• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Inspection of F. Atlee Dodge lift struts , installed with the Jenson forks. Per STC SA4635NM.

D

Dan M

MEMBER
I have been able to determine by log book entry and by reading the AD that I have the F. Atlee Dodge lift struts , installed with the Jenson forks. Per STC SA4635NM. What I understand is that the struts require a 60 month inspection per the AD. I am courious about the cost and availability of anyone around the Denver Colorado area to do th inspection? The simple answer is to by the new lift struts, but I would rather not spend that much unless it makes sense due to the cost of the repetitive inspection.

I would like to hear from anyone that has gone through this inspection lately or didn't do it due to the cost.
 
Punch test them every 5 years and you are good. No need to remove them and re-oil since they are sealed. Doesn't take long to punch, maybe two hours tops.
 
So others can tell the difference in Jensen/Atlee Dodgestruts and Univair.
Screenshots_2014-01-04-08-43-52.png
 

Attachments

  • Screenshots_2014-01-04-08-43-52.png
    Screenshots_2014-01-04-08-43-52.png
    1.3 MB · Views: 949
you can punch them if you like....

(3) Install F. Atlee Dodge wing lift strut assemblies following ... (STC) SA4635NM. Repetitively thereafter inspect the newly installed wing lift struts at intervals not to exceed 60 calendar months following the procedures in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, including all subparagraphs

(h)(1) Inspect each wing lift strut for corrosion and perceptible dents following Piper MSB No.528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper
MSB No. 910A....

 
Last edited:
thank you for the info my IA wants to see in a hard copy talked to Steve at atlee he would have to get one from the faa but no telling how long that will take
 
The AD tells you what to do. You either punch test every 5 years or use the NDT methods called out in the AD text. They never did get the recurring inspection of the struts removed.
 
(3) Install F. Atlee Dodge wing lift strut assemblies following F. Atlee
Dodge Aircraft Services, Inc. Installation Instructions No. 3233-I for
Modified Piper Wing Lift Struts Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
SA4635NM, dated February 1, 1991. Repetitively thereafter inspect the
newly installed wing lift struts at intervals not to exceed 60 calendar
months following the procedures in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD,
including all subparagraphs.
 
and btw.... "preceptible dents" refers to the depressions made with the Maul tester that indicates a thin wall due to corrosion. I wouldn't count any dents made by a rock or something.... that would be a different issue to evaluate. I ran into this some years back with a mechanic insisting there could be no dents in the strut.
 
Mechanics, like pilots, lawyers, doctors, and school teachers, come in all flavors and competencies. Choose wisely.

If you need the STC, only Atlee can give it (sell it) to you. If all you want to do is comply with an AD, your mechanic can sign that off. Doesn't have to be an IA. Don't need the FAA.

The AD takes hours. It is difficult enough off the airplane, and is probably a back-breaker on the airplane. Two grand and you are done - Univair. But $500 every five years is not bad, as an alternative.

Come down to SoCal - we apparently have folks who don't even do the muffler AD. I did a Cub last winter with 700 hours on the engine and exhaust, and only one muffler inspection over seven years. I can see why; even that took me a day. J-3s are easier - a J-3 muffler inspection takes an hour.
 
I've been getting my customers inspected by x-ray, they come to the airplane & shoot it on the wing... $220. done in about a half hour
 
Is that in the AD, or did you get a special deal from the feds? I agree - x-ray and ultrasound should have been a part of the AD.

We Champ owners are faced with the same ridiculous choice. A good borescope will do a great job of the wood spar inspection, but to comply with the AD we also have to do it with a Bend-A-Lite and a mirror. How the Bend-A-Lite company got to be sole source on this is beyond me.
 
we've been using x-ray up here almost as long as since the original AD came out, which was the late 70's (AD 77-03-08. it was accepted as an alternate method of compliance by the FAA through Repair Station approval under Part 145. the two local businesses doing the AD inspection are primarily doing industrial work. I have an x-ray entry in my logs from 1978. I remember when it came out..... it had an instruction to flush the struts with "Lion oil". there was a running joke about stealing the local caged lion & rendering him down. turns out Lion oil is linseed oil.

as for Champ spars.... ya, Bendolite is not so hot. it may be possible to inspect & feel comfortable about the condition but there is no way to comply with the letter of the law on that AD without removing the fabric. it calls for inspection of every inch of all faces of all 4 spars
 
