|
|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
 |
| Thread Tools |
Rating: 
|
Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Latest revision to maintenance manual
Has anyone seen the latest revision to the mm ?
D2500 2TR9 dated oct 2010 If so what are the changes? Thanks Gord
__________________
Gord C-FTES 
|
|
#2
09-12-11, 04:04 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Just talked to Cessna. It's a 300 page inspection document revision.
I ordered it as I have the paper manual. Once I get it I will post comments.
__________________
Gord C-FTES
|
|
#4
09-13-11, 10:46 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hi Herb, Are you asking if it was SID related or have you seen the revsion and know its sid related? Judging by the size (over 300 pages as I was told) I would assume its a major rewrite. the guy who took the order could only say it had to do with inspections. let me know.
__________________
Gord C-FTES
|
|
#5
09-14-11, 10:10 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I was asking if the document you referred to is the published SID's that we have been wondering about since the last meeting with Cessna almost 2 years ago. I also ordered a copy of the -13 revision which applies to the 65-73 models. I ordered one through Yingling for $8. I will post the results once it arrives.
Cessna indicated that they would revise the maintenance manual (MM) to include the new inspections (SID's) as the method of print. The fear was if someone hired a big shop that had all the new documents they might feel they are obligated to perform all inspections that the manufacturer has included in the MM. From what I see the revision was published Oct 2010.
__________________
Herb R Harney 1968 337C Flying the same Skymaster for 47 years
|
|
#6
09-14-11, 11:15 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hi Herb, thanks for the clarification.
__________________
Gord C-FTES
|
|
#7
09-14-11, 05:37 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
A bad day for Skymaster owners
Just reviewed the revisions. They are to put it mildly absurd and require in some instances removing engines, tail booms elevators, and rudders. Perhaps a class action suit is in order. If Cessna wants all this stuff done they should be paying for it.
__________________
Gord C-FTES Last edited by Gord Tessier : 09-14-11 at 05:58 PM.
|
|
#8
09-15-11, 11:36 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Easy does it Gord
Sounds like the SID's we have been talking about over the last 3 years have arrived. In the US these new inspections are not mandatory for Part 91 operation. What about Canada? Not sure but I don't remember hearing in any discussions that Canada was different than the US. Let me know if you have other information. There is a rule that is still on the books that says all aircraft inspections shall be carried out according to the original maintenance manual that was delivered with the aircraft. So unless some shop has some other policy you should be fine. Cessna has started writing these additional inspections to meet the demand from FAA and Congress coming from the Aging Aircraft issue. They, Cessna, seem to be acting very quiet about the release of these documents. As I said in the post above from what I see they have been out since October of last year. Guess we should have believed the press when they published this http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news..._201808-1.html Wow, this is my 1,000th post, cool!
__________________
Herb R Harney 1968 337C Flying the same Skymaster for 47 years Last edited by hharney : 09-15-11 at 11:42 AM.
|
|
#9
09-15-11, 08:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#10
09-15-11, 08:22 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
If Cessna is driving this train, then it seems to me, based on the magnitude of the inspections, they are admitting gross negligence.
|
|
#11
09-15-11, 08:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
It's simple. Cessna should pay for the inspections.
__________________
Gord C-FTES
|
|
#12
09-16-11, 07:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#13
09-16-11, 07:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
If you had a '65 Ford Mustang with 250,000 miles on it would you expect Ford to still warranty it???
|
|
#14
09-16-11, 07:24 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
If it was a design flaw then yes. If it was because of a worn out part then no. I don't mind paying for the part and the labour to install said part but the cost of the inspections could exceed the value of the ac. It's as if they are trying to ground the entire fleet in one fell swoop.
__________________
Gord C-FTES Last edited by Gord Tessier : 09-16-11 at 08:21 AM.
|
|
#15
09-16-11, 04:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Sorry, I just don't buy your reasoning. While I don't agree with Cessna and the SID, I do understand what's driving it. And it's not the FAA, it's Cessna attorneys playing CYA. With a country full of rogue lawyers looking for big payouts I don't blame them.
|
Linear Mode
