. Aircraft tires and tubes primarily incorporate natural rubber while automotive tires use synthetic compounds extensively. Aircraft tires are designed for a very specific job and are part of the landing gear system on almost every aircraft.
Credit to AvWeb for this excellent article
Following a request from EAA and AOPA, the FAA has released a policy that will make it easier for some owners of experimental aircraft to obtain special flight permits (SFPs) for their airplanes in order to reposition them for condition inspections.
The advent of the FAA's shift to an electronic airworthiness certification process can be daunting, but it need not be! DAR Arnold Holmes, our "local" DAR can explain what you need to get your aircraft certified. Arnold Holmes is a Private pilot, an A&P Mechanic with Inspection Authorization (IA), and a Designated Airworthiness Representative (DAR). He is a member of EAA and has over 25 years in aviation. Arnold runs DAR-Certification Services at the Leesburg Airport.
Check out his website at https://dar-certification.com.
ENJOY!