New AD for wings.

[WebMaster]

See attached.

Many thanks to our Left Coast contributor for bringing this to my attention

[Gord Tessier]

So, the obvious question is... who is going to pay to correct this? AE obviously made mistakes.
They should be paying for the labour and the parts to rectify this. They should also supply conventional wing tips to anyone who wants the mods removed. In my business if a vendor does shoddy workmanship then we get someone else to make good on it and bill the original vendor. My own mechanic was very surprised by the poor workmanship when he did my first annual. This is grounds for a class action suit. I hope AE realizes this and does the right thing before it gets out of control.

[WebMaster]

Read the AD carefully. This is for wing EXTENSIONS, that are fuel tanks.

It also begs the question, what about FLINT. They make wing extensions that are fuel tanks. I have seen more than 1 Skymaster with Flint tanks.

[Gord Tessier]

Yes, that is what mine are. It gets worse of you have the wing tips without the fuel tanks.
GTOW 4000 lbs. VFR only etc.

[rhurt]

The way I read the AD it is talking about wing extensions, not winglets or wing tips. It covers wing extensions with integral fuel tanks and wing extensions without integral fuel tanks. I have not looked up the STC numbers yet though.

[tropical]

Read the AD carefully. This is for wing EXTENSIONS, that are fuel tanks.

It also begs the question, what about FLINT. They make wing extensions that are fuel tanks. I have seen more than 1 Skymaster with Flint tanks.

FLINT obviously has better engineering.

[hharney]

Yes, that is what mine are. It gets worse of you have the wing tips without the fuel tanks.
GTOW 4000 lbs. VFR only etc.

Wing tips without fuel tanks? I am not following your course here Gord. Are you thinking the wing extensions without tanks that have fuel in them? Or are you referring to the winglets that AE has the STC for? The proposed AD for the wing extensions does not contain anything about the winglets.

http://www.aopa.org/aircraft/articles/2010/101020skymaster.html

[Gord Tessier]

Hi Herb, I used the wrong word earlier. I meant wing extensions without without fuel tanks.
There does not appear to be any problems with the wing tips. The ad refers to extensions with fuel tanks and extensions without. It appears the limitations are much more stringent on aircraft with the extensions but no fuel tank.
Either way, Saturday morning I start removing the mod. On Monday my engineer and I will do the one time inspection and be done with it. Probably saved my life.

[hharney]

Is there actually a mod for wing extensions without the tanks? I didn't understand that when I read the draft AD.

[Gord Tessier]

Hi Herb, it was news to me too. Why bother doing it at all if your not going to have the fuel tanks. Mine are coming off on Saturday. My engineer was beginning to worry after the last annual. He says it will probably save my life. The extended range was nice as a cushion on fuel reserve but I am really only good for a few hours at a time anyway. I think the mod should have come with a pilot relief tube but the FAA probably would have issued an AD on that too.

[stackj]

Ah, and once again my primary safety rule...

6 hour fuel range...

3 hour bladder range!

[rhurt]

There's a relief tube on this one. No need to give up coffee or even worry about a preflight pit stop.

I have four young daughters. Flying with five women made the mod essential.

[Gord Tessier]

Does anyone know how to reach Owen Bell?
My engineer has been trying to reach him.
I think one of he engineers (can't confirm as it was second hand) from the FAA has been trying to get in contact with him as well.

[WebMaster]

http://www.aviationenterprises.us/contact.html

[Gord Tessier]

My plane is now in being repaired.
This AD is very expensive in the neighborhood of $20,000.
The damage to my aircraft as a result of the installation of the wing extension/fuel tank STC is extensive.
The repairs are not only to comply with the AD but also to undue the damage caused by drilling into the spar caps.
I gave Mr. Bell an opportunity to contact me to discuss remediation but he has not even acknowledged my e-mail.

Mr. Bell, I know you read these posts? Now would be a good time to come clean and do the right thing. The damage caused by your STC is irrefutable. How can we continue to buy your other products if you are unwilling to stand by them?

