Mallion pre and post flight safety check.

[Guest]

A short video from Paramania showing you how to check your Mallions correctly before flight.

[youtubevideo]

[/youtubevideo]

SW

[norbertflyer]

Just got this email from the bhpa:

TO ALL PG POWER PILOTS

Please use the link below to read Safety Notice No.32 recently issued by the FSC Chairman.

http://bhpa.co.uk/pdf/safety_notices/sn032.082011.pdf

Jennifer Burdett

Office Manager

British Hang Gliding & Paragliding Association

8 Merus Court, Meridian Business Park, Leicester, LE19 1RJ

Tel. 0116 289 4316 www.bhpa.co.uk

British Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association Limited.

Registered in England no 2618166 Registered office: 340 Melton Road, Leicester, LE4 7SL

[Guest]

Great report,

Shame about the dig at Paramania at the end. Kind of de-values it for me.

It is NOT a paramania issue and ALL GIN glider using this batch of mallion are effected. There for, the safety notice is neglecting the safety of other GIN pilots for the sake of a dig.

If you have a wing produced at the GIN factory that is effected, you will be informed by your dealer very soon.

I already have replacement mallions for my customers effected wings.

SW

[skybound]

I don't think the BHPA were having a dig. All the other companies that Gin produce for that opted to use this cheaper style of Mallion have traced all the wings effected (Gin dont these mallions on their own wings).

I would of thought that all effected Revo2 customers would have been contacted by now rather than waiting for them to come back to the supplying dealer!

And why would you have replacement mallions anyway? I thought the problem was the poor pre-fight of the pilot

[garyfreefly]

Quote (I would of thought that all effected Revo2 customers would have been contacted by now rather than waiting for them to come back to the supplying dealer!)

So would I

This type of failure by any manafacturer just wouldnt be tolerated in any other type of aviation so why should it with our sport/lifestyle.... I just dont get it

[notch]

Clearly the mallion is defective from the photo - look at the thread.

The manufacturer rightly deserves some mud to be thrown over this, I mean how much money would have been saved over using certified mallions?

It probably costs less than $20 a wing to fit proper ones.

If they are this cost sensitive, you have to wonder what other shortcuts have been taken?

To try and cover it up with a "here's how you do up your mallions" video too.

[aquatix]

The article states that "This maillon type has been fitted to other glider types from other manufacturers but, with the co-operation of the manufacturing company, all of the affected gliders have been accounted for." This would suggest that it IS just a Paramania problem.

Clive & Gary are correct - the manufacturer & dealers should have been much more proactive in contacting any potentially affected customers immediately - not simply relying on the word to filter out through youtube video's, forums, and BHPA safety notices (since not all pilots are BHPA members).

This has been a longstanding problem with Paramania and at least some of their authorised dealers (not you Simon, as I know you have been proactive). My Revo 2 was delivered with several serious manufacturing defects (as I know others were) and I notified Paramania and the dealer immediately. Absolutely no effort was made by either to contact other customers or even place a safety notice on their website where it might actually be seen.

I won't name the (well known) dealer publicly, but I have several emails from last year describing the defects and asking them to notify other customers. The dealer did nothing, and Paramania actually told me it was too much trouble for them to send an email to the customers they had on direct mailing lists .... A mouse click too much trouble to potentially save someone's life ??? A shame, as it put me off buying their products in future.

So, in this day & age of technology is it too much to ask that manufacturers / dealers actually contact their customers by email, text (or even post) to ensure safety notices, checks or product recalls actually reach those concerned ??

[notch]

aquatix, what other defects were there?

Was looking at the Revo2 for some time, somehow now, not so much.

I think what most small manufacturers struggle with is that quality can only be determined by measuring as statistically significant number of devices over many batches. Testing 1 or 2 mallions is just not good enough, especially on a critical component.

[aquatix]

aquatix, what other defects were there?

Well I don't want to hijack the topic (although it is relevent) and I will also say it was early in the production run (June 2010) so things have hopefully improved, but:

The wing arrived with no manual, line plan, EN certification, warranty or inspection certificate ! Initial inflation revealed the middle A & B cascades had been routed through each other (lethal if flown) so I had to remove all the lines from the mallions back to the wing and redo them correctly. First 2 flights showed the marked brake line lengths were over 28cm too long (interesting landings) - which without a brake line chart meant several frustrating communications with Paramania, who initially denied any problem, then didn't know the correct lengths, then finally admitted there was a problem with that batch.... The trimmer and speedbar range on the risers did not match the factory figures for that size wing (29) and the trimmers could not be operated with one hand - this changed after less than 20 hours when they wouldn't stay closed and just slipped open instead (really useful on launch or landing) ! Finally the adjustable buckle on the brake handles turned out to be defective, requiring stitching to modify / make safe !

