My take
From what I understand, (sorry if posted already) if you complete all of the requirements of the SIDS inspection documents, there includes feedback forms
To fill out. This is a major part of the SIDS programme, as it lets Cessna know
What sort of defects are found, how common to a particular component or area
Of the aircraft and they can adjust the inspection criteria accordingly, for example, every Cessna A152 I am checking the Horizontal Stabilizer rear spar
On, under the elevator bell crank box structure, I am finding 3-4 inch cracks, the SID directs you to HFEC the doubler, but these defects are on the Spar under the Skin, behind the doubler. This information will be sent to cessna, they my add additional inspections around the area and alter the inspection accordingly.
They also know that this is now a common area for close inspection etc. and high incidence of cracking area.
so far we have found a Cracked C182 wing strut end fitting, that did not show up
On a Flouro dye check-post crack located. (I just wanted to see if the crack showed up, and it did not, but trust me, through an HFEC it was definately there). The C A152 Stabs, and other defects that honestly should have been picked up at the 100hrly/annual, such as rudder pedal brake pivot pins almost
Worn completely through the pedal, which we picked up during the Annual phase of the check. (Edit: this is the first time we have seen this aircraft) I also think that a lot of the SIDS are items that would normally be checked at a 100hrly inspection, so completing the SIDS during an annual is the most cost effective. Ultimately, Cessna want the feedback on what people are finding out there.
On compliance, I have read quite a lot of text on the matter, I have an AWB that talks about compliance which breaks down charter, private etc to be incorporated at slightly different intervals (circa2007 from memory)
Also within the SIDS document there is a compliance/incorporation date of dec13 for 200 series, jun 14 for 100 series. It doesn't mention that I remember anything about what category the aircraft are in (eg pvt, charter)
The log book statements don't just say, CASA schedule 5, and that's it,
Read below that as to what is also required per MM.
SIDS is part of the MM, so if you carry out maintenance using the correct revision Aircraft Maintenance Manual, SIDS is part of that manual so should be included.
Show me where it states, "SIDS not mandatory"
Also, what I tell people is, the things, defects, you find as a result of carrying out
A SID inspection, should be fixed anyway regardless how they are found, and in my experience we are finding defects which May, have not been picked up.
In reality, when we perform maintenance on aircraft, quite often, we inform the owner that we want to investigate a little further, dig a little deeper, open up some structure to get access to.. And if on the outside, the thing you are going to dismantle looks reasonable, it can be quite hard to get the owner onside, that what you are doing is necessary, after all, it hasn't been A problem before, and
Every owner of an aircraft knows about "intrusion", the possibility to damage surrounding structure, or disturb a local component or wiring by getting to the thing you want to look at. Particularly more frustrating to said owner when it turns out the thing you thought was suspect is ok.
But SIDS assists both maintainer and manufacturer alike, setting out tasks to look at certain areas of interest, you are able to show the owner areas cessna are concerned about on ageing aircraft, so you dismantle that quite good looking rear spar on the horizontal Stabilizer and find the 3inch crack hidden between the layers, you feel vindicated, happy you found a defect before it lead to something worse, then quickly brought back to earth when all the owner does is get upset that you found it and it will cost how much! Most are happy you found it.
There is a lot of Talk of over maintaining aircraft, I like to say there is a right amount of Maintenance. People also make a lot of comparisons to other machines, but I find it hard to compare aircraft to other vehicles.
I am always surprised when I speak with our customers, and they make reference to a car engine for example. My Car engine red lines at 7000 rpm,
But spends 90% of the time at18-1900 rpm.
One Cherokee I fly redilnesaround 2600, cruises at around 2350. That baby is working a lot closer to its mechanical limit than my car. Add to that for instance, a reference I heard, not sure of accuracy, that Subaru make more engines in one year, than TCM Continental have made...ever!
Think of the investment in one line of engine for a car, water cooled, low average rpm, uninhibited fuel delivery technology and computer controlled,
Fantastic clearances, usually derated for life increase, now think of continental or lycoming, extensive regulatory oversite, expense of getting new technology certified, LOW Volume unit movement, and they have to make it as light as possible, air cooled, large capacity, relatively high power, think 300hp @2700,
And when not running at full power for takeoff etc, sustained high power output,
Say 75% of max torque. (Note: I know cars have strict oversite but spread that cost between a few million units as apposed to a few thousand) and treated with respect, will get 2000hours or more before requiring a rebuild. I think they o a pretty good job considering.
But back on SIDS, we (I) am applying a consistent view they are part of the MM,
There is text directing them to be carried out, along with compliance dates, AWB, And as such mandatory.
Tell me again where it states NOT to do it...
Think of Cessna"s philosophy behind the incorporation of SIDS and the data, info they are collecting, and defects that are being found like wing strut cracking,
Find a good shop with people you can talk to, that will deliver the right amount of maintenance for you aircraft, start to carry out SIDS during the periodic to reduce double handling, if your aircraft has been maintained well it should go through smoothly.
Also a thorough check of the log book for things like engine mount removed at last engine overhaul, stripped and inspected, which Is what we normally do, and if it is documented and is within the SID inspection guideline then you don't need to double handle that either, the clock started when it was done previously.
SIDS are also in late model T206h aircraft also, so it's not just an older aircraft
Inspection.
The way I understand it Schedule 5 days are numbered, regardless the justification for placing the aircraft on it was due inadequate MM, (J3 Cub)
Which a lot of GA aircraft, I don't believe suffer from, I would like to see Schedule 5 gone, except for noted models with inadequate MM, everyone can have a consistent approach in regards to component o/haul periods (dukes fuel pump for example) and remove as much "open to interpretation" as possible.
And consistency with the maintenance allowing owners to budget effectively.
Find a good shop with people you can talk to, able to deliver the right amount of maintenance for your aircraft, fix up the cosmetics over time, start incorporating the SID inspections during a periodic if possible to reduce double handling.
If your aircraft is in overall good condition the SIDS will be incorporated without to much rework. And the things you find due to SID inspections should be fixed anyway!
Wow that was rambling!
Smooth seas and fair winds..