senica 3 wrinkles
 

Hi
I was looking at a senica on the airfield when I noticed wrinkles to the rear of the rear door behind at the frame to the rear of the heater.

I then looked at the other side and saw and felt the same wrinkles all round this frame. it looked as if it was built with a frame that was too small.

Is this normal

I'm reasonably familiar with Senecas and I've never seen any obvious wrinkles in that location. Causes could be either structural damage or a re-skin that didn't quite attach as it should (maybe due to starting riveting in the wrong place and experiencing 'creep').
Without seeing either the aircraft or a photograph, it's difficult to be positive.

senica 3 wrinkles
 

looking at all 3 here used for flight training they are all the same i will see if i can get pictures

senica 3 wrinkles
 

It can be seen if you stand at one end and look along the fuselage side. I forgot my camera today and only one was on the ground but I see the same wrinkle at the frame below the windscreen

Hi,
let me get my head around this. You say you were looking at an aircraft and "noticed wrinkles" and that you felt "it looked as if it was built with a frame that was too small" and you chat on the internet about it rather than speak with an engineer on site? What sort of person in an aviation environment would let an aircraft possibly go flying suspecting it has a problem. If you had been right and that aircraft had failed in flight whose fault would it have been?

I now no you must be the one who signs without seeing the airplane?

RPWarden, you mention in a previous thread regarding 'vialations' that you (as a pilot instructor) 'has it made'!

I somehow doubt your qualifications as a pilot instructor; (a) you cannot spell correctly, (b) your command of the English language is utterly dreadfull, (c) you say that you have to continue to fly these alleged 'unfit' aeroplanes without any due regard for anyone elses safety, and, (d) you aren't worthy of any further professional comment from me.

I work alongside our engineering team and I have every confidence in their ability. I have personally checked our three Seneca aircraft and there are NO 'wrinkles' in any part of the airframe.

Should you wish to continue with your outrageous allegations, I suggest that you contact the QCAA at your earlist convenience. I would take great delight in discovering that you are perhaps a failed student; or just simply an idiot! I suspect BOTH!

TCF

I've seen wrinkled Seneca's; quite a few of them. However, without seeing the aircraft, addressing the poster's concerns is rather difficult.

So far as the English language...it's not everyone's native tongue. Regardless of whether his diction is perfect, I believe we understand what he asks. Rather than respond with sarcasm and nothing of use, one might well try to answer the question.

I've seen Senenca fuselages and wings with wrinkles. The Seneca has a very insubstantial fuselage which is easy to twist or damage. Hard landings, rough field use, frequent exposure to significant turbulence can all result in visible wrinkles or oil canning and deformation to some degree. I flew them from rough airfields in the mountains and saw those very things. I never bent or damaged one myself, but it such damage can certainly be expected with hard use. In fact, many aircraft develop wrinkles and stretched skin with use and age, regardless of their operating conditions.

I personally know ALL of the college flying instructors; none of them write such bad English, nor would they be frightened of speaking out about engineering malpractices; for which I can assure you that there are NONE.

As I mentioned previously, without any hesitation, I invite RPWarden to come forward and make his complaint directly to the QCAA.

This is typical of PPrune 'aviation spotters and enthusiasts' taking the side of the thread starter without knowing or understanding anything about the insinuation that's been made. I work within the college and I know that there is no truth whatsoever in the allegation that's been made by RPWarden.

Moderator; please take note that I will reveal my identity to you as being a responsible individual holding a professional position within the college. The accusations made by RPWarden are wholly unsubstantiated and that my own perceptions about the style that RPWarden presents himself as being a 'flight instructor' within the college are, in my oppinion, bogus!

Thank you for your input SNS3Guppy, but you should perhaps also take a look at RPWardens thread entitled (Engineers and Technicians) 'Vialations', and you might well then better understand what this individual is trying to say... which is utter nonesense!

I have made my identity known to the moderator and that I will, if neccessary, make legal representations against this individual.

Please, do understand that I know ALL of the people who work within my department AND engineering and that NONE of them could be so crude and unprofessional as RPWarden. It's a FACT that he's NOT a flying instructor at the Qatar Aviation College; a disgruntled (maybe ex) student... maybe; but NOT an employee.

I'll say no more on the subject; I'll leave it to the moderator to sort out.

TCF

RPWarden.

These aircraft of which you speak. Do the decals on them say they are a "Senica" (sic) :rolleyes: