Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 61

Thread: Proposed AD from existing service bulletin on all 180 and 185 models.

  1. #1
    Farmboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Glens Falls, NY
    Posts
    2,367
    Post Thanks / Like

    Proposed AD from existing service bulletin on all 180 and 185 models.

    https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...-inc-airplanes

    Proposed AD revising existing Textron Aviation Single Engine Mandatory Service Letter SEL-55-01, dated December 7, 2017, and expanding into all models and time.


    The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Textron Aviation Inc. (Textron) Models 180, 180A, 180B, 180C, 180D, 180E, 180F, 180G, 180H, 180J, 180K, 182, 182A, 182B, 182C, 182D, 185, 185A, 185B, 185C, 185D, 185E, A185E, and A185F airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of cracks found in the tailcone and horizontal stabilizer attachment structure. This proposed AD would require inspecting the tailcone and horizontal stabilizer for corrosion and cracks and repairing or replacing damaged parts as necessary. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
    Discussion

    The FAA received a report of cracks in the tailcone and horizontal stabilizer attachment structure on a Textron (type certificate previously held by Cessna Aircraft Company) Model 185 airplane. It was observed during maintenance that the horizontal stabilizer tail section moved up and down and had excessive play. After a detailed inspection, the tailcone reinforcement braces were found cracked on both sides of the airplane. Upon further investigation, the FAA discovered similar conditions on 29 additional Textron 180 and 185 series airplanes. The FAA determined that the combination of the attachment structure design and high loads during landing contribute to the development of cracks in the tailcone and horizontal stabilizer attachment structure. This condition, if unaddressed, could result in failure of the horizontal stabilizer to tailcone attachment and lead to tail separation with consequent loss of control of the airplane.


    Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information


    The service information applies to airplanes with more than 3,000 total hours time-in-service or 10 years in service, while this proposed AD would apply regardless of the airplane's time-in-service. This proposed AD would require inspecting for and replacing loose or sheared rivets, which is not specified in the service information.
    Thanks Wag2+2 thanked for this post

  2. #2
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    19,491
    Post Thanks / Like
    Looks like Bushwheel Bill will be busy.
    https://www.cessnarepairs.com/
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Thanks Wag2+2 thanked for this post
    Likes SJ liked this post

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Fairbanks Alaska
    Posts
    634
    Post Thanks / Like
    No reason for an AD anyone that knows anything about them is already looking there!
    Tim
    Likes mike mcs repair, ron, aktango58, Fat Kid liked this post

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    sioux lookout
    Posts
    545
    Post Thanks / Like
    are the cracked parts what is referred to as the hockey stick brackets?

  5. #5
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    19,491
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by cub12 View Post
    are the cracked parts what is referred to as the hockey stick brackets?
    That is part of it but the proposed AD is addressing much more. sounds like people need to comment so this doesn't get blown out of proportion.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    148
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mit greb View Post
    No reason for an AD anyone that knows anything about them is already looking there!
    ^^^ This.
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    148
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    sounds like people need to comment so this doesn't get blown out of proportion.
    I object to the every 5 years part of it. Should be based solely on flight hours or make it something more reasonable like 10 years.

  8. #8
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    19,491
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mit greb View Post
    No reason for an AD anyone that knows anything about them is already looking there!
    How many people are pulling the tail off and looking. From what I have seen that is the only way to see a lot of the issues. I am curious the ratio of prudent owners vs not. Also the mechanics who do not educate themselves on the service bulletins and everything is SALY (same as last year). New term I got from my accountant wife.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    148
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    How many people are pulling the tail off and looking. From what I have seen that is the only way to see a lot of the issues. I am curious the ratio of prudent owners vs not. Also the mechanics who do not educate themselves on the service bulletins and everything is SALY (same as last year). New term I got from my accountant wife.
    You do not need to pull off the tail to perform this inspection. I did it using a boroscope. But let's say you do need to pull the tail. How many people are really going to do that every 5 years? It is just going to get pencil whipped. That said, the tail does need to come off every - I don't know - 20 years for complete service back there. Too many owners have never pulled things apart after 50+ years back there.

