Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Everything about your Aeronca, not Chief or Champ or Sedan specific.
User avatar
rkittine
Posts: 876
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 13:48
Contact:

Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by rkittine » Thu Feb 20, 2014 19:25

Does anyone know if it is true that you can forgo the installation of inspection holes and covers in the upper portion of the wing of a 7,8 or 11 Series Aeronca with over 90 HP if you can inspect the spar in an alternative method? They used a surplus proctoscope (new colonoscopy equipment was bought by the hospital) to inspect and video the spare in my 7CCM.

Bob
Robert P. Kittine, Jr.WA2YDV
West Nyack Aviation, L.L.C.
New York, New York 631-374-9652
rkittine@aol.com

MikeB
Posts: 3255
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 17:07
Location: Western Wisconsin
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by MikeB » Thu Feb 20, 2014 20:28

Bob,
To my knowledge there it's not necessary (although recommended) to put the upper wing inspection holes in as long as the spar can be inspected to the satisfaction of the IA. It does seem to me that during an annual inspection the spar is supposed to be inspected along it's entire length anyway. The critical points are pretty much known and we use a flashlight and also a Harbor Freight flexible scope to check the spar. Seems to work well. When I covered my L16 (new spars, ribs, etc. ) my IA said it was not necessary unless I wound up dragging a wing tip (ground loop) or some such incident :cry: . Although I had them on my Champ I was never a fan of the upper inspection covers as I though there would be a possibility of a leak on top of the spar which could cause rotting. Even covered the covers when I washed the plane!

Forget what I paid for the flexible inspection camera scope but seems it was around $75 and one of the handiest tools I've ever bought.

Mike

User avatar
rkittine
Posts: 876
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 13:48
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by rkittine » Thu Feb 20, 2014 21:38

Thanks Mike. I am looking at a Chief with an 0-200 and no inspection ports on the top of the wing, but the mechanic said that he bore scoped it and it was sufficient. - Bob
Robert P. Kittine, Jr.WA2YDV
West Nyack Aviation, L.L.C.
New York, New York 631-374-9652
rkittine@aol.com

Paul Agaliotis
Posts: 2482
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 18:49
Location: San Martin, California
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by Paul Agaliotis » Fri Feb 21, 2014 00:42

Those top access ports allow water to enter exactly where you don't want it. I don't think they are a good idea. You an see any problems without them.
Paul
Mailing Adress : Paul Agaliotis 2060 E. San Martin, San Martin,Calif. 95046

User avatar
rkittine
Posts: 876
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 13:48
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by rkittine » Fri Feb 21, 2014 07:23

So it is the inspection and not the ports that is the issue of the AD?
Robert P. Kittine, Jr.WA2YDV
West Nyack Aviation, L.L.C.
New York, New York 631-374-9652
rkittine@aol.com

MikeB
Posts: 3255
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 17:07
Location: Western Wisconsin
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by MikeB » Fri Feb 21, 2014 08:39

Should have also mentioned that my L16 has the Wagner 0200 conversion so it would fall under the AD. However, I agree with Paul the upper inspection ports are just a possible opening for water to leak on the spar. The Champion covers have a rubber gasket to seal the cover to the wing fabric and the Rainbow covers are supposed to be sealed down with silicone. As far as being able to inspect the spar at the strut doubler I think the Rainbow gives a little better access for whatever it's worth but with a strong light and a little common sense (regarding loads) you can do a pretty good job of getting to the critical spots without the upper openings.

Mike

Paul Agaliotis
Posts: 2482
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 18:49
Location: San Martin, California
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by Paul Agaliotis » Fri Feb 21, 2014 17:09

Bob,
It's the inspection. Some people created the top cover plates to make the inspection easier, but created a bigger potential for damage.
The AD itself is pretty draconian, many of the discribed "damage" are actually allowed and repairable defects. I find it a little amusing that a company that never produced a wood spar wing would have the operational experience and engineering to push for an AD of this magnatude.
Paul
Mailing Adress : Paul Agaliotis 2060 E. San Martin, San Martin,Calif. 95046

User avatar
rkittine
Posts: 876
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 13:48
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by rkittine » Sat Feb 22, 2014 05:39

Thanks Paul, How about the Sedan wing AD. Seems to have been a lot of communications about that recently. Bob
Robert P. Kittine, Jr.WA2YDV
West Nyack Aviation, L.L.C.
New York, New York 631-374-9652
rkittine@aol.com

Paul Agaliotis
Posts: 2482
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 18:49
Location: San Martin, California
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by Paul Agaliotis » Mon Feb 24, 2014 17:19

Bob,
Kind of the same situation. The wing is pretty easy to inspect without adding the holes. And the way it's written any of the standard repairs, partially severed angle or severed angle, are no longer useable for repaires. I don't know what you need to do if your spar has a previous installed angle repair. I have one in LA that has a small spot of exfoliation, from a bad heat treat, and the owners will probably sell or scrap the plane due to cost.
Paul
Mailing Adress : Paul Agaliotis 2060 E. San Martin, San Martin,Calif. 95046

User avatar
joea
Site Admin
Posts: 6052
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 13:01
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by joea » Mon Apr 28, 2014 20:37

Anyone interested, please LISTEN to Paul above...