Other than that it had a great colour scheme and came in a nice bag !

On the plus side, Paramania did send replacement riser sets, modified trimmers, replacement brake handles (non adjustable) and tip steering lines. It took too long and too much hassle however, so I never felt totally happy with the wing and ended up selling it. IMO they should have either replaced the whole wing or arranged for it to be professionally inspected and repaired by either themselves or a company such as Aerofix - so that all lines were checked - not just the few I had inspected and found to be faulty.

I have never had a single problem with any of the other 7 wings I have owned by the likes of Apco, Dudek, MacPara, Ozone etc. Unlucky, or substandard manufacturing / quality control ? - you decide !

[alan_k]

Sub standard quality control (customer follow up particularly) in my book.

Wings are not cheap items!

Cheers,

Alan

[Guest]

I would agree that ALL of the wings should be quality controlled for sure.

Some good points have been made here and lets face it.. .. We ALL want safer wings to fly.

The problem seems to be when the wings are sent directly from China. ( I will no longer accept this as a delivery option )

I will insist that my wings are checked and supplied by Paramania directly.

I genuinely believe this will solve ALL of there problems (pre delivery)

The other problem of course is the use of Mail order companies for buying wings. When purchased from a dealer, there is a hand over process which ensures a further check ( and test fly ) of the wing so don't buy a wing from the web / sent in the post to you. Get what your paying for and go to your delers field for the full hand over.

Or save £100 and buy it mail order.

SW

[Farmer_Dave]

It's good that this problem came to light, like any others, so that we can all be more aware and safer.

[pete_b]

Just got this email from the bhpa:

TO ALL PG POWER PILOTS

Please use the link below to read Safety Notice No.32 recently issued by the FSC Chairman.

http://bhpa.co.uk/pdf/safety_notices/sn032.082011.pdf

Jennifer Burdett

Office Manager

British Hang Gliding & Paragliding Association

8 Merus Court, Meridian Business Park, Leicester, LE19 1RJ

Tel. 0116 289 4316 http://www.bhpa.co.uk

British Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association Limited.

Registered in England no 2618166 Registered office: 340 Melton Road, Leicester, LE4 7SL

AS you were E-mailed by the BHPA, Can you get a copy of the testing house report and post it here please.

I would very much like to read it.

[tommcb6016]

Is that the norm? Having wings made in china?

Tom

[Guest]

I too would like to see an engineers report to back this (in house BHPA report) up.

I am not suggesting its incorrect. But I still want to see it (if) one exists. If not, then again... the report has 0 value.

It would be the same as any one of us writing a report.

SW

[Guest]

Is that the norm? Having wings made in china?

Tom

The GIN factory is in China. (has been since time began... way before the likes of reflex wings)

I am just now going to use Paramania as my filter and not accept direct from China stock.

A response that I am sure Paramania will understand and support.

SW

[skybound]

I thought Gin where based and manufacture in Korea?

[pete_b]

I thought Gin where based and manufacture in Korea?

Bonus point to Clive

Gin Gliders Inc.

285-1 GalDam-Ri, Mohyun-Myun

Yongin City, Kyunggi-Do

449-851 Korea

BUT they may be made in china

Nil points (pending enquiry)

[aquatix]

I will insist that my wings are checked and supplied by Paramania directly.

I genuinely believe this will solve ALL of there problems (pre delivery)

The other problem of course is the use of Mail order companies for buying wings. When purchased from a dealer, there is a hand over process which ensures a further check ( and test fly ) of the wing so don't buy a wing from the web / sent in the post to you. Get what your paying for and go to your delers field for the full hand over.

Or save £100 and buy it mail order.

Not sure this will make any real amount of difference. I purchased the faulty Revo 2 through my usual dealer (one of the 12 certified Paramania dealers in England) but after waiting 6 weeks for it to arrive, when I went to collect it they had sent the wrong colour ! The problems detailed previously began when Paramania sent me the correct colour glider - directly from their head office in Poland ..... I didn't cut corners, went through correct channels, and the only way it could be described as a "mail order glider" would be from Paramania ordering them in from China.