This is a wonderful opportunity for Aviation Enterprises to show the Skymaster community that they stand behind their products even to the point of making good on their errors.

Hey, who doesn't make mistakes? Lets fix this one together so we can continue to enjoy our beautiful aircraft and Aviation Enterprises can continue to flourish with the confidence of the Skymaster community.

[tropical]

My plane is now in being repaired.
This AD is very expensive in the neighborhood of $20,000.
The damage to my aircraft as a result of the installation of the wing extension/fuel tank STC is extensive.
The repairs are not only to comply with the AD but also to undue the damage caused by drilling into the spar caps.
I gave Mr. Bell an opportunity to contact me to discuss remediation but he has not even acknowledged my e-mail.

Mr. Bell, I know you read these posts? Now would be a good time to come clean and do the right thing. The damage caused by your STC is irrefutable. How can we continue to buy your other products if you are unwilling to stand by them?

This is a wonderful opportunity for Aviation Enterprises to show the Skymaster community that they stand behind their products even to the point of making good on their errors.

Hey, who doesn't make mistakes? Lets fix this one together so we can continue to enjoy our beautiful aircraft and Aviation Enterprises can continue to flourish with the confidence of the Skymaster community.

Good Luck on this one. If you want Owen Bell to reply you're gonna have to do it with a subpoena.

[WebMaster]

My plane is now in being repaired.
This AD is very expensive in the neighborhood of $20,000.
The damage to my aircraft as a result of the installation of the wing extension/fuel tank STC is extensive.
The repairs are not only to comply with the AD but also to undue the damage caused by drilling into the spar caps.
I gave Mr. Bell an opportunity to contact me to discuss remediation but he has not even acknowledged my e-mail.

Mr. Bell, I know you read these posts? Now would be a good time to come clean and do the right thing. The damage caused by your STC is irrefutable. How can we continue to buy your other products if you are unwilling to stand by them?

This is a wonderful opportunity for Aviation Enterprises to show the Skymaster community that they stand behind their products even to the point of making good on their errors.

Hey, who doesn't make mistakes? Lets fix this one together so we can continue to enjoy our beautiful aircraft and Aviation Enterprises can continue to flourish with the confidence of the Skymaster community.
Gord,
Was the modification to your aircraft done by Owen and his folks?

I'm presuming it was based on your letter, but just wanted clarification.

[WebMaster]

There's a relief tube on this one. No need to give up coffee or even worry about a preflight pit stop.

I have four young daughters. Flying with five women made the mod essential.

Be careful about that. It has been known to cause corrosion. You should check the airframe carefully, "downwind" of the place where the relief tube exits the aircraft.

[Gord Tessier]

Gord,
Was the modification to your aircraft done by Owen and his folks?

I'm presuming it was based on your letter, but just wanted clarification.

Hi Larry I am pretty sure it was down by Owen but I will double check.

[rhurt]

Be careful about that. It has been known to cause corrosion. You should check the airframe carefully, "downwind" of the place where the relief tube exits the aircraft.
It is mounted slightly below the port spar attach fairing, so it's pretty much out of the way of the prop/boom/elevator downstream. I always flush the tube with an antibacterial soap /water solution after each use though, and inspect the prop/elevator in case the airflow is different that what i expect.

[rhurt]

Hi Larry I am pretty sure it was down by Owen but I will double check.
Gord,

Have you heard back from Owen about this?

Randy

[Gord Tessier]

Actually I have. I have since forwarded him all the repair estimates. Once the final bill is in probably early this week I will forward it to him along with wire instructions.

[Gord Tessier]

I submitted the final bill to Mr. Bell at Aviation Enterprises last Thursday November 25th.
$21,253.20 Canadian dollars.
This included the repair as well as the cost to properly engineer the repair itself as it was far more than just filling a few holes and slapping some aluminum on the spar.
Moreover, the repair to the lower skin was accomplished by removing the skin and replacing it as you cannot reinforce a hole that has a stringer running over it. It would result in an uneven finish. It was actually necessary to open up the top of the wing completely to get in and make the repairs. The shop spent 179 hours doing the repair and they even reduced their shop rate by 12% so they could keep to the estimate which I felt was very accomodating of them. If any of you need a similar repair they are called Aerostructural Inc. and their phone number is 866-971-5244.
I also submitted all the work orders etc. and once I receive the funds I will release the balance of the engineering diagrams for his file on my plane.
I have had a few back and forth emails from Mr. Bell. I believe he will do the right thing and remediate the damage.
If there are any others out there I would be pleased to review my findings with you.

[Denhamblin]

I was recently made aware that some here have questions about the AD issued on Aviation Enterprises regarding extended wing tips and whether Flint Aero will also be affected. There will be an AD forthcoming dealing with our wing tips as well and we are currently working with the FAA and the Small Aircraft Directorate on this matter. The incident in Farmington, New Jersey prompted the FAA and the SAD to look into not only AE's modification but Flint Aero's as well (based on one Service Difficulty Report on a Flint modified T337G that reported some wing skin cracks at WS150 underneath the removable fuel tank access cover). I have had an engineer working on this project for the last few months and the engineering study has been quite intense. The FAA was able to get engineering data directly from Cessna though that information could not be shared with us. We have had to reverse engineer the wing which has taken quite some time.

To deal with this upcoming AD we are looking at two options. One would be a structural reinforcement while the other would involve reworking the limitation for “zero fuel” in the tip tanks. The current limitation is the requirement of maintaining at least 12 gallons of fuel in each tip until the aircraft gross weight reaches 4,330 lbs. This limitation has been in place from the time the STC was first issued in 1991. It is possible that the "fix" will include a combination of the two options.

The structural reinforcement will be relatively non-intrusive and includes reinforcing the stringer splice at WS150 and some externally mounted stainless steel straps on three stringers and the forward spar cap outboard of WS150. At WS150 there will be two bands of SS attached chordwise. One band will be 3.5” x 19.75” and will be riveted to the underside of the removable fuel panel and will attach at the existing screw locations at WS150. A second band (5” x 19.75”) will be riveted to the exterior of the upper skin and will also attach at WS150 via the existing screw locations. The stringer straps will be 1” wide and begin 2" outboard of WS150 and terminate 3" outboard of WS177. The spar doubler (also 1” wide) will originate at WS162 and terminate at WS192. These reinforcements will be required only on the upper wing surface. Of course, this “fix” will first have to be approved by the FAA though so far they have been very happy with the data we have supplied. Please note that the plans for the structural reinforcement is preliminary and may change as we continue to refine our data.

The limitation option is still one we are looking at. We believe the aircraft is fine at 4,330 lbs with a minimum of 12 gallons in each tip. At higher weights we believe that there would need to be more than 12 gallons in each tip. Right now I would error on the side of caution and recommend keeping the tips tanks full until the gross weight drops to 4,330 lbs and then begin transferring fuel from the tips to the mains. We are still working on what the “zero fuel” weight would be but we feel the weight of 3,300 lbs that is listed in the AD which affects Aviation Enterprises is much lower than it needs to be. Right now, though, I would recommend keeping a minimum of 12 gallons in each tip at all times (or at least when the gross weight is above 3,300 lbs) until we finalize the "zero fuel" weight. The limitation option may not be practical in the long term though it would at least be a required temporary limitation until the aircraft is reinforced.

This AD will only affect 337s that do not have the 150.6 gallon capacity factory fuel tanks, what we refer to as the “long wing” aircraft. The wing structure of the “long wing” is stronger than the “short wing” aircraft. I would note that the aircraft involved in the New Jersey incident as well as the one in the recent Avon Park incident were "short wing" aircraft.

