Avgas in France has reached $7.50/gal !

"Jay Honeck" wrote

Sorry, Martin. Here's more bad news for Europe and Austria:

From AOPA's member news area:
"And with that, Dries dropped a bomb. Diamond, he said, is establishing
what
it calls the Diamond China Project, a new manufacturing facility that will
be built "about 300 kilometers east of Beijing." Site construction began
one
month ago, and it will be twice the size of Diamond's Austrian facility -
and capable of employing 1,700 employees and building 600 aircraft a year.
Eventually, all propeller-driven Diamond aircraft will be built at the
Chinese plant, starting with DA40s. The first DA40 will roll out the
so-called "Aviation City" factory doors by year-end."

Good Lord help us all! I suppose they will be made with China steel. That
is the softest, inconsistent crap have ever seen, let alone all the other
made in China crap.
--
Jim in NC

Good Lord help us all! I suppose they will be made with China steel.
That
is the softest, inconsistent crap have ever seen, let alone all the other
made in China crap.

Now you've done it, Jim, you racist pig. How DARE you launch a wholesale
assault on another culture?

;-)

Hey, I wonder how many years (months?) it will be before GA in China
over-takes what's left of GA in France?

ducking!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote

Now you've done it, Jim, you racist pig. How DARE you launch a wholesale
assault on another culture?

Chuckle

;-)

Hey, I wonder how many years (months?) it will be before GA in China
over-takes what's left of GA in France?

ducking!

You better! g

Seriously, though, at least France has some degree of personal freedom left.

The pity is, China is giving us (the US) exzacary what they want. Cheap, at
all costs. I hope we wake up, before it is too late, and we have no
manufacturing and quality in the US, but I fear we will not.

I hope the consensus standards board, or if the Symphony (or any other
made in China airplanes) are to be certified, I hope they tear it apart stem
to stern, and check every part for hardness, fatigue, and any other test
they can think of. I can only imagine airplanes falling from the sky, just
like the public thinks is going to happen. One thing for certain; I will
not be flying in a made in China airplane.

I wonder how many others feel the same way.
--
Jim in NC

In article , Morgans wrote:
I hope the consensus standards board, or if the Symphony (or any other
made in China airplanes) are to be certified, I hope they tear it apart stem
to stern, and check every part for hardness, fatigue, and any other test
they can think of. I can only imagine airplanes falling from the sky, just
like the public thinks is going to happen. One thing for certain; I will
not be flying in a made in China airplane.

I wonder how many others feel the same way.

I don't feel this way at all. I have PIC time in Chinese made aircraft,
and I've helped do the grunt work to annual one. The CJ6 I flew was (and
is, I know the owner, and he's still flying it very frequently despite
the big paycut he had to take going from software engineering to flying
for the airlines!) a very well built plane. It is aerobatted with great
frequency. It certainly seemed better made than the Russian equivalents
(we tend to have the Russky ones here, Russia being closer than China).
Not that the Russian ones are badly made, but quite a bit of Russian
stuff seems to have rather poor finish. The CJ6 had been made with the
attention to the fit and finish of all the parts of the airframe (and
was even corrosion-proofed, which is something Cessna didn't do until
they restarted production in the 1990s).

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Jay Honeck" wrote

Now you've done it, Jim, you racist pig. How DARE you launch a
wholesale
assault on another culture?

Chuckle

;-)

Hey, I wonder how many years (months?) it will be before GA in China
over-takes what's left of GA in France?

ducking!

You better! g

Seriously, though, at least France has some degree of personal freedom
left.

The pity is, China is giving us (the US) exzacary what they want. Cheap,
at
all costs. I hope we wake up, before it is too late, and we have no
manufacturing and quality in the US, but I fear we will not.

I hope the consensus standards board, or if the Symphony (or any other
made in China airplanes) are to be certified, I hope they tear it apart
stem
to stern, and check every part for hardness, fatigue, and any other test
they can think of. I can only imagine airplanes falling from the sky,
just
like the public thinks is going to happen. One thing for certain; I will
not be flying in a made in China airplane.

I wonder how many others feel the same way.
--
Jim in NC

I have time in a Nanching (sp). It is an excellent airplane, solid airframe
and bullet proof engine. I don't see a problem as long as they don't use
Rotax engines.

In article , Dave Stadt wrote:
I have time in a Nanching (sp). It is an excellent airplane, solid airframe
and bullet proof engine. I don't see a problem as long as they don't use
Rotax engines.

I think the new Diamonds (DA-40 etc) use either the diesel or a Lycoming
O-360 (rated at 180hp).

Rotax aren't a bad engine manufacturers - you've gotta remember a lot of
their output is inherently less reliable 2-strokes.

The small 4cyl 4stroke fitted to the original Katana I think got a bad
rap mainly because there weren't many mainstream Lyco-Conti mechanics
who were familiar with it. We don't have a similar problem with the
Rotax 91* series engines here where they are more common (indeed, I've
flown behind the turbocharged 914S, and it's a very nice engine making
sea level power up to around 18000 feet, with automatic turbo and
mixture control).

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

"Dylan Smith" wrote

Rotax aren't a bad engine manufacturers - you've gotta remember a lot of
their output is inherently less reliable 2-strokes.

So lots of people say. Nevertheless, you'll not catch me flying behind one,
anywhere except the plains, or the water with floats.
--
Jim in NC

In article , Morgans wrote:
Rotax aren't a bad engine manufacturers - you've gotta remember a lot of
their output is inherently less reliable 2-strokes.

So lots of people say. Nevertheless, you'll not catch me flying behind one,
anywhere except the plains, or the water with floats.

I guess I live dangerously, I've flown the Europa across the Irish Sea
on several occasions! The 914S is a smooth engine giving good power. I
don't hear about them failing any more frequently than the traditional
Lyco-Conti engines (which I also fly behind quite frequently, our glider
club towplane has an O-320).

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Stadt
wrote:
I have time in a Nanching (sp). It is an excellent airplane, solid
airframe
and bullet proof engine. I don't see a problem as long as they don't
use
Rotax engines.

I think the new Diamonds (DA-40 etc) use either the diesel or a Lycoming
O-360 (rated at 180hp).

Rotax aren't a bad engine manufacturers - you've gotta remember a lot of
their output is inherently less reliable 2-strokes.

The small 4cyl 4stroke fitted to the original Katana I think got a bad
rap mainly because there weren't many mainstream Lyco-Conti mechanics
who were familiar with it. We don't have a similar problem with the
Rotax 91* series engines here where they are more common (indeed, I've
flown behind the turbocharged 914S, and it's a very nice engine making
sea level power up to around 18000 feet, with automatic turbo and
mixture control).

They dumped the Rotax because customer support is for the most part
non-existant. People aren't going to buy production airplanes that they
cannot get engine parts for. Rotax 4 strokes are somewhat better than the 2
strokes but certainly not what they should be. Homebuilders seem to like
them because they get to work on them a lot.


--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
. ..

They dumped the Rotax because customer support is for the most part
non-existant. People aren't going to buy production airplanes that they
cannot get engine parts for. Rotax 4 strokes are somewhat better than the
2
strokes but certainly not what they should be. Homebuilders seem to like
them because they get to work on them a lot.

That's like marrying a virgin -- they have no baseline to compare!


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO