I just want to relay some good news to aircraft owners saddled with mindless bureaucrats who create nothing good. I took this from one of the principle CPA members along with a host of others including our own resident A&P IA Michael who pushed back against Cessna and some FAA bureaucrats from strong arming senseless unnecessary and costly inspections.
Al Lehmann brought his T210J over for the free wing spar cap eddy current inspection today and I made a fascinating discovery when doing the paperwork – I could not find the SID that calls for the spar cap inspection. A secondary discovery is that Section 2B for Airworthiness Limitations is missing as well. It would appear the latest 210 service manual revisions removed the references completely.
I’ve looked through all the current 210 service manuals and can find NO reference in Section 2A for SID 57-11-03 for the spar cap inspection or any of Section 2B Airworthiness Limitations (which also called for the eddy current inspection of the spar cap).
It looks as though the FAA Letter of Interpretation Mike Busch and I requested about the Section 2B Airworthiness Limitation legality has had a positive effect. Cessna heeded the FAA request to remove this from their manuals. This should be a huge help for those of you in countries that are requiring the SID.
-————————-
Paul New
A&P IA
152
Activism does work but it takes time and energy as well as money
This is what the person whose airplane was inspected had to say.
I would like to add that it was an absolute pleasure to meet Paul and his expertise is without question. I encourage all to take him up on his offer. It has given me peace of mind and IMHO regardless of the SID it is something that should be done if only to give data to the FAA. This may stop further overreaction by the powers that be and help our 210 brethren in other countries not as fortunate as us in regards to SIDs. Many thanks to Paul for righting this wrong and for a wonderful time today at his shop. I learned a lot and plan on attending the 210 seminar in May.
Thank you Paul and all those who contribute to this forum it has made my ownership of a 210 worth doing.
-————————-
Al Lehmann
1969 T210J N2279R
1938 Luscombe 8A NC2065
Notice his reasoning (bold) for suggesting to do the inspection. That is what I call brotherhood. Why should he even care what happens here. It will never effect him yet he does.
For those not familiar with the issue. Paul writes it very concisely.
Quote:
For those of us not intricately familiar with the SID and the sub parts what exactly does this mean?
Jim,
Section 2A of your service manual was created to contain a complete series of recurring inspections and checks to ensure the continuing airworthiness of the legacy airplanes. The inspections called for are all the known “hot spots” that all of us need to know about.
Section 2B was created by Cessna with the FAA blessing to “require” recurring eddy current inspection of the 210 lower spar cap as described in one of the SID from section 2A. The LOI from FAA legal exposed that this section 2B could not be legally enforced and should never have been allowed in the first place.
The implication of removing the specific SID from Section 2A and removing Section 2B in it’s entirety is that these inspections are no longer required in any way. For those of us in the US, these would only have been required for part 135 operators but not for part 91 operators. For almost all other countries, these extra inspections have been considered mandatory by the overseeing government authority (their FAA equivalent). This was a huge financial burden with very little gain in safety.
-————————-
Paul New
A&P IA
15
Here is the value of the alphabet groups.
It seems that TSA in there overzealous move to protect us from ISIS and Migrants coming from artica had decided to restrict overflights of US airspace. That caused lengthy routes and increased expense for Canadian aviation. Now notice most of the costs were involving business aviation but all groups came together to stop a common foe. Here is the excerpt:
“The subsequent 15 days required relentless discussions and communications between COPA, AOPA, IAOPA, Canadian Business Aviation Association, Air Transport Association of Canada, FAA, Transport Canada, and more,” Gervais said. “This event was apparently an oversight, a mistake and unfortunately normal protocol between TSA/FAA and our Transport Canada Civil Aviation Security was skipped or forgotten.” Gervais said the matter has been a learning experience on both sides of the border. “COPA received assurance that such an event would not repeat itself without proper coordination,” he said. “Canadian and U.S. staff pulled together in an amazing collaboration to resolve this issue.”
Working and pulling on the string in the same direction gets things done and results in Brotherhood
C210_Flyer wrote:
Working and pulling on the string in the same direction gets things done and results in Brotherhood
Well said and very positive !
It’s really nice to see our efforts paid off with the Cessna SIDs and 210 spar cap “fiasco”. 
Yes the biggest gainers are those countries whose aviation authority take the easy way out and just mandate all service bulletins as required no matter how inane and costly.
I think every 210 and 177 owner should be very appreciative and understand that collectively we may survive against the stupidity and indifference of the bureaucrats. But people have to learn to stand up to them. This is an example that is not restricted to only Cessnas and certified aircraft but even possible to experimentals because you never know what power grab the bureaucrats may get into his brain.
