DG-300/303 owners...

On Apr 17, 1:11 am, Ann O'Rack wrote:
At 07:36 17 April 2007, wrote:

On Apr 16, 3:48 pm, 'Dan G' wrote:
On Apr 16, 9:26 pm, '
wrote:

Such a major flaw in a wing spar should be replaced
at the
manufacturers expense IMHO.
If Boeing shipped a plane that was discovered to have
a flaw in it
because their sub contractor failed to adhere to manufacturing
specs
or QA procedures, Boeing would fix the problem then
deal with the
sub. After all Boeing owns the paper for the sales
contract.

So what is different here?

What is different is that the manufacturing company
(Glaser-Dirks) no longer exists, would you expect DG
to be responsible for a manufacturing problem in, e.g.,
an LS3 also? Yes they could come up with a better
solution than they have so far but expecting them to
pay for it just because they sell the spare parts is
a fantasy.

DG acquired the IP and remains of the old Glaser-Dirks.
When acquiring the rights and user base to a company like that you
cant just pick and choose what you take responsibility for.
Also the 303's have been built by the new company so where do you draw
the line?

Plus DG also retained the original manufacturer (Elan/AMS).