New control cable inspections.
Although you can't read, Steve, others can.
Another weird quirk of aviation is that manufacturers and maintainers pretend they are perfect and nothing they produce and none of the work they do is defective.
When I give it away and go fishing, that will be another lost job in the GA maintenance industry.
Anyway, I'm still trying to solve the mystery of the statement that "CASA recently rescinded the control cable AD" in the AOPA magazine interview with the new CEO of CASA.
Is that statement just a case of AOPA and the CEO of CASA being clueless about what's happening in the real world?
[T]he problem with this approach to maintenance, is that ... infant mortality .... comes into play. There is always a finite chance that the new part you install will be defective, and as a result, you've removed a perfectly good part and discarded it, in favor of a bad one.
Compounding this is the finite and real probability that the process of maintenance itself will cause problems.
Compounding this is the finite and real probability that the process of maintenance itself will cause problems.
When I give it away and go fishing, that will be another lost job in the GA maintenance industry.
Anyway, I'm still trying to solve the mystery of the statement that "CASA recently rescinded the control cable AD" in the AOPA magazine interview with the new CEO of CASA.
Is that statement just a case of AOPA and the CEO of CASA being clueless about what's happening in the real world?
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps its more like you cant afford to maintain your aircraft and you should sell it and leave flying and take up fishing.
I see.
So if an individual in CASA with subjective opinions about the extent of a risk and how to mitigate that risk decides to issue an AD imposing that subjective opinion and consequent costs on aircraft owners, on pain of criminal conviction, despite the NAA responsible for the largest GA fleet on the planet not having done the same, aircraft owners should just STFU and pay.
If the proposed amendments to the AD come into effect, something that would have been criminally dangerous on 1 January 2018 will magically become acceptably safe until 1 September 2018, on which date it will magically become criminally dangerous. And aircraft owners should just STFU and not point out the nonsense.
Compliance with the inspection procedures in the proposed amended AD are more expensive than the current mandated replacement for many aircraft, and aircraft owners should thank CASA for its wonderful beneficence in proposing the amendment.
Meanwhile, on whatever planet AOPA and the CEO of CASA happen to be dwelling at the moment, the AD has been "rescinded". I suppose aircraft owners should just shrug and laugh it off as the usual dumb and dumber farce.
If the government issued a 'roadworthiness directive' requiring car owners to have the car's airbags inspected and replaced, at the owner's expense and on pain of criminal conviction, there would be riots until the government was tossed out on its ear. The different treatment of aircraft owners is about politics - plain and simple politics - not safety, but aircraft owners should just STFU and pay.
So if an individual in CASA with subjective opinions about the extent of a risk and how to mitigate that risk decides to issue an AD imposing that subjective opinion and consequent costs on aircraft owners, on pain of criminal conviction, despite the NAA responsible for the largest GA fleet on the planet not having done the same, aircraft owners should just STFU and pay.
If the proposed amendments to the AD come into effect, something that would have been criminally dangerous on 1 January 2018 will magically become acceptably safe until 1 September 2018, on which date it will magically become criminally dangerous. And aircraft owners should just STFU and not point out the nonsense.
Compliance with the inspection procedures in the proposed amended AD are more expensive than the current mandated replacement for many aircraft, and aircraft owners should thank CASA for its wonderful beneficence in proposing the amendment.
Meanwhile, on whatever planet AOPA and the CEO of CASA happen to be dwelling at the moment, the AD has been "rescinded". I suppose aircraft owners should just shrug and laugh it off as the usual dumb and dumber farce.
If the government issued a 'roadworthiness directive' requiring car owners to have the car's airbags inspected and replaced, at the owner's expense and on pain of criminal conviction, there would be riots until the government was tossed out on its ear. The different treatment of aircraft owners is about politics - plain and simple politics - not safety, but aircraft owners should just STFU and pay.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Compliance with the inspection procedures in the proposed amended AD are more expensive than the current mandated replacement for many aircraft, and aircraft owners should thank CASA for its wonderful beneficence in proposing the amendment.
I will try words of one sill a bull:
Try ree ding this thread.
My lay me told me that the in speck shuns ree quired by the pro posed new AD will be more ex pen sive than ree play sing the cabe ells on my air craft.
Try ree ding this thread.
My lay me told me that the in speck shuns ree quired by the pro posed new AD will be more ex pen sive than ree play sing the cabe ells on my air craft.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have read the thread, other than statements that it will cost more, there is no supporting evidence. You have no convincing argument that inspecting my TU206G cables will cost more than replacing them. Over to you
You will find that to inspect the cables properly (internal corrosion etc) please read AC43.13-1b Par 7-149 page 7-328 figure 7-16. Cable inspection technique
To do this inspection properly the cables must be partially removed so the full length of the cable can be inspected. This is time consuming and therefore expensive. It is basically the same cost of replacing the cables in total and having peace of mind for the next 15 years.
Of course if you find a LAME who will do a flick and tick it will initially be far cheaper, but at what cost??????
To do this inspection properly the cables must be partially removed so the full length of the cable can be inspected. This is time consuming and therefore expensive. It is basically the same cost of replacing the cables in total and having peace of mind for the next 15 years.
Of course if you find a LAME who will do a flick and tick it will initially be far cheaper, but at what cost??????
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You will find that to inspect the cables properly (internal corrosion etc) please read AC43.13-1b Par 7-149 page 7-328 figure 7-16. Cable inspection technique
To do this inspection properly the cables must be partially removed so the full length of the cable can be inspected. This is time consuming and therefore expensive. It is basically the same cost of replacing the cables in total and having peace of mind for the next 15 years.
