Joe Abrahamson

First off, there is no reason for an AD on the wing spars on the Aeronca Sedan. It was submitted to the ANC FSDO "there have been 34 spar caps sold and "90-95%" of them were replaced due to corrosion." The FAA then took this information to mean that there were extensive cases of corrosion on this model airplane. The above statement is simply incorrect. The truth is that the Type Certificate Holder has now admitted that he has no idea what so ever how many, even one, replacement spar caps were sold due to corrosion! There has NEVER been an accident or incident due to issues with the wing spar on the Aeronca Sedan. It is one of the strongest wings on most single engine aircraft out there. Thats one of the reasons why they are used in Alaska and the Yukon as bush planes. In the field there has been ONE report of spar corrosion found on an operational aircraft and it was operated in Alaska on floats. There is a second report of finding corrosion on a wing that had been in storage for years (please see below para). Thats it, TWO cases of corrosion in the entire fleet of 561 airplanes that Aeronca built with 1122 wing-sets on the aircraft. Anyone wanting to see a THREE year discussion about this, please go to: http://tinyurl.com/4y7q4dv at the National Aeronca Association's bulletin board. There is ONE, and only ONE person who has posted on this thread out of all the Sedan owners worldwide who has found corrosion. This "proposed rulemaking" needs to take into account the facts, and not a guess by someone selling spar cap strips AND the covers that were going to be required for this AD. I fly a Sedan and do the 100 hour/annual inspections on it. The last thing I want to see is corrosion anywhere and look twice as hard during the inspection's. There simply is not a corrosion problem with the Aeronca Sedan, so there is absolutely no need for an AD of any type on this aircraft for spar inspections. Please, lets stick with the facts and not someone's guess.