I think we are all aware that the pilots involved in the New Jersey incident were asking a lot of the airframe. The FAA quickly issued a SAIB (CE-10-20) though the response to that SAIB was tepid in their view. Flint Aero was included in that SAIB. The latest incident in Avon Park, Florida has the FAA additionally concerned because the wing failure occurred in the same general area (perhaps a bit inboard) though this aircraft did not have wing tip extensions. I do not know if this latest incident will have an effect on the upcoming AD for Flint Aero but they did contact me for some input.

I do appreciate Larry for allowing me to use this forum to get some information out. If anyone has any questions feel free to contact me via phone (619-448-1551), e-mail (Dennis@flintaero.com) or here in this thread.

Dennis Hamblin
President, Flint Aero, Inc.

[edasmus]

Thank you very much for the info. Please keep info coming as it is available.

Ed Asmus - N1873M

[tropical]

And note the very informative and quick reply from Owen Bell as well.........................

[Gord Tessier]

Did you mean the one from the Flint guy?

[WebMaster]

Gord, he was being facetious. Pointing out that while the AD for Flint hasn't been released, we, this message board, have yet to have a comment from Owen, on the Aviation Enterprises AD.

[WebMaster]

We appreciate the comments made by anyone who has any involvement with Skymasters.
Thank you for sharing with us.

A couple of comments, questions.
First, The New Jersey accident, I thought, involved a Super Skyrocket, a pressurized airplane. I would have assumed that it had the strengthened wing. Do you mean that all pressurized Skymasters don't have the same strengthened wing?? In other words, they are not all created equal.
Second, the straps on top of the wing are only for those aircraft that do not have the 150 gallon capacity wing, and have Flint tanks? Do aircraft that do not have the 150 gallon wing, and don't have Flint tanks going to need this reinforcement?
I have seen on other types of aircraft, a need for a spar inspection. This frequent, and frequently expensive inspection is waived, if there is a spar replacement. Would not a spar replacement, incorporating spar used in the stronger wing, be a better solution than straps on top of the wing??

Thank you,

[Gord Tessier]

It's all that cold weather up here. I thought he might be kidding. Thank you Larry for letting me be a part of this forum and this website. It is such a good feeling to know that I am not alone. I use my plane only for personal use and humanitarian missions. In January we were part of the Haiti airlift with Bahamas Habitat and when the weather permits we do Hope Air missions flying kids who need non urgent medical treatment from the near north down to Toronto.
The Skymaster is a great aircraft and I hope to be able to fly mine for a long time.
It's unfortunate for everyone involved that this happened.
All I am looking for is the cost to repair my plane not one red cent more.
Thanks again

[Denhamblin]

We appreciate the comments made by anyone who has any involvement with Skymasters.
Thank you for sharing with us.

A couple of comments, questions.
First, The New Jersey accident, I thought, involved a Super Skyrocket, a pressurized airplane. I would have assumed that it had the strengthened wing. Do you mean that all pressurized Skymasters don't have the same strengthened wing?? In other words, they are not all created equal.
Second, the straps on top of the wing are only for those aircraft that do not have the 150 gallon capacity wing, and have Flint tanks? Do aircraft that do not have the 150 gallon wing, and don't have Flint tanks going to need this reinforcement?
I have seen on other types of aircraft, a need for a spar inspection. This frequent, and frequently expensive inspection is waived, if there is a spar replacement. Would not a spar replacement, incorporating spar used in the stronger wing, be a better solution than straps on top of the wing??

Thank you,

Larry, the aircraft involved in the NJ incident was a T337G manufactured in 1973. The 150 gallon tanks were offered later though I am unsure as to when. It may have been an option in 1974 and may have been a standard in 1975. I have one customer who operates a fleet of 24 Skymasters and they only fly those with the long wing. From my records they fly both the G and H models. The "long wing' aircraft have "hat" stringers that extend out to WS177. On the "short wing" aircraft these "hat" stingers extend to WS150. Outboard of the "hat" stringers is a spice to a "J" stringer. Additionally, the spar caps on the "long wing" aircraft have a "T" configuration of the spar cap which extends to WS177 and from that point outboard they become an "L" shaped cap. On "short wing" aircraft this transition happens at WS150.

