Cut Strut Photo

[Mark Julicher]

This was my front left strut. Four photos from slightly different angles. There is slight pitting and a fair amount of surface rust.

My struts were rejected based on the x-rays, with the inspection station telling me they would not bother to do ultrasound 'because they are in such bad shape.'

Aircraft history: It was in a barn from 1980 to 1985 when I bought it. I doubt if it was hangared much before that. I restored it in 1986 and kept it tied down out doors in Arkansas, and Illinois for seven years. It was in a hail shed in Dayton, Ohio from 1993 through 1995. Moved to a hail shed in Ft Worth from 1995 to 1997. Tied down out doors in Arkansas from 1997 to 1999. Rebuilt in Marietta, Georgia in 2000. Tied down out doors at Cartersville, Georgia from 2000 to 2002. Kept in a hail shed in San Antonio from 2003 to present.

In all that time I never put tube oil in these struts. Call that ignorance or neglect if you wish. The plane was out doors through many gully-washers, brutal Arkansas humidity, and even a hurricane.

There is plenty of metal left. This strut is not pristine, but it was perfectly safe. A bit of oil and it would probably never rust again, but I have four new struts now.

[jstall]

Re: Cut Strut Photo

That Is Amazing

To Bad We Can't Get These Pictures And Article To Faa And In Particular Andy Mc Anaul

I'll Bet That This Is More Typical Of What Most Struts Look Like Rather Than Those That Old Harry Demonstrated

Js

[crispy critter]

Re: Cut Strut Photo

I agree,your struts are ok for now,but I still see a couple of heavier rust spots in those pics and it would not have been much longer until those struts became a problem. Look at it this way,if the AD had not came out,would you have questioned those struts? You would have probably flown them another 10-20 years without question,treatment,or worry and from the looks of a couple of those spots in your strut it would NOT have lasted another 10 years. That is one of the reasons we have the AD, so we inspect or replace them BEFORE they break! I know the FAA went about this AD the wrong way.They should have given us a little more time to adjust and comply,but they didn't. You are seeing this lightly to moderately rusted strut as a question of "why did we need this AD?" ,but for most this picture show's us and your story tells us exactly why we need this AD. Agreed that if the strut had been treated with something 20 years ago it would probably be rust free today,but it wasn't. In fact,the struts that had been treated at least once in thier life is probably the ones that are passing the AD while the untreated ones are not. I don't mean to offend you on this but I'm just saying this the way I see it.

[1938BF50]

Re: Cut Strut Photo

Go back and read some posts......Andy Mc Anaul could care less. I had over 100 hours in a professional lab using calibrated professional equipment, cutting, photographing, ultrasound, and finally tensile pull testing of strut sections taken from several struts that were better and worse than those shown. ALL passed loading scenarios with ample tensile strength.

I forwarded many photo's of my testing and documentation to Andy. I believe his exact words were "What am I supposed to do with this data? I can't use this". He hung up on my terminology of "moderate" and "extensive" corrosion.

I came away from this excercise with a very diminished respect for the FAA's willingness to cooperate.

[jstall]

Re: Cut Strut Photo

Go back and read some posts......Andy Mc Anaul could care less. I had over 100 hours in a professional lab using calibrated professional equipment, cutting, photographing, ultrasound, and finally tensile pull testing of strut sections taken from several struts that were better and worse than those shown. ALL passed loading scenarios with ample tensile strength.

I forwarded many photo's of my testing and documentation to Andy. I believe his exact words were "What am I supposed to do with this data? I can't use this". He hung up on my terminology of "moderate" and "extensive" corrosion.

I came away from this excercise with a very diminished respect for the FAA's willingness to cooperate.

My experience also, or at least with the SAT MIDO, not very impressed

JS

[Mark Julicher]

Re: Cut Strut Photo

Kevin,
Your analysis is right on. There are some rusty spots that would be better off fixed. Some of the spots that look like heavy rust are actually welding beads with surface rust on them. Still, you are looking inside a 62 year old structure and it isn't too bad.

I also cut one aft strut and I'll send both cut pieces to any responsible party that wants them. I will probably cut my other struts just to be sure they stay unused.

[VictorBravo]

Re: Cut Strut Photo

I had over 100 hours in a professional lab using calibrated professional equipment, cutting, photographing, ultrasound, and finally tensile pull testing

I believe his exact words were "What am I supposed to do with this data? I can't use this". He hung up on my terminology of "moderate" and "extensive" corrosion.

I came away from this excercise with a very diminished respect for the FAA's willingness to cooperate.

This information, from a qualified engineer, should be included in the "petition" that is being discussed elsewhere. jstall's first letter to the congressman was met with stonewalling form the FAA, and that stonewalling will be seen by the congressman as rather inappropriate in light of proper scientific test data.

[Guest]

Re: Cut Strut Photo

Golly, they look ok except for that apparent bubble on trailing edge.

I wonder if ultra sound would have passed them?

Dave

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Cut Strut Photo

I wish we could have pull tested them. I would love to be able to hand the FAA a stack of pull tests to the max design strength of the strut (plus a safety margin) with no breakages. Then go back once a year and pull them again after letting them "age" with no protection.
I know they would not want to pay any attention to the results, but there must be ways to drive the stake through the heart of this monster. We aren't a bunch of back woods "Hill-Williams" out here. I have DONE official pull tests and it isn't that hard to meet their quality, repeatability and format requirements.
I really DO want to know how bad a strut is before it needs to be replaced. If I know that I will back away from that point and happily replace my struts. The FAA doesn't even have a CLUE how bad the corrosion has to be before it constitutes a hazard to safety. I suspect the struts would pass a pull test with visible holes in them that NONE of us would even consider using. The design limit for a wing strut is long column crippling, NOT TENSION, and a crippling failure happens IN THE MIDDLE, (that's why the middle of the strut has support) NOT THE END where the corrosion is.
Hank