What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

A&P finds rivets missing ...

R

RKellogg

Well Known Member
From Front Page QUOTE>> The right side push/pull tube was NOT riveted to the end cone that connects to the control stick. Primary flight controls, folks! Holding the right aileron and having a helper move the stick to the right resulted in the end cone falling out. The left push/pull tube had the proper rivets. <<QUOTE

Remarkable. I am sure Randy checked the other end of the pushrod, too ... ??

- Roger

[ed. Added pics from front page per request of Don Hull. dr]

VAF_84%20Nov.%2005%2017.14_small.jpg


VAF_85%20Nov.%2005%2017.14_small.jpg


VAF_86%20Nov.%2005%2017.14_small.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A&P inspection

All I can say is: OMG!

That is not Randy Richmond's first save, and I'm sure it won't be his last!
Well done Monk!
 
Great find Randy!

Not sure this is the case here but I've always said the worst person to do a condition insp. is the builder himself. The builder automatically assumes everything was done correctly and will continue to overlook the errors he made when he built the aircraft.

In the air transport/military world there are always 2 sets of eyes (or more) looking at maintenance items on flight critical components, the guy working on one of these systems is not allowed to inspect his own work for exactly this reason.

I love experimental aircraft but this is one area where I think we fall short.
 
Last edited:
Good eye DanH.

Walt, the builder of my airplane was a 40+ year Air Force mechanic and they had a standing rule in his shops that the person doing maintenance had to have another do the inspection of the work. He was eager to hear how my first condition inspection went since it would be another A&P looking at his work (made me feel good).

Since that time, I've had two more A&Ps participate in condition inspections and each one sees something the others had not. Nothing significant but always comes out of inspection better than it went in.

DR: thanks for making this front-page material !
 
Finding life or death stuff like this on an airplane you have been flying certainly makes ones heart skip a beat doesn't it.
 
Walt said:
Not sure this is the case here but I've always said the worst person to do a condition insp. is the builder himself. The builder automatically assumes everything was done correctly and will continue to overlook the errors he made when he built the aircraft.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but just because you assembled an RV does not mean you have anywhere near the knowledge of an experienced A&P/IA mechanic when it comes to aircraft maintenance, inspection, wear and tear, repair, engine knowledge, etc. There's a huge difference between aircraft assembly and aircraft inspection and maintenance. Just because you have intimate knowledge of how the airframe was put together doesn't mean you have the knowledge and experience to act as a substitute for a real aircraft mechanic.
 
More eyes the better

Before my inspection I asked a group of 5 friends from my EAA chapter to look over my airplane and provide feedback. In that group were 2 A&P's, 1 experienced RV builder and all were pilots. I had everything apart just as it was going to be for the final inspection. It was a fun couple hours, they enjoyed doing it and found a couple items to address. All the issues found were miner which made me feel very good about my work in the end. I would highly recommend that others consider following this proceedure.

It would be interesting to hear how the builder prepared for his inspection and how it was conducted (anonomously would be understandable). I'm sure it was just human error that he is heartsick about now but in hindsight how he might have improved the process could be helpful to future builders.
 
In the part 121 world flight controls are a RII item requiring two sets of eyes to sign off.
 
speaks volumes for checklists.....and content!

THIS is an inspiration, and eye-opener.

....it makes me pause though, and think that when I am inspecting a control group like this, do I really know what I am looking for?
( non-builder, non-mechanic)
My checklist says something like 'verify controls secure and free' and perhaps 'travel'.
I mentally add, that ALL fasteners be safetied, ball ends free to 'swizzle' but no slack, no smoking attach points, welds solid, no evidence of movement .....and the mental list goes on.
....but No-Where is there ' ensure rivets installed!'

I think an A&P might be able to do a thorough annual on one or two pages, over a weekend, but not many of us qualify at that level.

Although seldom convenient, or free, I'll probably extend my 3-week annual to 4, and ensure when it's apart, I have at least One other mechanic go over everything.

thanks for the reality check.
 
WOW..

