The same happened with the 300 / 400 series SIDs .......
Were on Schedule 5, we don't need to do that!
Having seen some of the horror shows that came out of the SIDS program on the 300 and 400 series as well as a C206, people would be well advised to carry it out if they want to continue operating those aircraft.
These aircraft were never designed to do the hours that some are now wracking up and Cessna at least have had the balls to admit the fact and do something about it. I would be very surprised if the other manufacturers products didn't also show similar unforeseen problems if they were subjected to a similar program. After all, wasn't there a spar failure in a Beech Mentor that was being used in a warbird scenario? The same spar that is used on the Bonanza, Baron and Duke I think.
It was a spar crack in a C402C that led to Cessna instituting the SIDS program. The aircraft had done over 22,000 hours and a pilot complained that he had run out of aileron trim to keep the wings level. The aircraft was being used as a low-capacity RPT transport.
Schedule 5 should be scrapped for aircraft where there is a manufacturers recommended maintenance schedule.