PDA

View Full Version : Control cables for rent or sale or gifted to some poor Casarooted aircraft owner


Sandy Reith
14th May 2017, 06:09
"An airworthiness directive issued in early 2015 - AD/GENERAL/87 Primary Flight Control Cable Assembly Retirement put in place the mandatory replacement regime.

The directive covered primary flight control cable assemblies with terminals constructed of SAE-AISI 303 Se or SAE-AISI 304 stainless steel with a total time in service of 15 years or more.

The requirements of this airworthiness directive take effect from 1 January 2018."

If you care to read the full official version it pretty much means everyone had to throw out all their cables and install all new, practically speaking.

But now the idiots who are bent on destroying a once good industry are showing a glimmer of sense, and are saying that inspections are ok after all, so wonderful, won't that save us lots of dollars?

Except that some of us have already paid out several thousands because we had all the area concerned opened up and it was therefore logical to proceed earlier than the 1st. Jan '18.

So thanks so much you half witted clowns, what a total shambles we have for a regulator, and a totally hopeless Minister who wouldn't tie his shoelaces without the say so of his bosses, those that are supposed to be under his control, but, as is so plain, are the real power.

This is completely predictable because we have an 'independent' Commonwealth corporation run by the "Director of Air Safety" ( could you devise a more fatuous title? There he is up on cloud 9 with his baton...) who gets near twice the salary of the Minister. Same for Dept head Mr M, it's all back to front and GA continues to slide.

For all that; too late for me but it would be good to know who precipitated this welcome change, has the Iron Ring got a rust hole in it? Has someone with a brain moved to a position of influence?

SixDemonBag
14th May 2017, 06:21
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/0sEwtHiaDyE2n7eay8q4OT3QwejHSnjzHbDPcb4uafTpmvp03LS1QM8HVqH8 7h4CycWPMgAtWKcQ0nFD3TZDiiqCqxvy2JQJa8rSZPXOYfj1aBg8rG7BoyhT wJz5dsJrmrNO=w460-h199-nc

Band a Lot
14th May 2017, 06:36
wren460,

I only ever saw that in draft form and never recommended it to customers because of the way CASA handled the SID'S with extending dates again and again.

But yes if there was an opened area, I would have given the operator the option to save or waste money. If they asked me what I would do, my reply would be toss a coin - never know with CASA!

RedwireBluewire
16th May 2017, 23:06
Yep, just finished off a Citation Ultra. Complete set of primary flight control cables replaced because we were trying to be proactive and not leave it to the cutoff date. We would have had two more citations and three king airs to do which is why we started now.
The CASA rule change came about halfway through the job.
I always scoffed at when the GPWS system installs were mandated, and everyone left it until the last moment to get them done. At that time we had nose to tail Metro's in the hangar getting them installed as they were effectively grounded.
I can see why operators wait, CASA can just as easy change their mind.
It's such a gamble, when industry is struggling with costs anyway!

Creampuff
16th May 2017, 23:27
What "rule change"? So far as I am aware, no one has said the AD is going to be repealed. So far as I understand it, there may be an AMOC involving an inspection regime that, by definition, has to be approved by CASA.

It has yet to be seen whether compliance with the alternative inspection regime will be any less expensive than wholesale replacement of cables at 15 years. Given that the AD itself was an unjustified overreaction, I'm not holding my breath for a sensible alternative inspection regime to be approved.

Sunfish
17th May 2017, 01:45
To predict CASA actions in relation to any potential safety issue it appears that the most reliable predictor is cost. CASA will select the most expensive solution in terms of actual cost incurred plus opportunity costs.

The first thing CASA might like to try is the application of rigorous cost/benefit analysis, including the cost expectation of damage and accident due to incorrect removal and replacement of cables, which is not a zero figure, and the opportunity cost of out of service aircraft vs. the cost of doing absolutely nothing outside of existing procedures.

to put that another way, CASA actions could potentially do more harm than good.

mattyj
17th May 2017, 11:31
The replacement requirement will be changed to simple destructive testing only

Band a Lot
18th May 2017, 12:10
This had a few changed then soon after not required to change!

http://services.casa.gov.au/airworth/airwd/ADfiles/under/beech55/beech55-098.pdf