Of course if you find a LAME who will do a flick and tick it will initially be far cheaper, but at what cost??????
To do this inspection properly the cables must be partially removed so the full length of the cable can be inspected. This is time consuming and therefore expensive. It is basically the same cost of replacing the cables in total and having peace of mind for the next 15 years.
Of course if you find a LAME who will do a flick and tick it will initially be far cheaper, but at what cost??????
Inspection of primary flight control cable terminals can be difficult and problematic. Surface indication of stress corrosion cracking, such as corrosion pitting or cracking can be very difficult to see, even under 10X magnification and can sometimes emanate from within the sleeve of the terminal.
The cost of the cables is going to be about $3500.00 plus GST, so am still waiting for Plumbum Vesica to answer.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beechcraft Barron or Baron 55, 58 or even the G58 are rubbish to work on or maintain - take the cowls of a new $1M+ baron with out a scratch.
At around the B200 they became quite good, and have never needed to change a cable other than the door cables on some.
To carry out a CASA sched 5 on a Baron that a owner will think is only a minor rip off by the Maint Org requires a lot of tick and flick due lack of acces and surplus of screws.
IMO a CASA Shed 5 inspection on a B58 should be a min of 60hrs (no defects) for a CAR 30 and a largish Part 145 more like 85hrs with no tick and flicks.
At around the B200 they became quite good, and have never needed to change a cable other than the door cables on some.
To carry out a CASA sched 5 on a Baron that a owner will think is only a minor rip off by the Maint Org requires a lot of tick and flick due lack of acces and surplus of screws.
IMO a CASA Shed 5 inspection on a B58 should be a min of 60hrs (no defects) for a CAR 30 and a largish Part 145 more like 85hrs with no tick and flicks.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you for the input mate, but I think we are misunderstanding why the cable replacement was mandated. It was not for the cables themselves, but for the stainless steel end fittings.:
Inspection of primary flight control cable terminals can be difficult and problematic. Surface indication of stress corrosion cracking, such as corrosion pitting or cracking can be very difficult to see, even under 10X magnification and can sometimes emanate from within the sleeve of the terminal.
The cost of the cables is going to be about $3500.00 plus GST, so am still waiting for Plumbum Vesica to answer.
Inspection of primary flight control cable terminals can be difficult and problematic. Surface indication of stress corrosion cracking, such as corrosion pitting or cracking can be very difficult to see, even under 10X magnification and can sometimes emanate from within the sleeve of the terminal.
The cost of the cables is going to be about $3500.00 plus GST, so am still waiting for Plumbum Vesica to answer.
Is that just cables for C206? or fitment too.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just the cables mate, I was going to bang them in myself.
Two fvcken days to fit and rig the rudder, piece of sh1t. And don't start me on the undercarriage rigging, tension varies with voltage, make sure you have 27.5 volts exactly on the APU.
Beechcraft Barron or Baron 55, 58 or even the G58 are rubbish to work on or maintain
I'd suggest that Lead Balloon stick to flying GA as I've heard that he's far more competent at it than fishing..
P.S. I've also heard that Lead Balloon wasn't flying one of those "rubbish" Beechcraft aircraft on that trip.
Last edited by gerry111; 5th Aug 2017 at 13:49.
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Adeliade
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The trouble is people are capable of useing large words and complex arguments have little if any common sence and even less hand skills and then the poeple with little understanding of large words or complex arguments but with common sence and hand skills end up before people that can understand large words and complex arguments that had no common sence to take the advice of the people that said to DO it.
I always found it funny that engineers dont think they pilots but pilots think they engineering experts. But then again what would i know.
I always found it funny that engineers dont think they pilots but pilots think they engineering experts. But then again what would i know.
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Adeliade
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've heard a rumour that in 2000, Lead Balloon and a mate flew to Cooktown to celebrate NOCOG, which was a send up of SOCOG. (That was the Sydney organising committee for the 2000 Olympic games.) En-route, they apparently visited Karumba and went on a half day fishing trip with others. (The fishing was quite easy if one could haul in before the sharks took them.) Sadly, Lead Balloon was upstaged by his mate who caught something massive and then instantly retired from
I'd suggest that Lead Balloon stick to flying GA as I've heard that he's far more competent at it than fishing..
P.S. I've also heard that Lead Balloon wasn't flying one of those "rubbish" Beechcraft aircraft on that trip.
I'd suggest that Lead Balloon stick to flying GA as I've heard that he's far more competent at it than fishing..
P.S. I've also heard that Lead Balloon wasn't flying one of those "rubbish" Beechcraft aircraft on that trip.
Oh wasnt shark bait, bugger professional courtesy !
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is funny on several levels.
Reference your comment on dealing with over educated people in industry, they have always been a problem and have yet to work out a way to deal with them, other than using the good old Aussie smack in the chops.
Reference your comment on dealing with over educated people in industry, they have always been a problem and have yet to work out a way to deal with them, other than using the good old Aussie smack in the chops.
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Adeliade
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This just shows the state that lames face daily. An Ad is a MUST DO inspection. Thanks to aopa we now face with manufacturers on a lot of inspections which are open for interpretation. Do i dont i from the owner.
The hose AD is a could case in point.
Try and read 100.5. This was covered from basic ADs. Now is just a mess
The hose AD is a could case in point.
Try and read 100.5. This was covered from basic ADs. Now is just a mess
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I heard a rumour last week that SID's were not required on a 400 series aircraft that is in Private category.
Now unless there has been a new document released from CASA in the last year - that's some interesting interpretation going on!
Now unless there has been a new document released from CASA in the last year - that's some interesting interpretation going on!