Fleet Airworthiness Steering Committee

[Scott Ducey]

No problem David, I didn't take them negatively. There were two presentations - Kristins, which outlined the plan, and mine, which outlined the numbers. Kristin did not post hers. Suggest you contact her for the presentation. Before going into the meeting, we already sensed that there would be concern about our proposed plan. Therefore, we outlined a variety of options to the Board, as this was their marching orders - to outline a plan on how type support could be financed. We demonstrated this - after the Board meeting, the goal would have been to refine the plan further. So your questions are valid ones, but it made no sense to us to start building multiple cost models (as this would take a lot of work) before getting some sense from the board which direction they wanted to move. I do not want to start speaking for other people that were there, but there seems to be a considerable opinion against the following: (1) raising dues, or (2) reducing expenses. Under this scenario there really is nothing to explore going forward. My sense was the Board feels there are a significant number of members that 'want a magazine' - specifically a well produced magazine, on a monthly basis, which in the end costs a lot. We proposed eliminating the mag, reducing the freqency of the mag, lowering the cost of the mag. Response to all these options was "NO". I also outlined scenarios that illustrated the impact to our numbers IF there was an exodus of ICS members. The answer still was "NO". The Board also feels our dues are high compared to other type clubs, and shot down a $2 increase in dues even though it was recommended by the treasurer.

I can assure you that both Kristin and I came to the meeting with a variety of proposals, and were willing to listen to other options, and to negotiate. We were also willing to spend a considerable amount of time moving a plan forward for the benefit for all the ICS members and Comanche owners. However, given the complete rebuff we received, there really is no purpose to dedicating additional personal time to something which seems quite futile.

For the record, there was no alternative plan provided by members of the Board. The current plan is to continue spending 60 cents of every dollar of members dues on the magazine, continue to hope that people like Hans, Zach, Kristin and others volunteer for the rest of the group, and to basically not change anything even though revenues are down, expenses are up, and some kind of change WILL BE required to address the aforementioned trend.

David, I know you probably feel we should continue to step up to the plate and take a swing. But if you were there, you would know why we have come to this decision.

While I was disappointed in their decision, I was happy that we were given the opportunity to speak. If you feel you can put something together that makes sense, I would strongly encourage you to do so. While I do not speak for Kristin, I can tell you for myself, I am done trying.

Again, if you would like to talk in more detail about alll of this, feel free to call my cell, which I will email to you privately.

Thank you for the response and the 'thank you'.

Best Regards,

Scott

[jeffrey aryan]

To Scott, Kristin, and All,

I have read all the posts on the subject of Type Support. I have now come to the conclusion and agree that our aircraft are going to die a slow and painful death due to lack of type support and direction. Piper has orphaned us and ICS "Is" unwilling to change, that is certain. I wish it wasn't so.

I would just like to say to all, "Thank You Very Much" for trying to help.

Sincerely,

Jeff Aryan

[tomburke1]

As a long time Comanche owner I would like to say that I have never had a time where I felt that their was not support for the Comanche from the ICS. I have in the past been able to gather the information I need to keep my plane in good flying condition.
I don't expect someone to hold my hand or to actually locate the things I need, but in my searches I have received help from many of the members as to where I might look for what I need. Simply asking a few questions and making a few phone calls has served me well in finding the things I have needed over the years.
Would more support be better? How could anyone deny that. But, is what is available insufficient for someone to maintain their aircraft?
My experiences over the years makse me say that it is.

[jeffrey aryan]

To Tom and All,

Sir, I am respectfully going to disagree with you on your comments. Mainly about ICS being supportive in finding parts or information about our aircraft.

I am also a long time owner of a comanche. Early in my ownership of the aircraft (approximately 17 plus years). I couldn't find parts. I called Piper directly and got the run around by calling various so-called Piper dealers. I called ICS and got in touch with Maurice Taylor. He led me in a proper direction. But, the fact of the matter is that he was one man who dedicated himself to our aircraft type. He has been gone for many years now.

Today 17 years later, Who, Whom, or What is taking over ?

Who do we contact ?

Which mechanics understand and know how to work on our aircraft.

Hell, I don't know how to work on a computer but the neighbors' kid does. These skills and dedication are fading fast. Scott, Kristin, Hans and many others can only carry the torch for so long.

In my opinion, No matter if Webco wins or loses it's court case we all have lost. How long can Webco sustain itself on the parts and services they sell and perform. There legal tab is growing. Bob Weber has sold his plane.

The point is : ICS should be the point organization to go to in case of a problem.

Members pay dues for a magazine and to collectively keep a body of knowledge to maintain our aircraft. Well, the body of knowledge is fading away.

I know Hans and he is one of best friends. So, together I can figure out a fix for my plane. But what about yourself or someone else. How about the person who takes there plane to a mechanic and says fix it and doesn't get involved ? Is the job done correctly ? Who does the mechanic call for a hard to get part or a special procedure. Is there an alternative ?

How did people find out about the Torque tube incident ? It wasn't an ICS's alert. What was the FAA going to do ? Who stopped it ? It wasn't ICS's alert. It was individual people on there own doing what was right.

Now, alot of people are asking why do I belong to ICS ?
what am I really getting ? Is there a better way to disseminate information and keep the collective body of knowledge ? The web site isn't updated often, not easy to use.

Where is CFF, they have been around for years but no one outside the trustees knows anything about it. The ICS board controls them. I have heard there is a web site in the making but it hasn't been approved by the board. How long does it take ? The internet has been around for awhile now.

Various new ideas have been put before the board and have all been shot down. That is the furstrating part. Change needs to happen and the old guard doesnt want it to happen so it doesn't.

Put another way, I have an airplane with many "new" spare parts, If I just sell or junk the plane and throw the parts in the trash can, who gains ? answer: NO ONE. Who could I give the stuff to ? I couldn't call ICS and say who can pick this stuff up.

What about our Flight instructors, very few people have time in our type and with our accident rate going up who wants to insure the planes.

This is stuff ICS could do instead of having Board of Directors meetings, all the while they are not responsible to the membership but only to themselves.

Why can't the business meetings be done online for everyone to voice an opinion or concern and see what is happening ? I still don't understand why the Board needs it's own insurance. But, that's another issue.

These are some reasons why alot of people are fed up and furstrated with the current way things are being handled.

Regards,

Jeff Aryan

[Kristin Winter]

David,

Under some circumstances, your criticisms of the lack of detail might be spot on. This is not one of them. We have been operating in an environment that has been strongly negative from the beginning. What we have attempted to do is obtain some concensus that change is needed. Without some general feedback as to what might be acceptable, I for one was not willing to dump several hundred hours more in developing the complete business plan down to the finest detail and future projections. Call me crazy, but there is a limit to how much time I am willing to waste.

The reality is that ICS has an doomed business model. It is committed to providing an expensive magazine which is almost entirely focused on the social needs of an aging population. With that core group declining in numbers, ICS must either look to the Comanche owners who are not members, or it must ultimately go bankrupt. It is type support that is going to attract the non-member Comanche owners.

Were there any support for moving ICS down the path for better type support, more detailed plans would be forthcoming. We just never got to that point because there is no support on the board to change the status quo.

I have attached the two presentations that were given. One at the Fall Board Meeting and the other at the Spring Board Meeting.

[Kristin Winter]

Tom,

How would you be doing with your aircraft if the FAA had issued an AD mandating Piper SB 1160 on the torque tube and an AD requiring you to make a dye penetrant inspection of your horn every one hundred hours?

Those things did not happen because of the efforts of Hans, Eric, and Denny. Who will step up next time? There most assuredly will be a next time.

ICS cannot take credit for the actions of Hans and others, anymore than AOPA can, as likely they are also members of AOPA.

Type support is not only about finding parts, which is ever more becoming a scavenger hunt. It is about having an advocate for the fleet and to work to consolidate the tribal knowledge so that it is available to all.

[N3322G]

Hi David,

The short answer to your (repeated below) April 17 post is - we've done that and now both Scott and Kristin have posted their presentations. Prior to Kristin, I presented to the Board at the Dayton convention and posted the presentation draft here at http://www.comancheflyer.com/forum/view ... highlight= See page 13 of 17 for specific recommendations. Note that because I felt many people would be reading, not hearing, the presentation I heavily documented the logic and thoughts. I also followed all of the ICS protocols: reviewed the material with the Tribe Rep, gained approval for time on the agenda and respectfully presented the concepts and requested change with equanimity.

After attending the entire Board meeting and then presenting at the end, I realized there is a great deal of information and conversations shared at these Board meetings that I believe all ICS members would value so I suggested that the board meetings be recorded and posted on the website - just as all the other videos from the Dayton convention are now posted. This would be extremely valuable. So far, the Board has said, No. If they had said, Yes, then you would have been able to hear and see the presentations and conversations that concern all members.

Last week, Kristin and Scott did an admirable job presenting what many people have talked about and what Kristin, who led the Fleet Airworthiness Steering Committee, Scott and myself worked on via electronic communications since the Fall Board Meeting.(Steve Ells had conflicting elder-care responsibilities but did his best to add some value) I personally developed and fleshed out an alternative - going so far as to price it out with a complementary organization. Without Board support, there is no sense in donating more time to fine tune this effort.

My interest in increased technical support came as a result of the gear collapse. In my opinion (supported by many others) the reason my aircraft gear collapsed on landing is because the aging, talented highly experience Comanche mechanic, got in a hurry while installing and adjusting the 4 new micro-switches on the twin. I am paying for his haste in so many ways, it hurts to think about it. Further the repair shop stated the gear was installed and adjusted according to the Piper Service Manual. It was not and failed while the twin was aloft. Would increased type support have prevented these problems. Possibly. One thing for sure, even as a non-mechanic, I can now cite chapter and verse of some gear adjustment components.

Had I not been smart/lucky enough to insure the twin for its $155,000 value, the insurance company would have scrapped it. Had I not been smart/lucky enough to handle the emergency gear failure aloft in the way I did, I would have fried the gear motor (which are no longer available) and then because of the maladjusted gear, I was told I would not have been able to manually extend the gear. Either way, the risk of having the plane scrapped was very high.

I share this because the owner responsibility of flying an aging aircraft increases as the aircraft ages. Our volunteers are incredibly valuable - but like Maurice, they don't live forever - it is critically important to capture that knowledge now so we don't have the Maurice experience again. - awesomely Comanche-knowledgeable man but we forgot to capture his knowledge before he died. In one sense it is inconsiderate and wasteful to ask our volunteers a question, have them provide a free wonderful answer, but we do not capture the value of that expertise freely given. Sounds sort of short-sighted when you write that process down, doesn't it?

In closing, while I am moving on to more productive use my time, I would leave this subject with the following thoughts:
1. I highly recommend that the ICS Board videotape Board meetings and post them on the website.
2. I highly recommend ICS embrace electronic technology that captures and makes airworthiness information readily available to all Comanche stakeholders - owners, mechanics and repair shops.

If you are interested, I'd be happy to share additional thoughts at the Clifton fly-in next week.

David's April 17 post "Pat, All this "talk" of change and throwing "some" amount of money around to support change without an organizational and cost model is very very dangerous. All the advocates of change should be promoting or presenting a more detailed viable plan/strategy/solution. Many good minds are involved in this effort and it should not be so difficult. I just don’t think the correct “starting point” has been identified. We have been in idea collection mode for several years and nothing resembling a strategic solution with implementation details has been presented that I am aware of. All that is being asked is to spend more time detailing a plan that can be supported with specifics as opposed to the time that is continuously being used to say "things must change". Things must change to WHAT...HOW...AT WHAT COST? Not to mention the magazine… if there is, and I quote, “NO Village Press”, who will manage memberships, who will manage ICS goods being sold, who will perform the administrative duties that Village Press manages today? Remember, that was a recent “change”. Again, I am not saying that “change” can’t be done or should not be done…but use the talented brain trust touting this concept to provide viable solution alternatives instead of continuously stating the overbeaten obvious. "Change" buy in will be much easier when a viable charter and supporting details has been presented instead of trying to beat the membership into submission with never ending chatter, presentations and back room agreements. David"

[Ben Ayalon]

Jeff

As for the problem that we face.
I think that there is a real need for a change. For this to happen we will have to do one of the following:
1. Close the Flyer.
2. Increase dues.
3. Start a ‘Support Club’ for members that will pay (say) extra $150 p.a.
4. ICS pay (say) $20k p.a. to (say) Webco/ComancheGear for support and the caller pays another $40 per call? (Personally I would give a first refusal to the ICS Tech. Advisors that does the same for free).

I have to agree that the Flyer is of veritable quality but this is what we can come with, as long as members will not provide better quality articles it will remain at its current standard, regardless of its short comings I like the Flyer and want to keep it.
You and I do visit both forums but the majority of the ICS members do not, by cutting the Flyer we will lose all contact with them. I hear you saying that the Flyer should be changed into a digital edition, I agree, but…
 How will our advertisers react?
 How much money will we save if at all?
 Is it what the members want?

Let say that we close the Flyer and transfer the money towards ‘Tech Support’, how long will it take before the changes are felt? How many members will leave until changes are felt? Will ICS remain solvent?

I don’t know, I do not have the answers, even not bad answers.