..is all I can say about this. There must have been a resident angel flying in this bird at all times to keep that pushrod cap in there! When I looked at the picture, it took about 1.5 seconds to identify the problem, and when i did, I got that "hot" feeling all over. Gives me the heebie jeebies to see something like this and know it was flying. :(
 
Request to the VAF CEO, aka DeltaRomeo

Hey Doug!
I'm wishing you would post that photo and today's VAF description of the unriveted control rod over in the SAFETY Forum for posterity's sake. Seems like something good to be reminded of. ;)

[ed. Done. dr]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have the priviledge of working with professional test pilots (military, test pilot school at Edwards, ETPS or Pax River etc, the whole thing), one of whom built an RV6. I asked him about testing my RV4 when I get it done, despite the fact that I don't think I will have much difficulty transitioning, but 1st flight is not the time or place.

I asked him what he would want to have done prior to such a flight. He mentioned all the usual stuff, fuel flow, Wt n balance, fuel calibration, engine sensor calibration, but then he mentioned a control load check! What's that? That's where you block the control surfaces and put some good loads on the stick and pedals in each direction to make sure it all holds together. This particular AC would have failed that check. So I guess I learned something. Thank you very much for posting this.
 
I'm not a builder so I have no skin in this game, but I agree with Walt: the worst person to do the condition inspection is the builder.

With Doug publicizing Randy's save on the front page of VAF, there will be a lot of agreement here about how builders really do need to swallow their pride and have another set of expert eyeballs look at their airplanes.

I know a bunch of excellent builders who have built superb airplanes, who do their own condition inspections, which is fully within their right. My question for the group is this: how many of you builders, who have until now been doing your own condition inspections, will now change your mind and get an RV-expert A&P to do it? And if not, why not?
 
Scorch said:
I know a bunch of excellent builders who have built superb airplanes, who do their own condition inspections, which is fully within their right. My question for the group is this: how many of you builders, who have until now been doing your own condition inspections, will now change your mind and get an RV-expert A&P to do it? And if not, why not?
Click to expand...

Good question Scorch. I will most likely continue to sign off my own Condition Inspections - but I also have an airpark full of resident pilots/builders/mechanics that like to come look over shoulders. I also have a builder/wife as a second set of eyes on everything.

Randy has an absolutely remarkable eye for finding that little loose thing that others have missed (including on my own airplanes!). I know other A&P's who couldn't' identify a missing wing unless it was pointed out to them. It's not necessarily the A&P certificate that is valuable - it is a second (or third, or fourth, or fifth....) set of eyes and hands to look over work and see what others have missed.

We all need to be open to criticism of our own work, and willing to have a look at the work of others. I see more of a trend towards "Pre-DAR parties", where a builder opens up the airplane and the anagr to a variety of "inspectors" to come look things over before the DAR arrives. This particular example should have been caught at this stage - and those extra eyes enhance the chance of catching it. But it doesn't guarantee it - se we need to have different eyes looking all the time. How about CHANGING mechanics every couple of annuals? Yes, I have found things that really good mechanics have missed.

Inspect, inspect, inspect.....constantly!

Paul
 
That's crazy. I honestly didn't see it until I scrolled to the second picture. Some things are so obvious, they're not even noticed. I was looking for a missing nut or too many rod end threads showing. I thought maybe it was the trim spring hanging there.
 
Seeing stuff like this (scary!) makes me wonder who did the initial airworthiness inspection? This particular problem wasn't exactly hidden away... was the inspection of the sort where the FAA/DAR looked at it from 10 feet away and said "Yup, it's an airplane. Let's see your paperwork". Makes me glad I had Mel do my inspection; half a day spent crawling through mine with a mirror and a flashlight seems a better way to go.
 
Ironflight said:
Good question Scorch. I will most likely continue to sign off my own Condition Inspections - but I also have an airpark full of resident pilots/builders/mechanics that like to come look over shoulders. I also have a builder/wife as a second set of eyes on everything.

Randy has an absolutely remarkable eye for finding that little loose thing that others have missed (including on my own airplanes!). I know other A&P's who couldn't' identify a missing wing unless it was pointed out to them. It's not necessarily the A&P certificate that is valuable - it is a second (or third, or fourth, or fifth....) set of eyes and hands to look over work and see what others have missed.

