CAA grounds Shadows
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
From: UK, Leicester
CAA grounds Shadows
Bad news for Streak Shadow owners. After 20 years of flight with an eviable safety record the CAA has anounced a mandatory permit directive grounding all CFM Shadows and their derivitives subject to mods.
Apparently such aircraft have a fuselage fuel tank and its reckoned that in the event of an undercarriage failure, the tank may be ruptured with severe consequences.
I don't know whats worse, the fact that its grounded after 20 years of safe flight or the fact that its taken the CAA 20 years to think 'Hey maybe thats not very safe'.
My missus reckons they're having a laugh.
And what about any low wing with fuel tanks in the wings.
Are they going to be next?
No more PA28's ?
Apparently such aircraft have a fuselage fuel tank and its reckoned that in the event of an undercarriage failure, the tank may be ruptured with severe consequences.
I don't know whats worse, the fact that its grounded after 20 years of safe flight or the fact that its taken the CAA 20 years to think 'Hey maybe thats not very safe'.
My missus reckons they're having a laugh.
And what about any low wing with fuel tanks in the wings.
Are they going to be next?
No more PA28's ?
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
From: London
Why should Shadows be any different? I've just had to invest £1760 in a new flap torque tube for my Aztec (as have all PA23 owners) despite the fact that none have ever failed.
Keeps the CAA in a job and sees the Piper production line through lean times.
Will
Keeps the CAA in a job and sees the Piper production line through lean times.
Will
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
From: UK, Leicester
I must admit that Shadow bills do tend to be smaller than that as a rule (although in this case we'll see).
But on the plus side you will be able to fly for more than an hour after its fixed. The Shadow fix is to disable the bottom fuel tank and just use the slipper tank leaving an hours fuel plus 30min reserve.
You would think a regular inspection would suffice in both cases.
But on the plus side you will be able to fly for more than an hour after its fixed. The Shadow fix is to disable the bottom fuel tank and just use the slipper tank leaving an hours fuel plus 30min reserve.
You would think a regular inspection would suffice in both cases.
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
From: NW England
There is more to this than meets the eye and I suspect politics has alot to do with it if replies to my post yesterday is anything to go by.
The PFA MPD is crystal clear and refers only to Star Streaks, Streaks and DD types. There is NO MENTION of the lighter C types which are the most numerous on the register. PFA and BMAA permit Shadows so why are BMAA shadows 'grounded' and PFA ones issued with a MPD but only for the heavier models??
I am placing all my hope in the CTO at the BMAA and hope that he doesn't accept a similar MPD as simply a better option than grounding. This whole thing is ludicrous to the extremes and is about politics not about you and I flying for pleasure and fun in safety. THere are no grounds, no reason and no justification to ground 'C' type Shadows and I for one will fight this or any watered down Directive on principle.
Now if the CAA were to get really pedantic???
MPD banning pens, rulers and any non fixed item from the cockpit of a Rans S6 so preventing jammining of open control wires?
MPD banning tailwheel aircraft as too liable to groundloop and injire occupants?
MPD banning all low level fuel tanks in flex wings?
No, my friends this is skullduggery and an affront to common sense
Tony
PS - Adopting the Directive will be simple enough and involves feeding the engine from the main tank as opposed to the slipper and completely disabling the slipper. Minimal cost but a big hole in the range - that is until John Wightons Pannier tanks become an approved mod anyway. But it is a principal that is at stake and our mildly compliant British way of accepting anything that is put before us by an authority such as the CAA - It's wrong, very, very wrong and totally unjustified for an aircraft with an unparalleled safety record.
The PFA MPD is crystal clear and refers only to Star Streaks, Streaks and DD types. There is NO MENTION of the lighter C types which are the most numerous on the register. PFA and BMAA permit Shadows so why are BMAA shadows 'grounded' and PFA ones issued with a MPD but only for the heavier models??
I am placing all my hope in the CTO at the BMAA and hope that he doesn't accept a similar MPD as simply a better option than grounding. This whole thing is ludicrous to the extremes and is about politics not about you and I flying for pleasure and fun in safety. THere are no grounds, no reason and no justification to ground 'C' type Shadows and I for one will fight this or any watered down Directive on principle.
Now if the CAA were to get really pedantic???
MPD banning pens, rulers and any non fixed item from the cockpit of a Rans S6 so preventing jammining of open control wires?
MPD banning tailwheel aircraft as too liable to groundloop and injire occupants?
MPD banning all low level fuel tanks in flex wings?
No, my friends this is skullduggery and an affront to common sense
Tony
PS - Adopting the Directive will be simple enough and involves feeding the engine from the main tank as opposed to the slipper and completely disabling the slipper. Minimal cost but a big hole in the range - that is until John Wightons Pannier tanks become an approved mod anyway. But it is a principal that is at stake and our mildly compliant British way of accepting anything that is put before us by an authority such as the CAA - It's wrong, very, very wrong and totally unjustified for an aircraft with an unparalleled safety record.
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
From: the north
Do the CAA have to present clear evidence of the problem and in particular examples of the unfortunate results they are seeking to avoid when they make these edicts ??
If they are based on conjecture then surely the safest way out is to just ground us all.
Of course Shadows might be a threat as I think there were some sold to an axis of evil country !!
I feel sorry for all you Shadow owners out there.
If they are based on conjecture then surely the safest way out is to just ground us all.
Of course Shadows might be a threat as I think there were some sold to an axis of evil country !!
I feel sorry for all you Shadow owners out there.
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
From: London
As I understabd it there have been 17 undercarriage failures - luckily none of these resulted in a fire but tanks have ruptured. The CAA has sought a fix through the organisations but, due to the slow progress, has had to issue the order.
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
From: UK
I'm afraid from my point of view in dealing with the CAA from both a pilot and ATCO point of view they seem completely out of control. Decisions made with no consultation and absolutley no grounds are becoming common place; maybe they feel for their jobs with EASA knocking at the door...
The question is though, who is going to regulate the regulator???
The question is though, who is going to regulate the regulator???
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
From: UK, Leicester
For anyone interested the Shadow owners page has links to some cool auxillary fuel tanks in their latest editorial.
http://www.shadowowners.flyer.co.uk/
http://www.shadowowners.flyer.co.uk/
