PA-28-180 Wing Spar Concern

L

lbsulli

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jun 13, 2021
Messages
6
Display Name
Display name:
lbsulli
Hi guys! New member here. I’m a student pilot working on my PPL. My family has had a ‘68 Cherokee 180 for a couple years now. My dad and I are new to the aviation world and are training simultaneously. Studying through the plane logs a while back, I noticed an AD letter from years ago regarding the wing spars. It started to concern me as there were no log entries regarding inspection of this AD. However, I found out our serial number was not included.

Anyway, the more recent AD that is apparently all the craze right now, does include our serial number. Our annual was in February. In the log entry, it’s noted that the AD was acknowledged, inspected, defects were noted, and re-inspection is due in 2028.

Because of past incidents/accidents, I’m a little uptight about the whole wing spar thing. However, I just wanted to put my concern out there. Deep down inside, I’m probably reaching out in search of reassurance as this is inherently something that crosses my mind every time I go fly. Being new to all this, I’m not familiar with the detailed structure of aircraft, how maintenance and inspections work, etc. I’m just curious how concerned I should actually be if any at all.

My apologies for the long post and I appreciate any and all responses. Thank you!
 
I’m not totally up to speed on the details of the AD that has recently been released. I would also however have concerns if an eddy current inspection was done, “defects” which I presume would be cracks were found, and it was returned to service without repair. Unless you can track down the IA and get more detail it sounds to me like it should be done again and properly noted.
 
lbsulli said:
Our annual was in February. In the log entry, it’s noted that the AD was acknowledged, inspected, defects were noted, and re-inspection is due in 2028.
Click to expand...
I’m assuming this wasn’t AD 2020-26-16, as the PA-28-180 is not included. You must be referring to the wing spar corrosion directive.

The only way to know for sure is to have the eddy current inspection done on your spar.
 
RyanB said:
I’m assuming this wasn’t AD 2020-26-16, as the PA-28-180 is not included. You must be referring to the wing spar corrosion directive.

The only way to know for sure is to have the eddy current inspection done on your spar.
Click to expand...

It is AD 2020-24-05
 
lbsulli said:
It is AD 2020-24-05
Click to expand...
That’s the wing spar corrosion directive.

If you had this done and it was complied with (as it sounds like it was), than what’s the concern?
 
Grum.Man said:
I’m not totally up to speed on the details of the AD that has recently been released. I would also however have concerns if an eddy current inspection was done, “defects” which I presume would be cracks were found, and it was returned to service without repair. Unless you can track down the IA and get more detail it sounds to me like it should be done again and properly noted.
Click to expand...

The word “defects” is what threw me off, too. It would be most effective to talk with the IA. I’d like to know where he “noted” said “defects” and what they are exactly.
 
lbsulli said:
The word “defects” is what threw me off, too. It would be most effective to talk with the IA. I’d like to know where he “noted” said “defects” and what they are exactly.
Click to expand...
Bingo. That’s where I’d start.
 
RyanB said:
That’s the wing spar corrosion directive.

If you had this done and it was complied with (as it sounds like it was), than what’s the concern?
Click to expand...

I guess I should put more faith in the IA. The spook of a wing failure has gotten to my head… I tend to be a little overboard when it comes to maintenance and safety.
 
lbsulli said:
I guess I should put more faith in the IA. The spook of a wing failure has gotten to my head… I tend to be a little overboard when it comes to maintenance and safety.
Click to expand...
No disagreements there. I think if it were me, I’d also want to inquire more about what defects were found and also how they were treated.
 
RyanB said:
No disagreements there. I think if it were me, I’d also want to inquire more about what defects were found and also how they were treated.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the feedback, Ryan!
 
lbsulli said:
I guess I should put more faith in the IA. The spook of a wing failure has gotten to my head… I tend to be a little overboard when it comes to maintenance and safety.
Click to expand...

If it is something you’re concerned about, why not discuss it with your mechanic and have a look at the affected area yourself? Having a deeper knowledge of the airplane you own and fly is never a bad thing. :)
 
Last edited:
Seems like a liability to the IA, to note defects - but not the specifics of what they are, where, a full description.
Otherwise new, more serious defects could be found at the crash site and now he is on the hook for those.
Or at least a reference indicating how these are not defects involving airworthiness.
 
RyanB said:
No disagreements there. I think if it were me, I’d also want to inquire more about what defects were found and also how they were treated.
Click to expand...

Meh. What's the worst that could happen? I mean the reason they put two wings on there is in case one falls off, right?
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Seems like a liability to the IA, to note defects
Click to expand...
Depends on how the AD and subsequent SB is written. In this one, I believe if corrosion is detected but after cleaning it is within the stated limits, the spar can remain in service to the next inspection cycle. So it would be required/appropriate to note the "defect" but still call the spar inspection good. But without reading the actual write up I couldn't comment any further. However, based on the limited info we have on this aircraft, if I would have noted corrosion, cleaned it, and found acceptable, I would have stated corrosion/defect was found as well.
 
1. Was there damage history to this plane?
2. Do you have the inspection plates installed?
3. Where has it spent it's life?

Go check out some of the airframe components vids on both ad's. Learn you some stuff and take notes for questions to your IA and know what you're looking at yourself. That's probably more piece of mind if you know what you're looking at as opposed to taking somebody else's word. I spoke to them when I bought my 180 as there is a little history in it's past. Shocking I know for a 58 year old plane to not be pristine. After talking to them, they foresee the Eddy current inspection being mandated for all pa28/32's after the FAA sees the numbers they've been seeing. But that's not the AD that applies here. I'm a welder by trade and know what aluminum corrosion looks like. Luckily my 180 had the plates installed and had clear sight to the spar. I'm more concerned about the damage that occured in 1973 on mine so I'll have the Eddy done when the annual is due. With that said, if the IA says you don't need to even look at it (takes 20 minutes tops) for 7 years, I probably wouldn't worry about corrosion. Unless this is your 200 dollar annual that started a p!ssing match in another thread.
 
I most definitely would have it thoroughly checked out. Mine had the Eddy current inspection done and in a subsequent annual in which I requested that an actual visual inspection be performed, incorrect hardware was found. Yeah, I'm glad my wing(s) stayed on!
 
Joe_B1 said:
I most definitely would have it thoroughly checked out. Mine had the Eddy current inspection done and in a subsequent annual in which I requested that an actual visual inspection be performed, incorrect hardware was found. Yeah, I'm glad my wing(s) stayed on!
Click to expand...

Good to know! Thank you!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top