AD 81-19-04

AD 81-19-04

Postby Dave » Mon May 17, 2010 9:08 pm

Dave Barron
Dave
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:37 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA

Postby Jay » Tue May 18, 2010 12:15 am

Jay
PA 30 N7702Y
User avatar
Jay
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 473
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 10:59 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: AD 81-19-04

Postby tomgo2 » Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:06 pm

Hi Everyone,

Just curious how many people here have to go through this painful process every 5 years? Does anyone know the reasoning behind this AD or what drove this requirement? I got a quote for $3,000. Is this reasonable?

I am looking into doing an STC to replace the hoses and would like to know if anyone else would be interested in supporting this. The STC would replace the lines with qualified PMA hoses and an instructions for continued airworthiness that could extend the life of the lines or provide reasonable inspection requirements that could extend the life.

Tom
tomgo2
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:13 am

Re: AD 81-19-04

Postby Clarence Beintema » Sun Nov 08, 2015 1:30 am

Wouldn't it make more sense to apply for an AMOC by installing better hoses and seeking a longer life?

Clarence
Clarence Beintema
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 11:41 pm

Re: AD 81-19-04

Postby tomgo2 » Mon Nov 09, 2015 8:14 pm

Hi Clarence,

Good point. Has anyone been successful in doing this?

I suppose I could get a Powerplant DER to approve replacement hoses and apply for an AMOC, but I would prefer to go a little further and make it a marketable solution to others and sell PMA'd hoses.

How many twincos do you think are out there with turbos?

Tom
tomgo2
ICS member
ICS member
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:13 am


Return to Maintenance - General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron