Marc Fries

Document ID: FAA-2008-0177-0005
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Federal Aviation Administration
Received Date: February 25 2008, at 09:40 AM Eastern Standard Time
Date Posted: February 25 2008, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: March 21 2008, at 09:17 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: 
Tracking Number: 803bc8ef
View Document:  View as format xml

View Comment

The FAA is giving unwaranted favoritism to Taylorcraft Aviation of Brownsville, Texas by requiring (short of an AMOC) in Compliance paragraphs (e)(3)(i)(ii) that all repair schemes be "obtained" from them. Repairs to welded tube steel airframes is a simple task for many experienced IA's. Acceptable techniques are already given to us in AC43.13, which is FAA approved for major repairs when determined by the user to be appropriate, as in the case of a 1940's era aircraft. The aircraft manufacture (when and while they still exist) is a good source for repair procedures, but the FAA certainly shouldn't make them the only (by legal regulation) source on simple aircraft. The Compliance paragraph should read "(e)...do the following: (i) repair using acceptable methods and practices." or something similar. Furthermore, inspecting the attach fitting is already a requirement of an annual/100hr. inspection as in FAR 43 appendix D, and cracks or corrosion in a airframe is what any experienced IA is looking for, making this AD redundant.

Related Comments

   
Total: 5
Anonymous
Public Submission    Posted: 02/22/2008     ID: FAA-2008-0177-0003

James Zangger
Public Submission    Posted: 02/22/2008     ID: FAA-2008-0177-0004

Taylorcraft Foundation TF# 1
Public Submission    Posted: 03/21/2008     ID: FAA-2008-0177-0012

David Rude
Public Submission    Posted: 03/04/2008     ID: FAA-2008-0177-0008

Marc Fries
Public Submission    Posted: 02/25/2008     ID: FAA-2008-0177-0005