One of the times I wish John M. was still around to jump in with his typical snarky style, but the legitimate business reasons for “the factory” doing things the way they do. LOL. I miss those days.
2 Likes
Hi Murray,
My Sonex & your Sonex , as with every other A/B model, does not differ so much from each other ie there are no major structural or control system differences.
Sure there is a customisation here or there but they are still well & truly recognisable as Sonex aircraft.
I understand (?) that you have or are planning, to make changes to your Rotax engine. Does this mean that Rotax service advise will no longer be applicable?
Hi,
My thanks for your the reference to the excellent Kitplanes article - right at the end a statement caught my eye;
“For inspection and service requirements that apply to any manufactured item such as an engine, prop or avionics, be sure to check with the manufacturer of that item for guidance. Lycoming, Continental, Rotax and Hartzell, just to name a few, have extensive information available to owners and maintenance technicians regarding their products.”
If its good enough/expected ,that engine, prop, avionics manufactures, etc, will supply a detailed periodic service/inspection manual , why cant Sonex do the same for the airframes it has designed & supplied?
I rest my case.
Sonex does this for the AeroVee. You can download the manual.
1 Like
Those other manufacturers do indeed supply maintenance manuals for their products such as engines, propellers, avionics, etc.
Who is the manufacturer of your Sonex?
3 Likes
“Who is the manufacturer of your Sonex?”
Very good point - Me!.
Unfortunatly Me has only built one Sonex & refurbished another completely diffrent aircraft.
So with the experince of just the one Sonex, I hardly have sufficient data to be able to target know (?) areas of concern that the factory should know of.
Thank you for assisting in making my point - a single Sonex builder is highly unlikly to know the fleet service history that would allow the drawing up of a targeted (rather than generic) periodic airframe service/inspection manual.
Should the factory not know of particular areas/fittings/systems, etc, this is a deficiency in their organisation, that should be corrected.
Thanks Bryan - While an AeroVee service manual may make interesting reading, it will only have a few common points, that can be applied to my Rotax 912ULS.
Rotax supply a number of extraordinarily comprehensive engine manuals - Operator, Line Maintenance, Heavy Maintenance, Installation & others
My point is probably not clear. There is annual inspection guidance supplied for Sonex’s engine, which puts them on par with Rotax, Lycoming, and so on. There is not for the airframe - but can you find a Cessna authored guidance for the annual inspection of a C152? I think not, it comes back to Appendix D of FAR part 43. So again, Sonex is on par with Cessna at least. I see no evidence to support the statement that Sonex is “slack.”
3 Likes
I would add that the Van’s condition inspection presentation linked to in a previous comment is extremely general and an overview of how to conduct an inspection as opposed to a listing of specific items or trouble spots to inspect, so I would say that Sonex is not out of step with Van’s either.
4 Likes
Bit late in the day (Australian E time) to contact any aircraft maintenance facilities but I did manage to catch one LAME - he informed me that he always refers to the aircraft (Air Tractor) manufactures airframe service manual - so they do exist. For Cessna/Piper/ etc I don’t know - will try & find out.
Anyhow - the argument that its not done by so & so, does not mean that it should or can’t be done by Sonex. This is particularly important, as they are supplying the home built market, where every shred of advice should be made available, to what are , in effect, non licensed (amature) engineers.
“…listing of specific items or trouble spots to inspec…”
To some extent the Service Bulletin (SB) system addresses specific points .
Unfortunatly they are usually issued in isolation (addressing a single point) ie not in a progressive maintenance/inspection format.
“…I would say that Sonex is not out of step with Van’s either.”
As for what Vans do or not, how is this a good argument for not providing, what in the end is a safety enhancement document ie well mainatine airframe, where all particular matters have been addressed , is inherently a safer aircraft.
Those that make an argument for being in step with the rest of the industry, risk supporting the lowest standard
Agreeing to disagree.
Case dismissed.
4 Likes
Okay, I’ll bite. I did Sonex tech support for 80% of the company’s existence. I was the one who told people who inquired to follow Appendix D. I will die on that hill and here’s why:
Until everyone, EVERYONE, builds their airplane EXACTLY to the plans, employing quality workmanship, such a manual is impossible to develop. Your engine has a service manual because it was manufactured in a factory where the designer had control. Each one comes off the line meeting a baseline standard. No one has substituted rings, failed to measure endplay or swapped out the ignition for something “better.” It arrived as a finished unit. (Unless you built an AeroVee, where I also saw countless modifications and parts substitutions to what was intended.) Your propeller was carved in a factory that had full control over it from the moment they sourced the wood to the moment it shipped to you. Same for your instruments. Your airframe was shipped as parts (or sourced as raw materials, in the case of plans-built airframes) and very detailed plans. You, and/or others, applied whatever level of skill and care they possess to interpret those parts and plans into an airplane. You (or others) may have made modifications to suit your personal desires. You (or others) followed the advice of keyboard warriors in some places rather than the Sonex-provided plans. No kit manufacturer can write a manual that accounts for the innumerable deviations possible in the E-AB category.
