up date on 9712T

Greg Bockelman said:
Both of you might consider letting it go. Further argument on this is pointless.
Click to expand...
You are right teaching Glen that these are not The part numbers of a mag pedal is useless.
He doesn't seem able to tell us what happens when you expose magnesium to chromic acid. yet that is elementary A&P studies on how to identify the materials we work on. I first started to doubt he was ignorant on the subject of alodine usage when he made the statement about how much alodine I had used on the part I showed, He didn't realize it isn't how much you use, it's the time exposed to the chromic acid to that determines the color of the aluminum.
Then he starts with the limits that is given in the ad posted, not realizing that Mac Farland is a CRS and sells parts to the public and must have FAA certify any procedure they do. A&Ps working these repairs are not held to that standard. we are allowed to determine what is a major or minor repair. then act accordingly.
But he wouldn't know that -or care it's just more I'm the expert BS he writes
 
GlennAB1 said:
You're not suppose to apply Alodine to magnesium .
So, why would you do that? Are you doing destructive testing?
Click to expand...
IOWs you do not know the test to identify a mag alloy.
Do you know why Alodine 1200 is not to be used on Mag. alloys?

For the rest of you folks that would not be expected to know elementary A&P stuff. Placing a speck of Alodine (Chromic acid) on a mag. part will turn it BLACK telling you it is a mag alloy. Then you would know to use a chemical conversion coating such as DOW #19 o the part.
These rudder pedals were tested and they did not turn black when Alodine was applied after being cleaned in my bead blast cabinet using Glass bead. Which worries Glen, because he doesn't know that when a glass bead strikes a solid surface it shatters and turns to dust. and is removed from the cabinet by the circulating air filter. Glass that is used is never recycled to strike any surface again.
This why I use a glass bead. I've explained this twice to Glen but he simply does not comprehend the process.
The reason the pedals advertised in the ad posted here can't be welded is simple, The alloy Cessna and Continental use is a Zinc alloy. When you try to weld it it, the zinc will fume out of the molten puddle, thus the weld will be a different weld alloy, which will expand and shrink at a different rate, causing cracking beside the weld bead, as it is heated and cooled, This is why the oil sumps for the 0-300-A thru D are getting difficult to find. they corrode and can't be welded.
You can depend that these pedals will be repaired properly, if they can't they will be thrown away and new bought.
 
GlennAB1 said:
They are junk and you're going to try to make them work and sell the aircraft to some unsuspecting soul.
Click to expand...
There ya go again making accusations that are not true. Trying to build your self up by making others look bad ?
 
Last edited:
A properly cleaned and alodined 150 aluminum rudder pedal.
 

Attachments

  • 20170320_090127.jpg
    20170320_090127.jpg
    160.7 KB · Views: 53
Tom-D said:
IOWs you do not know the test to identify a mag alloy.
Do you know why Alodine 1200 is not to be used on Mag. alloys?
For the rest of you folks that would not be expected to know elementary A&P stuff.
Click to expand...
Tom, I have almost 30 years NDT experience. I have access to proper equipment for metals sorting. Already told you in another thread, alodine is corrosive. Magnesium is one of the metals, most susceptible to corrosion. Thank you for pointing out you are an elementary A&P.
 
You can cut the sexual tension between them with a knife!
 
Alright.
Based on the Cessna IPC found here:
https://www.redskyventures.org/doc/cessna-maintenance-manuals/Cessna_150_1963-69_PartsManual.pdf
Pages 265-267, Fig. 34, Index No's: 1A and 29A, Usable on code E. Tom's airplane (s/n 15076947) uses PN 1460320-1.
1460320-495 is obviously the casting number, not the manufacturers part number. More often than not, that is the case. I see it all the time. If we had access to engineering drawings you would see that casting #(s) combined with finishing details are what create a MPN.
PN's are usually identified by rubber stamp such as:
http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTIwMFgxNjAw/z/M6cAAOSwUV9WnvVe/$_1.JPG
Two more references to PN 1460320-1 being Magnesium:
http://www.skygeek.com/cessna-0760678-2-rudder-pedal.html

https://www.skyshop.com.au/pdf/2009-2010_catalog%20206.pdf
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
I first started to doubt he was ignorant on the subject of alodine usage when he made the statement about how much alodine I had used on the part I showed, He didn't realize it isn't how much you use, it's the time exposed to the chromic acid to that determines the color of the aluminum.
Click to expand...
Maybe, you've only been exposed to premixed alodine? Powdered alodine can be diluted incorrectly, being stronger than directed and pertinent to "how much you use".
BTW, your first sentence is hilarious.
 
been a while

nTmVbyX.jpg
 
Tom-D said:
You should try looking up the part number and calling Cessna.
Click to expand...

After seeing the picture of the alodined rudder pedal, I did double check the part number and emailed Cessna tech support.

Quote:
If that is a P/N 1460320-1 the material should be AZ91A per federal specification QQ-M-38. That is a magnesium casting and as a general rule not weld able unless done by an extremely talented individual.
It probably would be cheaper to just procure a new rudder pedal instead of finding someone qualified to weld it.

Michael Tweedus
Sr. Field Engineer
Textron Aviation

 
JAWS said:
Quote:
If that is a P/N 1460320-1
Michael Tweedus
Sr. Field Engineer
Textron Aviation
Click to expand...
It is not.
magnesium rudder pedals did not start until the start of the 152 production, all replacement parts after that were mag.
If that were a Mag pedal, it would have turn black in the Alodine treatment.
 
GlennAB1 said:
Maybe, you've only been exposed to premixed alodine? Powdered alodine can be diluted incorrectly, being stronger than directed and pertinent to "how much you use".
BTW, your first sentence is hilarious.
Click to expand...
IOWs you don't know what Alodine 1200 is.
 
GlennAB1 said:
Tom, I have almost 30 years NDT experience.
Click to expand...
I doubt it, you didn't even know the test to determine the material. this info is kindergarten education for A&Ps and you didn't know it.
 
WOW!
Good luck with your project, Tom.

Where is the bunny with the pancake!
 
JAWS said:
After seeing the picture of the alodined rudder pedal, I did double check the part number and emailed Cessna tech support.

Quote:
If that is a P/N 1460320-1 the material should be AZ91A per federal specification QQ-M-38. That is a magnesium casting and as a general rule not weld able unless done by an extremely talented individual.
It probably would be cheaper to just procure a new rudder pedal instead of finding someone qualified to weld it.

Michael Tweedus
Sr. Field Engineer
Textron Aviation
Click to expand...
If you can prove to me that this is in fact a mag alloy and why it didn't turn black in the alodine bath, I'll do the bushing insert for the repair of the pedal.
 
Tom-D said:
If you can prove to me that this is in fact a mag alloy and why it didn't turn black in the alodine bath, I'll do the bushing insert for the repair of the pedal.
Click to expand...
You're going to do what you want and claim your A&P school general shop practices are adequate. You've already proven that false with your inadequate gear bolt torque. Either you didn't confirm with a mirror and bright light, that the gear was seated, or with a straight edge, that the gears were flush/even.
 
GlennAB1 said:
You're going to do what you want and claim your A&P school general shop practices are adequate. You've already proven that false with your inadequate gear bolt torque. Either you didn't confirm with a mirror and bright light, that the gear was seated, or with a straight edge, that the gears were flush/even.
Click to expand...

show me in the 0-200 overhaul manual where it says to do that. grabbing at straws again, because you can't

you sound like a broken record. best stick with reading your job cards.
 
Glenn, knock it off. Unless you have physically seen the parts involved, all you are doing is speculating.

Tom, ignore Glenn. The arguing is serving no useful purpose.
 
Job cards create continuity, unlike what you do, picking and choose whether you want to follow manufacturers instructions, 43.13, or A&P school general shop practices.... it appears, whichever is cheapest or most convenient....
 
Last edited:
GlennAB1 said:
Job cards create continuity, unlike what you do, picking and closing whether you want to follow manufacturers instructions, 43.13, or A&P school general shop practices.... it appears, whichever is cheapest or most convenient....
Click to expand...
IOWs you do not understand major and minor repairs.
 
GlennAB1 said:
Alright.
Based on the Cessna IPC found here:
https://www.redskyventures.org/doc/cessna-maintenance-manuals/Cessna_150_1963-69_PartsManual.pdf
Pages 265-267, Fig. 34, Index No's: 1A and 29A, Usable on code E. Tom's airplane (s/n 15076947) uses PN 1460320-1.
1460320-495 is obviously the casting number, not the manufacturers part number. More often than not, that is the case. I see it all the time. If we had access to engineering drawings you would see that casting #(s) combined with finishing details are what create a MPN.
PN's are usually identified by rubber stamp such as:
http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTIwMFgxNjAw/z/M6cAAOSwUV9WnvVe/$_1.JPG
Two more references to PN 1460320-1 being Magnesium:
http://www.skygeek.com/cessna-0760678-2-rudder-pedal.html

https://www.skyshop.com.au/pdf/2009-2010_catalog%20206.pdf
Click to expand...
Liked the way you reference the 1963-69 IPB for a 1976 aircraft. and assume the after market part would be the same as the OEM.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Tom, ignore Glenn. The arguing is serving no useful purpose.
Click to expand...
I have a better Idea, rather than leave his stupid statements and assumptions go un-rebuted I'll simply leave the group.
then those who would like to watch the progress of my projects and maybe learn some thing in the process, can be the losers.

seeing as members like him have rendered the webpage useless for that purpose anyway, other wise we would still have members like Ron Levi, and Dr Bruce as active members.

CYA
 
Tom-D said:
Liked the way you reference the 1963-69 IPB for a 1976 aircraft. and assume the after market part would be the same as the OEM.
Click to expand...
Like the way you didn't offer a reference that would prove you wrong.
Would a 1976 Cessna 150 Illustrated Parts Catalog suffice for a 1976 aircraft, or would you have a problem with that?
Figure 61, Index No. 1, pages 152 & 153, Same part number as in previous manual (1460320-1):
http://rob.com/matt/manuals/150_pm_70-77.pdf
 
Tom:
I'm going to say what I think and you may not like it.

When you stop making posts that are nothing but bait for you to start an argument and tell people they don't have a clue what they are talking about you may gain some respect from the members here. I'm a retired IA and find some of your posts to be severely lacking in content and simply looking to start an argument that you seem to relish. That is not he way to provide information to the masses as you claim. It is merely self aggrandizement on your part. Holier than though comes to mind. Yes, you have been an A&P for years, but all of us are still subject to question. You refuse to acknowledge that and swear your word is gospel. When someone challenges you you get hostile. Are other's opinions invalid in your opinion? If so, I think you need to reevaluate.

Just take it for what it's worth almost every subject you start is simply asking to start an argument with those of similar experience. The opinions of ten IA's vs yours cant always be wrong and it's time you learned to accept that.

You have fomented a lot of controversy here, and much if it not for the betterment of those who depend on reliable and certifiable information. Most of your posts are to create a discussion in which you hope to prevail.

The foregoing was not intended as a personal attack but simply an observation of your performance over the time I have been here. Lots of trash with no substance.

Note to mods: If you feel this is a personal attack please feel free to delete it, but it you do it will simply indicate your penchant to censor those who are of a different opinion. I believe in truth. BS walks.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top