Good Luck on this one. If you want Owen Bell to reply you're gonna have to do it with a subpoena.

Gord,
Was the modification to your aircraft done by Owen and his folks?

I'm presuming it was based on your letter, but just wanted clarification.

Be careful about that. It has been known to cause corrosion. You should check the airframe carefully, "downwind" of the place where the relief tube exits the aircraft.

Hi Larry I am pretty sure it was down by Owen but I will double check.

It is mounted slightly below the port spar attach fairing, so it's pretty much out of the way of the prop/boom/elevator downstream. I always flush the tube with an antibacterial soap /water solution after each use though, and inspect the prop/elevator in case the airflow is different that what i expect.

Gord,

Have you heard back from Owen about this?

Randy

Actually I have. I have since forwarded him all the repair estimates. Once the final bill is in probably early this week I will forward it to him along with wire instructions.

Bills submitted
 

I submitted the final bill to Mr. Bell at Aviation Enterprises last Thursday November 25th.
$21,253.20 Canadian dollars.
This included the repair as well as the cost to properly engineer the repair itself as it was far more than just filling a few holes and slapping some aluminum on the spar.
Moreover, the repair to the lower skin was accomplished by removing the skin and replacing it as you cannot reinforce a hole that has a stringer running over it. It would result in an uneven finish. It was actually necessary to open up the top of the wing completely to get in and make the repairs. The shop spent 179 hours doing the repair and they even reduced their shop rate by 12% so they could keep to the estimate which I felt was very accomodating of them. If any of you need a similar repair they are called Aerostructural Inc. and their phone number is 866-971-5244.
I also submitted all the work orders etc. and once I receive the funds I will release the balance of the engineering diagrams for his file on my plane.
I have had a few back and forth emails from Mr. Bell. I believe he will do the right thing and remediate the damage.
If there are any others out there I would be pleased to review my findings with you.

I was recently made aware that some here have questions about the AD issued on Aviation Enterprises regarding extended wing tips and whether Flint Aero will also be affected. There will be an AD forthcoming dealing with our wing tips as well and we are currently working with the FAA and the Small Aircraft Directorate on this matter. The incident in Farmington, New Jersey prompted the FAA and the SAD to look into not only AE's modification but Flint Aero's as well (based on one Service Difficulty Report on a Flint modified T337G that reported some wing skin cracks at WS150 underneath the removable fuel tank access cover). I have had an engineer working on this project for the last few months and the engineering study has been quite intense. The FAA was able to get engineering data directly from Cessna though that information could not be shared with us. We have had to reverse engineer the wing which has taken quite some time.

To deal with this upcoming AD we are looking at two options. One would be a structural reinforcement while the other would involve reworking the limitation for “zero fuel” in the tip tanks. The current limitation is the requirement of maintaining at least 12 gallons of fuel in each tip until the aircraft gross weight reaches 4,330 lbs. This limitation has been in place from the time the STC was first issued in 1991. It is possible that the "fix" will include a combination of the two options.

The structural reinforcement will be relatively non-intrusive and includes reinforcing the stringer splice at WS150 and some externally mounted stainless steel straps on three stringers and the forward spar cap outboard of WS150. At WS150 there will be two bands of SS attached chordwise. One band will be 3.5” x 19.75” and will be riveted to the underside of the removable fuel panel and will attach at the existing screw locations at WS150. A second band (5” x 19.75”) will be riveted to the exterior of the upper skin and will also attach at WS150 via the existing screw locations. The stringer straps will be 1” wide and begin 2" outboard of WS150 and terminate 3" outboard of WS177. The spar doubler (also 1” wide) will originate at WS162 and terminate at WS192. These reinforcements will be required only on the upper wing surface. Of course, this “fix” will first have to be approved by the FAA though so far they have been very happy with the data we have supplied. Please note that the plans for the structural reinforcement is preliminary and may change as we continue to refine our data.

The limitation option is still one we are looking at. We believe the aircraft is fine at 4,330 lbs with a minimum of 12 gallons in each tip. At higher weights we believe that there would need to be more than 12 gallons in each tip. Right now I would error on the side of caution and recommend keeping the tips tanks full until the gross weight drops to 4,330 lbs and then begin transferring fuel from the tips to the mains. We are still working on what the “zero fuel” weight would be but we feel the weight of 3,300 lbs that is listed in the AD which affects Aviation Enterprises is much lower than it needs to be. Right now, though, I would recommend keeping a minimum of 12 gallons in each tip at all times (or at least when the gross weight is above 3,300 lbs) until we finalize the "zero fuel" weight. The limitation option may not be practical in the long term though it would at least be a required temporary limitation until the aircraft is reinforced.

This AD will only affect 337s that do not have the 150.6 gallon capacity factory fuel tanks, what we refer to as the “long wing” aircraft. The wing structure of the “long wing” is stronger than the “short wing” aircraft. I would note that the aircraft involved in the New Jersey incident as well as the one in the recent Avon Park incident were "short wing" aircraft.

I think we are all aware that the pilots involved in the New Jersey incident were asking a lot of the airframe. The FAA quickly issued a SAIB (CE-10-20) though the response to that SAIB was tepid in their view. Flint Aero was included in that SAIB. The latest incident in Avon Park, Florida has the FAA additionally concerned because the wing failure occurred in the same general area (perhaps a bit inboard) though this aircraft did not have wing tip extensions. I do not know if this latest incident will have an effect on the upcoming AD for Flint Aero but they did contact me for some input.

I do appreciate Larry for allowing me to use this forum to get some information out. If anyone has any questions feel free to contact me via phone (619-448-1551), e-mail (Dennis@flintaero.com) or here in this thread.

Dennis Hamblin
President, Flint Aero, Inc.

Thank you very much for the info. Please keep info coming as it is available.

Ed Asmus - N1873M

And note the very informative and quick reply from Owen Bell as well.........................

Did you mean the one from the Flint guy?

No
 

Gord, he was being facetious. Pointing out that while the AD for Flint hasn't been released, we, this message board, have yet to have a comment from Owen, on the Aviation Enterprises AD.

Dennis
 

We appreciate the comments made by anyone who has any involvement with Skymasters.
Thank you for sharing with us.

A couple of comments, questions.
First, The New Jersey accident, I thought, involved a Super Skyrocket, a pressurized airplane. I would have assumed that it had the strengthened wing. Do you mean that all pressurized Skymasters don't have the same strengthened wing?? In other words, they are not all created equal.
Second, the straps on top of the wing are only for those aircraft that do not have the 150 gallon capacity wing, and have Flint tanks? Do aircraft that do not have the 150 gallon wing, and don't have Flint tanks going to need this reinforcement?
I have seen on other types of aircraft, a need for a spar inspection. This frequent, and frequently expensive inspection is waived, if there is a spar replacement. Would not a spar replacement, incorporating spar used in the stronger wing, be a better solution than straps on top of the wing??

Thank you,

It's all that cold weather up here. I thought he might be kidding. Thank you Larry for letting me be a part of this forum and this website. It is such a good feeling to know that I am not alone. I use my plane only for personal use and humanitarian missions. In January we were part of the Haiti airlift with Bahamas Habitat and when the weather permits we do Hope Air missions flying kids who need non urgent medical treatment from the near north down to Toronto.
The Skymaster is a great aircraft and I hope to be able to fly mine for a long time.
It's unfortunate for everyone involved that this happened.
All I am looking for is the cost to repair my plane not one red cent more.
Thanks again