C ICEY Posted October 6, 2013 Report Share Posted October 6, 2013 This is strange. I am on the wet side of the mountains in BC, and my 2003 CT2k has seen several full seasons stored out of doors and subjected to considerable freeze thaw cycles and occasionally to moisture trapped underneath wing covers in a full range of temperatures. I have only seen a few minor spots where a small pinhole has allowed water into the foam resulting in a small dent. This may have been precipitated by minor hailstone impact. I have sealed the pinholes and the dents have so far not expanded. I do have a small patch of foam deterioration on my stabilator, but nothing like I see in your photos. I also have some experience with observing carbon fibre sandwich repairs, as once upon a time I was forced into a slightly long landing on a rather short golf hole. A very skilled flight Designs engineer from E Germany named Gerhard ...?.......(I'm away from home right now but can get you more information when I get back) did an exceptional job of a major structural repair on the fuselage and some minor patching on the wings. He also came back to do an amazing refinishing of a classic Libelle 301 sailplane. Yours look to be surfaces that can be readily brought back into 100% condition by a duly trained tech. the source of the trouble, though appears to defy explanation, I couldn't tell you what the cost might be though to get it airworthy, although you might be able to ship the parts for refinishing. I'm not sure if Gerhard still travels, but he certainly loved coming over to Canada and wasn't exorbitant in cost. mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floats Posted October 6, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2013 Thanks Mike. When a Russian or Ukrainian technician came to install my floats, he also did extraordinary carbon fiber work on the firewall. The skills of their repair people are amazing. I wish the skills of their factory people were the same. One of the blog member indicated that before 2010 , the fabrication process had not been standardized, so I wonder if I caught the lemon of the year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted October 7, 2013 Report Share Posted October 7, 2013 Do you have records showing that you bought the composiclean? I would also recommend showing that you have less than 100 hrs on the plane, showing them the storage records, and receipts that you bought the composiclean. See if you have any luck that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted October 7, 2013 Report Share Posted October 7, 2013 Do you have records showing that you bought the composiclean? I would also recommend showing that you have less than 100 hrs on the plane, showing them the storage records, and receipts that you bought the composiclean. See if you have any luck that way. The Composiclean cleaning kit used to be delivered with the airplanes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floats Posted October 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 7, 2013 The kit was indeed delivered with the airplane. I have all the documentation to justify the indoor hangar. But what is the point. How do I run after a company based in Germany. FD does not have a representative in Canada anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlennM Posted October 9, 2013 Report Share Posted October 9, 2013 ...How do I run after a company based in Germany. FD does not have a representative in Canada anymore. I would plan to go to the Sebring LSA show early next year. I met the CEO of FD in Sebring (Mathias something?) a couple of years ago and discussed my problem with him and Tom Peghiny from FDUSA. They followed through with every word of our agreement and my problem was resolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floats Posted October 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 Upon seeing the attached video Flight Design USA and Flight Design Germany informed me that it was not safe to fly without changing the parts. FD USA told me that the plane might have been delivered with the defect but does not take responsibility. As there is no rep in Canada, there does not seem to be many recourses Rene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 That seems, on the surface, to be quite a black mark against the company. Mistakes happen, but a good company will always strive to make things right. Sorry for your plight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 Hi Floats, I have never seen anything like that. That's unbelievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 Wow, it's like the surfaces are just made of heavy paper. I hate to say it, but it might be time to contact a product liability attorney, if FD is really being this unresponsive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 What the crap? This isn't just core damage. Depending on the timeframe, I don't think this is just delamination, I think this is the epoxy itself breaking down. It depends on how long this has been going on for, and how uniform it has been... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Koerner Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 It looks like the foam core has been completely dissolved out of these areas. What is left is just the thin carbon fiber inner and outer surfaces. A sandwich construction depends on the core for stiffness. I don't think I would need Flight Design to tell me this is not airworthy. Mike Koerner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 Both areas are in the water spray which would get wet constantly. Maybe the CT or that year CT was not meant or designed well enough to with stand constant water and who knows exactly what may be in some water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 It looks like the foam core has been completely dissolved out of these areas. What is left is just the thin carbon fiber inner and outer surfaces. A sandwich construction depends on the core for stiffness. I don't think I would need Flight Design to tell me this is not airworthy. Mike Koerner Carbon fiber and fiberglass, even just one layer, is still very stiff if just the core broke down. It shouldn't be crinkling... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 Both areas are in the water spray which would get wet constantly. Maybe the CT or that year CT was not meant or designed well enough to with stand constant water and who knows exactly what may be in some water. Has Flight Design ever prohibited or recommended against a CT being float mounted? If not, you may have a case of an "implied warranty for fitness of purpose" or something like that, as Andy suggests. A plane tied down outside in the Pacific Northwest may spend a fair percentage of its life wet. Water should not, by itself, dissolve an airplane! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floats Posted October 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 The floats were sold and installed by Flight Design. They issued a POH for CTSW on floats. Rene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 The floats were sold and installed by Flight Design. They issued a POH for CTSW on floats. Rene Then my layman's opinion is that they owe you a new plane. Then use yours as an engineering study to get to the root of the problem. That simply should not happen to a 6 or 7 year old airplane. And this should be an object lesson to those all gushy about composites being somehow "best" - other construction methods do have one advantage - they have stood the test of time. This from someone who has owned metal, tube & fabric and composite planes, with my current ride being a composite of the same vintage as floats'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 Both areas are in the water spray which would get wet constantly. Maybe the CT or that year CT was not meant or designed well enough to with stand constant water and who knows exactly what may be in some water. If that is the case, FD should not approve the airplane for use with floats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 Again, I want to make a point that we don't know who floats is. I'm keeping a healthy amount of skepticism. So far I've only seen the results of a number of possible causes. Floats, we really need to see very highly detailed photos of cross sections. The tail strake doesn't have a core, but i am very interested in seeing that stabilator. If you cut into it and see an intact core, that would prove the epoxy breakdown theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floats Posted October 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 I personally have no theory. Jacques, a senior member of this forum has seen it and does not understand what goes on. I am reluctant to cut anything myself. I might check with the safety board of Canada that analyses the causes of plane accidents if they would look into this. They should be happy to do prevention for once. Rene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacques Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 Hi all, yep..it was pretty 'scary'' to smash the fin and elevator like this.. That's my hands that you see on the video. for Anticept...René (floats) is an experienced sailor who sailed many oceans and KNOWS how to handle and take care of float plane.. I know that plane since day ONE when René took delivery in 2007 and we ferried it accross Canada.(on wheels) . Then a FD technician flew from Ukraine to install the amphibs floats . (late fall 2007) for the info,,,the floats are CZAW (Zenair) 1350 amphibs sold WITH the plane In 2008.. the plane stayed in the climate controled hangar where it spend every winter since then. Since 2009. the plane is used on floats and NEVER slept on the water. The only 'cleaner/wax' used was the Composiclean supplied with the plane . I would be curious to use a a borescope and look the Inside of the elevator. On the video you see only the left side of the elevator....that's because the right side is OK ... for now. the plane has less that 100 hrs (including the 22 hrs ferry flight on wheels. so,not much with the floats THAT PLANE WAS NOT ABUSED and IT WAS WELL TAKEN CARE OF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 Hi Jacques! I mean no disrespect to anyone, but I don't know anyone here either. I am not accusing floats of not knowing how to handle and store the plane, I am simply stating that I am withholding judgement until I have more information. We're blasting the manufacturer about a defect, which could very well be true, but past experience and wisdom dictates that everything should be examined. Anyways, the epoxy, methods, and materials used in aircraft is different than that in boats and cars. They have similarities, but they also have different chemical stabilities and vulnerabilities. Being a boater will lend credit to floats, but not everything is the same . Floats, can you at least remove the tail strake then, and take video and pictures? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WmInce Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 Let's hope Flight Design does the right thing. Many eyes are watching. Perspective purchasers are also watching and interested to see where it goes from here. How far will Flight Design go to stand behind their product? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacques Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 They have similarities, but they also have different chemical stabilities and vulnerabilities. . that's right,,,and that's the manufacturer duty to put the right material at the right place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 that's right,,,and that's the manufacturer duty to put the right material at the right place. Agreed. Still though, we really need to see the inside of the damage... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.