Last edited:
But - "Before Further Flight" [/B]is the most serious of all airworthiness Directives. It means "Grounding" - the very most draconian of all categories.
Use an even torquing sequence working back and forth between each of the bolts attaching the U-1202 until the final torque is achieved. Check that the U-202 is holding the gear leg evenly on both sides.
I assume that "U-202" is a typographical error?
Van's supports some 7800 flying RVs out of that little hangar in Oregon. That's more than the number of Boeing 737s out there. Give 'em a BREAK, guys
Tony
What Tony said! I will second the "sheesh".
Actually, it is not an Airworthiness Directive. Those can only be issued by the FAA and only on Type Certificated aircraft.
All customer built RV-12's are Experimental (either E-AB or E-LSA). There is technically no regulatory binding notification that any kit manufacturer can make for an airplane certificated as experimental.
Sheesh
I'm well aware of the technical differences between "true" AD's and Experimental Amateur Built's, Scott, but try having an incident without being in compliance with a Van's SB, and see what the insurance company's claims adjuster will tell you. Or worse yet, the Plaintiff's attorney. Van's SB's are just as binding as the FAA's, except they're not issued by the government. Non-comply at your (legal) peril.
As Van's has written it, if you're away from your home base and find out about this, you're SOL.
Side note - The ASTM's that the RV-12 were certificated under have a continued airworthiness portion that Van's is bound to comply with. They require that a risk analysis be done on each operational problem / service issue that gets discovered, and then issue notification to owners (as stipulated by the ASTM) based on the determination of the risk analysis). This requirement is primarily in the context of servicing a S-LSA fleet. For an S-LSA it would be binding (it is not experimental), for an E-LSA, it is not.
Of course, I was wrong. But, how could I know? None of Van's Revisions give the slightest clue (as far as I've been able to determine), as to what the changes are. So the user is left to try and proof every detail on every page trying to discern what the changes are, and their significance. This has really been apparent in the Rev 1 Update (?) to the Skyview POH.
I disagree. If you have an accident that is in no way related to the landing gear, it is highly unlikely that the Ins company would have any grounds to deny the claim since in the FAA's eyes, a service bulletin doesn't constitute unairworthy (not even with certificated aircraft).
I believe work is being done towards changing the revision documenting process, so that this doesn't happen any longer.
Completed the SB on my 12 today. I drilled off the two Cover Plates to get a good look at the hardware after 168 hours, and a lot of landings, all on hard surface.
As found, one of the U-1202 brackets did have a small rivet interference and gaps on each side did not look quite equal. The other U-1202 bracket looked square. There were a lot of threads showing beyond the nuts on the AN6-24A bolts. I believe these nuts were bottomed out on the bolts, but some clamping was taking place because there was an imprint of the washer in the powder coating on the bracket.
After taking off the nuts on the outboard AN5 bolts I found no cracks in the C-channel but it was apparent that the washers do not bear the full 360?, as was noted in previous posts:
I corrected the rivet interference by slightly grinding the U-1202 per the SB. I used the even torquing sequence and verified the U1202s were holding the gear leg evenly. I added an additional washer on each of the AN6-24A bolts per the SB.
One thing that I would like to see is a change from rivets to nutplates and screws holding on the F-1275G left and right Cover Plates. This might be something we could do individually, post AW inspection.
Tony
I corrected the rivet interference by slightly grinding the U-1202 per the SB.
Tony
After following this thread one thing I can see that I don't like is that little lip shown in Tonys picture and pointed out in other post. Maybe Vans could offer all RV12 owners a special machined washer with a set bend on the bottom of the washer but even across the top where the nut would rest on it so that when the nut is tighten it would put equal pressure 360 degrees around the surface at that location. I'm sure with all the special tools they have this wouldn't be to much of a problem to make. As a minimum change the machine process when making the spar for future RV12 so that it is flat at that location. Just my personal observation. I have checked my and found no cracks.
I would think since Vans has the exact engineering specs on the main spar channel and I assume builds them in house with a precision milling machine each one should be exactly the same or extremely close so making the previously stated washer shouldn't be much of a problem. Maybe Scott could chime in and explain how this piece is made.A stepped washer would be difficult because Van's have no way of knowing what the step height is in each case.
I totally agree that builders trying to sand this area flat would result in many uneven surfaces across the spectrum of RV12s. Not a good idea at all.I have a step that looks very much like Tony's. I sent a photo and measurements to Vans and they suggested I file the area flat, but I've got no chance of doing that accurately by hand in such a confined space.
I would think since Vans has the exact engineering specs on the main spar channel and I assume builds them in house with a precision milling machine each one should be exactly the same or extremely close so making the previously stated washer shouldn't be much of a problem
The problem does not seem to be - based on your picture- interference with rivets - it appears to be a "shoulder" or non-flush machined pocket that prevents the washer from bearing 100% on the web of the channel. What's needed is a radiused washer to even the difference in height (or grinding the pocket down to flush - ouch!)
Did you do this with the airplane on the gear? Or jacked (Remember - I have your sawhorse stands....)
Could you have done this in Friday Harbor? Just wondering. You know - "Before Further Flight"?
Bob Bogash
N737G
I think the answer is a larger washer set in a epoxy grout
Please read the following update from Van's
http://www.vansaircraft.com/images/open/RV-12 landing gear update.pdf
Low whistle........ think we've hooked a big one here, boys.
I don't think anyone wants to glue their cracked channels back together - or at least I hope not. If you're referring to the JB Weld, North Up, that would be to act as a solid shim filling the gap between the bottom of the pocket and the U-channel web on uncracked channels..
N/S DonFromTx - You took a certain amount of heat early on when you started this thread - stuff about unsubstantiated reporting, too melodramatic, sky is falling, exaggeration, etc. I'm here to say Thanks, Don - we all owe you a beer, and I'll buy you one personally if I ever get down there again.
Bob Bogash
N737G
Ditto, Don. You da' man. Thank you.Thanks so much Bob, that really means a lot to me for you to say that..