|
|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating: 
|
Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re Inspections
Are these intended for commercially operated aircraft or are they planning to include personally used aircraft as well?
Thank Gord 
|
|
#2
12-09-09, 08:08 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
As it stands now
It is something that is still not clear. If you read the above, all commercially operated C337's in the US will have to comply with the new service manual, which will include the SIDs. The operators in other countries will have to, as indicated above.
Private operators in the US may find that their IA's will want to follow the new service manual, including the SID's, at the time of the next annual, after they take effect. That part is unclear, but certainly seems likely. Does that answer your question??
|
|
#3
12-09-09, 09:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Corrosion Proofed Aircraft Exempted?
Has there been any discussion at all of factory corrosion proofed aircraft vs. plain? Mine was originally for export, is 100% zinc chromated.
Also, has anyone contemplated a class action lawsuit based on a theory of fraud? Cessna is attempting to effectively decertify our aircraft by these SID actions, and I don't believe they have the underlying facts to justify what they are doing. I would happily throw $1,000 in the pot along with 250 other owners to fund the action. Thanks, Chris Welsh
|
|
#4
12-09-09, 09:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Corrosion Inspection
There is a corrosion program, called CPCP. Regardless of the kind of corrosion your aircraft had from the factory, the SIDs (the CPCP is one of the SIDs) will require an inspection.
|
|
#6
12-09-09, 10:07 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Not true!!
Us lawyers are usually quite happy regardless of the outcome.  At least I always required that I be paid up front so the outcome was not terribly important. 
|
|
#7
12-09-09, 10:20 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
The corrosion program (CPCP) is NOT a SID. It is a separate inspection program. The Cessna 400 series owners tried the litigation avenue and failed. Not that it may be a different case for high wing Cessna's but there is some history already.
__________________
Herb R Harney 1968 337C Flying the same Skymaster for 47 years Last edited by hharney : 05-31-11 at 08:07 PM.
|
|
#8
12-09-09, 10:36 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
[quote=larry bowdish;14836]It is something that is still not clear. If you read the above, all commercially operated C337's in the US will have to comply with the new service manual, which will include the SIDs. The operators in other countries will have to, as indicated above.
Private operators in the US may find that their IA's will want to follow the new service manual, including the SID's, at the time of the next annual, after they take effect. That part is unclear, but certainly seems likely. Does that answer your question?? Hi, Thanks for the reply and yes it does.. hopefully. My AME (Aircraft Maintenance Engineer) in Canada seems to think I will be ok as I only fly my aircraft for personal enjoyment. No commercial use. Frankly I don't mine doing some of the more non-invasive inspections if it will make my plane safer for me and my family. My engineer allows me assist at annual for educational purposes and we usually go well above what is required as far as inspections. Thanks for all your time and engagement. Cessna needs guidance from those who know. It's good that they have solicited your help.
|
|
#9
12-10-09, 12:53 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I hate to say it guys but if it's in the manual and you don't comply your aircraft isnot airworthy!!! There are no rules in the regs about this specifickly so the manual is controling! Cessna is out for blood on this one!
_Travis
|
|
#10
12-12-09, 11:10 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Not True
Part 43 of the Regs allows alternatives to the OEM Service Manual. Part D of 43 is allowed to use for 100 hour inspections / Annuals. Your SOAPA SID Steering committee has researched this and this is still working with Cessna on some clarification of these concerns. Ultimately the inspection has to be signed off by the IA and it is up to his discretion based on Part 43 of the regs. If the IA need clarification on this then the local FISDO is involved. The FAA rep from the FISDO can require all or any inspections based on their interpretation of the OEM SM and the regs in Part 43. That's my understanding and maybe their are others out there that can chime in. Look Below at Section 43.5 (C) § 43.5 Approval for return to service after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration. top No person may approve for return to service any aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance, that has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless— (a) The maintenance record entry required by §43.9 or §43.11, as appropriate, has been made; (b) The repair or alteration form authorized by or furnished by the Administrator has been executed in a manner prescribed by the Administrator; and (c) If a repair or an alteration results in any change in the aircraft operating limitations or flight data contained in the approved aircraft flight manual, those operating limitations or flight data are appropriately revised and set forth as prescribed in §91.9 of this chapter. [Doc. No. 1993, 29 FR 5451, Apr. 23, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 43–23, 47 FR 41084, Sept. 16, 1982; Amdt. 43–31, 54 FR 34330, Aug. 18, 1989]
__________________
Herb R Harney 1968 337C Flying the same Skymaster for 47 years
|
|
#11
12-12-09, 12:49 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hi Herb,
we met at Airventure this year my parents and I stop and checked your plane out while you were unpacking! Love what you have done by the way! I guess I agree with you that the procedure can be altered or an alternate procdure can be approved by the FAA but I don't know a mechanic or IA that will stray from the factory procedures without guidance! I work for an OEM and can say that our legal department is kept buisy fighing cases where maintinance was (or was not) conducted in an approved manor! Ultametly one must comply! Either the factory methed or an approved alternate but, still compliance. Unfortunitally I don't know anyone who's got the cash to do the engineering to come up with an alternate means of compliance! It's like saying I'm not gonna do an annual caus my IA doesn't want to. There are several ways to do an annual but they must be approved ways and they will all referance the aircraft service manual or at the berry least specific literature for minimum requirements in the FAR's. But agin the FAR's are silent on this detailed of a procedure so the ASM will be controlling! Agin Cessna must have some kind of motivation for gowing through all this for an out of production type. For all our sakes I hope I'm wrong! Or maby Cessna will note that the procedures are optional in the book and we can for get about it till they decide to change there verbage! Travis
|
|
#12
12-14-09, 08:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Travis, I remember meeting you at OSH. You are from the Ft Worth area and I asked you about landing at Mecham.
At the meeting in Wichita we also discussed the rule that says (paraphrase): for inspection follow the Section in the Service Manual that was delivered with the airplane. This may be another way to qualify our original inspection list rather than adopting the new one.
__________________
Herb R Harney 1968 337C Flying the same Skymaster for 47 years Last edited by hharney : 12-14-09 at 08:07 PM.
|
Hybrid Mode
