strut x-rays

[otrcman]

This question is really prompted by x-rays that we did on a set of Champ struts, but I hope the guys with Taylorcraft experience will have the answer:

Who interpreted the x-ray inspection results for the Taylorcraft struts ? It's all pretty clear cut if the images show absolutely no corrosion, but what if some spots appear ? Who interprets the images to say whether the spots are OK or too deep to return to service ? The company that did our Champ struts just gave us the images without venturing an opinion of any kind, and yet they are the same people who did several sets of T-craft struts here in Southern CA.

No offhand opinions, please. What I need are facts.

Dick

[astjp2]

Re: strut x-rays

It needs to be a level 3 NDI tech from what I remember, maybe a level 4 depending on the specifics of the AD which I would have to read again. The average IA does not have the hours required to do the inspection. If you paid for an inspection and didn't get a report by an NDI tech, you got screwed. THe IA signs off the inspection in the logs being complied with IAW report # by so and so at this many hours TT due again in_____ That is why I recommend new struts, I will devalue an airplane by 5K for 2K worth of struts on a prebuy for that reason. Tim

[otrcman]

Re: strut x-rays

It needs to be a level 3 NDI tech from what I remember, maybe a level 4 depending on the specifics of the AD which I would have to read again. The average IA does not have the hours required to do the inspection. If you paid for an inspection and didn't get a report by an NDI tech, you got screwed. THe IA signs off the inspection in the logs being complied with IAW report # by so and so at this many hours TT due again in_____ That is why I recommend new struts, I will devalue an airplane by 5K for 2K worth of struts on a prebuy for that reason. Tim

Thank you for that reply, Tim. It's just the sort of information I was hoping for. In our case, there is no AD for the Champ. We just did the x-rays because the wings were off and it was a convenient opportunity. The company (L.A. X-Ray) did warn us in advance that they didn't have any data to work with and as such couldn't give us an airworthiness statement. But I had hoped that they would be able to tell us more about the depth of any rust spots that they found. As an aero engineer I could have made the calculations if I knew the extent and location of any material loss.

I think I'll go back to the company and ask in more detail if they can give me a material loss estimate.

Dick

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: strut x-rays

Several of us with NDI experience tried to explain to the FAA that using Ultrasonic, Eddy-Current or X-Ray were TERRIBLE ways to identify the extent of corrosion inside a tube. Finally convinced them that Eddy-Current flat out wouldn't work (it is for CRACKS, not corrosion pits) and that ultrasonic required samples of tubes for comparison (EVERY type/size of tube and different corrosion damage). You need to do a side by side comparison to quantify the corrosion damage. X-ray will show "something" inside the tube, but it takes a lot of experience to tell what you are looking at.
The whole strut fiasco was a huge "Goat Rope" and didn't improve safety in the slightest. We OFFERED a method that would work and provide verification of safety (pull testing), but it was rejected out of hand. I even designed a simple fixture to do the tests. No interest.
What are you going to do? I bought sealed new struts since I DO NOT believe anyone can consistently verify safety with the FAA methods.

As a separate issue, I DO NOT believe there was ever a safety issue in the first place. From the records I have seen there has NEVER been a strut failure on a Taylorcraft.

Hank

[N74DV]

Re: strut x-rays

From the records I have seen there has NEVER been a strut failure on a Taylorcraft.

Hank

Precisely! so WTF caused the FAA to screw us like that? I seem to remember there was some rumor back when this was all going down that the current TCDS holder of Taylorcrafts was conspiring to force the fleet to buy his shiny new struts (which they never ended up making as I recall) and supplied the FAA with a false narrative of a imminent safety hazard. No idea of it was true though.

[astjp2]

Re: strut x-rays

Part was due to the A-111 attach fitting breaking and taking out the strut on that float plane in Seattle. Tim
Oh and he built struts, they were almost double of the cost of the other suppliers so they didn't sell any.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: strut x-rays

Dirty Harry didn't sell any because he could never get his manufacturing process approved by the FAA. The only struts he sold were made by others. He convinced the FAA the struts were bad after the crash before they even recovered the wreckage to find that the lower longeron was corroded through, NOT the strut. The plane wasn't even legal to fly.
If you ever have the misfortune to actually see this guy, RUN.

