X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 07:40:02 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from proxy1.addr.com ([38.113.244.28] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.11) with ESMTPS id 2279599 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 01:51:57 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=38.113.244.28; envelope-from=timothy.ong@leadingedgeaircraft.com Received: from TimOng (bc11879.bendcable.com [66.220.118.79]) by proxy1.addr.com (8.12.11/8.12.8/Submit) with ESMTP id l7N5plo6011907 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2007 22:51:47 -0700 (PDT) From: "Timothy Ong" X-Original-To: "'Lancair Mailing List'" Subject: TK5 shocks...the rest of the story X-Original-Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 22:50:36 -0700 X-Original-Message-ID: <03c001c7e549$8a951d70$6501a8c0@TimOng> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_03C1_01C7E50E.DE364570" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 Thread-Index: AcflSYcxY2yE7dqBRN6DbcyTbEea9w== This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_03C1_01C7E50E.DE364570 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Guys, Sorry I've been real busy, but I've had a chance to look over the posts to the LML about the TK5 shocks. Indeed, if the shock has completely failed, it would not be advisable to fly except with the gear down. You will not hurt the shock deflated, but there is the good possibility that the gear will not retract properly. To date there has been over 400 sets sold to Lancair 235, 320, 360 aircraft owners (I'm trying to round up the exact number). This is probably over half the entire flying fleet. Of the failures (approximately 20-30) most were due to hard landings (this is an understatement) at which the aircraft should have been grounded anyway for a thorough inspection. There also have been a couple initial failures to installation errors on my part of seals and are defective components (mostly schraders). These type failures typically fail immediately upon installation. Interestingly enough I dyno test each shock, but for some reason the test does not pick up these failures (still scratching my head on this one). I have a one year warranty that covers any manufacturing defects whatsoever. I have actually warranted shocks that are much older do to the fact they had just begun their flight testing. In the past, if the aircraft has been AOG and not at its home airport, I have FEDEX'd overnight a replacement shock to get the aircraft home and sorted it out later. I have and always will stand behind my products that I design. The TK5 shock has definitely been proven in the market. At only 1.15 lbs, it is definitely the lightest alternative to the donuts. As far as Chris Z's comment that basically only good things are said on the LML about the TK5 shocks because I work for Lancair and that would be burning a big bridge...obviously Chris doesn't know me very well at all. If I've missed answering any of the pertinent questions, please let me know and, I'll try again. Regards, Timothy Ong ------=_NextPart_000_03C1_01C7E50E.DE364570 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Guys,

Sorry I’ve been real busy, but I’ve had a = chance to look over the posts to the LML about the TK5 = shocks.

Indeed, if the shock has completely failed, it would = not be advisable to fly except with the gear down. You will not hurt the = shock deflated, but there is the good possibility that the gear will not = retract properly.

To date there has been over 400 sets sold to Lancair = 235, 320, 360 aircraft owners (I’m trying to round up the exact = number). This is probably over half the entire flying fleet. Of the = failures (approximately 20-30) most were due to hard landings (this is an = understatement) at which the aircraft should have been grounded anyway for a thorough inspection.

There also have been a couple initial failures to installation errors on my part of seals and are defective components = (mostly schraders). These type failures typically fail immediately upon installation. Interestingly enough I dyno test each shock, but for = some reason the test does not pick up these failures (still scratching my = head on this one).

I have a one year warranty that covers any = manufacturing defects whatsoever. I have actually warranted shocks that are much = older do to the fact they had just begun their flight = testing.

In the past, if the aircraft has been AOG and not at = its home airport, I have FEDEX’d overnight a replacement shock to get = the aircraft home and sorted it out later.

I have and always will stand behind my products that = I design. The TK5 shock has definitely been proven in the = market. At only 1.15 lbs, it is definitely the lightest alternative to the = donuts.

As far as Chris Z’s comment that basically only = good things are said on the LML about the TK5 shocks because I work for = Lancair and that would be burning a big bridge…..obviously Chris doesn’t = know me very well at all.

If I’ve missed answering any of the pertinent questions, please let me know and, I’ll try = again.

Regards,

Timothy Ong

------=_NextPart_000_03C1_01C7E50E.DE364570--