![]() |
|
Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools |
Rating: ![]() |
Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
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
__________________
Gord C-FTES |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]() 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.
__________________
Gord C-FTES Last edited by Gord Tessier : 12-16-10 at 07:17 AM. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Update for further information
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). |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Unfortunate
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.
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Good Work
Thank you for keeping us apprised, Dennis.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
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/contentSt...ontentType=pdf
__________________
Herb R Harney 1968 337C Flying the same Skymaster for 47 years |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
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.
__________________
Gord C-FTES |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
send email
Quote:
http://www.337skymaster.com/messages...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. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|