What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Go-No Go Gauge for Wing retention bushings

WingedFrog

WingedFrog

Well Known Member
How many tests did you make with this gauge during your last annual inspection?
If you answered less than 16 tests you missed a few! I admit I missed a lot at my first annual but did all 16 tests duting my second annual.
Here is how it goes:
First, how many wing retention bushings do we have?
Answer: 4 in the center fuselage and 4 on the wings
Next: how many tests per bushings?
Answer: 2 (one on each side)
Total: 16 tests
I think the maintenance manual should explain better the tests that need to be made with this Go-No Go gauge lest some of you fellow builders might miss some :eek:
 
WingedFrog said:
How many tests did you make with this gauge during your last annual inspection?
If you answered less than 16 tests you missed a few! I admit I missed a lot at my first annual but did all 16 tests duting my second annual.
Here is how it goes:
First, how many wing retention bushings do we have?
Answer: 4 in the center fuselage and 4 on the wings
Next: how many tests per bushings?
Answer: 2 (one on each side)
Total: 16 tests
I think the maintenance manual should explain better the tests that need to be made with this Go-No Go gauge lest some of you fellow builders might miss some :eek:
Click to expand...

You have me mystified....what gauge?...I'm assuming you are referring to the big ones the wing retention pins go through?
 
I must admit that after flying 3 1/2 years the spar no-go gage still mystifies me. A detailed explanation of its use would be appreciated. It doesn't seem to fit into the bronze spar pin bushings. Am I supposed to drive it the bushings and check the holes they fit in? Seems like a bad idea to drive out the bushings and insert this gage.
 
MM Page 3-13

i-HbBCfHB-L.jpg
 
When I got final paperwork from Van's, I received the "bushing" checker (didn't have the foggiest idea of what it as until now)....absolutely not documentation or what it was😳

Now I know!
 
Phantom30 said:
When I got final paperwork from Van's, I received the "bushing" checker (didn't have the foggiest idea of what it as until now)....absolutely not documentation or what it was😳

Now I know!
Click to expand...

The documentation is the maint manual that you received when you received the tool.
If you use the M.M. Check list when you do your first condition inspection, it leads you through the check process
 
rvbuilder2002 said:
The documentation is the maint manual that you received when you received the tool.
If you use the M.M. Check list when you do your first condition inspection, it leads you through the check process
Click to expand...

The evidence kindly provided by Tony above shows that the "Check process" of the maintenance manual falls short in this case, Scott. It would not take lots of work at VANs to improve it (although I feel I did most of the work here for you guys:eek:)
 
WingedFrog said:
The evidence kindly provided by Tony above shows that the "Check process" of the maintenance manual falls short in this case, Scott. It would not take lots of work at VANs to improve it (although I feel I did most of the work here for you guys:eek:)
Click to expand...

What part did you not understand?

The thing I am having a hard time understanding, is how it helps someone by doing the math for them and telling them how many actual checks they should be doing.

When the text in the process says "Use the main Spar Gauge Pin to check the wear of both ends of all the wing retention pin bushings"

Figure 7 clearly shows what a "wing Retention Pin Bushing" is. So the inspector is to find each of those (anyone that has any business doing a condition inspection on an RV-12 will likely be able to find them all without being told how many there are) and insert the gauge into both ends.

Short of making a video showing where each one is located, I am not sure what would make it any more clear, but we are always up against the problem that every human processes info a little bit differently. Because of that, there will always be some people that think it is not clear enough. The reverse of this situation, is that if you write a long draw out process with a high level of detail, there are people who will not read it.... they want to be able to get the main detail info that they need, without a bunch of reading.
 
Last edited:
rvbuilder2002 said:
What part did you not understand?

The thing I am having a hard time understanding, is how it helps someone by doing the math for them and telling them how many actual checks they should be doing.

When the text in the process says "Use the main Spar Gauge Pin to check the wear of both ends of all the wing retention pin bushings"

Figure 7 clearly shows what a "wing Retention Pin Bushing" is. So the inspector is to find each of those (anyone that has any business doing a condition inspection on an RV-12 will likely be able to find them all without being told how many there are) and insert the gauge into both ends.

