an odd statement from Harry Ingram

[N74DV]

I found this very ironic. In an interview conducted last September (2006) by General Aviation News, Harry made this comment in regards to an accusation he made about a certain group of guys he claimed was purposely attempting to run him out of business.

he said:

"Why would they go to this extreme?" Ingram wrote. "Greed. If the factory wasn't in business they could create an environment very similar to the Piper Cub lift strut Airworthiness Directive. Let's do some math: 3,000 Taylorcrafts, $2,500 for a new set of lift struts equals $7,500,000."

Did he really say "If the factory wasn't in business" we'd have a Piper Cub strut fiasco?

the factory IS in business and Harry initiated the very same ordeal he claimed to be trying to protect us from should he be driven out of business due to this alleged conspiracy to put him under.

hmmm...... just had to post this. When I read that comment in his interview it made my blood boil.

[Guest]

Re: an odd statement from Harry Ingram

Hi DJ,

I noticed that to and found it strange. I guess there ar few interpretations one could make.

I don't like paying $ for new struts but I do think that some checking was in order. A better less costly scheme could have been devised.

[PT13Pilot]

Re: an odd statement from Harry Ingram

I think Harry found the holy grail of making money in aviation, AD with mandatory parts replacement. So far he hasn't paid the bills selling airplanes or parts. How many times has he moved and gone under? About 3 years ago when I started working on this T-Craft I ordered a gear to fuselage fairing that had blown off in the breeze and was happy the factory was in business. Now with the AD, and after reading of all the money he's taken and promises he's never delivered on, I'm in no hurry to spend a dime with him. The owner of the BC I just finished wants me to rebuild his trim system at some point, and if I have to order from the factory, they're going to have to send it COD. Because if I don't see a box with parts in it, I'm not giving him a dime. Wish it was different, but that's the way I feel about it.

And I agree with Dave, these old airplanes need more attention and inspection. They are getting older and need more maintenance, and the expense and availability of some parts, coupled with some owners unwillingness to spend anything on them and some mechanics that don't care ends up with airplanes going down hill fast. I would have been shocked if the struts I just had inspected would have failed. Last year when I had the wings off, I had borescoped the struts, and treated them with CorrosionX before I reinstalled them. They were off, why not look? Seems like many of the AD's in the last 10 years or so have been trying to mandate common sense and trying to make people perform the maintenance that they should have been doing all along. Like the strut fitting failure on the seaplane crash. 70% of the fitting was gone?? It didn't get that way overnight. Are we all going to have to buy new fittings now because of this?