Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 15:04:57 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-4987748@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.101.166.170; envelope-from=joel@meself.com
From: Joel Hall <joel@meself.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: RE: Aircraft Repairs
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In response to the thread about good shops and bad shops, one might draw
the conclusion that they were bad shop's if they weren't RDD or
Hadlich's. Those are great shops and I know the people at both shops.
There is also Fibercraft, a shop I have used continually since 2003 on
four different aircraft. Everyone knows they are a great shop as well.
One good thing that is present at all of these good shops is that there
is a good deal of "coopetition" going on. There is a constant flow of
information concerning best-practices and saftey upgrades that are
exchanged between these shops. All of the best shops in the country have
open lines with each other. If your shop does not know these shops and
is not communicating frequently, then maybe they should be. I can't
count the number of safety upgrades I have done through the years with
Fibercraft with issues that Fibercraft discovered OR learned from RDD,
Mike Custard (Advanced Aviation), etc. It is the sharing of information
from these top shops that keep the fleet safe. Just my two cents.
Joel


>From my personal experience I have found that there is a mix  of
>response from our industry: the good are very very good and the bad are
>very very (very) bad.  The good do superb work for reasonable
>compensation (RDD and the Hadlich duo come to mind) and the bad steal
>your money and leave you with an unsafe aircraft (names withheld).