Strut Airworthiness Directive (AD) (merged VI)

[1938BF50]

Re: Strut Airworthiness Directive (AD) (merged V)

Bill,

I concur! I too am tired of the silence, promises of updates and minimal lack of input from those most positioned to do so.

I have offered several times to help in whatever capacity that I can, on several issues in the past, with little or no feedback from those in “authority”. Concerning the lift strut issue…..to date it seems that we “worker bees” are the only ones contributing to the safety of the colony. I will continue to help any way that I can. I spent an entire weekend “testing” my lift struts for integrity and DOCUMENTING the results. I asked for known corroded struts and got offers from two very regular contributors on this forum(sincere thanx!). As soon as those strut sections arrive, I will prep them for more ultrasonic testing and then prepare and pull standard dogbone tensile test specimens from documented areas of corrosion. Results will document the remaining strength of various degrees of corrosion. My intent is to provide baseline data to help determine approved test method(s). The ultrasonic tester that I am using is portable and easy to use. Struts AND fuselage tubing can be checked for material thickness (an excellent indicator of remaining material thickness) on the plane and very quickly with minimal disturbance.

So far, I feel like I am all alone in the dessert. Right or wrong, I feel like others are just waiting to see what sifts out from all of this. We need to work together on this issue or we will just get steamrolled. Correct me if I am wrong, but we have heard not a single word from the factory on this strut issue! That fact alone should weigh heavily with those reading and listening. ANY REPUTABLE FACTORY WOULD BE HEAVILY INVOLVED WITH END USERS IN AN ISSUE AS POTENTIALLY SERIOUS AS THIS ONE.

I will post a lengthy comment to the FAA docket, including documented test results as they become available.

How else can I help?

[Chet Peek]

Re: Strut Airworthiness Directive (AD) (merged V)

Taylorcraft drawing #D-A816 shows the open ended front strut and applies to D models, O-57-A, O-57 and L-2 B's
Drawing # D-A817 shows the much smaller adjustable rear strut, same models.

Chet Peek

[VictorBravo]

Re: Strut Airworthiness Directive (AD) (merged V)

Just a thought... if any people or entities are working on "back room" deals and discussions about the wing struts and how to deal with the issue, and they don't think that the rest of us should be involved... then those people are taking the risk that the unwashed masses not involved in whatever they're doing will decide to do something on their own.

And if that conflicts with or surprises the smaller back room group, or muddies the waters, it will be the fault of the smaller group. Some of us will not sit in a vacuum and wait.

In the absence of direct participation from the FAA, or the factory, or other responsible parties, some of us might "kick it up a notch" under the assumption that those certain entities' silence is intentional.

If ten or twenty of us get a little too tired of what is NOT being said on this forum, and decide to start making calls a level or two above the people we've been waiting to hear from, then those cards will fall where they fall. If one of those calls is to an attorney, or a congressman, or a higher level bureaucrat, or a bankruptcy judge, or some Italian guy in Brooklyn, it will be the doing of those who should have been participating in this group.

Most tailwheel pilots will become very upset if they get the feeling that they are being manipulated, or being put in a separate sandbox to keep them busy. Politicians do that shit to their constituents, not airplane people.

So far I'm speaking for myself, but anyone else who feels the same way should feel free to speak up.

[VictorBravo]

Re: Strut Airworthiness Directive (AD) (merged V)

This may or may not be on-topic, but the strangest thought just occurred in my feeble mind.... didn't we hear recently that there is a new owner or majority shareholder in Taylorcraft? Why have we not heard from this person or people on the strut issue, the fuselage issue, etc?

I for one am getting the feeling that there may be two discussions going on between two groups of people - one large group on this forum and one small group off this forum.

I don't care who I piss off by saying this, friend or foe... if that is what is going on here (letting the majority of us spin our wheels on this group and get nothing accomplished... essentially getting the "mushroom treatment"), then there will be hell to pay. Considering what is at stake and how many people have a legitimate right to be upset about tis strut business, everyone involved in any "back room" discussions damn well better bring it out in the open post haste.

