aopa help for faa-2007-28478

[flymac]

Hi all spoke with a safety officer with the aopa they are aware of are ad they can help but need ia and a&p to suggest alternative ways to check struts like the cub . if your a&p or ia they whant your comments . email or call thanks mac. aopa #301695 2000










billy mcfarland

[N96337]

Re: aopa help for faa-2007-28478

Billy,
What if we're not an aopa member?
JH

[lfries]

Re: aopa help for faa-2007-28478

Join. We need more horsepower than what we have. I'm a member but I'm not an A&P, IA. I have to have most of the work done to my AC because I'm
not competent to work on my Taylorcraft.

[VictorBravo]

Re: aopa help for faa-2007-28478

I have to have most of the work done to my AC because I'm not competent to work on my Taylorcraft.

Go on ebay or a second hand bookstore and find a book by Richard Bach, titled "A Gift of Wings"

Then read a story in the book called "A Light in the Toolbox"

Even an un-licensed amateur mechanic (yours truly) becomes a better and more educated pilot by learning more about his airplane. It is a noble pursuit that WILL save your hide someday.

Sorry to butt in...

[flymac]

Re: aopa help for faa-2007-28478

aopa membership . no im not but they are all ears and glad to help me us he never asked if i was a member . I going to call bruce lansberg i remeber him from hyde field out side wash dc back in the line boy days he is a professional safety actibist to the faa and flying commuity .

[Guest]

Re: aopa help for faa-2007-28478

Hi all spoke with a safety officer with the aopa they are aware of are ad they can help but need ia and a&p to suggest alternative ways to check struts like the cub . if your a&p or ia they whant your comments . email or call thanks mac. aopa #301695 2000
billy mcfarland

This is not critique of you at all.

They are offering you nothing at all but cheap talk and that's all any of those orgs will offer.

Any one of us can make comments on the docket that Rob and others have pointed us to.

They are just repeating what we already know. Somebody make a good proposal and it will be heard.

I have one on the docket that I expect to be accepted regarding using used struts.

A second made verbally that has been rejected regarding refurbishong struts.

I intend to make an alternate inspection proposal.

Anyone can do that.

[Forrest Barber]

Re: aopa help for faa-2007-28478

I am a member of AOPA, have been since 1962. I am a Airport Network Rep.

Billy how about joining the Foundation! AOPA is way above us and we sure do not need another set of inspection requirements. Where were they during the AWC sheet request for comments?? Any effort is good on your part but I do not understand what they can do in this situation, IT is up to us to prove that once we start the inspections , hopefully not that much will be found bad, IF they are then they need to be replaced.
here is only one of about 100 comments from other folks , this one is high up in EAA and we are communicating:

"Hi Forrest,
"I read your posts on the Taylorcraft.org website; your phone must be ringing off the hook. When you have a moment, would you give me a call? I need a bit more background on this before I start writing notes back to members who seem 1) Surprised 2) Annoyed and 3) Wondering what EAA/VAA is going to do about it.
Knowing how this particular issue has affected others, in particular Piper, I'm inclined to remind folks of the continuing debate about non-sealed lift struts across the spectrum of all strut braced aircraft. The fact is that unsealed struts are more prone to failure, and only proper inspection will keep them safe.
Also, for those who wonder why the FAA doesn't let them inspect the Taylorcraft struts in the same way as the late 1970's Piper AD, that simple. The FAA had determined that the widely accepted, accurate inspection methods available are to be used for inspections. At the time of the Piper AD (1979?), the punch test was deemed adequate enough, and thanks to the strut fork AD, many of the old struts were gone in a pretty quick hurry. The need for the inspections soon dwindled to just a few, and now, with no reoccurrences thanks to the sealed struts, there's no need for the FAA to revisit the Piper AD. You can bet that if there was a reoccurring issue, the FAA would require the same inspections now being called out for in the Taylorcraft AD.
The trouble is that some folks are sure that the Taylorcraft AD is all about generating funds for Taylorcraft, and less about safety. If you can help me fill in some of the actual details about what was found, that would help quash that rumor, if indeed it need squashing.
Also, what's your best guess regarding the bracket on the Wiley airplane? Will there be an AD? What a shame. That too could reach across a wide variety of aircraft!
Best Regards, (name withheld by Forrest)