You can remove the Jensen Fork and look into the strut through the giant 13/16 hole! Spray some corrosion X in there and put a new oring on.
 
beezerboy said:
and btw.... "preceptible dents" refers to the depressions made with the Maul tester that indicates a thin wall due to corrosion. I wouldn't count any dents made by a rock or something.... that would be a different issue to evaluate. I ran into this some years back with a mechanic insisting there could be no dents in the strut.
Click to expand...

beezerboy said:
good way to inspect I suppose.... not "approved" though, or is it.... do you know something?
Click to expand...
For those of you who are asking what the AD says, here it is in it's entirety: http://www.federalregister.com/Browse/Document/usa/na/fr/2015/4/29/2015-08732 It is lengthy.

Dents?

(h) Inspect Wing Lift Struts
(i) If no corrosion is visible and no perceptible dents are found on any wing lift strut during the inspection required in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, before further flight, apply corrosion inhibitor to each wing lift strut following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, as applicable. Repetitively thereafter inspect each wing lift strut at intervals not to exceed 24 calendar months following the procedures in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(ii) If corrosion or perceptible dents are found on any wing lift strut during the inspection required in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD or during any repetitive inspection required in paragraph (h)(1)(i) of this AD, before further flight, replace the affected wing lift strut with one of the replacement options specified in paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2), or (i)(3) of this AD. Do the replacement following the procedures specified in those paragraphs, as applicable.

I'm inclined to agree that "perceptible dents" means the Maule tester dents. However the AD does not say this. beezer's mechanic is correct in covering his rear. IF the dent was minor and most assuredly caused by a "rock" strike I would have to be prepared to argue my case with the FAA inspector.

For those who disagree with any AD there is always this section at the end:

(n) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
 (1) The Manager, Atlanta ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD related to Piper Aircraft, Inc. airplanes; the Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD related to FS 2000 Corp, FS 2001 Corp, FS 2002 Corporation, and FS 2003 Corporation airplanes; and the Manager, Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD related to LAVIA ARGENTINA S.A. (LAVIASA) airplanes, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
f58c4ca1-f775-40ee-baa3-236a786e2b20
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the appropriate person identified in paragraph (o) of this AD.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
(3) AMOCs approved for AD 93-10-06, AD 99-01-05, and AD 99-01-05 R1, are approved as AMOCs for this AD.

Perhaps nanook has an authorization for his procedure under (n)? I think that he has a good idea and would feel more comfortable using that procedure than using a Maule tester. What if the Maule tester punch was in between two separate corrosion pits? It would test OK yet could be marginal. There are a number of corrosion protection chemicals that could be used if corrosion X is not available.

Just remember that ADs are considered LAW! Must be followed to the letter! Unless you are able to change it in accordance with (n) above.
 
I have seen X-rays of struts with what I would consider to have quite a bit of corrosion but they still passed & got a signed Repair Station maintenance release. they also had some weld inclusions & stuff from the factory too.... pretty interesting. but then all NDI is always done with calibration & radiography can tell you exactly how much metal is there.

not sure that you could tell that much by a visual inspection with a scope because there is no way to calibrate what you see. none of the scopes I've used had an optical comparator that would be of any use but somebody might make one.

the instructions for Ultrasonic A scan inspection are kind of silly in a way. first off, you are basically replacing the Maule tester with the transduce on a 1/4" grid. it's also tricky trying to couple to a curved surface with a solid delay line. far easier to do the delay line with a water column bubbler (I was Level I certified on A scan at one time). by the time you dink around with UT it'll be more money than an xray. the best piece of information in that blerb is the wall thickness can go to .024 before it has to be rejected.

by the time you can dent them with a Maule tester the wall is probably thinner than .024.
 
Even the FAA knows that. The Taylorcraft now has a similar test, and modern testing methods are approved. Who knows what their thought processes are - often official stuff makes no sense at all to me.

