CARV in trouble (the ARV Griffin maker)
Patrick Fynn
Please forward to anyone who could benefit from this information.
Dick Craig is keeping his griffin3.listbot.com members blissfully
ignorant
through censorship.
Mr. Craig responded to the verifiable facts that I presented with some
serious allegations.
It requires a response
> Patrick Fynn (if that is your name) I question your
motives, and that of your
> posting. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first
time I've seen you
> post anything on RAH. Why now?.
The first rule about protecting yourself from the truth is to attack the
messenger. None of the
above is relevant.
> You failed to mention that IARV's lawyers have suggested
that
> they attempt an out of court settlement since their case is
weak.
There is of course no public record of this. If you aren't making this
up, you must have been
talking to one of the litigants and I doubt if IARV would talk to you.
If CARV is taking an
attempt to settle as a sign of weakness, it is shear speculation. I can
think of some more
plausible explanations. Litigation is expensive; only the lawyers win
in the end, especially since
CARV has no money.
> You also failed to mention CARV's counter suite against
IARV
> based on on Marsden's inability to complete the work he was
contracted for.
You have been lied to Mr. Craig.You can check this by phoning the Court
of Queen's Bench in
Edmonton at 780-422-2237. Send them $10 and ask them to do a search of
International Air R.V. Inc.
and David Marsden vs Canada Air. R.V. Inc. The claim was filed back in
March. It is now
June and not only is there no counter suit on file but no defense! Why
haven't CARV defended themselves?
Perhaps they know that there is no defense. Why waste money on lawyers
in a loosing cause? Perhaps
their lawyers have them on C.O.D. They wouldn't be able to hide their
financial situation from their lawyers.
If they can't afford something as essential as advertising in Kitplanes,
how could they afford lawyers?
> Admittedly I don't know all of the details, but there is
much more to the story
> than you presented. There is no question that the Griffin
is a great little
> airplane, but it took the current people at CARV to develop
it to the
> marketable product that it now is -- something that was not
happening with Dave
> and Steve Marsden's involvement in the company.
You only have to go to CARV's home page to prove that this is a lie.
The split with IARV came
in July, 1998. They have a news release dated November 28, 1997
outlining the improvements
incorporated into the Griffin III.. Currently you can read it at:
http://www.arvcorp.com/gec-g3improvements.htm
I will post the text at the end of this message in case they change
their web site after reading this.
These other links decribe the development and testing that had been
completed. I remember
seeing these pages last summer.
http://www.arvcorp.com/gf-manufacturing.htm
http://www.arvcorp.com/gga-testing.htm
CARV shows a picture of what they call the ARV Griffin IV showplane
registration CG-CQX at:
http://www.arvcorp.com/ga-intro.htm
They are representing it as an example of their current product. This
aircraft was at Oshkosh in
August, 1998, just weeks after the split with IARV. The aircraft was
structurally complete at Oshkosh.
It has a fuselage, wings, a tail, landing gear and an engine. Apart
from a few finishing items like a cowling
it was a complete aircraft.
Griffin builders who took delivery before July 1998 should know the
development history. Please
post here or at griffin3.listbot.com what portion of the development you
estimate was done before July, 1998.
> The Griffin is a nice kit plane
The evidence shows that Griffin was developed while IARV was working
with CARV. It was
IARVs job to develop it. Since we all agree that the Griffin is a nice
plane, they did their job well.
> Since Marsden was contracted by CARV to do design work on
the Griffin, and failed to
> fulfill his end of the agreement, I don't see how he can
sue to halt production of the Griffin.
This doesn't ring true. Marsden has a long history of successfully
completed projects. You can
read about them at:
http://www.arvcorp.com/iarv/other.htm
There is no reason why Marsden would not be able to complete the Griffin
project.
It shows how desperate CARV is that they have to lie to Mr. Craig, one
of their biggest supporters,
So why the split with IARV. Perhaps IARV was no longer needed, having
finished the development
for which CARV did not want to pay. This would explain the timing and
the law suit. We know they
are liars; it isn't a stretch to suppose that they are also thieves.
