Revo 2 mallions

[outkast]

some of you may be aware of this appearing on another forum

To All Pilots:

As you all know, Clive Bunce had a very near-death experience when an

"A" riser maillon on a new Paramania Revo 2 wing which he was test

flying suffered catastrophic failure at a height above the ground at

which it would have been doubtful whether he could have recovered in

time or survived the outcome.

Clive is a first-class pilot, ex-BMAA instructor and is finalising his

BHPA instructor's licence and to insinuate that his pre-flight checks

had not been carried out properly is ludicrous. In fact the maillon did

not fail because it had not been screwed up properly, it seems to have

failed because it was defective, made of sub-standard materials, was not

strong enough for the purpose intended, had not been properly tested or

all four.

Furthermore, it is hoped that every pilot checks to ensure that all his

maillons are properly done up before every flight. But even when the

screw gates are properly done up, how many pilots can put their maillons

under any sort of pressure beyond a quick tug? How many pilots have

access to a test rig that will test them to their Safe Working Load or

breaking strain? None. Instead, we totally rely on a manufacturer

using maillons of a known quality, batch controlled, properly tested and

marked. For example, the maillons in use on that Paramania wing did not

have the markings of the industry standard maillon made by Peguet who

manufacture the Maillon Rapide.

http://www.peguet.fr/gb/peguet-qualite-securite.html

It could be that this is just an isolated incident - and we certainly

hope it is - but equally, if the maillons in use are sub-standard or

defective, there could be very wide-ranging and negative implications.

When any aircraft suffers a catastrophic failure, the first action is to

ground the fleet, the second is to investigate the incident, the third

is to find a remedial solution, the fourth is to test that solution and

finally, the solution is implemented and the fleet ungrounded. For any

manufacturer, this is both embarrassing and potentially damaging but

vitally necessary in order to save incidents and lives. Imagine the

main hang bolt breaking on a Pegasus Quick and imagine what the response

would be from a responsible manufacturer like P&M. The fleet would be

grounded immediately until the cause was investigated. Interestingly,

when a responsible manufacturer does this and 'holds his hands up' -

whether it is a vehicle recall programme or the recent Evektor EuroStar

wing spar incidents - he gains respect and credibility for acting

responsibly and putting his customers' well-being first before his own

commercial and financial interests.

So why should things be any different in paramotoring?

Strangely, I have not seen any mention of this issue yet on the

Paramania website but I know that Theron and Pascal monitor this forum

and hope they are 'not too busy flying' to answer some pertinent

questions here. I will also email the company directly and post their

response if nothing is forthcoming from them on this forum.

By the way, can Pete Baldwin who is a PMC instructor and posts on the

PMC forum, confirm that a safety notice has been posted by Simon

Westmore as I know a lot of pilots who are PMC also buy Paramania wings?

1. Will Paramania identify which wings are affected and are fitted with

these maillons and contacted all importers, dealers and owners and told

them not to fly their wings until further notice?

2. Can we have assurances that Paramania will do everything they can to

ease the concerns of Paramania wing owners and not try to "hush" this

incident up?

3. Can Paramania please identify which company manufacture their

maillons so that pilots flying other Paramania wings (and wings of other

manufacturers also using these maillons) can stop flying until their

maillons have been checked?

4. Can Paramania provide proof of how the maillons in their wings are

load-tested and batch-controlled in case of isolated maillon failure?

5. Can Paramania explain to their customers what the recall procedures

for testing the existing maillons in use or exchanging them for new ones

are?

6. Can Paramania confirm whether GIN are still manufacturing their

wings and if so, should other GIN gliders be suspect.

7. If Paramania wings are now being made in (say) China along with the

maillons, can they please let us know which company are making their

wings and maillons and the quality & test procedures employed.

Equipment failures in aviation are, thankfully, a rare thing because

manufacturers and their equipment suppliers are only too aware of the

consequences if a failure should occur. Manufacturers usually specify

that the highest quality components are used where there is no fail-safe

if that item should fail. Using quality assured items is expensive but

in the case of maillons, we are talking about a few Euros difference

between using a known item and an unknown item. If a manufacturer

chooses to use a cheaper alternative to save a few Euros and this proves

to be sub-standard and fails, then that manufacturer must bear the full

cost in financial, commercial and credibility terms.

Paul Mahony

BHPA Flight & Safety Committee Member

[Guest]

All I can say is...

A) the subject line is incorrect and should read Mallions. As soon as brands are mentioned, it becomes a brand war.

B) The part will be tested fully to find out IF it failed or was undone before flight.

The only QUALIFIED Engineer to have seen this picture so far (lecs university) has suggested that it could not have been done up.

The proper test will be carried out and a report produced

Speculation at this point is both silly and dangerous.

