Dang it! Another AD...

[gkainz]

from our club maintenance officer ...

AD 2010-15-10, effective Aug 31, will require inspection/perhaps repair of control wheel shafts on Pipers.

Inspection costs estimated around $250, Fix-it costs perhaps $1,500 per plane.

Wonderful.

 

[Bob Noel]

2 reports, out of 41,000+ airplanes.

Way to go FAA.

 

[Richard]

One way to look at it is the AD appears to be based on 2 reports. Another way to look at it is in consideration of the aging of the fleet those two reports could simply be the tip of the iceberg.

I haven't read the AD but is this for the U-joint or the whole assembly? In my 1962 Cherokee I had a slight problem with the pitch. It turned out to be an easy and inexpensive replacement of the U-joint. I also had a similar problem on a 1978 C-210 I used to fly.

Believe you me, you'd sure not like to be that guy up there having a problem.

For the low down try talking to one of the two Cherokee owner's groups. That's not to say your A&P would need that advice but to say a pilot should know his aircraft.

EDIT: oh yeah, when at a SoCal airport getting new tires I spied an early model Cherokee right next to mine. I looked at the data plate and saw his S/N was one less than mine. I bet those two planes hadn't been that close together since the factory assembly line some 44 years earlier. And he was in the shop for replacement of the control wheel U-joint.

 

[Bob Bement]

The typical FAA knee jerk reaction!

 

[Bob Noel]

One way to look at it is the AD appears to be based on 2 reports. Another way to look at it is in consideration of the aging of the fleet those two reports could simply be the tip of the iceberg.

wrt the possibility of it being the tip of the iceberg. The age
of the fleet, and therefore the number of operating hours, would
tend to invalidate the premise that there are a lot of aircraft with
improperly drilled or installed control wheel shafts.

 

[Maxmosbey]

For the low down try talking to one of the two Cherokee owner's groups. That's not to say your A&P would need that advice but to say a pilot should know his aircraft.

As an A&P/IA, I don't pretend to know everything about every airplane. I don't mind it at all if the owner has information that will help me research an AD or a Service Bulletin. It saves me a lot of time. It is always easy to verify their information to see if it is applicable.

 

[ScottM]

The AD is attached here in case anyone wanted to see it and did not want to go looking on the FAA site for it.

 

[Richard]

Max, I understand and agree with your position. I was simply saying I think it's a great idea for a pilot to become very familiar with his steed. That is, don't leave it up to the shop to be the sole source of mechanical information to the pilot. It is very helpful if the pilot takes steps to bring himself to the same page as the A&P. And if that helps the A&P that is another benefit.

 

[Richard]

wrt the possibility of it being the tip of the iceberg. The age
of the fleet, and therefore the number of operating hours, would
tend to invalidate the premise that there are a lot of aircraft with
improperly drilled or installed control wheel shafts.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. To me, it would be logical to assume the age of the aircraft and the odds it's been tinkered with or parts have exceeded their wear limits is directly porportionate.

Also, consider how many owners have not reported difficulties. I have met more than a few owners who think since bailing wire is good enough for the tractor it's good enough for his aircraft. (Not always literally bailing wire but that is their attitude about maintaining "airworthiness".) This applies to first hand knowledge I've had of the rental fleet.

 

[schmookeeg]

I don't understand the kvetching.

1. Piper incorrectly assembled an unknown number of yoke attachment hardware.

2. If the hardware fails, you die in a flaming crater, screaming like a girl with a skinned knee.

3. The AD requires you look and see if YOUR piper is one of the members of #1 above. Estimated effort is a whopping 0.5-3 hours, which apparently depends on how buried the part is.

==

If the situation in #1 above was mentioned to me, I wouldn't wait for an AD to get under there and peek.

It's a one-time AD. By using the AD format, it guarantees that most if not all of the planes will get "looked" at by their next annual. Sounds good to me.

 

[flyersfan31]

I don't understand the kvetching.

1. Piper incorrectly assembled an unknown number of yoke attachment hardware.

2. If the hardware fails, you die in a flaming crater, screaming like a girl with a skinned knee.

3. The AD requires you look and see if YOUR piper is one of the members of #1 above. Estimated effort is a whopping 0.5-3 hours, which apparently depends on how buried the part is.

==

If the situation in #1 above was mentioned to me, I wouldn't wait for an AD to get under there and peek.

It's a one-time AD. By using the AD format, it guarantees that most if not all of the planes will get "looked" at by their next annual. Sounds good to me.

Well, that certainly puts it into perspective....

 

[ScottM]

I don't understand the kvetching.

1. Piper incorrectly assembled an unknown number of yoke attachment hardware.

And we the owners have to pay for checking to see if they fouled up. Shouldn't piper be footing the bill for this? If these were cars this would be a recall and would be inspected at the manufacturers expense. BUT NOOOooooooo airplane owners are rich suckers.

 

[flyersfan31]

And we the owners have to pay for checking to see if they fouled up. Shouldn't piper be footing the bill for this? If these were cars this would be a recall and would be inspected at the manufacturers expense. BUT NOOOooooooo airplane owners are rich suckers.

or the FAA is in bed with the mfrs and doesn't give a rats anus about the owners/pilots.