Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

[Robert Lees]

Re: Annual Inspection Manual proposal

As long as the "recommendations" are based upon:

a) fact or
b) expert opinion or
c) prior in-service knowledge

then there can be no basis upon which to sue. Also, there is no point us reinventing the wheel (for example, the Lubrication Chart and inspection instructions produced in the Taylorcraft Owners & Service manuals are well documented, so only photos or added description is needed to highlight the location of lubrication points).

I have edited the thread title to be simply "Inspection Manual proposal". At some point in the future, it could become "Taylorcraft Inspection Recommendations" or similar.

Bill, are you going to get the ball rolling with a ToC so that we can start fleshing it out?

[magman]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

One of the things I do to familiarize myself with aircraft that I have only a small amount of experience with is to check the FAA Data.

The Airworthiness Alerts & it's predecessor Inspection Aids do a good job that
may include pics & comments by the folks that discovered the problems.Many of these discrepancies do not become AD's or SB's.

Using these "tools" there are quite a few occasions where I found the same situation.

My collection goes back into the '60's.

The difficulty is they are not all arranged by aircraft type.

Compiling these into a " T-Craft Areas of Concern" may be of interest to a lot of
owners & A & P's.

Please accept my apology if it already exists.

[VictorBravo]

Re: Annual Inspection Manual proposal

Bill, are you going to get the ball rolling with a ToC so that we can start fleshing it out?

The "starting point" Table of Contents would be pretty obvious, just the different areas of the airplane of course... especially if we're starting out with just a straight annual inspection.

Sorry to air my "personal" troubles here, but I also would like it to be known that this likely cannot be a quick process, and especially will not be a quick process if too many people are relying on me as the primary source of horsepower. Our current economy has had a poor effect on my flap widget business, which means that paying the rent is kinda tough these days, which means that something else may have to be put in front of the flap widget to make ends meet. Not trying to whine (I had it pretty good in a previous life), but so that everyone knows - this project would be some distance down on the daily priority list for me and I do not want to disappoint. This has to be a group effort or it will never get done in our lifetimes.

Now if someone could fix our economy here... I could put MUCH more time into this T-craft project

What I suggest is some sort of a discussion thread or real estate area on this site where people can put their suggestions and knowledge in with some semblance of usefulness.

For example, Rob has hundreds of photos and detailed task notes from his rebuild. But I sure as heck cannot and will not go through all of it and pick out the stuff that is relevant to an annual (as opposed to his full restoration). So in this example, I'd ask Rob to pick out the bits from his collection that he thinks are applicable to an annual inspection rather than creating a trophy winner.

Other contributors would do the same, contributing certain tidbits and things that they have found to be important on an annual. Our numerous IA's and A&P's can add things that they have found on "annual from Hell" experiences.

The single most important thing is that there are many people here who have many times more experience than I. People who have rebuilt and/or maintained T-crafts for decades... people who have done annuals on hundreds of T-crafts and have seen many things most of us have not. Engineers that have knowledge of how long something will go before it fails. Owners who have had something go bang in flight. Rank amateurs who have stumbled upon something unexpected. The people who might have walked past that seaplane and seen exactly why mechanics repeatedly overlooked a fatal accident that was about to happen.Those are the key people here, not just the guy who will eventually weave it together into a coherent document.

If the forum admin's have the time and generosity to create a place where all this data can be compiled, it would be a good idea... but hopefully it can be a place that is NOT "out of sight - out of mind" in a week when this thread loses its new-ness. This is once again a long term project.

To keep it from becoming too hard to work with, I suggest that obvious sub-categories be created such as wings, fuselage, control system, tail surfaces, struts, firewall forward, engine, and landing gear.

So when someone wants to contribute their experience or knowledge on lubricating the landing gear hinge bolts, they can start by reading whatever has been posted in that area already, and if their idea is not a duplicate of someone else's posting they can add it.

My opinion is is that this "Data Collection" process has to happen first, or be well underway, before an actual manual can be created. So assuming the admin's create a workable place with categories as above, people (me too) can start uploading their tidbits with or without photos. We can add more photos later, it's the ideas and reasoning behind the item that are important now.

What I'm looking for are comments like

1) "Landing Gear Section: Be sure to use thin penetrant oil on the landing gear hinge bolts because thick oil will not get everywhere it needs to be... when I took my bolts out for rebuild we found that only the ends of the bolts got good lubrication and other parts of the bolt were galled" (this is not an actual item, I have no idea if this is valid or not).

2) Be sure to lift the wing by the strut attach point until the near wheel comes off the ground. You are listening for creaking, groaning, and metallic clunking noises. The metallic clunk may be caused by wear or damage at the wing root attach bolt lug holes. Make sure to perform this test in a quiet environment with another person "listening" close to the wing roots. Perform this test on both sides. Any significant noises should be investigated fully by looking inside the wing for relative movement between components such as bolts, fittings, spars, ribs, etc. to arrive at a confident determination as to the cause." (This one's real unfortunately)

[Robert Lees]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

So in this example, I'd ask Rob to pick out the bits from his collection that he thinks are applicable to an annual inspection rather than creating a trophy winner.

A couple of years ago, I presented to the (then) Taylorcraft forum at Oshkosh my version of those items quite likely to be overlooked or missed during an Inspection. Admittedly, it was only ten items that deserved the most attention (in my opinion), and it has been on my site ever since. Link here. I would invite others to expand upon this.

this likely cannot be a quick process

I don't think anyone is expecting instant results.

We know what we want...we know the information is out there...What we need, between us, is an idea of how to collect it. Many of us have our tips & tricks for continued airworthiness.

Many of us could offer ourselves as a "collecting point" for tips, photos, hints, etc. Now I don't mind being that collection point, but the mechanism for that collection needs deciding. Perhaps a dedicated thread on this forum?

In the meantime, and on the basis that we're talking about the technical inspection & maintenance of the Taylorcraft, a good starting point for folks to review what is "out there" is the Foundation Technical Resources page, which gives links to the FAA TCDS & STC "approved data" to which magman refers.

If folks wish to send me their hints & tips, they may do so via email or PM. If anonymity is requested, I'll respect that. When sufficient data becomes available, I'll create a new thread with the "contents", from which we may be able to create a Table of Contents, and expand from there.

Rob

[magman]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

While the TCDS & STC's are "Approved Data" & are excellent resources it is NOT

what I was referring to.

When a defect is found A & P's , Repair Stations & others submitted a form

known as a "Malfunction & Defect Form" ( aka M & D).

The folks in the FAA palace in Okla City would compile these & produce a

monthly pub called the "Inspection Aids" & later referred to as the "Airworthiness

Alerts".

These included text & possibly pics or drawings.

After receiving these in the mail most A & P's would check & see if the defect

was to be found in aircraft they serviced.

They were generally separated by mfg in each issue.

The "Aids" also had a Yearly Volume.

FAA cx this paper pub about 10 yrs. ago.

My guess is that some of the M & D submissions became AD's or SB's

& possibly saved some aircraft.

The concept of using info discovered by others has worked well for me.

If you are compiling a manual to inspect T-Crafts I believe this resource should

not be left out.

[barnstmr]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

I have just a couple of comments...

1) Take note that the FAA is increasingly looking toward Type Clubs as a knowledge database. That being said... whatever the result of this effort could eventually become adopted by the FAA as a standard for all Taylorcraft owners to follow. THIS COULD BE GOOD OR BAD. It could become adopted as a requirement. So.. keep in mind that if the level of detail in this document becomes too exhaustive, it is possible that one day your I.A. may be required or at least feel compelled to bill you for every step and every procedure in this annual inspection checklist. It is possible. And the result may be an increase in the cost of annual inspections for the average T-craft owner.

2) To magman, et.al.... nowadays, M&D reports are entered into the FAA-SDR (service difficulty report) database. This information is currently compiled into a searchable database on the FAA website. See this link. http://av-info.faa.gov/sdrx/Default.aspx

[barnstmr]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

My advise is the advise I got from an old timer (and mentor to me)... K.I.S.S.

KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID.

[VictorBravo]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

it is possible that one day your I.A. may be required or at least feel compelled to bill you for every step and every procedure in this annual inspection checklist.

OK, this sounds valid, and looks like a good reason to split this document into two sections...a straightforward annual inspection and then a section on common issues, ongoing maintenance, etc. that is not all rolled up into one procedure.

Does this sound good to all involved?

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

The items that go into the actual "Annual" document are (or should be) things that have proven to be common problems that we should be looking at on a regular basis. A subset of that list would be items like the lower longeron or struts that gets a lot of attention for a period of time. If more problems are found on other planes, it gets added to the permanent annual list. If no other planes have the problem, it goes to the historic list we use when we rebuild or restore a plane.
That seems to me like a reasonable way to divide the list of potential issues and the tribe would decide here where it gets recorded by making our cases here to everyone. With a system like that we could have stopped the wing strut lunacy in its tracks since the FAA has better things to do than worry about us if we are doing a good job ourselves. I think WE would have done one time inspections (NOT EDDIE CURRENT!) and found very few bad struts. We would have been able to DEMONSTRATE that even the worst in service struts were actually serviceable with a pull test and the FAA wouldn't have defaulted to the simplest solution FOR THEM, which was to throw a Draconian inspection requirement on us.
If we are SAFE, PROFESSIONAL and THOROUGH, the FAA would probably LOVE for us to take care of our own problems. THE FAA SAD office is full of good, reasonable people. If we do things right we will never have another strut fiasco.
Hank

[jstall]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

Very well put Hank

JS

[Forrest Barber]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

My very own KISS Standard Annual & Inspection form is now attached , this is 43 Appendix D and I use it for all small ships plus any Condition Inspection I do as an A&P . I will be gald to add any Taylorcraft specific items ; but this one seemed to fill the bill all these years.

[barnstmr]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

I agree with Forrest on this one... I would not try to re-invent annual inspection requirements for Taylorcrafts. When we start detailing out the job of the A&P with Inspection Authorization for annual inspections, we are only expanding our own grief. These guys are trained and authorized by the FAA to do their job to a standard. As owner / operators, we will use the I.A. that can be trusted to do their job right.

So... I recommend this inspection manual effort should not try to dictate annual inspection requirements. Instead this group effort should be recommendations for restorers, owners, and operators for the upkeep of their Taylorcraft airplanes. And, it should be so designed that if one follows these recommendations, he/she should have no worries at annual inspection time. Just leave it to the I.A. to handle the annual inspection.

[dalijohn]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

Bill,
I'd be happy to work with you on compiling the manual. Might I suggest using the JASC codes to organize the data?

[mikerice]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

While the ATA/JASC codes are a little overkill for Taylorcrafts, I present below, the ATA Codes, edited for Taylorcraft applicable systems.
The JASC code uses the same first two digits and adds 2 more digits for component detail.

Using these codes does give a nice Table of Contents and makes me think a wiki is not a bad idea after all. In deference to VB, a wiki does allow a community such as the Taylorcraft forum to easily contribute material, and this TOC gets it in the right place.

And Easy is what will make this project work....

AIRCRAFT
11 Placards and Markings
12 Servicing
14 Hardware

AIRFRAME SYSTEMS
23 Communications
24 Electrical Power
25 Equipment/Furnishings
27 Flight Controls
28 Fuel
31 Instruments
32 Landing Gear
33 Lights
34 Navigation
51 Standard Practices/Structures
52 Doors
53 Fuselage
55 Stabilizers
56 Windows
57 Wings

POWERPLANT SYSTEM
71 Powerplant
73 Engine Fuel and Control
74 Ignition
76 Engine Controls
77 Engine Indicating
78 Engine Exhaust.
79 Engine Oil
80 Starting
85 Reciprocating Engine

[barnstmr]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

Hank, Bill, Mike, et.al.
Seriously, I implore you to re-consider the path where this is heading. With all due respect... (and I mean I do respect each of the contributors to this thread as carrying significant weight to the core knowledge of this forum and to the Taylorcraft Foundation) please step back a minute and realize that this is getting out of hand... a snowball effect is happening here. This started as a great suggestion for this forum and the foundation to collect photos and "lessons learned" information and make it available to other Taylorcraft restorers, owners, and operators. Since that initial suggestion, there have been some really good ideas that have collectively grown to the point of making a Taylorcraft Service manual that meets today's international standards for Airline Transport Association. You guys are jumping on the same bandwagon that has taken aviation into the regulatory nightmare that it has become. This is the kind of thing that the FAA scouts are looking for to arm themselves with ammo to regulate the future of aviation.

Whats wrong with backing up a few steps and realize that people like Rob Lees have created some wonderfully helpful data on their own merit? Why not stick to the simple approach he used? Perhaps work to create a searchable database of photos and information to make the collection of data more useful to the Forum users.

Maybe this is starting to sound like a broken wheel... but KISS should be the goal. I have been watching the FAA regulatory process at work for the past 20 years... and believe me... this is how the mighty hand of bureaucracy gets a foothold. Once we as a group adopt an all-encompassing approach to maintenance, they will have us in the snare of red-tape.

Look at the airplane we are talking about. With only the exception of modern-day avionics and gadgets, Taylorcrafts are NOT any more complicated than they were in the beginning? Somehow our predecessors figured out from the available information how to keep them flying safely for all these years. So I submit to the tribe.... DO WE REALLY NEED AN ATA/JASC FORMATTED ALL-ENCOMPASSING MANUAL TO KEEP THESE BIRDS SAFE AND AIRWORTHY? I do not believe we do.

But I do believe it is wonderful to have this forum and all of the intelligent folks here willing to share their experiences and photos, and perspectives. I absolutely love Rob's photo documentary of his project and others like his. This is the type of thing I believe we should strive to collect, catalog, and organize to share and distribute through the Taylorcraft owner/operator/restorer network. I do not want anything that is pitched to be the GOSPEL on how to maintain my airplane. The FAA already provides enough of that. I humbly submit this opinion and it is just that... my opinion. I do not mean to attack or insult the intelligence of the posters of this thread. Quite conversely, I applaud you guys for working hard to share your knowledge and provide useful information. Please just take a moment to look at the big picture perspective and re-evaluate the goal.