As some have pointed out, Sonex doesn’t have information on every airplane. Frankly, some airplanes I DID have information on I would have grounded if it had been in my power.
Sonex alerts builders to known issues within their control through Service Bulletins and drawing revisions. Appendix D, together with the airplane’s plans set, will guide any owner through a satisfactory inspection. Deviations from the design, particular to each airframe, will fall under the scope of Appendix D. A canopy assembly inspection will reveal problems whether it was built per plans, using a Sonex-provided canopy, or is a builder-implented, one-off tilt-back canopy mechanism that utilizes an after-market canopy.
These are my personal opinions as I retired from Sonex in 2022 and I do not speak for Sonex.
Kerry Fores
Plans Built Sonex #9, “Metal Illness”
AirVenture 2006 Plans Built Champion
10 Likes
Hi Kerry,
Thank you for your comprehensive response.
While I have some sympathy for the, no can do a manual, when so many Sonex are customised/vary from the plans, I do not accept that an airframe service/inspection manual could not be developed.
Fact: - Sonex & Forum contributors constantly refer to “generic” inspection/maintenance advice, generated by Governments agencies, well meaning private experts and other aircraft manufactures manuals.
Seems to me, that the above is a second best solution, in that the maintainer will only have Sonex specific data of one aircraft, with which to apply/customise the generic solution.
If a generic periodic inspection/service schedule can be generated, why can’t Sonex, using the same base information, develop a more targeted manual?
It remains a glairing deficit in Sonex’s customer support.
Skippy, you should have known Sonex’ policy before you made your purchase.
The benefit of lower costs for kit aircraft is generated by cutting the lawyers and insurance companies out of the equation. This means you have to make and keep certain documentation. Whether we like it or not, We are all in the same boat.
This forum is about solving problems, sharing information, toward that end, the community was provided you with options to move forward.
I’m exhausted and done.
8 Likes
Your loyalty is commendable JKS, dare I say misplaced.
There are certain expectations of service/good suppliers . Some are custom ( expected/normal ), some legally binding.
Sonex has now let me down twice, on what I have come to expect as normal service.
“…you should have known Sonex’ policy before you made your purchase.”
Wow! Before contracting to purchase a good/service do you research every aspect of the providers culture/policies - I suggest not.
You like me have expectations of good/service providers that for the most part are met.
Just occasional you will be disappointed, as I have been in this and one other instance.
Did you (or anyone else) contact Sonex and ask what is their policy on honoring product warranty (for purchasers of incomplete projects), periodic airframe inspection/maintenance?
I didn’t and don’t expect you did. Like me you assumed that they would meet whatever standards apply in your country of residence.
“Whether we like it or not, We are all in the same boat.”
True! And it behoves us to speak up when not satisfied with the captain (Sonex) of that boat.
“This forum is about solving problems, …”,
True! That is one of the Forums objectives. Unfortunately the solution - a Sonex targeted periodic airframe inspection/service manual is not and will not be available any time soon.
“…sharing information…”
Yes again! My thanks to those generous owner/maintainers, who sent me their personal periodic(100hr) airframe inspection/service manuals.
“…the community was provided you with options”
And I am grateful. That the “community” have had to come up with their own documented solution to this recurring activity, is to their credit, shame on Sonex.
If Sonex wish to continue into the future, as a viable (competitive) supplier of aircraft kits/plans, they will need to change their customer support philosophy - its small details, like the lack a transferable warranty, service manual, that have a negative impact on a manufactures reputation.
I’ll agree with Bryan; let’s agree to disagree on this topic. Personally, I don’t feel that Sonex carries (or will carry in the future) a “negative reputation” because of the “small details” you listed. After my purchases from Sonex, I don’t feel entitled to features that are clearly not included. I thought Kerry’s explanation of why a comprehensive service manual would not be a great publication; especially in your case, Skippy, as no two Sonex are exactly alike and modifications aren’t performed in a vacuum.
I would like to steer this discussion back onto a productive course rather than making claims that the company will suffer because they don’t offer these features you feel entitled to post purchase. Although my Sonex is not done yet, here is my first draft of a condition inspection checklist. I chose to include the applicable “maintenance manual” reference for each task. Take this with a grain of salt, though, as it is still a work in progress and uses AC43.13 references:
6 Likes
My last responce;
If customers do not demand/bring attention, to what they see as deficiencies in service, nothing will change.
The Sonex range of aircraft are exceptional.
The Sonex customer service ethos less so.
I have had experince of European kit/factory built aircraft - Sonex could learn a thing or two.
Nuff said