We all need to be open to criticism of our own work, and willing to have a look at the work of others. I see more of a trend towards "Pre-DAR parties", where a builder opens up the airplane and the anagr to a variety of "inspectors" to come look things over before the DAR arrives. This particular example should have been caught at this stage - and those extra eyes enhance the chance of catching it. But it doesn't guarantee it - se we need to have different eyes looking all the time. How about CHANGING mechanics every couple of annuals? Yes, I have found things that really good mechanics have missed.

Inspect, inspect, inspect.....constantly!

Paul
Click to expand...

Paul is the only one who really gets it. There are many levels of A&P competency and integrity. Most know little or nothing about EAB. Obviously in this case it was one of the exceptional ones. I lost track a long time ago of how many A&P's have tried to kill me in the last 50 plus years.
I will continue to do my own condition inspections thank you. I worked for two years in a shop with two A&P's, both were AI's. Never once saw a proper magneto inspection, and the lower oil screens on Lycomings were never checked. Aeronca with wood spars that had been on its back, signed off with deep gouges in the top of the rear spar.
 
sblack said:
....
I asked him what he would want to have done prior to such a flight. He mentioned all the usual stuff, fuel flow, Wt n balance, fuel calibration, engine sensor calibration, but then he mentioned a control load check! What's that? That's where you block the control surfaces and put some good loads on the stick and pedals in each direction to make sure it all holds together. ....
Click to expand...

Standard practice for the sailplane guys since the control systems are effectively reconnected every time the glider is trailered and re-assembled.

Some FBOs/clubs even do this on the take off line just before the glider is hooked up.

Good practice for power aircraft after any work on a control system. :)
 
jrs14855 said:
I worked for two years in a shop with two A&P's, both were AI's. Never once saw a proper magneto inspection, and the lower oil screens on Lycomings were never checked. Aeronca with wood spars that had been on its back, signed off with deep gouges in the top of the rear spar.
Click to expand...


In a former life as a freight dog working for a less than scrupulous 135 operation I have encountered many "woops" moments by the MX crew. i.e. plastic plug left in oil cooler inlet, missing crush gasket on oil screen after oil change, finger tight spark plugs, etc...

Most impressive was the "healing table" (where all mx logbook entries were made).
 
Donation Motivation

rv7boy said:
Hey Doug!
I'm wishing you would post that photo and today's VAF description of the unriveted control rod over in the SAFETY Forum for posterity's sake. Seems like something good to be reminded of. ;)

[ed. Done. dr]
Click to expand...

Not that I needed any more reasons, but this single article made the annual donation worth it! In fact, I'll up next year's! Doug, you should attach this link anytime you're reminding us to consider donating!
 
jbDC9 said:
Seeing stuff like this (scary!) makes me wonder who did the initial airworthiness inspection? This particular problem wasn't exactly hidden away... was the inspection of the sort where the FAA/DAR looked at it from 10 feet away and said "Yup, it's an airplane. Let's see your paperwork". Makes me glad I had Mel do my inspection; half a day spent crawling through mine with a mirror and a flashlight seems a better way to go.
Click to expand...
Don't count on an FAA inspector to catch such a thing. The FAA inspector I had perform my Airworthiness Inspection told me on the phone a week prior to his arrival that he wanted the airplane in flight condition. That meant he wanted all inspection panels, fairings, cowling, etc. in place and secured for flight. I mentioned to him that on an RV, if one does that there will be little visible to inspect. He insisted that this was to be the condition he wanted the plane.

I did not feel comfortable at all in doing so. I knew full well that he would not be able to see much of any of the actual working components of the airplane in that condition. For a week I debated with myself on whether to abide by his wishes or to leave the plane open for inspection. I ended up removing the cowl, all intersection fairings, wing inspection plates and the rear baggage bulkhead prior to his arrival. When he arrived he was vocally upset that I had not made the airplane 'ready for flight'. He was very openly upset during the entire 'inspection' that I had not followed his direction. Even though the airplane was pretty open to inspection in this state, he only cursorily looked at the plane's components.

