Service Issues With Knoxville Service Center

Hi All,

I’m not usually a poster, but unfortunately we have experienced some surprisingly serious service issues with the Knoxville Service Center and are wondering if this is an isolated event. We currently have N58BR there for what started with an annual. It has been there since September and we have just been notified the return to service date is being bumped once again–which will make the 5th time. Communication has been lacking, and the overall experience has been such that I would have to think very hard about purchasing another Cirrus at this point. I have been an aircraft owner for many years and believe I have reasonable expectations. I have requested to speak to someone who has the ability to impact how things are being handled and also seems to care enough to engage, but I have not been put in touch with anyone above the service manager level in spite of my repeated requests. My frustration has driven me to reach out to the group in hopes you all have some productive suggestions or know someone I can speak with. Thanks in advance…

September? Let’s start with the discrepancy list. Post it up.

What exactly is wrong?

Is a part on back order?

“September? Let’s start with the discrepancy list. Post it up”

Love to see it too but short of waiting on an engine there is no excuse.

I think there is a broader point. 5 date slips and no one to elevate too are both serious issues REGARDLESS of the discrepancies found in the annual. Anything that serious should have lots of personal attention from the DOM.

Wow! I could not be more surprised. 'Looking forward to hearing “the rest of the story.”

Thank you for posting. -j

September? That’s crazy … and unacceptable.

I do my Annuals at Europe’s largest Cirrus SC, “Cirrus SAS” in the Netherlands. The last 5 Annuals took 1.5 days, all including repairs, CAPS change or upgrades like Beringer Brakes. None took 2 complete days …

There must be a SERIOUS problem … no?

I reached out to a contact at Cirrus and suggested that they reach out to you.

In doing a little research, I note a tail number that matches this one had a deer strike a few years ago.

Curiosity getting the better of me, is any of the delay a result of the Cirrus team finding issues not previously found or some of the repair work after the deer strike?

I guess I am having a bit of a hard time trying to imagine why a Perspective model airplane of the G3 variety would have such long delays in parts.

As we are using the forum to try to solve the issue, can you help us help you with more information?

I agree with that. I do my annuals at my trusted shop in Hamburg (Siemers) which is no SC but has maintained all my airplanes since I became an owner. Never more than 2 weeks, mostly 1 week.

Cirrus SAS is great, they did my CAPS change in one day.

5 months is well beyond unreasonable unless something structural is the issue.


I received a reply about this and was told Cirrus is attempting to reach Josh to bring this to a satisfactory conclusion. I don’t know more than that.

If there is anyway we can help Josh get this resolved, I am eager to help and I think others here will assist if needed.

I know Cirrus is working to do the same.

We all want a good outcome and a great experience with our airplanes. Here’s hoping this can be worked out quickly and to the satisfaction of all.

I was able to connect with Jon Wright today, and he is working on addressing the concerns with this event. I believe we are working towards a positive outcome. Thanks for all the responses.

That is so good to hear. I know they are learning and striving. I am sure that Cirrus appreciates your efforts to work with them to a good outcome.

This has yet to be satisfactorily resolved, but here is a sequence of events that might answer most of the questions from the forum.

Sequence of Events:

  1. Aircraft arrives at the Cirrus Service Center on 8/23/2019 for an Annual Inspection.
  2. Estimate for Work Order # TYS21692-08-2019 received on 9/4/2019.
  3. Estimate Reviewed via phone call 9/9/2019.
  4. After the Estimate Review, Cirrus determined numerous items on the initial estimate were actually not due—including Items 45, 46 (Seatbelt Inflator Assembly), Item 42 (Battery Replacement).
  5. After the Estimate Review, Cirrus determined the EMA Controller was overdue and was not replaced by the Factory Service Center during the last annual. According to [Manager] at Cirrus the EMA was not replaced by Cirrus during the previous annual event in 2018 due to “an oversite on our part.” Please note: the total cost of the previous annual event in which the aircraft was RTS illegally/unsafely and with at least one overdue item was >$30,000.
  6. 9/10/2019 a list of customer authorized actions were emailed to Cirrus.
  7. 9/11/2019 an updated list of customer authorized actions were emailed to Cirrus.
  8. 9/13/2019 Cirrus notified customer that they discovered during the inspection that the parachute strap was frayed due to a “factory defect” when it was installed new. This means the aircraft has operated since new in an unsafe condition due to a factory defect. This defect was not detected during the annual event of 2018, which means the aircraft was returned to service in 2018 by Cirrus Aircraft in an unairworthy and unsafe condition.
  9. 9/25/2019 a list of customer authorized actions were emailed to Cirrus.
  10. 10/19/2019 Cirrus notified the customer that, due to a supply issue, the CAP Strap replacement was delayed and had “just shipped” and that the aircraft would be ready for pickup 15 days after the CAP strap replacement was installed.
  11. 10/23/2019 Cirrus notified customer that there were issues during the installation of the replacement CAP strap and that a 2nd replacement CAP strap would need to be installed. As of this date, Cirrus stated “all parts had been ordered” and a delivery date was pending from factory.
  12. 11/1/2019 Cirrus notified customer they are still awaiting the 2nd CAPS strap replacement.
  13. 11/8/2019 Cirrus notified customer the CAP strap and associated parts had shipped and “should arrive mid next week” and they would “immediately get it installed”.
  14. 11/12/2019 Cirrus notified customer the CAP strap was received and estimated the aircraft would be ready for pickup December 6th.
  15. 12/2/2019 Cirrus notified customer the paintwork was still in process and estimated the aircraft would be ready for pickup December 16th.
  16. 12/17/2019 Cirrus notified customer the paint work should be completed 12/18 and that once paintwork was complete final inspections would be needed prior to the aircraft returning to service.
  17. 12/30/2019 Cirrus notified customer the aircraft was “completed and test flown” and that they were waiting on a part to be delivered 12/31. Once this part was installed, Cirrus stated the aircraft would be ready for pickup.
  18. 12/31/2019 Cirrus emailed an invoice to customer for 174% more than the total of all the work the customer authorized. No explanation was given for the increase in the total event cost.

Yikes. Lots to be concerned about. Actually quite a bit to be nauseous over.

This type of poor communication and up charges are the type of thing that gives ownership lots of concerns. I wonder if they are Savvy approved [:O]

Apparently none (listed anyway) have anything to do any prior incidents.

Noticed that this was posted in the “guest” forum:

  1. Join COPA. Cheap with lots ROI.

  2. Savvy would be helpful in this situation if you were using them . Highly suggest, at least early years of ownership.

I don’t know about the USA - but in Germany an invoice can be max. 10% over the estimate of a company. The rest sounds pretty embarassing …

PS: Why was that stuff not done under warranty? I’d be willing to pay 0 $ for that.

Why would it be covered by warranty on a 10 year old plane?

Unfortunately there is no such law here.

this is insane. If you decide to stick with cirrus (honestly if i were in your shoes i probably wouldnt) i would NEVER use this shop again. This is an absolute joke. Poorly ran operation seems like

Sorry, Roger! Of course not … I somehow thought he was talking about a new SF50.

But the law here is that the invoice can be max 15-20 % higher than the estimate (NOT 10 percent as I wrote!). But I have (now) read that courts regularly approve invoices up to 25 percent higher than the estimate.But that’s really the limit.

YOu don’t have anything similar?

Ouch, What’s next? Are they going to start charging storage fees for the last 14 weeks?

My personal experience has been 25% differences with no change orders. 175% difference is justification for calling your attorney in.