>
As for
> debt -- I'd like you to show me a developing company that
does not have debt of
> some sort.
Look at:
http://www.arvcorp.com/gea-recflyer.htm
Another link to the CARV web page show the reprint of an article in the
Recreational Flyer dated
November, 1995. How long are you going to forgive them for being
developing company Mr. Craig.
> Having met the
> individuals involved with CARV (nice people, pleasent to
deal with), and
> visited their site in Edmonton, I have high confidence that
CARV will be a
> successful company.
I am quite sure they appeared to be 'nice' while trying to get money out
of your pocket, but they are
not good people. They will soon be out of business, and they deserve it.
> Patrick Fynn wrote:
> The days of ARV Griffin manufacturer Canada ARV may well
be numbered. Here
> is what I know:
>
> 1) They are hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt to
suppliers. Some
> of the debts are several years old.
> 2) The Griffin's designers have terminated the
manufacturing rights for,
> amongst other things, non-payment. This happened last
year sometime. CARV
> continues to manufacture the Griffin in violation of
their agreement.
> 3) The Griffins designers are suing the manufacturer for
over $2 million
> and to force them to stop producing the Griffin.
> 4) Kitplanes has removed CARV from thier list of
advertiser's web pages.
> This may well mean that they will be refusing to print
the company's ads.
> 5) ARV Corp., the public company that was created to
take over CARV
> thereby providing capital for manufacturing the Griffin,
has been given a
> stop trading order from the Alberta Stock Exchange
because management
> failed to file financial statements. If the major
transaction (take-over)
> hasn't taken place by June 11, 1999, ARV Corp will be
delisted. Given the
> poor finacial situation of CARV it is almost certain that
the stock
> exchange will not allow the take-over.
>
> Whether you are a kitplane buyer or a supplier, if you
want to deal with
> these people, you had better do it on a COD basis.
http://www.arvcorp.com/gec-g3improvements.htm
Press Release November 28, 1997
Improvements incorporated into ARV Griffin Mark III
Canada Air R V Inc. is now in full production of the new Griffin III
model, and a production of a batch of 10 kits has been
started for completion before the end of February 1998.
The Griffin III is a new model incorporating some significant
improvements from the Griffin II which was featured in a kitplanes
article in February 1997.
Griffin III is a direct development of Griffin II and it retains the
best features of Griffin II. Improvements were in response to
market feedback after displaying Griffin II at several fly-in airshows.
The major improvements are as follows:
1. A new wing was designed, partly in an effort to move the strut
forward to allow easier entry into the cabin. A new higher lift
airfoil section was used to provide a slightly higher aspect ratio wing
(11:1) with higher wing loading for better ride in rough air.
The new wing section is a laminar section specifically designed to avoid
the usual increase in stall speed with roughness.
2. The full span flaperon control was reduced in chord from 9 inches to
6 inches and made all metal instead of fabric covered.
This was in response to the market survey indicating that customers were
interested in higher powered engines which would
mean higher cruising speeds. The smaller chord flaperon would reduce the
hinge moment loads that can become significant at
higher speeds, and the all metal control is more rigid in torsion.
3. The control system was redesigned to provide more rigid controls, and
also simplified to reduce the number of expensive
bearings required. As with the original Griffin, all the controls are
contained within the fuselage, and control rigging is not
disturbed if the wings are removed for storage or transport.
4. An aeroelastic flutter analysis was carried out based on measured
structural stiffness and using Subsonic Aeroelastic Flutter
analysis software purchased from Martin Holmann. The all metal structure
is very stiff. The analysis indicated no problem with
flutter up to speeds of at least 400 mph!
5. The cabin floor was redesigned to allow the option of sliding seats
on rails or seats with adjustable back rests similar to those
in Griffin II. The back rest type seats provide more head room for tall
people and are simpler and lighter.
6. Griffin III is available with either conventional (taildragger)
undercarriage or trigear versions, with a possible option to be
convertible. The Griffin III prototype has the taildragger option, and
the forward visibility when taxiing has proven to be just
excellent, as good (or better than) most trigear aircraft.
7. The composite undercarriage legs were designed to provide the full
FAR 23 requirements for energy absorption and
strength. A new castoring nose wheel with a rubber type spring was
designed. Steering on taxiing is by means of differential
braking using the very effective toe operated Cleveland disc brakes.
8. Extensive structural testing was carried out to prove the structural
strength of components.
Flight tests of the Griffin III prototype have shown it to have the same
excellent stability and handling as the previous Griffins.
Pitch stability is dead beat which makes it a very comfortable cross
country aircraft. The aircraft can be trimmed to hold an
absolutely steady speed, even in rough air.
The narrow chord ailerons are even more effective than on Griffin II,
and lateral control forces are light. Roll rate is 45 to 60
degrees per second. There is just enough adverse yaw to be able to
illustrate adverse yaw effect.
The stall characteristics are such that a stall is pretty much of a
non-event. The airspeed can be reduced to some minimum, and
if the stick is held full back it just increases by about 5 mph and then
decreases again to the minimum. Aileron control is retained
right into the stall. With cruise power applied the aircraft can be
flown under full control at the power off stall speed of 45 mph.
The reason for the mild stall is that the new airfoil used on this
aircraft has a trailing edge type stall where separation begins at
the trailing edge and gradually progresses forward.
The Griffin III kit comes fully jigged, with pilot holes drilled so the
kit can be assembled with clecoes for finish drilling and
riveting. It is pretty well a quick build kit which has been approved
for the 51% rule. All the components that require bending of
sheet metal, welding or machining are provided in the kit. Fibreglass
wing tips and tail tips come with the kit. Some of the
critical structural parts such as the wing main spars are completed at
the factory. Factory jigging ensures that the wings will fit
the fuselage correctly, and critical components like the wings will not
have a built in twist.
Press Releases
ARV Home Page Griffin Homepage
Survey - Free Draw for Tail Kit
For more information, write, telephone, or
e-mail: Marketing
CANADA AIR R.V. INC.
Hangar #11, City Center Airport
11760 109 Street
EDMONTON, Alberta, Canada
T5G 2T8
Telephone: 403-944-9210 or 403-448-0348
Fax: 403-461-0584 or 403-479-1002
e-Mail Marketing Dept.
These pages are updated as time permits; new
information is added when available.
Please send us your comments or suggestions.
Check back for updated information.
Last Modified July 3, 1998
http://www.arvcorp.com/gf-manufacturing.htm
Manufacturing the ARV Griffin
The ARV Griffin is an all metal , side-by-side two place high wing
experimental or amateur built aircraft.
The structure is mostly conventional, with the innovative effort being
directed at making construction as simple as possible for
the builder. One principle way this is accomplished is by having as few
individual parts as possible. For example, the wing skins
consist of only three parts, extending 15 feet from root to tip. The
fuselage skin consists of only six pieces. The entire structure
only uses approximately 6,250 rivets.
The ARV Griffin is a
CAD/CAM aircraft (Computer Aided
Design/Computer Aided
Manufacturing). We use numerically
controlled industrial
lasers and water jets on many parts. This
gives us consistent
quality and accuracy at a cost lower than
hand made. Located in
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Air R.V.
has the resources of a
modern industrial city available for the
expansion of
production.
The principal components, wings, fuselage and tailplane are
pre-assembled in jigs with pilot holes to allow the builder to
assemble the aircraft without jigs. Some of the critical components such
as the wing spars are completed at the factory. Ribs
are all formed and attached to the spar in order to assemble the wing in
a jig to be sure to get it straight with no twist.
Factory Wing Assembly Jig:
Wing shown prior to Skinning
Factory Fuselage Assembly Jig:
Fuselage Ready for Disassembly prior to
shipping
All the flying surfaces, the wings and tailplanes, are flush riveted.