All this to say that the quality of any inspection is really only as thorough as the person, and his skill, knowledge and experience chooses to be. Names, titles, certificates, licenses, pats on the backs, notes from mom or any other accolade does nothing to ensure any given person will appropriately inspect our airplanes. The truth is, none of that matters as much as what Paul states. . . a second, third, fourth, fifth set of eyes on things. Even my wife, who has no mechanical interests, has been a great set of eyes for me. I have had teenage kids, EAA chapter members, wives of friends, anyone I can persuade to do so, look over my airplane. I tell everyone to not be afraid of pointing anything they find out to me. I honor and respect everyone's comments when inspecting my plane. And I have continued to invite anyone and everyone to look over my plane and my work whenever they are around. It is a continual ongoing process that did not stop once the plane was built.

I think I am no different than anyone else on the planet. I have an ego just like the next guy. I do, however, recognize what that ego is doing TO ME! Our egos are not at all interested in keeping us alive. They are only interested in presenting us to the world in a favorable light. That is not necessarily the best attitude to have when one's life is dependent upon being willing to acknowledge a problem and further, being able to admit that we may have been the one who created the problem.

Slap that ego up 'side the head and get some more eyes inspecting! It may be our own lives those other eyes may be saving!
 
With starting my fuse construction, there will be at least 3 set of eyes, and more probably 6 sets--( since some of them want to see if a hose guy can build an airframe :eek:).
On a serious note---YES we have an A&P look at everything we do, and in some cases a couple of A&P/IA's. Really helps.
Tom
 
Come on guys, this one is just plain dumb. Nobody looked. To quote Connie Edwards, the unpainted cone fitting "...sticks out like a ruby in a goat's (anus)".
 
RVbySDI said:
Don't count on an FAA inspector to catch such a thing. The FAA inspector I had perform my Airworthiness Inspection told me on the phone a week prior to his arrival that he wanted the airplane in flight condition. That meant he wanted all inspection panels, fairings, cowling, etc. in place and secured for flight. I mentioned to him that on an RV, if one does that there will be little visible to inspect. He insisted that this was to be the condition he wanted the plane.

I did not feel comfortable at all in doing so. I knew full well that he would not be able to see much of any of the actual working components of the airplane in that condition. For a week I debated with myself on whether to abide by his wishes or to leave the plane open for inspection. I ended up removing the cowl, all intersection fairings, wing inspection plates and the rear baggage bulkhead prior to his arrival. When he arrived he was vocally upset that I had not made the airplane 'ready for flight'. He was very openly upset during the entire 'inspection' that I had not followed his direction. Even though the airplane was pretty open to inspection in this state, he only cursorily looked at the plane's components.

All this to say that the quality of any inspection is really only as thorough as the person, and his skill, knowledge and experience chooses to be. Names, titles, certificates, licenses, pats on the backs, notes from mom or any other accolade does nothing to ensure any given person will appropriately inspect our airplanes. The truth is, none of that matters as much as what Paul states. . . a second, third, fourth, fifth set of eyes on things. Even my wife, who has no mechanical interests, has been a great set of eyes for me. I have had teenage kids, EAA chapter members, wives of friends, anyone I can persuade to do so, look over my airplane. I tell everyone to not be afraid of pointing anything they find out to me. I honor and respect everyone's comments when inspecting my plane. And I have continued to invite anyone and everyone to look over my plane and my work whenever they are around. It is a continual ongoing process that did not stop once the plane was built.

I think I am no different than anyone else on the planet. I have an ego just like the next guy. I do, however, recognize what that ego is doing TO ME! Our egos are not at all interested in keeping us alive. They are only interested in presenting us to the world in a favorable light. That is not necessarily the best attitude to have when one's life is dependent upon being willing to acknowledge a problem and further, being able to admit that we may have been the one who created the problem.

Slap that ego up 'side the head and get some more eyes inspecting! It may be our own lives those other eyes may be saving!
Click to expand...

In all fairness, it is not an FAA inspectors (or DAR for that matter) responsibility to inspect a builders airplane on the premise of making a judgement on whether it is in a condition for safe operation or not.
His only official duty is to make a judgement on whether the airplane meets all of the certification requirements as spelled out in FAA Order 8130.2G
Just guessing, but his instructions were probably his way of reducing his personal liability.
When we apply for certification, we are expected to be supplying an aircraft for inspection, that we personally certify is in a condition for safe operation, just like we will on each yearly condition inspection after that.
Having said that, most of the FAA inspectors and DAR's I have worked with, have a much higher interest in the overall condition of the airplane, but no one should be relying on that to any degree.
It is much more preferable to use all of the other means available (tech. counselors, other experienced builders, etc.) prior to inspection day. Don't count on the paperwork guy for anything other than handing you your airworthiness certificate.
 
