Lloyd J. Fries

First I hope the incorrect Docket number is not a method to cause confusion and thereby generate less comments. The proposal claims the AD is the result of data collected from a Taylorcraft acident. This accident has been incorrectly used by the FAA to 1. Issue an Emergency AD on the struts. Said struts were not the cause of the accident. The AD appeared to have more to do with promoting an FAA approved Factory than promoting aviation safety. 2. Now we have this AD solely because this "One" Aircraft was not maintained in accordance with the the 100hr/annual inspection requirements. Perhaps the FAA would be doing its job listing those IA's who fail to do adequate inspections rather than issue an AD. It would be nice to require the FAA to list or show "all information" evaluated which enabled the FAA to make an unsafe determination. The proposed AD gives greater respect to the non existant Taylorcraft Factory than its own regulations and instructions regarding repairs. This alone would cause most reasonable people to think there was to close of a tie in between the FAA and the former Factory.