The skins are dimpled and Avex blind rivets are used.
Optionally, the aircraft can be assembled with standard AN type solid
rivets. The wing has been designed in such a way that all
the skin rivets can be bucked. Use is made of the 3/32” rivets which are
easy to hammer and make an excellent smooth finish.
On the other hand, the Avex rivets are easier to use and with some
filling and smoothing also provide a smooth surface for the
laminar wing section.
The large roomy cabin with exceptional visibility is one of the best
features of this aircraft. The cabin is very solidly constructed
with double sheet metal floor and a roll cage structure framing the
cabin. Conventional sliding seats are easily removed for
extra cargo space , and seat backs tilt forward for access to the large
baggage space behind the seats. All the controls are
hidden under the floor where nothing can fall in to jam them.
The leaf spring type undercarriage was designed using the finite element
method to meet the rigorous FAR 23 design standards
of strength and energy absorption.
ARV Home Page Griffin Homepage
Survey - Free Draw for Tail Kit Development of
the ARV Griffin
Canada Air R. V. Inc., the Manufacturer of
the ARV Griffin
For more information, write, telephone, or
e-mail: Marketing
CANADA AIR R.V. INC.
Hangar #11, City Center Airport
11760 109 Street
EDMONTON, Alberta, Canada
T5G 2T8
Telephone: 403-944-9210 or
403-448-0348
Fax: 403-461-0584 or 403-479-1002
e-Mail Marketing Dept.
These pages are updated as time permits;
new information is added when available.
Please send us your comments or
suggestions. Check back for updated information.
Last Modified July 3, 1998
http://www.arvcorp.com/gga-testing.htm
ARV Griffin Structural Testing
At International Air R.V. Inc., we are committed to developing only the
safest aviation products. To this end, we performed
tests to verify the structural integrity of critical components of the
ARV Griffin although the government requires no testing for
amateur built or experimental aircraft.
We designed the ARV Griffin for the Utility Category at a gross weight
of 1500 lbs. To meet FAR 23 requirements, we must
demonstrate that the structure can support the following ultimate loads
for at least three seconds without failing:
i. Symmetrical load of 6.6g
ii. 4.4g with 1.5 times the torsion of full aileron deflection at
maneuver speed (122 mph)
iii. 3.0g with 1.5 times the torsional of the flap fully down position
at the flap design dive speed (87 mph)
These numbers have a 1.5 safety factor built in over the limit loads,
the largest loads that we expect the aircraft to experience
over its life.
Loads on the fuselage are concentrated at hard points. The inertia of
the engine acts on the motor mount. The inertia of the
pilots is taken through the seat rails and payload is supported by floor
beams. The wing supports these loads almost entirely
through the strut, and not through the wing root. We constructed a test
rig to supported the fuselage by the strut pickup. We
applied downward load to the motor mount with a come-along fixed to an
autobody frame rack (see Figure 1). We chained a
steel beam through the cockpit to the frame rack. When we loaded the
motor mount, the downward reaction on the beam
loaded the cockpit at the centroid of the pilots and payload (see Figure
2). Sand bags simulated the load on the tail.
Figure 1: Test Fuselage in Frame Rack
As the fuselage was loaded, we monitored stress with strain gauges
mounted at critical locations (see Figure 2).
Figure 2: Strut Support, Cockpit Load and
Strain Gauges
The load on the wing is distributed along the span by a combination of
aerodynamic forces and inertia. On an ordinary wing the
aerodynamic load is distributed spanwise according to the Schrenk
distribution (see Figure 3). This is an empirical distribution
that accounts for the effect of vorticity. Vorticity is the same
phenomenon that causes induced drag. The effect of vorticity is
most predominant at the wing tip where it reduces the lift generated.
Figure 3 Wing Load Distributions Modified for Winglets
Winglets reduce the effect of vorticity, thereby reducing induced drag
and increasing the lift generated at the tip. The extra lift
reduces the stall speed, but since it is at the tip where the moment arm
is the longest, it adds significantly to the load on the
structure. Since we intend to use winglets with the ARV Griffin , I had
to modify the load curves used in design and testing to
account for the effect of winglets (see Figure 3). I based this
modification on computation fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of
winglets performed at the University of Alberta.
