[Doug Rohrer]

I purchased a flying RV-9A in June last year. I was told which of Van's Service Bulletins, Letters and Notices and Revisions had been done and confirmed they were shown in the log book. However, there are several applicable items that have not been done. I will have all but a couple of minor items done this winter. Will all of these fixes need to be done prior to my next annual in June? I will be using a local A&P mechanic to do my inspection. Will he treat all of these items like AD's for certified aircraft, or are they considered voluntary or advisory? I would like some input from other members of this board before discussing it with my mechanic. Thanks for the advice.

 

[apkp777]

Service Bulletins are not mandatory, but you would be foolish not to comply with them. Depending on the A&P, he may not be aware of the complete list of SB's. You should have a copy of all applicable SB's and AD's for your mechanic. He'll give you good advice about what you should do.

 

[sprucemoose]

Van's service bulletins are not mandatory. Ill even go a step further- some of them are downright unneccesay. You need to find an A&P who is knowledgeable about homebuilts, and Vans in particular, to help you decide how to procede.

 

[flyboy1963]

SB's optional?

I agree with Jeff, some may be unnecessary.
Still, if you insure your plane, and have ANY kind of claim, adjusters that are used to dealing with Certified A/c accidents are no doubt going to look for SB compliance, and wave them in your face when it's time to pay up!

 

[Ironflight]

I agree with Jeff, some may be unnecessary.
Still, if you insure your plane, and have ANY kind of claim, adjusters that are used to dealing with Certified A/c accidents are no doubt going to look for SB compliance, and wave them in your face when it's time to pay up!

OK, I am just curious, because this is brought up now and again - does anybody have FIRST-HAND experience with a claim being denied because an SB was not complied with on their aircraft? (Not "I had a brotherin law's second cousin's gardener what had a friend who.... stories.....)

I just want to know if this is a real problem, or a theoretical one, that's all!

Paul

 

[rocketbob]

Van's service bulletins are not mandatory. Ill even go a step further- some of them are downright unneccesay. You need to find an A&P who is knowledgeable about homebuilts, and Vans in particular, to help you decide how to procede.

I'll even go further..some of them are downright stupid. Like safetying the B-nut on the tank pickup.

 

[sprucemoose]

Bob,

I was being diplomatic but you are spot on. The fuel pickup one was stupid and I kick myself for complying. The mk1 FAB mod is a close second on the scale. They both appear to be legal CYA rather than well though out legitimate solutions to real problems. As a result, I will never again perform a Vans SB without giving some serious consideration to it first.

YMMV.

 

[frazitl]

OK Nomex is on

Why didn't you like the fuel pickup sb? I did it during initial construction with my QB tanks, and it looked like a good idea to me. If the nut loosens, or the pickup tube moves, it looks like you could easily run out of fuel prematurely.

Maybe I just need that glider rating...

 

[JonJay]

Fuel Pick Up SB

I believe they had one off field incident "reported" where the claim was the pick up rotating when the B nut for the fuel line was tightened on the bulkhead fitting. I guess, if you did not tighten the assembly properly it could rotate. That was enough for Vans to CYA.
I guess it could happen, I have never tried to do it on purpose, but maybe. I did it as it came out just before my wings went on and was an easy "fix?".

Obviously the accident aircrafts fuel system was not tested properly prior to the first flight or the alleged rotated pick up would have been discovered very easily.

Vans has to CYA on a lot of stupid things and it only takes one.

Other SB's like the Tank Support slotting is only a recommendation based on the potential of the tank breaking apart if the wings where sheared off. Not sure any of that was based on a real situation or not.

 

[rocketbob]

Why didn't you like the fuel pickup sb? I did it during initial construction with my QB tanks, and it looked like a good idea to me. If the nut loosens, or the pickup tube moves, it looks like you could easily run out of fuel prematurely.

Maybe I just need that glider rating...

Its silly because if the nut is properly tightened, its not going to come loose. The SB could have said to check to see if it was tightened, and left it at that. After all, there are many B-nuts in the fuel system, why not safety the rest of them?

I also believe that safetying the oil filter is silly also. If the filter is loose enough to rotate, it will be leaking profusely.

 

[apkp777]

After all, there are many B-nuts in the fuel system, why not safety the rest of them?

I also believe that safetying the oil filter is silly also. If the filter is loose enough to rotate, it will be leaking profusely.

If the B-nut in the tank came loose you would never know since there is no periodic maintenance of the interior of the tank. Other B-nuts would have evidence of leakage and can be corrected. It actually quiet common on Boeing aircraft to safety B-nuts. I don't have a problem with that one.

The service bulletin that tells you to remove the "blue protective plastic" before assembling the tank. That one is hilarious! No doubt someone really did a dope on that one.

I think it is interesting that many of the RV's I see are loaded with ten pounds of "torque seal". I spent 15 years as an A&P any never touched the stuff. I am still undecided if I'll use it. I had someone tell me to put it on the connecting rod nuts when I assemble my engine. Yeah, I don't think so!

Still, I don't ignore manufacturer's SB's, SI's or other info. True some of it is an obvious attempt to cover themselves. But comforting to know that there are people out there more stupid than myself at times.

 

[zilik]

If the filter is loose enough to rotate, it will be leaking profusely.

Agreed

The service bulletin that tells you to remove the "blue protective plastic" before assembling the tank. That one is hilarious! No doubt someone really did a dope on that one

As I recall, Vans had some QB tanks that were shipped to builders that still had the plastic (clear at the time) on the skins. QC slipped a little.


As for an A&P doing the condition inspection it is totally up the that person as to whether or not the SB's are complied with. It is his/her license on the line. The beauty of being the builder is we get to weigh the pros and cons of each SB and decide if it's necessary to comply. On my 6A I complied with all the nose gear/wheel SB's and decided to forgo the tank B-nut. I can, and have checked the integrity of the fuel pickup as they are quite visible through the tank drain fitting with the fitting removed.

Each of us has our own comfort level.

 

[sprucemoose]

I believe they had one off field incident "reported" where the claim was the pick up rotating when the B nut for the fuel line was tightened on the bulkhead fitting. I guess, if you did not tighten the assembly properly it could rotate.

Jon,

This is all true, but not what this SB is all about. There was another fix for that, which has since been incorporated into the design. It was about the B-nut that attaches the pickup tube to the bulkhead fitting. If not properly torqued, this could back off. Well, someone forgot and voila. I built my tanks. I KNOW that I triple and fourple checked that nut.

So, what's the harm? Well, if you Prosealed your access plate on (as is becoming vogue) then you could end up doing more harm than good. God help you if you have to do this on a tank with the flop tube (like I did.) Sort of like drilling out a bad rivet in your spar (oh wait, we don't rivet spars anymore) you can end up doing more harm than good, trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[plehrke]

OK, I am just curious, because this is brought up now and again - does anybody have FIRST-HAND experience with a claim being denied because an SB was not complied with on their aircraft? (Not "I had a brotherin law's second cousin's gardener what had a friend who.... stories.....)

I just want to know if this is a real problem, or a theoretical one, that's all!

Paul

Back to the question at hand. Anybody have any first hand knowledge? I have a few stories I could tell for ADs on certified but I am wondering about SB for experimentals.

 

[Low Pass]

I comply with *all* SBs *twice*. Because I may have made a mistake the first time and/or my judgement may have been faulty.