Short of making a video showing where each one is located, I am not sure what would make it any more clear, but we are always up against the problem that every human processes info a little bit differently. Because of that, there will always be some people that think it is not clear enough. The reverse of this situation, is that if you write a long draw out process with a high level of detail, there are people who will not read it.... they want to be able to get the main detail info that they need, without a bunch of reading.
Click to expand...

You don't need to get that defensive on a simple issue that can be fixed in one short sentence: "There are 8 bushing to check, 4 in the center fuselage and 4 on the wings. Make sure you check each bushing on both sides".
Is this asking too much? Claiming as you do that because one has built an RV-12 one should be smart enough to find all the bushings, or even worse, implying that if you miss some you are kind of an idiot that does not even deserve to do his own inspection is not the idea I have of a company caring about its customers.
 
WingedFrog said:
implying that if you miss some you are kind of an idiot that does not even deserve to do his own inspection is not the idea I have of a company caring about its customers.
Click to expand...

I wasn't being defensive, and my intent was not to make anyone feel like an idiot.

It was not meant as a sarcastic statement, I meant only what it says.
If someone is not aware enough about the airplane to find all of the bushings, then they probably should not be doing a condition inspection. Period.
(this is actually one of my pet peeves with the experimental side of aviation and in my opinion probably some of the cause of accidents that are precipitated by mechanical or structural failure.... I.E, people do maint. or inspections on things that they don't have proper knowledge of)

That awareness can come from many ways. A builder will probably be aware just from building the airplane. An A&P or Repairman doing an inspection on an airplane they didn't build (such as an S-LSA RV-12) will likely have to use more of the documentation. Possibly even the KAI.
The KAI is specifically listed as a supplement document to the Maint. Manual and is intended to be used along with it for obtaining part numbers, etc..

BTW, one standard often used in technical writing is to not specify counts, etc, when it is not considered crucial to understanding. The reason being that anytime a design change is made that caused a change in the count, there is then a risk that updating the appropriate documentation could be missed (this can sometimes be many different places).
Additionally, if we applied your idea to the entire construction manual, there is probably literally hundreds of places that the plans should give counts of parts ( "rivet the 18 rib attach angles to the wing spar, etc.") when the plans clearly depict all of the angles, it is pointless to say how many.
 
rvbuilder2002 said:
I wasn't being defensive, and my intent was not to make anyone feel like an idiot.

It was not meant as a sarcastic statement, I meant only what it says.
If someone is not aware enough about the airplane to find all of the bushings, then they probably should not be doing a condition inspection. Period.
(this is actually one of my pet peeves with the experimental side of aviation and in my opinion probably some of the cause of accidents that are precipitated by mechanical or structural failure.... I.E, people do maint. or inspections on things that they don't have proper knowledge of)

That awareness can come from many ways. A builder will probably be aware just from building the airplane. An A&P or Repairman doing an inspection on an airplane they didn't build (such as an S-LSA RV-12) will likely have to use more of the documentation. Possibly even the KAI.
The KAI is specifically listed as a supplement document to the Maint. Manual and is intended to be used along with it for obtaining part numbers, etc..

BTW, one standard often used in technical writing is to not specify counts, etc, when it is not considered crucial to understanding. The reason being that anytime a design change is made that caused a change in the count, there is then a risk that updating the appropriate documentation could be missed (this can sometimes be many different places).
Additionally, if we applied your idea to the entire construction manual, there is probably literally hundreds of places that the plans should give counts of parts ( "rivet the 18 rib attach angles to the wing spar, etc.") when the plans clearly depict all of the angles, it is pointless to say how many.
Click to expand...

Scott....I think your point on technical maintenance manuals is totally correct; however, when speaking about "building plans & related items" you are dealing a different group of folks. I have at times struggled with what I call "Oregon Engineerize" language in the plans when statement like what Winged Frog is saying would have made much more sense. That said....I don't think either of you will change your position.

LOL....Ric
 
Last edited:
What is the "KAI"?
I have found the MM (Maintenance Manual), POH (Pilot Operating Handbook), and PAP (Product Acceptance Procedure), but have searched for KAI and can't seem to locate it.
John
Edit - Found it - Kit Assembly Instructions.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top