[M Towsley]

Re: strut x-rays

Hank, I'm a little worried you keep a picture of Harry around that close you can post it at-will.

Yes, Harry thought he was going to make millions, instead, he just screwed the rest of us and put money into the pockets of strut makers.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: strut x-rays

His is a face I NEVER want to forget.

Hank

And it did take me several minutes to find it. ;-)

[Ray36048]

Re: strut x-rays

On a similar note, what has happened to all of the Taylorcraft tooling?

When the factory was operating in Lock Haven, they were open for tours during the annual Piper Fly in. I was amazed to see all of the tooling and fixtures, some of which dated back to the late 1930's.

[astjp2]

Re: strut x-rays

Heard its in Mexico

[jstall]

Re: strut x-rays

Yep that would be correct it was a manufactured scam by Harry
and a former FAA inspector that was in bed with him, very sad deal
for sure that FAA guy lost his job over it, then went to down to Harrys and worked during the final hours, it was a scam from the very beginning for money

Several of us with NDI experience tried to explain to the FAA that using Ultrasonic, Eddy-Current or X-Ray were TERRIBLE ways to identify the extent of corrosion inside a tube. Finally convinced them that Eddy-Current flat out wouldn't work (it is for CRACKS, not corrosion pits) and that ultrasonic required samples of tubes for comparison (EVERY type/size of tube and different corrosion damage). You need to do a side by side comparison to quantify the corrosion damage. X-ray will show "something" inside the tube, but it takes a lot of experience to tell what you are looking at.
The whole strut fiasco was a huge "Goat Rope" and didn't improve safety in the slightest. We OFFERED a method that would work and provide verification of safety (pull testing), but it was rejected out of hand. I even designed a simple fixture to do the tests. No interest.
What are you going to do? I bought sealed new struts since I DO NOT believe anyone can consistently verify safety with the FAA methods.

As a separate issue, I DO NOT believe there was ever a safety issue in the first place. From the records I have seen there has NEVER been a strut failure on a Taylorcraft.

Hank

[jstall]

Re: strut x-rays

The failure came from a sea plane in the NW that had a failure due to attach points at the point attaching strut to fuselage

not strut failures, just like the Ercoupe wings came off when it went in straigh in, no wings just fell off, I could say more but I won't, FAA isn't for us they could care less

Several of us with NDI experience tried to explain to the FAA that using Ultrasonic, Eddy-Current or X-Ray were TERRIBLE ways to identify the extent of corrosion inside a tube. Finally convinced them that Eddy-Current flat out wouldn't work (it is for CRACKS, not corrosion pits) and that ultrasonic required samples of tubes for comparison (EVERY type/size of tube and different corrosion damage). You need to do a side by side comparison to quantify the corrosion damage. X-ray will show "something" inside the tube, but it takes a lot of experience to tell what you are looking at.
The whole strut fiasco was a huge "Goat Rope" and didn't improve safety in the slightest. We OFFERED a method that would work and provide verification of safety (pull testing), but it was rejected out of hand. I even designed a simple fixture to do the tests. No interest.
What are you going to do? I bought sealed new struts since I DO NOT believe anyone can consistently verify safety with the FAA methods.

As a separate issue, I DO NOT believe there was ever a safety issue in the first place. From the records I have seen there has NEVER been a strut failure on a Taylorcraft.

Hank

[jstall]

Re: strut x-rays

That AD should be recended, or should be edited after the 1st inspection showing the struts were ok

AD actually should be recended, MY OPINION ONLY JS

Yep that would be correct it was a manufactured scam by Harry
and a former FAA inspector that was in bed with him, very sad deal
for sure that FAA guy lost his job over it, then went to down to Harrys and worked during the final hours, it was a scam from the very beginning for money

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: strut x-rays

That would mean the FAA would have to admit they were scammed by Harry. Not likely to happen.

Hank