The Main message ( to cut through the junk )

CHECK YOUR MALLIONS (Whatever your wings brand) before each flight without fail.

If it turns out to be a faulty part then clearly it will be published in a technical safety bulletin from the manufacture to all owners.

My advice, check your wing every time, and wait out for the (official report) from someone qualified to make it.

SW

[pete_b]

Paramania Pre flight checks - safety Response to Clive bunce re

maillion failure post on UK paramotor forum

Paramania are happy that no one was hurt during this incident would

like make the following points of safety to help ensure this type of

thing does not happen again.

1. Paramania equipment is manufactured and produced by Gin gliders,

Gin has the reputation of making the highest quality worldwide. The

said same mallion is used on all Gin equipment, this includes other

brands such as U-turn, Air-cross and until last year Nivuk. All this

gliders have passed EN load tests and individual manufacturers tests,

to our knowledge under normal loadings, there have been NO structural

failures of this part.

2. It is very clear from the photograph posted on the forum that this

mailion opened in flight NOT because it failed, but because it was NOT

done up!

3. It is the responsibility of all pilots to carry out preflight

checks (a mallion check is fundamental here). All responsible

instructors, must ensure that students are properly taught to carry

out those pre flight checks.

4. In this case it is clear that Clive Bunce was the instructor in

charge. It is therefore his responsibility and his alone to ensure

that all equipment used is properly pre-flighted before use by

students or himself as a pilot. Doubly so if the equipment is new and

has never been flown before. In this case it is clear that he simply

forgot to do so!

In the name of safety, Paramania would like to remind pilots of

danger the periods in a pilots carrier. In general there a 2 when

Pilots are at high risk.

At the start when they have left training school and are just staring

to get confident on their own, typically between 25-50hrs.

Then later on as they get over confident because they are flying often

and feel they are invincible..Typically 500 hrs + (this is highly

likely here as Clive Bunce works in the industry as the main UK Dudek

importer, so he flies often on many different wings).

Conclusion -

Pilots should use this incident in a positive way as a reminder, to

help remember the fundamentals of pre-flight checks, no matter how

many hrs you have. This applies especially to instructors and

experienced pilots who often fly different equipment, both wings and

motors.

Paramania would also like to invite Mr Clive Bunce to attend our next

joint safety seminar. (we will shortly publish dates and location) and

to contact our us for dealer training if he intends to use the Revo2

in his school in the future.

Paramania team

[Guest]

Hummm,

I think they could have left out the last paragraph.

SW

[outkast]

Hummm,

I think they could have left out the last paragraph.

SW

why is that? if he or someone else is making mistakes surely its better it is addressed sooner rather than later?

[garyfreefly]

Panic Panic Panic

Quick .....Get a video on youtube......

[youtubevideo]

[/youtubevideo]

Phew ....That Should do it

[Guest]

I dont think thats a fair comment.

I felt like the same message needed to get out (not because people dont know, more as a reminder to check the kit) Even if its found that the mallion was closed before take off, how is it a bad message?. I can not see how this video can be taken as a negative thing at all. It is clear, concise, and works.

Thanks to Paramania for a prompt reply and good advice for all pilots, old, bold and new.

SW

[outkast]

I dont think thats a fair comment.

I felt like the same message needed to get out (not because people dont know, more as a reminder to check the kit) Even if its found that the mallion was closed before take off, how is it a bad message?. I can not see how this video can be taken as a negative thing at all. It is clear, concise, and works.

Thanks to Paramania for a prompt reply and good advice for all pilots, old, bold and new.

SW

I agree about the video, but am a disapointed the dealer who sold me the wing did not contact me as soon as he became aware there was a posible issue with the mallions, regardless of wether I had already seen it on another forum.

its bad form as far as I am concerned

[touch107fm]

I dont think thats a fair comment.

I felt like the same message needed to get out (not because people dont know, more as a reminder to check the kit) Even if its found that the mallion was closed before take off, how is it a bad message?. I can not see how this video can be taken as a negative thing at all. It is clear, concise, and works.

Thanks to Paramania for a prompt reply and good advice for all pilots, old, bold and new.

SW

I have to agree with Simon on this one, as I didnt even think to check my mallion's, I was flying at the weekend with our usual flying group and out of team of 5 only one had checked there mallions since buying there wings.

So if anything good is to come out of this, It is to send the message out to the paragliding and paramotoring community to always check things like this.

I realize that for many of you out there that is just common sense but for some they would not have know this.

Anyways just my two cent !!

D

[Farmer_Dave]

Hands up from me too.. visual check is all mine get bar once per season. But , correct me if I'm wrong here. Clive checked the tightness as it was a new wing. The photo would indicate that it broke free at the other end and not the piece of thread that you tighten up. Is this right? If so, it would be difficult to check for this type of fault, and so hopefully a one off.