  10. #10
    behindpropellers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    6,783
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    How many people are pulling the tail off and looking. From what I have seen that is the only way to see a lot of the issues. I am curious the ratio of prudent owners vs not. Also the mechanics who do not educate themselves on the service bulletins and everything is SALY (same as last year). New term I got from my accountant wife.
    Hah. I just worked on a 182B. I asked if the tail had been inspected. Oh yes, my mechanic did that last year. Started looking close, and non of the vinyl coated screws had been removed. I asked the owner when it was wrapped in vinyl..." 2 or 3 years ago".

    Probably prudent to just remove the tail every 20 years or 3000 hours.
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  11. #11
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    19,491
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 180_jeff View Post
    You do not need to pull off the tail to perform this inspection. I did it using a boroscope. But let's say you do need to pull the tail. How many people are really going to do that every 5 years? It is just going to get pencil whipped. That said, the tail does need to come off every - I don't know - 20 years for complete service back there. Too many owners have never pulled things apart after 50+ years back there.
    Some of the cracks I have seen would not be visible via a borescope. Only visible with the hardware removed.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes JohnnyR liked this post

  12. #12
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    19,491
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by behindpropellers View Post
    Hah. I just worked on a 182B. I asked if the tail had been inspected. Oh yes, my mechanic did that last year. Started looking close, and non of the vinyl coated screws had been removed. I asked the owner when it was wrapped in vinyl..." 2 or 3 years ago".

    Probably prudent to just remove the tail every 20 years or 3000 hours.
    You know as well as I do the ratio of pencil whippers to real A&P mechanics is getting worse every day. The only good thing about that is some of us will always have a job.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  13. #13
    Flyingde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    48
    Post Thanks / Like
    So they move it to every 20 years and there will be people who say aww you can go 30.....

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Southern NH
    Posts
    578
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    You know as well as I do the ratio of pencil whippers to real A&P mechanics is getting worse every day. The only good thing about that is some of us will always have a job.
    My friend and IA has maintained my Cub since 2001. He has rebuilt it completely, from end to end including the engine. We just finished the annual, and he uses a piper inspection checklist and never, ever cuts a corner. I only had about 10 hours on a fairly recent oil and filter change and asked him if we had to drop the oil and change the filter. He said his name was in the book and his friend was in the pilot seat, so yes he was cutting the filter and putting in fresh oil. You’ll never have to explain why you did, but may have to explain why you didn’t. I appreciate his approach....
    Thanks algonquin thanked for this post

  15. #15
    SuperCub MD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Collins, Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    The wording in the proposed AD requires a"visual inspection". They also give a 2 hour time to complete the inspection. Obviously the AD would not require a complete tear down of the tail like in the SL, and there is no mention of completely complying with the SL in the AD wording.
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  16. #16
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    19,491
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperCub MD View Post
    The wording in the proposed AD requires a"visual inspection". They also give a 2 hour time to complete the inspection. Obviously the AD would not require a complete tear down of the tail like in the SL, and there is no mention of completely complying with the SL in the AD wording.
    Yea, not sure how you can see and inspect everything they want especially in the time they say it takes. Will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  17. #17
    texmex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Hanging Rock, Australia.
    Posts
    353
    Post Thanks / Like
    Some of the cracks I have seen would not be visible via a borescope. Only visible with the hardware removed.
    That was certainly the case with my aircraft.

    I wasn't intending to pull the tail off, but there was a significant amount of corrosion growing on the underside where the 'Tanalain' leading edge was installed. The nuffties had bare a aluminium join, and then painted the stab.

    When off, we discovered the 'hockey sticks' were both worn probably a third through. The steel bushing had been flogging about. The decision was made to go with the Bushwheel Bill mod.

    Definitely not detectable without removing the stabiliser.

  18. #18
    CenterHillAg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas Coast
    Posts
    117
    Post Thanks / Like
    We pulled the tail off my ‘56 182 a few years at my first annual with it and replaced all kinds of brackets and hardware, I doubt it had been done in the previous 30 years. It had more slop than a Cub tail, nice and solid now.