He knows what he is talking about on both Chief's/Champs and Sedans. We are now going on 4 years now since this storm came up about Sedan wings and the "33/34" Sedans out there needing new spars just did not happen...

This little episode on the "Sedan spar issue" cost the Sedan owners 20-30% of the value of their airplanes and for the most part it was for nothing. Same thing happened with the Chief's and Champs.... once again all for nothing.

MikeB
Posts: 3255
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 17:07
Location: Western Wisconsin
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by MikeB » Tue Apr 29, 2014 19:06

The new metal spar wing from Champion is around $21,000 for a set of two. Seems like the wooden spar wings served Aeroncas quite well for 60 years. It's said the laminated spars are actually stronger than the solid wood. There were a number of cases where a scratched (often from sliding a rib on) spar was 'misdiagnosed' as a crack. I think one of the bigger problems was loose rib nails caused by the spar drying out after years. Occasionally there would be a horizontal crack outboard from a nail hole and I have seen a couple that were cracked between the bolt holes/under the attach plates.
Mike

Paul Agaliotis
Posts: 2482
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 18:49
Location: San Martin, California
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by Paul Agaliotis » Wed Apr 30, 2014 17:13

Mike,
I've seen the same conditions, and the repair is covered in the AC43, Repair of longitudal cracks. Specifically calls out the end grain splitting. These are all repairable defects, carried over from the CAM 18. And along comes this AD, at the end it has you check for any defects, repairable or not, and reject the spar. Why?? I can think of a $21,000 dollar reason. This was a self serving AD, all in the perceived interest of safety.
I work on heavy jets and I can assure you they are NOT crack free. This depends on the location and extent of the crack. We don't reject an item due to a crack in every case.
Paul
Mailing Adress : Paul Agaliotis 2060 E. San Martin, San Martin,Calif. 95046

bob turner
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2011 23:09
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by bob turner » Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:33

We were ruminating about this on the Champ forum - my opinion is that installing a port on top is the same as admitting that you cannot see the top surface any other way. Once you admit that, the way the AD is worded, you have admitted that you need top openings all along both spars.

That said, the dangerous area is apparently under the doublers, on the top of the spar, outboard of the lift strut attach point. Compression fractures are said to occur after wing impact.

One might wonder why Cubs do not have this AD - or indeed what horsepower has to do with it.

User avatar
joea
Site Admin
Posts: 6052
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 13:01
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by joea » Tue Jun 03, 2014 23:50

Bob,

This all started with Citabria's and once the FAA got their claws on it decided that the Chief/Champ wing was the same thing and that the Chief/Champ were doing acro's just like the Citabria (which they usually are NOT) then decided that we needed an AD rammed down our throats.

Then throw a Type Certificate holder who wants to sell wings and its all over. We had seen it on the Chief/Champs and now the very same thing on the Sedan. Two years after the supposed 33-34 Sedans with bad wings (or so we were told by the type holder) and I am guessing that its less than 10 airplanes out of 561 made, hardly what is needed for an AD.

You hardly see a Cub doing acro and IMHO thats part of the reason why they do not have the same AD that we in the Aeronca world do...

Joe A

MikeB
Posts: 3255
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 17:07
Location: Western Wisconsin
Contact:

Re: Wing Inspection AD 2000-25-02

Post by MikeB » Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:27

I don't know how many cracks were actually found at the outboard doublers but I'd guess very few and I know a lot of spars were misdiagnosed with horizontal scratches and especially laminated joints on the original spars. Obviously no one wants to be flying around with a cracked spar at a critical spot but I think it would take a pretty good hit or wing drag to create enough pressure to crack the spar. I've always wondered about the 90+ HP restriction .... almost if they feel the increased speed would put on heavier wing loads. On the other hand, my L16/0200 cruises about 90-95 instead of 85 with my old 65 so that's really not a big factor plus both are red lined at 129 MPH anyway and I don't do aerobatics.

I've looked at some pretty sad wings with loose nails, mouse chewings and crude repairs but I've never seen one cracked at the doubler but obviously they did exist. Best to check carefully if you don't know the history.

Mike

Post Reply