But, you know what, I have had customers who dismantle the product so they can swap over the part on which the S/N sticker is, so they can send something back under warranty Not knowing the S/N is also held in a FLASH chip inside… and the other day I got this from one of Switzerland’s most reputable industrial companies!
That reminds me on similar situation I had. A reputable Croatian bank tried to increase processing capability of our software, which they haven’t paid for, by changing configuration file without realizing it was digitally signed. Of course the software didn’t work reporting tampering with the configuration. They were embarrassed and offended at the same time, accusing us for the luck of trust because they just “wanted to try” increased performance without commercially using it.
This whole story is a nightmare. A nightmare for the founder, the employees, the creditors, the builders and wannabes, and customers like myself having paid a hefty deposit for either an engine, or prop, or combination of.
A difficult pill to swallow is the tone used in some of Van’s latest communication, excerpt of Questions & Answers:
Although our testing proved that laser-cut parts are functionally equivalent to punched parts, the belief among many builders is that they are unsuitable for use. This has resulted in an unmanageable number of requests to replace laser-cut parts and cancel orders. More than 1,800 customers are currently affected by this issue, some of whom have received more than one kit.
Reading across the lines, greedy builders not willing to build using cracking laser cut parts iso the punched parts they ordered are now being held responsible for the company’s demise… really?
A few builders have been posting vids of their build, and some of those go towards explaining the amplitude of the problem. One thing we all have to realize is that whilst most of these builders are economically doing ok, not many are in the well off category. Building your own aircraft is often a way to alleviate acquisition and running costs in owning and operating an aircraft.
I really feel for all those who now had their dream shattered by a company that for too many years just spent too much time navel-gazing.
Dan wrote:
A difficult pill to swallow is the tone used in some of Van’s latest communication, excerpt of Questions & Answers:
Although our testing proved that laser-cut parts are functionally equivalent to punched parts, the belief among many builders is that they are unsuitable for use. This has resulted in an unmanageable number of requests to replace laser-cut parts and cancel orders. More than 1,800 customers are currently affected by this issue, some of whom have received more than one kit.
Reading across the lines, greedy builders not willing to build using cracking laser cut parts iso the punched parts they ordered are now being held responsible for the company’s demise… really?
Absolutely.
Once a company starts slagging off its customers like that then you know there’s a real problem. The fact that such a statement is made after new leadership comes in does not bode well.
Reading across the lines, greedy builders not willing to build using cracking laser cut parts iso the punched parts they ordered are now being held responsible for the company’s demise… really?
The whole thing definitely is sad and constantly passing the blame to everyone else except themselves (e.g. third party vendors, builders) will tarnish their reputation regardless of the outcome.
It appears the new blame is uncontrollable inflation. That definitely was/is a factor but also could have been managed properly. People warned Van’s YEARS ago about the dangers of grossly overselling their manufacturing capabilities. They should have halted all new customers and empennage kits until they caught up. Instead I remember them saying how they were focusing on pushing out empennage kits, like they knew they would be creating a “captive customer”.
I saw several aircraft parts manufacturers that halted orders due to backlogs. I suspect they are not on the verge of bankruptcy.
Reading across the lines, greedy builders not willing to build using cracking laser cut parts iso the punched parts they ordered are now being held responsible for the company’s demise.
That might be true factually (although I think Vans Aircraft will just be reorganized to protect itself from lawsuits), but it seems to me obvious that doing business with people can’t be done successfully according to calculation, it’s done based on negotiation. Trying to satisfy people with the former struck me as an ‘egghead’ error that was destined to fail as a negotiation gambit.
Silvaire wrote:
Trying to satisfy people with the former struck me as an ‘egghead’ error that was destined to fail as a negotiation gambit.
That’s a good description.
They could have done a better job with the testing – been more open about methods and released more information – but it was probably doomed as a strategy and not worth spending a single dollar on.
Those customers who were more prepared to speak their mind hinted that they wouldn’t trust any testing Van’s did because the magnitude of the issue meant that the financial incentive to give most parts the all-clear was impossible to avoid. VAF always rapidly removed any comment along those lines.
The sour grapes comments from Van’s about the financial impact probably indicates those customers were correct in their assessment of the situation.