I used the modified Schrenk distribution to establish a pattern for
piling sand bags on the wing to approximate aerodynamic
loads as shown in Figure 4. Inertial relief due to the fuel causes the
notch in the curve at the root.
Figure 4 Load Test Sand Bag Distribution (note inertial relief at the
root)
The resultant force acting on the wing is 120 forward of vertical during
a pull-up at the maneuver speed. We therefore mounted
the wing upside down at a nose down incidence of 120 . We piled sand
onto the wing over the ¼ chord (the aerodynamic
center) according to the pattern shown in Figure 4 (see Figure 5). The
load was equivalent to 6.67g.
Figure 5: Ultimate Load Test For Wing
Note: The wing weighs as much as one of the
smaller bags
For the aileron and flap deflected cases, we used a smaller pile of sand
in a pattern similar that shown in Figure 4. To generate
torsion the sand was centered 8" (Figure 6) and 18" (Figure 7) behind
the ¼ chord respectively. The torsion was equivalent to
full aileron deflection at 225 mph and 200 flap deflection at 172 mph.
Figure 6: Torsional Load Test
Figure 7: Ultimate Torsional Load Test
Note Sand Bags Piled on Aft Spar
When we decided to increase the allowable horsepower to 160, we wanted
to be sure that the airframe could handle the
resulting speeds. We purchased Martin Holmann’s Subsonic Aerodynamic
Flutter program and performed an aeroelastic
analysis. Figures 8 through 11 illustrate the wing vibration mode shapes
determined from the analysis. A similar analysis was
done for the tail. The analysis showed that we should not expect any
problems with flutter below 450 mph.
The structural testing program has given us confidence in the integrity
of our product and the peace of mind to allow us to sleep
at night.
ARV Home Page Griffin Homepage
Survey - Free Draw for Tail Kit Ancestry of the
ARV Griffin
Development of the ARV Griffin
For more information, write, telephone, or
e-mail: Marketing
International Air R.V. Inc.
Hangar #11, City Center Airport
11760 109 Street
EDMONTON, Alberta, Canada
T5G 2T8
Telephone: 403-944-9210 or 403-448-0348
Fax: 403-461-0584 or 403-479-1002
e-Mail Marketing Dept.
These pages are updated as time permits; new
information is added when available.
Please send us your comments or suggestions.
Check back for updated information.
Last Modified July 3, 1998
http://www.arvcorp.com/iarv/other.htm
The Griffin's Ancestors: Other Marsden Designs
Dr. Dave Marsden, designer of the Griffin, has had a distinguished
aviation career. While attending the University of Alberta,
Dave enrolled in the RCAF Reserve Training Plan and went through the
basic flight training in Harvards. The was flying T-33s
by the time he earned his bachelor of science degree in 1955. Awarded
the Athlone Fellowship the year of his graduation, he
traveled to England to earn a master’s degree at the Aeronautical
College at Cranfield in 1957. Upon his return to Canada,
Dave went to work for the National Research Council in the Aerodynamics
Department and by 1964 had also earned a
doctorate in aerospace engineering from the University of Toronto
Aerospace Institute.
The Griffin is a Unique airplane and is the most recent of Dr. Marsden’s
designs, but each of his other designs are remarkable
in their own way.
The Sigma Sailplane
In 1967, the British engaged in a research project to build a glider
that could compete with German gliders, which at that time
were winning most of the competitions. Four years later, the British
design team produced the Sigma, which had a 21metre long
variable-geometry wing controlled by a hydraulic system.
The Sigma exhibited poor roll control and
didn’t perform nearly as well as its designers had
expected. In addition, it weighed in at a
whopping 1300 lbs empty.
Not knowing how to modify the airplane to get
the performance they wanted, the design
team invited proposals.