[pftcraft]

Re: Strut Airworthiness Directive (AD) (merged V)

Bill Berle..Please contact me regarding Harer STC...Thanks Patrick [email protected]

[lfries]

Re: Strut Airworthiness Directive (AD) (merged V)

Thanks for calling the EAA. They have way more clout than
we do.

[cpirrmann]

Re: Strut Airworthiness Directive (AD) (merged V)

I don't know if this is where this belongs, but I called EAA Government Relations and left them a message about the AD and Service Bulletin. I'll post more if I hear anything.

[VictorBravo]

Re: Strut Airworthiness Directive (AD) (merged V)

I'm working on the other.
Darryl

Thank you sincerely.

[flyguy]

Re: Strut Airworthiness Directive (AD) (merged V)

Bill,
Good point on that point.

RE "scrap pile": Since I don't know the Identity nor motivation of the individual or institution that supplied the parts to the FAA, the reader is free to take those two words in their worst possible and most basic connotation.

I am reasonably sure that I understand the motivation of the institution responsible for the Service Bulletin, I'm working on the other.



Darryl

[210turbo]

Re: Strut Airworthiness Directive (AD) (merged III)

The faa inspected one of my t-cart's several months ago and the guy stated he was prepairing the AD for this strut problem. He picked up my two sets and turned them up and down, he said he was listening for the sound of particles moving around. He said that my struts were probably good. He said I would need to get then eddie currant checked and if no rust is found I could coat them with oil and seal then up.
It sound as if this has changed???
Our local fisdo also handles the factory

[VictorBravo]

Re: Wonderful FAA

Has anyone been able to get the FAA engineer to comment on this specific point?

Has anyone been able to get the FAA engineer to comment on any specific point that has been raised on this Forum?

[Frank DeBartolo]

Re: Strut Airworthiness Directive (AD) (merged III)

I just read Brian Douglas' comments to the FAA. Brian is from Dublin, Ireland. Brian purchased new Univair struts ten years ago and is concerned that he will have to undergo the eddy current test.

Brian, if the struts are the sealed, oiled FAA/PMA approved design part #UA-A815 for the front struts and part # UA-A854 for the rear struts, the AD does not apply here in the US. I don't know what Irish regulations are but I hope they are the same as the US regs.

Frank D
N43684

Re: Wonderful FAA

Where they came from should make a big difference. If from the scrap pile, un maintained AC then the AD is not looking out the the fleet. The AD writer is just trying to justify there position/grade level. If IA's have been finding bad struts on properly maintained AC then the AD is required. I would just like to know that the money I spend is necessary and not to line someones pockets with money or justify the AD writers Grade Level.

What is the report called when an A&P or IA submits a repair or finding to the FAA. I don't know if anyone has asked for the "trail" of reports. I do know that one probably has to use the "Correct Words" when asking for the report.

It's been established that they came from airplanes not a scrap pile.

See the thread called "Some rusty strut pictures".

Also I interpreted a "scrap pile" in the original post by flyguy as a crappy airplane not an actual pile. Maybe that's a point of confusion and my mistake.

Dave

[lfries]

Re: Wonderful FAA

Where they came from should make a big difference. If from the scrap pile, un maintained AC then the AD is not looking out the the fleet. The AD writer is just trying to justify there position/grade level. If IA's have been finding bad struts on properly maintained AC then the AD is required. I would just like to know that the money I spend is necessary and not to line someones pockets with money or justify the AD writers Grade Level.

What is the report called when an A&P or IA submits a repair or finding to the FAA. I don't know if anyone has asked for the "trail" of reports. I do know that one probably has to use the "Correct Words" when asking for the report.

[flyguy]

Re: Wonderful FAA

Yeah, probably right about that.
DC