Edwin J. Torbett

FAA ? 2008-0177 General Comment: Flight safety is the prime factor with the FAA and most of the people involved in aviation., but we do not need people using the system to cause an unjust AD to be placed on any aircraft to create a additional income for their personal gains. The aircraft in question had not been maintained to our normal standards. A proper inspection should have shown there was a need for repair then there would not have been an accident. The struts were not the problem which the type holder was or is wanting to sell replacement?s for., then to have the Taylorcraft Type Holder be the approving authority for the attachment repair is not in the best interest of the FAA or aircraft owners. We have been using the AC 43.13 at present and CAM_8 in prior years as our main guideline for repairs, ?where will we go from here? We can repair and keep these aircraft in airworthy condition with the knowledge and information we have if they are inspected and maintained properly Taylorcraft said they had a test done by a laboratory to determine if the Maul tester could be used, his was done in a manner that was to their benefit since grinding work hardened the material which then would not show indentations when punched. This process has been used on the Piper?s for number of years without a problem to my knowledge. The struts on the Pre War aircraft are not the same as Post War aircraft, the new struts will not fit without changing fittings. Taylorcraft LLC could or would not give me an answer to this problem, all they wanted to do was sell the new struts. They could not deliver what they sold and left a number of customers in the cold Edwin J. Torbett, Sycamore, IL