The upcoming AD for aircraft modified with Flint Aero extended wing tip fuel tanks will only be for "short wing" 337s modified with Flint Aero extended wing tip fuel tanks as far as we can tell right now. Until the FAA signs off on our findings we can only speculate but I can say that I am very comfortable with the work of my engineer and the feedback I have received from the FAA on our preliminary findings.If you don't have the Flint Aero tips you would not be effected by this AD. If you have wing tip extensions manufactured by Aviation Enterprises you would be required to follow the instructions in that AD. However, the accident in Avon Park may bring into question the non-modified 337 wing. Since the accident in New Jersey the focus has been only on 337s with extended wing tips.

A replacement of the spar will not be required in addressing the issues incorporated in the forthcoming AD for 337s modified with Flint Aero tip tanks. There may be other ways to address the issue but we think our solution is one that addresses the issue in the most economically feasible way. According to my engineer, and he has been in this trade for many years, this has been done before on other aircraft.

[Alfonso]

Copy of email message sent today :

----- Original Message -----
From: Alfonso Diaz del Castillo
To: Dennis Hamblin ; jose.obregon@ntsb.gov ; william.o.herderich@faa.gov
Cc: Alfonso Diaz del Castillo
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 9:51 AM
Subject: SECOND C337 DOWN DUE TO WING FAILURE

Hello Dennis and (Jose and William), it has been sometime since our last communication. I hope you all are doing well.

Dennis, thank you for posting in the Cessna Pilot Association’s (CPA) web board, your article of the additional and pending Airworthiness Directive (AD) for the Cessna Skymasters. Please email me the complete list of all the Skymaster forums that are out there, as it will be very helpful. I am a member of CPA, but it is not a Skymaster forum per se.

In your article posted in CPA you mention that the recent C337 incident in Avon Park, Florida, does not have wing tip extensions. Have you check with the NTSB or the FAA to verify that it positively did not have now or before Aviation Enterprises winglets? I believe the winglets could provide for bending, pulling and pushing effects on the wing, and could have had some effect in both incidents, in addition to the fuel wing tip extensions.

Thank you for your input and best regards,

Alfonso Diaz del Castillo - (C336 - N695AD)

Phones: Cell 202-309-3969 - Office 571-227-2208 - Home 301-934-9100 - Fax 301-934-2111

----- Original Message -----
From: Alfonso Diaz del Castillo
To: jose.obregon@ntsb.gov ; william.o.herderich@faa.gov
Cc: Fiestair@erols.com
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 8:09 AM
Subject: THREE PICTURES OF A SKYMASTER WINGLET


Good morning William and Jose.

Enclosed are three pictures of a winglet on a Skymaster C337 that I took on Oshkosh last year (I believe it is an Aviation Enterprises winglet). It may be helpful to you in visualizing how big it really is and how it may have affected the flexing of the wing on the accident C337 aircraft under your investigation, especially if it is not perfectly aligned with the centerline of the aircraft. I hope these pictures are helpful to you.

Best regards,

Alfonso Diaz del Castillo - N695AD

Phones: Cell 202-309-3969 - Office 571-227-2208 - Home 301-934-9100 Fax 301-934-2111

[Gord Tessier]

Well, here we go. It appears Aviation Enterprises, though guilty of creating an unsafe condition and I quote from the AD 2010-21-18

"Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by a wing overload failure and by reports of cracks in the upper wing
skins on certain Cessna airplanes that are now or have ever been modified by Aviation Enterprises STC SA02055AT, SA02056AT, SA02307AT, or SA02308AT. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct damage in the wings and to prevent overload failure of the wing due to the installation of the STCs. Damage in the wing or overload failure of the wing could result in structural failure of the wing, which could result in a loss of control.

At first they were willing to accept responsibility. Then they asked for proof that the work was done. Then they wanted all the engineering data (I speculate so they could copy it and use it to create a fix for the remaining aircraft) and finally they finished off by asking me for the "weight and balance for every flight since the STC was done". Of course that information does not exist.