    We pull the tails off ag planes every year no matter what, others say that’s overkill but I’ve seen enough corrosion and wear while hanging around the mechanics shop to make me a believer in the practice.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    148
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    Some of the cracks I have seen would not be visible via a borescope. Only visible with the hardware removed.
    What we did was remove the stab hinge bolts and lifted the stab all the way up. The boroscope just made easy work of what would ordinarily be mirror and flashlight technique.

  20. #20
    Eddie Foy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    3,580
    Post Thanks / Like
    I did the SL procedure on my 180 while I was "overhauling" it. Removed the whole empennage and inspected not only the hockey stick but the Elevator hinge brackets. No cracks found on my 12,000 hour plane. Replaced the jackscrews while I had it apart. Also installed the Airframes tail spring. The old saddle had to be cut out. The sleeve had become one with the saddle.

    I am assuming that since the SL is documented that I will be good.
    "Put out my hand and touched the face of God!"

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    148
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Eddie Foy View Post
    I am assuming that since the SL is documented that I will be good.
    Yeah, except it is a recurring AD.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    don
    Posts
    744
    Post Thanks / Like
    I bet the problem is caused by ground handling using the horizontal stab. Not inflight loads.

  23. #23
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    10,992
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by don d View Post
    I bet the problem is caused by ground handling using the horizontal stab. Not inflight loads.
    Not at all. Ever watch the tail on a rocky beach landing. The thing is flapping around.


    Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app

  24. #24
    BC12D-4-85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK.
    Posts
    2,141
    Post Thanks / Like
    They tend to shake bad passing worms while on floats too

    Gary
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  25. #25
    aktango58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    18AA
    Posts
    9,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Interesting read. As a former 180 owner that did the full part replacement years ago, and found the cracks once the tail came off, I have my own perspective.

    Most of you are correct. The tails shake like mad with full flaps and slow, if on floats or rough they get worked hard. Attach brackets are not exactly tough, and for years Cessna was selling replacements that had improper hardening, causing them to wear out quickly. Some of the commercial guys were talking replacing them every 2,000 hours or so.

    That said- there is a square inspection/access panel that can be added to the side. Reach through that to get to the inside nut, remove the bolt from the outside. Lift and inspect once the four bolts are out. Yes, Borescope would be the way to do it.

    The interesting thing, of all the planes I know of having this issue, I don't know of any that has had an in-flight problem. Even one that three of the four attach points were GONE! A quick grab of the tail and feel if it is working in the attach fittings tells the pilot if it is broken, or a mechanic. There are planes that have been flying with cracked attach points for years I bet. We just don't know because it does not get repaired until the mechanic feels the tail slop.

    MY opinion, worth half what you paid
    I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!
    Likes mike mcs repair, OLDCROWE liked this post

  26. #26
    Eddie Foy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    3,580
    Post Thanks / Like
    Actually is a proposed AD. Have you seen any info as to recurring inspections?



    Quote Originally Posted by 180_jeff View Post
    Yeah, except it is a recurring AD.
    "Put out my hand and touched the face of God!"

  27. #27

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    148
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Eddie Foy View Post
    Actually is a proposed AD. Have you seen any info as to recurring inspections?
    True, it is just proposed at this point, but it will go through.

    https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...-inc-airplanes

    "... and thereafter every 500 hours TIS or 5 years, whichever occurs first ..."
    Thanks Eddie Foy thanked for this post

  28. #28
    hotrod180's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Port Townsend, WA
    Posts
    3,076
    Post Thanks / Like
    Has anyone installed the QMI "mini hockey stick" as a fix?
    What does the STC paperwork say about recurring inspections?
    Bushwheel Bill's video indicates their ICA calls for 10 years / 1,500 hours recurring inspections,
    as opposed to the SEL-55-01's 5 years & 500 hours.
    Dunno if the STC's ICA would supercede the AD requirements or not.

    https://www.supercub.org/forum/showt...Bushwheel-Bill
    Cessna Skywagon-- accept no substitute!