Dr. Marsden’s proposal for changing the wing
design won, and after the changes were
made, the Sigma’s performance rivaled that of the German gliders.
Although it made a strong showing in the one competitive
event it flew in, the need for a big, physically powerful crew to handle
the weight of the airplane prevented its entry in further
events.
The Gemini Glider
In 1973, Dr. Marsden designed the Gemini two-place glider, which had a
wingspan of 18.3
metres with a full-span slotted flap. The Gemini established national
records for the 100 km
triangle, the 300 km triangle, and the 400 km out-and-return distances.
With two people
aboard, the Gemini’s performance equaled that of the single-place
Schemp-Hirth Cirrus,
which was one of the most competitive gliders of that era. The Gemini
also featured a
four-piece wing, which made it possible for two people (rather than the
three or four
needed with most two-place gliders) to remove it from its trailer and
rig it for flight.
The Bushmaster
Dr. Marsden designed the Bushmaster
Ultralight in 1984, and it was produced in Sylvan
Lake, Alberta, until 1986. Some were sold as
kits and some as factory-built airplanes. All
together, the Sylvan Lake factory built about
94 airplanes before management troubles
caused it to close. The Bushmaster, which was
probably the first real airplane in the
Canadian ultralight field, would no doubt
have become a leader in its category. The
roll-cage type construction of its cabin,
which made it an extremely safe and rugged
airplane, has been carried forward to the
Griffin.
Initially, the Bushmaster flew on a 38 hp two-stroke Rotax engine - even
on floats!. Many later Bushmasters were equipped
with Rotax 503 50 hp engines, and some owners have now installed 80 hp
four-stroke Rotax engines.
The Westwind
http://www.arvcorp.com/gea-recflyer.htm
ARV GRIFFIN: The newest highwing kitplane
Reprinted by permission from "The Recreational Flyer" November 1995
The ARV Griffin, Canada's most recent entry into the highly
competitive kitplane market, is the first plane to pass
inspection through the new AIR-ABA program. The plane inspected
was the second prototype of the all-metal,
two-place high-wing plane designed by pilot and aeronautical
engineer Dr. David Marsden, president of the
Edmonton-based Canada Air R.V. Inc.
Arnold Forest, the RAA's regional director for Alberta and a
volunteer inspector for the AIR-ABA program in
that province, conducted the final inspection. This Griffin was
powered by a 100 hp. Continental O-200 engine.
According to company figures cruise speed is 120 mph at 75 per cent
power and rate of climb is 870 ft. per
minute at 1,500 lb. full gross weight.
Dave Marsden's background includes learning to fly Harvards and
T-Birds in the RCAF while an engineering
student. He became a soaring enthusiast in England while studying
for his master's degree, returned to Canada to
complete his Ph.D. at the University of Toronto Institute for
Aerospace Studies, then taught aerodynamics in the
University of Alberta's Mechanical Engineering Department.
He had 30 years of soaring, designing and building sailplanes and
ultralights when he introduced the prototype
Griffin in 1993. It was powered by a 72 hp. converted auto engine,
cruised at 100 mph and had a 925 ft. per
minute rate of climb, the company reported. His earlier powered
aircraft designs include the often copied
Bushmaster ultralight in 1984 and the later Westwind and Goldfinch,
also ultralights.
Marsden has been the main test pilot for the Griffin, which has
long tapered wings (35.5 ft span) with a modified
NASA natural laminar flow aerofoil developed in 1991. He said it
has excellent handling characteristics and is at
the leading edge of performance efficiency with its 12:1 glide
ratio. It comes in either tri-gear or tail wheel models.
The use of push rods and aircraft bearings give it smooth controls
and it handles turbulent conditions and
crosswinds well, important factors for someone selecting a trainer,
he said.
For builders the Griffin kits are shipped pre-jigged, preassembled
in factory jigs. Pilot holes are drilled to allow the
builder to assemble the aircraft without jigs. All the necessary
welding is done. There are just 3,000 rivets, putting
it into the quick build category. The kits also include all the
rivets, nuts and bolts needed and a manual the
company claims is "very intuitive".
After showing the first prototype at last summer's Arlington and
Abbotsford air shows ARV's marketing and
sales manager, said there was the kind of "positive" response that
comes from pilots taking a serious look at the
Griffin. The feedback resulted in some minor ergonomic changes for
a larger door.
One of those present at the first flight of the second prototype
was Art Breier, President of Edmonton RAA
Chapter, who has been involved in the project. He made a deposit on
one of the first production Griffins, to be
built as a chapter project with members buying shares. He
described the Griffin as "a pleasure to fly, lighter on the
controls than a Cessna".
The Griffin has bubble side door windows, making the cabin a roomy
47 inches at the elbow, and has been tested
to 6.6 g's (8 g's at the ultralight limit of 1,058 lbs. with a
Suzuki engine). It is currently being offered with three
firewall forward engine choices, the O-200, a 105 hp. Subaru and a
80 hp. Suzuki Turbo engine. The factory
claims a 125 mph cruise with the Sub Suzuki engine. Despite those
kinds of speeds the stall is listed as 45 mph
with the Suzuki and 48 with the larger engines.
With the standard 24.6 gal. tanks the Subaru equipped Griffins will
have a range of 772 miles, with the O-200 the
range is 567 miles and with the Suzuki 758 miles. Empty and gross
weights with the Subaru engine are 750 and
1,500 lbs. respectively, with the O-200 740 and 1,500 lbs. and with
the Suzuki 628 and 1,058 lbs. Baggage limit
with the Suzuki is 100 lbs. and with the larger engines 200 lbs.
Kit price, less engine, is $15,750 CDN for the first 10 Griffins,
then it reverts to the full price of $18,750 CDN.
According to Dennis Lawrence, ARV's general manager, kits are now
being sold for January 1996 delivery.
Press Release 002 Press Releases
ARV Home Page Griffin Homepage
Survey - Free Draw for Tail Kit
For more information, write, telephone, or
e-mail: Marketing
CANADA AIR R.V. INC.
Hangar #11, City Center Airport
11760 109 Street
EDMONTON, Alberta, Canada
T5G 2T8
Telephone: 403-944-9210 or 403-448-0348
Fax: 403-461-0584 or 403-479-1002
e-Mail Marketing Dept.
These pages are updated as time permits; new
information is added when available.
Please send us your comments or suggestions.
Check back for updated information.
Last Modified July 3, 1998
Richard Craig
Patrick Fynn wrote:
> Please forward to anyone who could benefit from this information.
> Dick Craig is keeping his griffin3.listbot.com members blissfully
> ignorant
> through censorship.
There is no censorship on the ARV Griffin Builders List. It was set up by
ARV Griffin Builders to discuss issues related to the construction of this
kit plane. You have attempted to use it to forward you malicious agenda
against CARV -- that is why you and your posts were removed from the list.
You also failed to provide the requested demographic information to ensure
accountability of posted information. You then tried to join the list again
under an alias. Patrick, deceit seems to be your middle name.
Dick Craig
List Manager, ARV Griffin Builders List
Richard Craig
Patrick Fynn wrote:
>
> > Patrick Fynn (if that is your name) I question your
> motives, and that of your
> > posting. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first
> time I've seen you
> > post anything on RAH. Why now?.
>
> The first rule about protecting yourself from the truth is to attack the
> messenger. None of the
> above is relevant.
>
Patrick,
It is very relevant. You have been asked several time to explain what your
profound interest in the ARV Griffin is, and to explain your motives. It is
obvious you are not interested in building a Griffin. You are not know to
CARV except for your poisenous posts here on RAH. I suspect you are
connected with, or to someone from IARV, which then makes your motives less
than noble. Why do you not answer this, and explain your motives. Why do
you hide behind an e-mail address that is obviously meant to mislead people
into thinking you are somehow connected with the ARV Griffin? Why are you
being so elusive?
Dick Craig