If they say Lion Oil and you use someing better, you are out of compliance without a letter of approval.
 
personally, I don't see visual by scope as a particularly effective method. 1.... you have to remove the forks. thats hours of work to get them out, back in, and re-rigged. and 2.... every strut that has been treated (all of them by now) has a bunch of oil & goop in it, some of it comes out when you pull the fork, some does not. anything that stays would impede the inspection. and 3.... oh yea, it's not an approved method for compliance.

my first boss, Stu Silver (Alaskans might remember him) called the FAA about Lion oil when the AD came out in '77... they told him same as linseed, which is an old time paint additive & widely used for corrosion protection inside tubing. still listed in 43.13... see 6-42. they also said, ya sure, LPS3 is ok. don't have that in writing though. there are a couple other SBs that spec out TT-S-176D and also list MIL- C-16173E as an alternative, which LPS3 meets. in any case, I would consider it a minor deviation to use modern materials that are made for the purpose and commonly used through out the aviation industry, including the military.

from MSB528:
Inject one quart of Valoil, Lionoil Multi-Purpose L-1, Linseed Oil, Paralketone or any alternate preservative conforming to Federal Specification TT-S-176D, into the bolt hole at the top of the strut....

MSB910 says pretty much the same thing

 
beezerboy said:
..
Inject one quart of Valoil, Lionoil Multi-Purpose L-1, Linseed Oil, Paralketone or any alternate preservative conforming to Federal Specification TT-S-176D, into the bolt hole at the top of the strut....
...
Click to expand...

don't forget to drain the WATER out of the strut first... or its just oil on top of water......
 
Before the strut AD came to be I was helping my mentor dismantle a filthy old Tripacer that had not been out of the hangar for years. With the wing tip on a step ladder I was removing the struts. As I swung the first loose strut to set it on sawhorses, the hollering and cussing began. The struts were filled to the top with dirty, black motor oil and I was pouring it out on everything within reach. Never determined if it was effective at preventing corrosion but it sure was messy. I did look for water in the struts and couldn't find any. Should have measured the amount to see how much extra weight it added. I would guess two gallons at least. jrh
 
actually.... you're supposed to slosh the qt of oil to coat all surfaces & then drain it. linseed will dry into hard film. so will the LPS3 over time. an oil that stays wet isn't much help in displacing water. but ya, I have pulled a few forks & got wet oil. thats another reason why visual wouldn't be that great unless you were working on one that had never been treated.... existing corrosion pits would be filled with sealer.
 
Something appears to be getting lost in translation here. Dodge would cut open your struts when installing the boss for the Jensen Fork. He would not install the boss if there was any corrosion present. After welding the boss the new fork would seal the end with an oring. The boss is big enough to see through, why would you use a lubricant which would then cover up what you need to inspect every 5 years? You would then have to spray something in to dissolve the LPS3 or whatever to inspect the next time. The beauty of the Jensen mod was, it is a stronger fork. You can visually insp your strut by removing the fork, you can use a corrosion inhibitor every five years (clear one like corrosion X). If you are visually challenged put a borescope w/magnifier in the giant boss hole. The AD was written for Piper struts that you could not visually insp.
 
nanook, that is a valid procedure which would accomplish the intent of the AD. Did you get an AMOC from the FSDO so that you can deviate from the written requirements of the AD?
 
the sealed struts are, uhhhhh.... sealed. them there is really no chance of water getting in there unless you drill holes. Atlee meant to get the 60 mo repetitive inspection waived like the sealed factory struts but never did. it's really the small fork struts that might still have a problem because they are open at the top (where the bolts go through). there aren't too many left in service but there are some. what it costs for an owner to pay someone to pull the forks & fiddle around with putting them back & riggin, etc.... balance that against 200 bucks to have a guy xray so you can see exactly whats there and have a permanent record, and he's done in 1/2 hour. I have Atlee struts on mine & its a pain in the ass to do an inspection that I don't think there is any reason to have to do.... but thats how I stay legal
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
PA-18 150 wing lift struts
Replies
5
Views
4K
bhcuber
B
B
Lift struts appear new with big forks - how do you tell . .
Replies
20
Views
5K
bob turner
B
Steve Pierce
Airworthiness Directive 99-01-05 R1 Wing Lift Struts Revision
2
Replies
42
Views
19K
Steve Pierce
Steve Pierce
Randy
Atlee Dodge lift strut reinforcment bracket install on covered wing
Replies
6
Views
5K
Steve Pierce
Steve Pierce
S
Any guidance on installing Atlee Dodge Lift Strut Reinforcement Brackets (3192-18)?
Replies
5
Views
2K
slowjunk
S
Back
Top