LifeofReiley said:
Yes... and a HUGE load of Luck!
Click to expand...

I don't think so. Ailerons are always loaded trailing edge up by nature of the fact that they are part of a wing that produces lift. So those pushrods would have always been in compression to some extent. That is the only way I can see this situation remaining like this for many flight hrs. If he had ever gone to -ve g then different story. It's certainly bizzare. I checked to make sure it wasn't April first!
 
sblack said:
I don't think so. Ailerons are always loaded trailing edge up by nature of the fact that they are part of a wing that produces lift. So those pushrods would have always been in compression to some extent. That is the only way I can see this situation remaining like this for many flight hrs. If he had ever gone to -ve g then different story. It's certainly bizzare. I checked to make sure it wasn't April first!
Click to expand...

So maybe it was by design... to keep the pilot honest. :eek:
 
sblack said:
I don't think so. Ailerons are always loaded trailing edge up by nature of the fact that they are part of a wing that produces lift. So those pushrods would have always been in compression to some extent. That is the only way I can see this situation remaining like this for many flight hrs. If he had ever gone to -ve g then different story. It's certainly bizzare. I checked to make sure it wasn't April first!
Click to expand...

True but only in level flight.
Anytime the airplane had roll input towards the right, particularly if it went far enough to hit the aileron up stop, there would be a pull load on that push/pull tube.
My guess is that when this was discovered during the inspection, it probably didn't pull apart easily. The size tolerance of the aluminum tubing is wide enough that sometimes the tube ends are quite difficult to insert. This amplify the danger of not riveting because if the tube ends were quite tight, the system can work without giving any indication to the builder or other people that look at it.
When I inspect the control system of a new RV, I start at the stick grip, and systematically follow the entire path of the control system to the control surface, looking for how each part is fastened to the next (screw, bolt, jam nut, rivet, etc.)
 
Last edited:
For fun a couple months ago, I tried an approach with no direct aileron or elevator control. Just rudder, throttle, and elevator trim (and eventually, flaps). I started about five miles out. Flew a semi-standard pattern and got down to about 50 feet before chickening out. My pitch oscillations were getting fairly large. My conclusion was that I could probably get it down, but it wouldn't be pretty and it is doubtful the plane would survive.

(BTW, I have manual trim, so I didn't need to touch the stick)

Try it next time you're looking for a new challenge.
 
Last edited:
Controls

fl-mike said:
For fun a couple months ago, I tried an approach with no direct aileron or elevator control. Just rudder, throttle, and elevator trim (and eventually, flaps). I started about five miles out. Flew a semi-standard pattern and got down to about 50 feet before chickening out. My pitch oscillations were getting fairly large. My conclusion was that I could probably get it down, but it wouldn't be pretty and it is doubtful the plane would survive.

Try it next time you're looking for a new challenge.
Click to expand...
Having survived a complete loss of elevator control many years ago, I practice this all the time. The airplane I was most comfortable in was the Beech 18 because of the large trim wheel that is located in a reasonable location. The trim wheel can be spun very rapidly if necessary. I have done takeoffs in the Beech with trim and rudder only and approaches down to about 5 feet. There have been at least three incidents of elevator control failure in Beech 18's and all were landed safely with trim only.
 
Freight Dog

ShortSnorter said:
In a former life as a freight dog working for a less than scrupulous 135 operation I have encountered many "woops" moments by the MX crew. i.e. plastic plug left in oil cooler inlet, missing crush gasket on oil screen after oil change, finger tight spark plugs, etc...

Most impressive was the "healing table" (where all mx logbook entries were made).
Click to expand...

Repeat AD's being "performed" from 800 miles away. Mail order annuals, send your log books and $75. Disconnecting the Hobbs 10 hours before the inspection is due.
One of my favorites was a ramp check. FAA Inspector was a pretty nice guy. He looked at the pilots shoulder straps. One strap looked like a rat had chewed halfway thru it. FAA asked what should I do. I responded I think you should ground the airplane. One of my happiest moments was calling my boss and telling him the FAA grounded the airplane.
 
rvbuilder2002 said:
True but only in level flight.
Anytime the airplane had roll input towards the right, particularly if it went far enough to hit the aileron up stop, there would be a pull load on that push/pull tube.
.)
Click to expand...

Having wind tunnel tested many airplanes, I can tell you there would not be a tension force until very large aileron deflection. If you were to detach the pushrod in flight the aileron would float up to over half deflection depending on the angle of attack of the wing.
 
rvbuilder2002 said:
In all fairness, it is not an FAA inspectors (or DAR for that matter) responsibility to inspect a builders airplane on the premise of making a judgement on whether it is in a condition for safe operation or not.
His only official duty is to make a judgement on whether the airplane meets all of the certification requirements as spelled out in FAA Order 8130.2G
Just guessing, but his instructions were probably his way of reducing his personal liability.
When we apply for certification, we are expected to be supplying an aircraft for inspection, that we personally certify is in a condition for safe operation, just like we will on each yearly condition inspection after that.
Having said that, most of the FAA inspectors and DAR's I have worked with, have a much higher interest in the overall condition of the airplane, but no one should be relying on that to any degree.
It is much more preferable to use all of the other means available (tech. counselors, other experienced builders, etc.) prior to inspection day. Don't count on the paperwork guy for anything other than handing you your airworthiness certificate.
Click to expand...

My DAR was fantastic...he did a *very* thorough inspection, focusing on control continuity among many other things. He spent probably 5 hours or so going over the plane with me, looking at every connection point, checking jam nuts, ensuring that the right hardware was installed be it castellated nuts with cotter pins where needed, nylocks elsewhere, whatever. Engine controls to all the stops. You name it. in addition, I had 3 people (2 who had completed RVs, one in the process of building, and one of the 2 was an experienced A&P) do a "pre-inspection inspection". By the time all of that was done, the paperwork part was short and sweet and when he said "Congratulations! You have an airplane", I knew that everything that could be done to make sure it was safe was done.

I'd have felt genuinely ripped off if my DAR charged me 500 dinero for pushing paperwork. As it is, I couldn't have been happier with his service. And no bulls**t dinking around with trivialities like the size of lettering or painting the fuel caps red or any made-up "rules", either.

He was a shining example of professionalism, courtesy and expertise.
 
This is a real eye opener! Having bought, not built; but having tinkered a lot (including with my flight controls), I'm embarrassed to say that I have not heard of a flight control load check. Seeing this, it makes perfect sense!

I've had 7 Condition Inspections done on my plane, by two different A&P/IAs over the years, and I also have the local RV multi-builder/guru/craftsman pick it apart. I also stay intimately involved (read: I'm the go-fer and assistant throughout…probably like many RV buyers). Each guy brings different strengths and perspectives to the inspections, each has his own data-bank of hot items and pet peeves, and the cross-pollination is always good…for all three of us!

Yet none of us have ever done this FC Load test (and we do inspect and lubricate all the flight control components, end-to-end). I haven't seen it on any Condition Inspection Checklists either (though I can't say I've looked at every one out there).

So here's a thought to enhance our collective awareness: Any value to a thread that contains oft-overlooked inspection items, hot buttons, "stuff I've found", or "stuff I do that ya don't see on CI Checklists", with input from A&Ps, DARs, Tech Counselors, and RV Building Gurus/Repeat Offenders?

I reckon we'd all learn a bunch, and many of us will expand our CI Checklists a bit.

Great heads-up thread! Thanks!

Cheers,
Bob
 
Names, titles, certificates, licenses, pats on the backs, notes from mom or any other accolade does nothing to ensure any given person will appropriately inspect our airplanes. The truth is, none of that matters as much as what Paul states. . . a second, third, fourth, fifth set of eyes on things. Even my wife, who has no mechanical interests, has been a great set of eyes for me. I have had teenage kids, EAA chapter members, wives of friends, anyone I can persuade to do so, look over my airplane.
Click to expand...
Really? A guy spends years in technical study and practical, hands-on experience to get his A&P certificate, and you equate it to a pat on the back or a note from Mom? Do you really mean to suggest that hard-earned technical qualifications are meaningless, and an inspection by your wife with no mechanical interest is just as valid?

