Already a member? Please login below for an enhanced experience. Not a member? Join today
Menu

AOPA wants alternative means of compliance for Taylorcraft ADAOPA wants alternative means of compliance for Taylorcraft AD

AOPA wants alternative means of compliance for Taylorcraft AD

By AOPA ePublishing staff

Reports of moderate to severe corrosion of wing struts on Taylorcraft A, B, and F series aircraft sparked an airworthiness directive (AD) for strut inspections and replacement.

AOPA wrote the FAA on Oct. 11 to request alternative means of compliance for the AD.

"Alternative means of compliance grant a degree of flexibility to aircraft owners and therefore mitigate some of the burden of complying with an AD while still addressing the underlying safety concern," AOPA wrote.

Airworthiness directive

The AD, issued Aug. 13, has multiple requirements:

  • Visually inspect the wing struts for corrosion within five hours of flight time
  • Corrosion detected—eddy current or ultrasound before further flight, and possible wing strut replacement with Taylorcraft parts
  • No corrosion—within three months have a follow up eddy current or ultrasound inspection
  • Repetitive eddy current or ultrasound inspections every 24 months until the wing struts are replaced

Alternative means of compliance

AOPA has requested that the FAA extend the initial eddy current or ultrasound inspection to 24 months for all aircraft if no corrosion is found and permit X-ray or borescope inspections as alternatives.

The association also told the FAA that struts produced by manufacturers other than Taylorcraft should be permitted to replace any corroded struts. Otherwise aircraft owners who recently refurbished their aircraft and replaced the wing struts with parts from manufacturers besides Taylorcraft would still need to get the wing struts inspected every 24 months until they were replaced with a part number currently listed in the AD.

October 17, 2007

Related Articles