[matt_k]

Where can you see the picturs of this? Was it tight but pulled and sheared the thread under load?

[clivefreeman]

Here isthe link with the photo of the malion !!

http://paramotorcentral.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=31947

[matt_k]

O! so a pre flight check wouldnt have bought this problem to light until it was under load!

Should all malions have a certified load stamped on them?

[Guest]

Guys,

I do think that it is worth waiting for the AAIB report to come to light, if they choose to investigate it that is.

Assumption is the mother of all F ups.

Clear facts from qualified people are what are needed here, so lets keep this thread a nice clean place with accurate information as and when it arrises, for people to find for years to come in the interest of safety alone.

SW

[pete_b]

O! so a pre flight check wouldnt have bought this problem to light until it was under load!

Should all malions have a certified load stamped on them?

No

[clivefreeman]

O! so a pre flight check wouldnt have bought this problem to light until it was under load!

Should all malions have a certified load stamped on them?

No

Pete you are a man of many words !!

[pete_b]

O! so a pre flight check wouldnt have bought this problem to light until it was under load!

Should all malions have a certified load stamped on them?

No

Pete you are a man of many words !!

Yep

[paramotormike]

Why should all malions NOT have a certified stamp on them?

Surley this would be a good thing?

http://www.s3i.co.uk/rapide_link_delta.php

Mike

[pete_b]

Why should all malions NOT have a certified stamp on them?

Surley this would be a good thing?

http://www.s3i.co.uk/rapide_link_delta.php

Mike

Why should cars not have a speed regulator on them like lorries do surely this would be a good thing as well?

It is not compulsory.

If they are tested to a specific breaking point then there is no real need to state it on them.

Stamping it on to the Mailion would make it that little bit weaker anyway I would have thought!.

[matt_k]

ok

[Richwill15]

As a complete newbie to this I really am coming from a point of virpew as an interested party rather than any subject matter expert. However I found the following interesting

http://paramotorcentral.org/viewtopic.p ... 7417dbfdc3

Not sure whether this is something new or refers to the case above. Does raise some interesting questions.

Al

[Guest]

Hi Al,

It is in reference to the same incident.

SW

[Richwill15]

Hi Al,

It is in reference to the same incident.

SW

Cheers Simon.

[aquatix]

I felt like the same message needed to get out ....

I agree about the video, but am a disapointed the dealer who sold me the wing did not contact me as soon as he became aware there was a posible issue with the mallions, regardless of wether I had already seen it on another forum.

its bad form as far as I am concerned

Without wishing to be argumentative or have any more posts censored or removed, this subject of dealer / manufacturer communication over safety issues is important.

I received a new Revo2 almost exactly 12 months ago. It arrived with multiple faults - several of which on their own would have had serious or potentially fatal consequences if flown. Only a thorough pre-flight inspection (by me) prevented this, but it is marketed to beginners who may not think to inspect a new wing (or know how).

After a lengthy discussion with Paramania (emails available) they suggested it was the fault of the (well known) UK dealer who should have inspected the wing - even though they supplied it to me direct from their main office / factory.

Mine was not the only wing to be shipped with similar faults, but despite repeated requests neither the dealer or manufacturer made any attempt to notify other customers or issue a safety notice on their websites. A few notices and youtube videos have subsequently surfaced, but still there has been no effort to contact customers directly.

Perhaps they are worried that issuing safety warnings might affect sales, but personally I would rather buy from a company that cares about customer safety and deals with any issues promptly and effectively. Any reasonable person would understand that problems can occasionally occur with a batch of materials or somewhere in an outsourced manufacturing process.

Not criticising any brand, as Paramania have a great team and promptly supplied me with new lines, brakes, risers etc for me to rectify the problems. My issue is with problem reporting in general - ie any potential safety issue should be notified immediately to customers and dealers until it is resolved, not left to filter out gradually via forum debate.

Of course it is too early to know if this is an isolated incident of a defective maillon or simply user error, but similar problems have occurred in the past with certain karabiners and harness quick-lock connectors. Let's hope there is a speedy and thorough investigation / clarification with prompt reporting....

PS - one possible advantage of free flying is the occasional parawaiting, which lends itself perfectly to giving your kit a thorough inspection. Like others have said, it can be all too easy to just set up and go with paramotoring, so things can be overlooked pre-flight.

[alan_k]

Sometimes I almost think it is a bother that to get a half hour flight in I am out of the house for nearly 2 hours.

20 minutes of this is getting to the field and back and the rest of the time on the ground is packing up afterwards (well it won't go in the car unless I do) and doing a thorough pre flight; I have never been tempted to skip it.

ALWAYS DO A THOROUGH PRE-FLIGHT, you know it makes sense

Cheers,

Alan