I mean, what is the point of having teenage kids and wives of friends look over your airplane, when they have no idea what to look for? Why would you value the opinion of someone with zero technical knowledge or building background?

I personally would not sleep better knowing that my airplane had been inspected by teenage kids or wives of friends. I'll stick with Randy Richmond inspecting my airplane, and not just because he has years of experience building, inspecting, and flying RVs. His A&P/IA does mean something. It's not a pat on the back or a note from his Mom.
 
Last edited:
inspection

Properly inspecting any aircraft is a combination of skill, knowledge,concentration, and preperation. Its unlikely you will do a good inspection without those things. Not all A&Ps are great at inspection but without the above mentioned qualities no one will do a very good inspection. I WOULD RATHER HAVE ONE PERSON WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY ARE DOING THAN TEN WHO DONT

The item found on this thread is such an obvious area to be inspected that it borders on negligence by anyone who signed the condition inspection previously.

Cm. A&P Former phase inspector F-4E
 
While all the point re inspection are valid I just don't completely buy the story. Something is missing in the narrative. I don't believe in those sorts of miracles.
 
sblack said:
but then he mentioned a control load check! What's that? That's where you block the control surfaces and put some good loads on the stick and pedals in each direction to make sure it all holds together. This particular AC would have failed that check. So I guess I learned something. Thank you very much for posting this.
Click to expand...

This defect would only have been found if you locked the stick in position and then loaded up each surface independently, otherwise a single aileron would effectively lock the stick in place.

Most control failures are from fasteners that fall out (nut left off, missing cotter key etc) or jamming so things usually go from working fine to not working at all in a flash.
 
Last edited:
I actually had a builder one time ask me if he could epoxy the end cone to the tube as he did not like rivets. I told him NO! And sell the kit if you don't like rivets!
 
Christopher Murphy said:
Properly inspecting any aircraft is a combination of skill, knowledge,concentration, and preperation. Its unlikely you will do a good inspection without those things. Not all A&Ps are great at inspection but without the above mentioned qualities no one will do a very good inspection. I WOULD RATHER HAVE ONE PERSON WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY ARE DOING THAN TEN WHO DONT

The item found on this thread is such an obvious area to be inspected that it borders on negligence by anyone who signed the condition inspection previously.

Cm. A&P Former phase inspector F-4E
Click to expand...

I can add that this particular aircraft was in for "Heavy maintenance" due to some other major issues that were discovered, and yes it had been regularly "inspected".

However, the problem with this profession (common to many I might add), is the work is hard and the pay is low, so folks tend to take short cuts to increase productivity. As an example I was talking to my hanger neighbor just the other day about his older corvette that needed some work, the labor rate was $105/hr to replace a window! My shop rate, which is "competitive" (but I stll hear complaints that I'm expensive) is $65/hr. (the average auto mechanic makes more than an aircraft mechanic). Now you tell me, how do you attract good talent that really cares and is willing to dedicate the time and work hard for such low pay? If you wonder why you get pencil whipped inspections, this is why.

Of course lets not forget there is always the cheap a** aircraft owners (of which there are many) that are just as much to blame for this situation, all they want is a signature in the logbook from the lowest bidder, and unfortunately the temptation for many to accept some "easy money" is just to great to pass up.

As Stein would say, just my 2c
 
Last edited:
Scorch said:
Really? A guy spends years in technical study and practical, hands-on experience to get his A&P certificate, and you equate it to a pat on the back or a note from Mom? Do you really mean to suggest that hard-earned technical qualifications are meaningless, and an inspection by your wife with no mechanical interest is just as valid?

I mean, what is the point of having teenage kids and wives of friends look over your airplane, when they have no idea what to look for? Why would you value the opinion of someone with zero technical knowledge or building background?

