Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Cessna 210 wing spar AD - and looking for an eddy current inspection

From Savvy email:

This AD requires visual and eddy current inspections of the carry-thru spar lower cap, corrective action if necessary, application of a protective coating and corrosion inhibiting compound, and reporting the inspection results to the FAA.
The FAA is issuing the AD as a “direct to final” rule which means there’s no NPRM and no comment period.

Here

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Interesting it doesn’t affect the other cantilever wing Cessnas eg 177/190/195.

A C180 was lost in mountain wave conditions, but the strut wing Cessnas have been quite immune to in flight structural failure.

Oxford (EGTK), United Kingdom

Somewhat strange that this comes out now. I don’t have time now to cross-check the AD reference numbers, but there was one out last year (same issue) and we had our C210L eddy current inspected. Luckily, no corrosion was found.

The N model and few lucky R model owners just hit the jackpot. I’ve drilled out a carry thru spar once and it’s a serious job to change one out if you need to. When a headliner goes up, often what’s behind there can’t get examined very easily in annual maintenance. Much different than under the floor which is easy to inspect. Some may have a zipper to facilitate access, some not.

Buying, Selling, Flying
EISG, Ireland

WilliamF wrote:

The N model and few lucky R model owners just hit the jackpot.

Not sure if that’s what you meant, but this AD doesn’t apply to the N and R models.

ELLX

I meant they hit the jackpot in that there will be a two tier market now for 210’s where the N&R models will become even more valuable than their older siblings.

Buying, Selling, Flying
EISG, Ireland

A video on the topic, recorded some months ago.


LFOU, France

For those who are involved with C 210’s, know that FAA AD 2020-03-16 comes into effect on March 09, and affects most 210s.

US2020_03_16_pdf

This addresses a serious concern, not new, but recently enhanced in importance. I have been involved with three 210’s so far, each affected by this defect, and it certainly justifies the required inspection.

Upon seeing the condition of one 210’s spar, I asked that the wings be removed, and they were the same day, pending rectification. The corrosion I observed on that plane was much worse than the damage found on the Australian 210 which lost a wing last spring, inciting this AD. That spar has since been replaced with a used spar, which I inspected, then went for the required visual and eddy current inspection, which it passed no defect, no problem. That replacement spar has been installed in that 210, with a process I am approving. It is a complex task, but we have found an excellent solution. Another airplane I know was removed from service as unrepairable (so far – no replacement spar available), and a third plane, I did an approval of a varied repair, though that was a P210, which is not listed on the AD – I don’t know why, it also had corrosion on the spar.

Australian report here:

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2019/aair/ao-2019-026/

In my opinion, this is a don’t overlook AD, there is zero alternate load path, should there be a crack in the spar flange – and we know that there has been at least one crack…

Last Edited by Pilot_DAR at 21 Feb 21:12
Home runway, in central Ontario, Canada, Canada

@Pilot_DAR do you know if this is different / in addition to last year’s spar inspection AD? We had that done on our 210L (visual and eddy current) and all came out well.

172driver wrote:

@Pilot_DAR do you know if this is different / in addition to last year’s spar inspection AD? We had that done on our 210L (visual and eddy current) and all came out well.

Double check the text of the AD, it’s in there, but very likely you’re fine. Talk to the person who signed out that inspection, as someone will have to sign that the plane complies with the AD before long.

Note that if the plane has any wing mods, it may get complicated. This was the case for a 210P I was involved with, and I had to issue an STC to the plane to validate the inspection with the already installed speed brakes, as Cessna disavowed them.

Home runway, in central Ontario, Canada, Canada
41 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top