Instead of doing the right thing they have decided to hide and hope that myself and the other aircraft owners will just go away. Well, I can't speak for the others but I can tell you right now that I will not go away until I am reimbursed for the damage caused. I have availed myself to one of the legal firms that my company uses in Tennessee and I will be litigating. They did over $21,000 damage to my aircraft.

When I am finished I am told the cost to them including legal fees and damages will approach or exceed $100,000. The firm I am using has extensive experience in this area.

[Denhamblin]

I just spoke with my engineer and he did say he was wrong in his assessment of the zero fuel weight (the gross weight of the aircraft) for the "short wing" 337s. It appears that will be 3,400lbs. You do need to keep at least 12 gallons of fuel in each tip tank until your weight drops to this point. Once the aircraft is reinforced this will go back up to 4,330lbs. I am still waiting on hearing how much fuel you need to keep in each tip at higher gross weights. Right now I would say keep your tips full until you get your weight down to 4,330lbs and then transfer some fuel out of the tips but you need to keep at least 12 gallons in each tip at 4,330lbs.

Again, this will only effect the "short wing aircraft." If you have the factory 150 gal tanks you are fine with the STC as it is currently written.

Also, I think it is important to add that our engineering numbers only deal with a total gross weight of 4,700lbs and below. Technically, our STC only provides a GWI up to 4,630lbs (that of a non-turbo 337G).

[WebMaster]

It's unfortunate, Gord. I would think that they (Aviation Enterprises ) would want to get things straight. Resorting to attorneys makes attorneys happy. Unfortunately, I think that Aviation Enterprises would end up being not happy. I know of a similar case, and the plaintiff ended up owning the company, or at least it's assets.

[WebMaster]

Thank you for keeping us apprised, Dennis.

[hharney]

This notice of Final Ruling on the Modified wing AD recommends inspection of those aircraft with the winglets in suit with the procedures outlined for wing extension modified aircraft.

During my next annual I will be looking very seriously at the identified locations per the AD. I will be at the second year anniversary with the winglets installed and I have had one flight with severe turbulence. I looked at the wings very close last year when the SAIB came out and did not find any concerns. When I installed the winglets I planned on following the suggested installation instructions but from the suggestion of the paint shop I used rivnuts were installed on all fasteners instead of using sheet metal screws. I will keep the message board updated with the inspection results.


http://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?objectId=0900006480baeac2&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf

[Gord Tessier]

Hi Larry, do you know how I can get in touch with N5ZX?

Of interest is a colleague of mine had similar damage and AE covered 2/3s of the repair.

[Jerry De Santis]

Hi Folks, Been a while since I posted on the site here.

Have you every wondered why AE is not listed on this websites web page listing or about their past quality history?

Reading about the quality of the wing extensions and the problems resulting from them made me wonder!

Maybe you should too!

Jerry

[WebMaster]

Hi Larry, do you know how I can get in touch with N5ZX?

Of interest is a colleague of mine had similar damage and AE covered 2/3s of the repair.

Follow this link.
http://www.337skymaster.com/messages/showthread.php?t=2672&highlight=n5zx
Then, click on the user, N5ZX, and you will have the ability to send a PM (not recommended, because the last login was some time ago), or an email, through the message board.

[Ernie Martin]

Hello, Jerry, good to hear from you again.

As one of the Webmasters for this page, I would like to say that Aviation Enterprises' absence from our list of web sites has less to do with the quality of their work and more to do with the fact that AE's owner, Owen Bell, did not emphasize their web site. Although it's better now, AE's website of years past was below average -- often just pages with pictures and bullets, with negligible design. Had Owen asked for us to include AE in our list of websites, we would have done it.

The question of quality is, of course, on everyone's mind. But, as a mechanical engineer like you, I think it's more about pushing the envelope. You push here, and something gives elsewhere. It's often hard to anticipate all the areas that need to be examined when you are modifying a complex item like an aircraft. Or maybe some corners were cut, like a test that wasn't performed or one where the test conditions didn't fully simulate reality. Hopefully, time will tell where the mistakes were made.