  29. #29
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    19,491
    Post Thanks / Like
    The FAA actually fast tracked Bill's STC. They will have to issue an AMOC (alternate means of compliance) for his STC. He and I discussed this last Sunday and I agreed to help him with it.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Thanks hotrod180 thanked for this post
    Likes mike mcs repair, hotrod180, cubscout liked this post

  30. #30
    aktango58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    18AA
    Posts
    9,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    The FAA actually fast tracked Bill's STC. They will have to issue an AMOC (alternate means of compliance) for his STC. He and I discussed this last Sunday and I agreed to help him with it.
    It would seem that an STC'd part would eliminate the AD, as it is no longer the factory part the AD addresses. I can see the FAA having a mandatory inspection on the STC, doing what the STC is thought.

    An example: If you have a stock muffler, you have an AD. If you run Atlee's you don't.

    We really need to be thankful guys like Bill, Joe and so many others are out there finding fixes and making parts for our old planes.
    I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!

  31. #31
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    19,491
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by aktango58 View Post
    It would seem that an STC'd part would eliminate the AD, as it is no longer the factory part the AD addresses. I can see the FAA having a mandatory inspection on the STC, doing what the STC is thought.

    An example: If you have a stock muffler, you have an AD. If you run Atlee's you don't.

    We really need to be thankful guys like Bill, Joe and so many others are out there finding fixes and making parts for our old planes.
    Here is the AMOC for the Atlee muffler. Sutton has one as well.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  32. #32

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    149
    Post Thanks / Like
    I hope Bill's building up inventory. If and when the AD becomes real, there will be a lot of inspections happening at the same time.

  33. #33

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    7,044
    Post Thanks / Like
    I did exactly one of those inspections. Took me two weeks! You need really small fingers and special tools just to remove the simple stuff, like elevators. I will decline doing another . . .

  34. #34
    Eddie Foy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    3,580
    Post Thanks / Like
    Use these on the elevators.
    https://www.aircraftspruce.com/pages...ex/ms21042.php


    Quote Originally Posted by bob turner View Post
    I did exactly one of those inspections. Took me two weeks! You need really small fingers and special tools just to remove the simple stuff, like elevators. I will decline doing another . . .
    "Put out my hand and touched the face of God!"

  35. #35
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    10,992
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by bob turner View Post
    I did exactly one of those inspections. Took me two weeks! You need really small fingers and special tools just to remove the simple stuff, like elevators. I will decline doing another . . .

    seriously??????? simple job!

  36. #36
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    10,992
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by bob turner View Post
    I did exactly one of those inspections. Took me two weeks! You need really small fingers and special tools just to remove the simple stuff, like elevators. I will decline doing another . . .
    been over a decade i think since I last had that fun, but key step, is remove center blots to elevator/control arm.... that lets elevators hang down(up???), then you can get more wrench travel on elevator attach bolts(2).... simple job.....

  37. #37

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    148
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mike mcs repair View Post
    seriously??????? simple job!
    I am wondering the same thing - what am I missing?

  38. #38

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Kenai, Alaska
    Posts
    186
    Post Thanks / Like
    A big help is if the last guy installing elevators attach bolts used reduced diameter nuts, the smaller wrench allows more rotation when removing or installing.
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  39. #39
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    10,089
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by bob turner View Post
    I did exactly one of those inspections. Took me two weeks! You need really small fingers and special tools just to remove the simple stuff, like elevators. I will decline doing another . . .
    Quote Originally Posted by mike mcs repair View Post
    seriously??????? simple job!
    In 1975 a brand new 180 dropped the gear sprocket off one of the trim screw jacks. It took me 18 hours to remove and replace the entire tail to get at it. There were too many parts which had to be removed to get at the next part. This airplane had less than 20 hours total time. When they are new you take extra care not to scratch the paint.

    That inspection plate on the bottom of the tail cone came out after this airplane was built.
    N1PA
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  40. #40

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    148
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by skywagon8a View Post
    That inspection plate on the bottom of the tail cone came out after this airplane was built.
    I added that guy along with the two more forward ones. Handy.
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Service bulletin #107
    By PIPER J5.5 in forum Tips and Tricks
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-03-2015, 11:37 AM
  2. Service Bulletin for mice?
    By SteveE in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-16-2013, 04:47 PM
  3. New TCM Service Bulletin
    By Steve Pierce in forum Tips and Tricks
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 04-23-2003, 04:23 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •