Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Airworthiness Directive Concerns 2007

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Airworthiness Directive Concerns 2007

    The factory is the only source for keeping us informed with the situation at the factory , then we have to sort it out. the Brownsville Herald is coming up with new story now. I have been getting no solution from the FAA, I try , they do not respond quickly. I am back after getting two airplanes ready for delivery to new owners, News articles arte coming soon. I don't know what to tell you if the sources do not want to post onto the forumn.
    Taylorcraft Foundation, Inc
    Forrest A Barber 330-495-5447
    TF#1
    www.BarberAircraft.com
    taylorcraft@neo.rr.com

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Airworthiness Directive Concerns 2007

      this is a neat thread

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Airworthiness Directive Concerns 2007

        It is interesting that the factory does not own TCDS A-700, hence they do not include BLs in their Service Bulletin, Only BCs & Fs,BUT are informative on their website that the AD includes all Taylorcraft TCDS. So, how are they legally qualified to produce parts for an aircraft that they do not own the TCDS? Why do they have any authority to influence the FAA on aircraft not covered by their owned TCDS?

        I know this is really a mute point. I want my struts airworthy.
        Mike Burnett
        1941 BL-65
        NC29815
        469-951-3433

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Airworthiness Directive Concerns 2007

          My question is are magnetic resonance and ultrasound testing allowed in place of radio sound to satisfy the AD requirements? Aren't x-rays considered old technology?

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Airworthiness Directive Concerns 2007

            "Taylorcraft Service Bulletin No. 2007-001 requires initial visual inspection of the lower 12 inches of the right and left wing forward and aft lift struts within the next 30 days, and eddy current or ultrasound inspection of the same lower 12 inch areas within the next 3 months,"

            Erm, well since mine hasn't been in airworthy status during this time and my shop has basically written me off as beyond their expertise (I find all the down gripes they miss and have to go around them to find the parts... a project that has stopped me pretty much cold on major areas... AFTER they pushed my plane out of their hangar in my absence...) there was really not much I had in the way of options when I received this SB. So I am wondering -

            What does the FAA do to you if you miss this deadline? Pull your license? In which case I am hardly in a big rush to turn myself in.

            Any suggestions?
            Bill Fife
            BL12-65 '41 Deluxe Under (s-l-o-w) Restoration

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Airworthiness Directive Concerns 2007

              The Taylorcraft Service Bulletin SB2007-001 turned into FAA AD 2007-16-14 (commonly referred to as the "Strut AD").

              If your aircraft has not been flying since the Strut AD was issued, then you have nothing to worry about. As long as you have not been flying it, you are not at fault.

              However, if you want to make it airworthy again now, then you must comply with the AD requirements.

              Hope that helps.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Airworthiness Directive Concerns 2007

                Yes thanks Rob, and my apologies. When I first saw this thread I neglected to look at the date - the way it was written it looked to me like yet ANOTHER letter was forthcoming. I see now that was my oversight.

                Still the need for clarification was real. The wording of these SB /AD notices is often unclear leaving many loopholes and loose ends. Just don't need any more snags than I've already encountered.

                I have decided on eddy testing before sending them to be "repaired". I don't believe in fixin' it if it ain't broke. If they've been sealed and no water has entered isn't that better? Besides these are lighter than D struts and weight is critical in this particular aircraft.

                TKS for your reply.

                P.S.: These struts were completely and professionally refinished to the tune of some $1,500 on next to the last annual. To my knowledge one if not both are sealed at both ends and look pristine, having been "always hangared" for the life of the plane.
                Last edited by wmfife; 07-03-2010, 14:12. Reason: Data
                Bill Fife
                BL12-65 '41 Deluxe Under (s-l-o-w) Restoration

                Comment

                Working...
                X