I personally would not sleep better knowing that my airplane had been inspected by teenage kids or wives of friends. I'll stick with Randy Richmond inspecting my airplane, and not just because he has years of experience building, inspecting, and flying RVs. His A&P/IA does mean something. It's not a pat on the back or a note from his Mom.
Click to expand...
Do you really mean to suggest that hard-earned technical qualifications are meaningless, and an inspection by your wife with no mechanical interest is just as valid?
Well, Ross, my statement was not meant to deride anyone's ability, nor meant to imply that all certifications are meaningless. But with all due respect to anyone with a piece of paper, that piece of paper, or any other mechanism of recognition, did not MAKE anyone the superb technician she/he is. You stated it in your chastisement of my words what makes someone a go-to person for such a task as we are discussing. "hard-earned technical qualifications" can only mean one thing. Anyone who works with such a philosophy takes his responsibilities seriously and believes that hard work and conscientious attention to the given tasks performed are the driving force for striving to be the best one can be. It is my contention by my statements that THAT is what gives one the qualifications one possesses to be a master at his profession. In all honesty there are indeed those who do not operate as such. No, my statement was not meant to say that all who possess a "hard-earned technical qualification" is meaningless. I am saying that not everyone who holds such a qualification is made of the same mold. His A&P/IA does mean something. It's not a pat on the back or a note from his Mom. His A&P/IA does indeed mean something but it does so because of the actions and behaviors he elicits while performing his tasks within his given profession.

Now to answer your question about my wife, a teenage kid or someone else's wife inspecting something and considering it just as valid as your expertise. I will stand by my statement to the effect that, yes, indeed, I consider such a person's inspection as valid. However, I was NOT comparing their validity to that of an expert's. Not exactly what I was saying. What I was saying, or at least attempting to say, was that even an uneducated eye can catch things that even the most expert eye may overlook. Do not disregard such a person just because she/he does not appear to have the knowledge one would expect to have to be able to find an anomaly. Even the wisdom of a child can often humble the most knowledgeable of persons. This is where the ego thing gets in the way!
 
Rivets missings

Many years ago Ken at Vans described the same situation on his airplane - before it ever flew. Someone else at Vans suggested a load check for ailerons. When it was done the cone popped out of the rod. IIRC Ken said he was just sure that part had been riveted. This is a sensible test. If I can find the copy of the RVator with the story we'll get it posted.
 
Real Story?

rbibb said:
While all the point re inspection are valid I just don't completely buy the story. Something is missing in the narrative. I don't believe in those sorts of miracles.
Click to expand...

After looking at the pictures, I think the evidence points to a possible scenario that may have caused this over-sight.

As Dan H already pointed out, the end fitting isn't painted while the other side clearly is. Furthermore, looking at the second picture shows that the end of the tube itself is free of primer indicating that it was trimmed after-the-fact.

I suspect that the push rod was originally completed with the ends properly riveted, and some point later found to be too long (I recall hearing that early kits had incorrect push rod lengths on the plans). The original end was then cut off and discarded and replaced with a new part so that it wouldn't have preexisting holes). The person doing the work may have intended to test-fit the re-trimmed push-rod with the intent of drilling and riveting after the re-trimmed length was verified. This is the type of thing where some type of interruption of the task may have prevented proper completion and then the unriveted fitting was subsequently forgotten about.

Skylor
 
Aileron Control

A different tack on this discussion. Is an RV controllable with one aileron disconnected? I've wondered - but haven't felt the need to actually test it. One of those one - or - zero situations. If it is controllable, might be interesting exploring the flight envelope, but if it isn't.............
 
one aileron ...

pvalovich said:
A different tack on this discussion. Is an RV controllable with one aileron disconnected? I've wondered - but haven't felt the need to actually test it. One of those one - or - zero situations. If it is controllable, might be interesting exploring the flight envelope, but if it isn't.............
Click to expand...

Interesting thought puzzle. Years ago one aircraft designer advertised his design as having two independant aileron control systems, which sounded a bit lame to me. I will guess that the disconnected aileron would immediately go full up due to pressure differiential. To balance this loss of lift the pilot would need to fully raise the other aileron. This might allow rolls toward the disconnected aileron, but not cessation of roll. Most airplanes exhibit rudder-roll coupling to some degree, perhaps enough to maintain roll position. As pointed out in the original post, the loose collar is likely to bind and jam the linkage in some inappropriate position, perhaps also defeating pitch control. I do not feel nearly as lucky as I did wnen I was younger. Sounds like a bad day...

One friend lost control of ailerons in a MiniMax, and landed with just elevator and rudder, but in that case the ailerons were still connected to each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top