Don’t miss understand, I am FOR tech. support, now I have a problem with a cracked rudder spar and my shop wants an approved repair procedure, they say that the manual says that this item is not repairable, i.e. I need a new rudder. It would be great if ICS could come with such a thing. I think that at best ICS will be able to support this sort of action but nothing more, we are not parts providers.

The issues are not simple and I don’t think that there is a ‘school classroom’ answer. I believe that the board will have to ask the members what they want, but do the members care? From past experience we know that many do not bother to response. Many complained about their inability to vote, so ICS changed the rules and enabled postal vote, the result is that very few take the opportunity.

Scott
I tried to download you Word document but it fail. Can you please send it over?

Thanks

Fly safe all

Ben

[Jay]

I wasn't at the meeting, and I could be wrong, but I DO think that it is time to poll the membership and ASK people what they want instead of having a small number of people carry on a discussion about what they THINK is important to the members.

We might be surprised at the level of support we'd find for changing the Flyer or increasing dues. But if what the membership really wants is the current magazine and low dues, then at least we KNOW that.

Jay

[jeffrey aryan]

To Ben,

I would pay extra for services but it will not happen within this organization. I believe ICS is to strongly entrenched in the old days and will not let go and move forward. Many have tried as we know.

If you think the membership will lose more members because the magazine will not come out monthly then that is ok. I disagree. I can only imagine that the members you talk about have no contact with ICS and probably don't care. To them the plane is just a tool or a gift givin to them by a loved one.

I get Air and Space and Pilot Getaways magazine and they come out bi-monthly. I feel there content is much better because they don't have to reach a monthly deadline.

I am putting my money and support toward Piper Flyers and/or Piper Owners Society. They both have magazines and active people to call to help find parts.

ICS has not only put the final nail in the coffin but it is being buryed as we speak.

Fly safely, for a long time,

Jeff Aryan

[Chris Kuyoth]

Tom,

So far I too have been able to keep my 260 in airworthy condition through parts scrounging, extensive research and excellent support from the technical folks at ICS. It is an involved process and requires a lot of time and effort on my part, not to mention the effort of the technical folks at ICS. If I had to pay ICS or a mechanic for that time and effort, I am certain that I could not afford a Comanche.

In contrast, I see my father with his Cherokee 235 only a few years newer, with absolutely none of the headaches that come with owning an orphaned airplane. Though his airplane is slower, burns more fuel, has significantly less range, a lower service ceiling and carries about the same weight as my airplane, it is worth considerably more according to the prices in Trade-a-Plane. I wonder how much of the increased value is related to ease/cost of ownership?

My point is that as the Comanches age and issues continue to arise from part availability and service concerns, what will happen to the market value of our airplanes? Now I don't plan on selling my baby anytime soon, but a healthy bluebook value for the Comanche has multiple benefits. A higher value promotes repairing vs. scrapping for one. The larger the fleet, the more incentive there is for suppliers to continue providing critical parts. In addition, those parts should be less expensive with increased volumes. Would Webco be viable if the Comanche fleet were half the size?

I have owned two different Comanches over the last 12 years. I have witnessed first hand the growing uncertainty of part availability. It is not going to get any better by itself. Given the rate of growth of the "endangered parts list", I am very concerned with being able to keep my 260 airworthy for the next 35 years. I am contemplating a major upgrade to my panel which will hopefully provide functionality for the next 20-25 years. Does it make sense to spend upward of $25k-$30k on an airplane that could be grounded for lack of a landing gear transmission?

Chris

[tomburke1]

"How would you be doing with your aircraft if the FAA had issued an AD mandating Piper SB 1160 on the torque tube and an AD requiring you to make a dye penetrant inspection of your horn every one hundred hours?

Those things did not happen because of the efforts of Hans, Eric, and Denny. Who will step up next time? There most assuredly will be a next time.

ICS cannot take credit for the actions of Hans and others, anymore than AOPA can, as likely they are also members of AOPA.

Type support is not only about finding parts, which is ever more becoming a scavenger hunt. It is about having an advocate for the fleet and to work to consolidate the tribal knowledge so that it is available to all."

Your statement suggests that ICS had nothing to do with this situation. If that is what you are saying I can only say that I have heard a different story. My understanding is that ICS is responsible in part, for the ultimate result that has been arrived at.

I have had a few conversations with Dave Fitzgerald regarding this. He has said that ICS has been involved with the investigation of the problem from the start_________________

[Diller]

[Barry Payne]

[Kristin Winter]