Quality control checks should be carried out at every stage of the process, with a final sign-off done before it leaves the factory - that way nothing should 'slip through the net'. A final dealer check is nice, but should not replace essential safety checks. I expected better when purchasing a supposedly certified glider from a reputable company at a cost of over £2.5k for some fabric & string - which was not trying to cut costs with some non-branded mail order Chinese copy.

Perhaps Gin put their best trained staff (ie the 13 year olds on 10p per hour) to work on their own brand gliders whilst competitors brands are made at their factory by the less qualified (ie 7 year olds on 6p per hour) ?

Not sure why you question the validity of the BHPA safety notice ? They don't endorse or sell gliders so there is no anti-Paramania bias there. It merely states that examination of several of the Taiwanese maillons revealed they were not manufactured to the correct design criteria. It doesn't require the resources of an AAIB investigation and such findings would be equally valid if you, Pete or I inspected a batch - and you must find it credible to be supplying replacement maillons to your customers ?

Surely the safety of ALL pilots should come before any perceived PMC v BHPA rivalry ?

[Guest]

The only reason I am not yet happy with the report is because I have not seen a qualified engineers report to back up any of its claims.?

What we see is Just an un-official report produced in house presented as official / factual.

I could have done that with my ruler.

It's a joke of a report, and yes I do want to see it changed for the safety of everyone.

If you are happy with the way this has been handled by all people involved then feel free to read and digest the information the BHPA have presented you.

I will wait for someone qualified thanks.

I don't care about the BHPA and don't consider them competitors / rivals. They do their thing, and we do ours. But in my opinion ( and I am allowed one, yes? ) is that the BHPA accident / incident reporting system that is badly flawed.

PS, Still waiting for a report from Pete B's accident? (guess that must still be in the system as well then? from over 2 years ago) Cant wait to see that one it must be very in depth (as you would hope for considering that a) Pete is a BHPA member and B) he was very badly hurt. c) It CAN be avoided in the future with the correct information, if we ever get it.

It's a joke, that should not be accepted. They have a legal responsibility to investigate and did not talk to even one of the 12 people that were in the field that day. If I ever hear of the same accident happening and hurting someone else I would directly blame the BHPA and its lack of ANY action to prevent it happening again.

SW

[skybound]

Simon a point I think you are missing here is that the safety report was compiled with the help of Gin. Gin acknowledged that about 20% of the 5000 maillions they induvidaly inspected where flawed. Gin where disappointed but responsible enough to help the BHPA release the safety notice.

So in my mind why do you need to see an engineers report when the manufacture (Gin) except there was a problem?

[Guest]

Because they don't make the mallions.

I also ACCEPT there was a problem, but I do not accept that report due to the lack of credible content.

If you had died the mallion would have been forensically examined ( a service that we can all pay for ). I see no reason why the same should not have happend in this case ( or if it has, why it has not been made public )

SW

[skybound]

Simon I need some help here as I still don't understand what you mean about the credibility of the report?

The report was issued with the help of the manufacture, they where happy with the content. Gin whernt happy with gate gap inregality nor with some of thread formation.

So if you agree there was a problem why are you unhappy that people where told about it through a recognised reporting system?

[Guest]

OK, so clearly you have decided since our conversation yesterday that you have changed your mind about the idea, after suggesting I call Mark Dale for a copy of it.

A report that shows the stages of testing from a certified engineering house is not to much to ask when the safety of people could be at stake (LIFE).

To produce this report, it must have been tested yes?

How? who by? were they qualified to carry out the testing?

This information is currently missing from the report making it incomplete in my opinion. If the information exists... then rather than chucking little snippets out on a forum get the info out to everyone.

EG, you said "Gin acknowledged that about 20% of the 5000 maillions they induvidaly inspected where flawed"

The report says "On two of the maillons examined the actual distance engaged was less than 2.40mm.)" which is clearly not 20% of 5000 but, for a report reader, the only number referenced when referring to examinations.

So how do you know this? and why dont we? Its not on the report. What else do we need to know to qualify this report?

SW

[skybound]

No I Havant changed my mind since yesterday, what i did tell you was that if you had direct questions then go DIRECT, speak with the BHPA in your capacity as head of the PMC.

"I also ACCEPT there was a problem, but I do not accept that report due to the lack of credible content"

If you accept there was a problem have you been given a list of serial numbers identifying these wings? because all the wings Ive seen from Paramainia dont have any date of manufacture marked on the plate, so the owner nor you I guess have no idea when they where actually made.

I hope you are putting as much effort in resoving the safety issue as you are in trying to rubbish what is at the end of the day a Safety Report to save life's!

Not making this personal, just speaking my mind. a nice big smilly to prove it