Well, we thought it would come down to it and it has. I just got the e-mail form the FAA saying that the control wheel inspection will be an AD effective 31 Aug and must be completed in 12 months or 100 hours after it goes into effect. I love how they dismiss the comments. My favorite is this one:
mented that the cost for maintenance and replacement parts should be absorbed by Piper. Several aircraft owners disagreed with covering the cost for a Piper mistake. Several aircraft owners/operators felt that Piper failed to manufacture the aircraft to design specification and their quality system did not detect a bad assembly.The FAA has determined that there is an unsafe condition and has identified actions to correct that unsafe condition. One of the FAA's responsibilities is to identify the direct costs involved (labor and parts) with the corrective actions. It is every owner's and operator's responsibility to maintain the airplane to the type design and address any airworthiness concerns. This includes all maintenance requirements and ADs that correct an unsafe condition.
We are not changing the final rule AD action based on this comment.
They don't even ANSWER the question that is raised about Piper messing this up. It wasn't designed as required by the FAA, so how does it meet the design requirements of the type design? How do we maintain something that was WRONG in the first place. I honestly think that as a group, those that own Piper airplanes should look at filing suit against this. I am on fire about this.
mented that the cost for maintenance and replacement parts should be absorbed by Piper. Several aircraft owners disagreed with covering the cost for a Piper mistake. Several aircraft owners/operators felt that Piper failed to manufacture the aircraft to design specification and their quality system did not detect a bad assembly.The FAA has determined that there is an unsafe condition and has identified actions to correct that unsafe condition. One of the FAA's responsibilities is to identify the direct costs involved (labor and parts) with the corrective actions. It is every owner's and operator's responsibility to maintain the airplane to the type design and address any airworthiness concerns. This includes all maintenance requirements and ADs that correct an unsafe condition.
We are not changing the final rule AD action based on this comment.
They don't even ANSWER the question that is raised about Piper messing this up. It wasn't designed as required by the FAA, so how does it meet the design requirements of the type design? How do we maintain something that was WRONG in the first place. I honestly think that as a group, those that own Piper airplanes should look at filing suit against this. I am on fire about this.