Ernie

[WebMaster]

Without going into details, AE's website was removed after some issues were raised.

[Jerry De Santis]

Thank you Ernie, nice to her from you again. And, thank you Larry for your wise response.

Larry, you are correct not to get into details nor will I. However Ernie, Just to set the record straight, you reasoning why AE is not listed on the web site listing page is in error. It predates many of the people that now enjoy this site today and even predates Larry as the webmaster. But enough of that.

For the sake of all you good readers on this web site, when it comes to after market changes to our aircraft, soundly check the vendor out completely. BBB, FAA record etc. Don't jist take other peoples opinion of the vendor. They may not have all the facts. Remember, when you and your loved ones are flying in the plane, the vendor is not with you. There are some very good after market vendors out there and likewise some not so good!

Jerry

[rhurt]

Thank you Ernie, nice to her from you again. And, thank you Larry for your wise response.

Larry, you are correct not to get into details nor will I. However Ernie, Just to set the record straight, you reasoning why AE is not listed on the web site listing page is in error. It predates many of the people that now enjoy this site today and even predates Larry as the webmaster. But enough of that.

For the sake of all you good readers on this web site, when it comes to after market changes to our aircraft, soundly check the vendor out completely. BBB, FAA record etc. Don't jist take other peoples opinion of the vendor. They may not have all the facts. Remember, when you and your loved ones are flying in the plane, the vendor is not with you. There are some very good after market vendors out there and likewise some not so good!

Jerry

Thank you guys for putting up this website. I appreciate the posting of information about the old aircraft we fly and maintain. With all due respect though: This information is absolutely useless.

My 337C is currently in Owen Bell's hangar getting air conditioning, a rear engine cooling mod, and a cargo pod installed. Should I abort the project or not? Is there another source for Skymaster A/C or rear engine cooling mod?

Is there a way to search the FAA record for actions against companies or individuals? Are there any against Aviation Enterprises or Owen? What exactly is the concern with AE? Fill us in. Is it bad tip tanks? Aren't the Flint tanks subject to similar speed limitations? What about the O-2 at Avon Park? Maybe Cessna made a mistake.

Did you pay too much for something? Did you buy a used engine part and then he didn't warranty the entire engine when the used part damaged it? Would you pay for all the repairs to an airplane's wings when you had no way of knowing if the Va limitations were followed?

Until I have more information I will continue to use my own observations to formulate how I regard Owen: A guy who loves Skymasters and is willing to put a large amount of his energy and resources into making them better and keeping them flying.

Randy Hurt

[WebMaster]

Thank you guys for putting up this website. I appreciate the posting of information about the old aircraft we fly and maintain. With all due respect though: This information is absolutely useless.

Until I have more information I will continue to use my own observations to formulate how I regard Owen: A guy who loves Skymasters and is willing to put a large amount of his energy and resources into making them better and keeping them flying.

Randy Hurt

Randy, like all of us, you make your decisions based on your observations. If it is working for you, that's great.

[Gord Tessier]

I think I will let the AD that specifically mentions AE speak for itself. "unsafe condition" . It is located at the very top of this post by Larry. It's from the FAA. As well as comments made by the structural engineers who had to undue the damage caused by shoddy installation work which included drilling through spar caps and bending/cutting ribs. They had never seen such poor workmanship. This isn't about a badly designed mod. It's about all the poor installation jobs that were done in installing the mod. The damage was done at installation.
For my part I have given AE the opportunity to pay for the damage and only the damage that they caused. Nothing more. No fuel, no loss of enjoyment etc. They have blown me off so now it's in the hands of my lawyers.
I would get your work done quickly if I were you. The facts are there. It's all in the AD.

[Jerry De Santis]

Randy, it is your choice who you get your work done by. I truly wish you good luck and pray that you have thousands of hours of safe flying.

Jerry