I just happened upon this from the Titan submarine disaster.
Most deep-sea craft undergo costly rounds of inspection and testing by reputable marine organizations that specialize in certifying the deep-diving craft as safe. But Mr. Rush obtained no certification for Titan, saying it stifled innovation. In a documentary, he said: “You are remembered for the rules you break, and I’ve broken some rules to make this. The carbon fiber and titanium — there’s a rule you don’t do that. Well, I did.”
That sounds eerily similar to the January 2022 video. Just replace “carbon fiber and titanium” with “laser cut parts”.
Peter wrote:
How can prices go so high? This is mostly sheet metal. I buy “aviation” aluminium sheet and it costs peanuts.And with no certification, they don’t need to do anything with it. No internal paperwork, no QA. They need to do no more than if selling outdoor furniture.
Because people are willing to pay! CubCrafters has got this right, perhaps a few others as well. The more work the factory put into it, the higher the “quality”, the better. And if the “builder” can just pop by for a couple of weeks to “build” the aircraft, this is even better, perhaps necessary.
Certification means nothing, unless you absolutely want a certified aircraft. CubCrafters can deliver you certified aircraft as well, but that will basically double the price again, to 5-600k. It’s completely insane the cost of these tube and fabric Cubs, but people want them. People with money want them. Build from scratch, and the only thing that cost is engine and avionics. If you are not too picky about that, a brand new Cub that will last for centuries will cost 20-30k.
This is how tailor made (hand made) stuff works. It’s the same with boats and cars (with cars though, this is only applicable for the very high end hand made stuff).
It will be interesting to see how Vans ends up. Perhaps my worries are ungrounded, it’s Vans after all. Still, if Vans have to convince people to invest, they have to have a business model that at least manage to stay afloat with some degree of certainty. CubCrafters has the recipe. Make fewer aircraft at much higher prices that are practically key ready (the builder visits the factory for 2-3 weeks). The market is there for sure.
Dan wrote:
I really feel for all those who now had their dream shattered by a company that for too many years just spent too much time navel-gazing.
I think you are being very unfair. The truth is that they have been operating the business to satisfy the builder community. That is increasingly simpler to built aircraft at a very reasonable kit prices. The problem is that this is not the optimal way to operate if you want to run a healthy business. The problem with optimizing for profit, is that you have to go after a different market. You have to do like CubCrafters. Down scaling, increase quality, increase price. Go after the market segment where people are willing to pay for a “certified quality” factory built non certified aircraft. That market is as far as I can see untapped due to the demise of the traditional certified market.
This is obviously also what they “newer generation” of builders want. But are they willing to pay for this? Perhaps a few, but certainly not the majority. Homebuilding used to be away of getting a high performance aircraft at little cost by using lots of time on it. This is not true anymore due to the way the kit industry has evolved.
The whole thing is very similar to the European UL industry. It used to be a way to get up in the air in your own aircraft at very little cost. Today you can get ULs for 2-300k and more, and every manufacturer is gradually but truly heading in that direction, or they simply disappear. The reason is market and profit combined with production cost.
The laser cutting was a method to solve an immediate problem. It’s still amazing how the same builders think punched parts are somehow OK in comparison. In hindsight, laser cutting up to the correct dimension was not a very good idea due to a few other reasons. These reasons are not laser cutting up to the correct dimension (when done properly) is worse than punching up to the correct dimension. As a production process it’s very stupid because there is no way to visually see if the part is OK, as you can do with punched parts.
IMO the correct way to view this, is Vans tried too hard to satisfy the customers getting their kits in a timely fashion while still being able to do it without ending belly up. Unfortunately they ended belly up nonetheless.
How many ready made cubs do CubCrafters sell per annum?
Isn’t it an oxymoron to say that what builders want these days is a ready made factory, homebuilt? At a huge costs.
Yes there are some ULMs which can be bought keys in hand, from a manufacturer.
IIRC the Swiss/Italian Risen is the most expensive and also the fastest and would compete in every way with a 2 seat certified day vfr aircraft but the last time I looked even that doesn’t reach €300,000. It comes in at IIRC at about the price I have seen used RV7s go for on planecheck.The Risen comes with a guarantee the used RV7 does not.
