SkydiveJack 1 #1 December 31, 2005 I got this from my weekly AOPA e-mail update. Looks like the operators will have to reduce the take-off weight by 375 lbs. until this issue is resolved. Jack FAA ISSUES EMERGENCY AD FOR RARE AIRPLANE MODEL The New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority has notified the FAA that the wings on Pacific Aerospace 750XL airplane models may not meet the ultimate load requirements for a maximum takeoff weight of 7,500 pounds. The maximum takeoff weight has been reduced to 7,125 pounds while the company develops a modification that will replace critical rivets with "AN" bolts. There are only five of these aircraft in the U.S. registry. Download the AD (http://download.aopa.org/epilot/2005/20052653ad.pdf ). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eule 0 #2 December 31, 2005 QuoteDownload the AD ( http://download.aopa.org/epilot/2005/20052653ad.pdf ). Clicky of Jack's AOPA link: http://download.aopa.org/epilot/2005/20052653ad.pdf Clicky direct to FAA: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/0/024844d7e970c68d862570e00057f02e/$FILE/2005-26-53%20(Emergency).pdf If FAA clicky doesn't work: Go to http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/safety/alerts/ Click on "Airworthiness Directives (AD)" Click on "Emergency ADs (Last 30 days)" Click on "2005-26-53" Original emergency airworthiness directive from New Zealand CAA: http://www.caa.govt.nz/fulltext/nzcars/Emergency/DCA_750XL_7.pdf Followup emergency AD from NZ CAA, approving replacement of rivets with bolts per PAC service bulletin: http://www.caa.govt.nz/fulltext/nzcars/Emergency/DCA_750XL_7A.pdf EulePLF does not stand for Please Land on Face. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
btucker 0 #3 December 31, 2005 Does this mean less jumpers? {how much does the a/c weigh?} Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot1 0 #4 December 31, 2005 QuoteDoes this mean less jumpers? {how much does the a/c weigh?} PAC XL750 Specs Be safe Edwww.WestCoastWingsuits.com www.PrecisionSkydiving.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tbrown 26 #5 December 31, 2005 Quote QuoteDoes this mean less jumpers? {how much does the a/c weigh?} Would be the easiest way to reduce weight on a jump plane. The difference looks like 375 lbs, so I'm thinking less two "average" size jumpers might do it ? 'Til they get a new bag of screws to hold the wings on anyway.... Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skybytch 259 #6 December 31, 2005 QuoteThe difference looks like 375 lbs, so I'm thinking less two "average" size jumpers might do it ? There are never more than 15 jumpers on the PAC at Davis. Assuming the max weight refers to full fuel, 17 jumpers and a pilot, I'm assuming that this will not affect normal operations here. But I've been wrong before. Don't know how many jumpers the other PAC's in the US typically fly with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites riggerrob 558 #7 December 31, 2005 We could review the numbers, but very few airplanes can fly will full seats and full fuel and full baggage. They plan it so that pilots can trade off passengers or cargo on longer flights so that they can fill all the fuel tanks. For example King Airs have a total of six fuel tanks: 2 nacelle tanks, then inner and outer wing tanks. Most King Airs - configured for skydiving - rarely fill any more than the nacelle tanks. They only fill the outer wing tanks for end-of-season ferry flights. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bodypilot1 0 #8 January 1, 2006 This bit of info was posted in another group here in Nor Cal by [email protected] "For European certification they required a new test on the wing of the PAC 750XL. The test is something like 3.5 G's plus 150%. On the test wing (almost 40,000lbs), It came up 8% of the desired goal. That is why there is a new temporary max weight of 7125 lbs. The factory knew that the wing and spar should easily pass the test, so they knew there was either a manufacturing issue with that one wing or a flaw in the test. Upon investination, they discovered incorect rivits installed in the spar cap. So within 48 hours the factory had a fix and issued a service bullentin. To insure the error could not repeated, they elected to replace the rivits with bolts. Now in the real world, it was never a operational issue. We had to do a new weight & balance. So with a full load of 17 jumpers, you are now limited to 350 lbs of fuel. Since we usually only fly with 15 or 16 as a max, there is no change. The good news is the Factory ID'ed a problem and had it resolved with a fix, retested and had service bullentin issued within 48 hours. That's factory support! Be safe Edwww.WestCoastWingsuits.com www.PrecisionSkydiving.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites btucker 0 #9 January 1, 2006 Awsome - ask a question, get an answer :-) I notice that 7125 (remains) the max landing weight, so probably a non issue for skydiving. -> i.e. Quite often we've had to land after a few minutes - clearence. empty weight is 3100. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ZigZagMarquis 8 #10 January 1, 2006 Any word how they're handling this at Taft?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ZigZagMarquis 8 #11 January 9, 2006 ... bump... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites headoverheels 291 #12 January 9, 2006 Rather than bumping it, why not contact them? I'd be pretty sure it is done by carrying either less jumpers or less fuel, if they were even operating at max load in the past. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ZigZagMarquis 8 #13 January 9, 2006 Quote Rather than bumping it, why not contact them? I'd be pretty sure it is done by carrying either less jumpers or less fuel, if they were even operating at max load in the past. Didn't feel it important enough for me to call and bug them... just currious and thought maybe some of the Taft Locals might want to post and say if they knew. You're probably right though... less fuel, maybe a couple few jumpers until they comply with the AD. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ltdiver 3 #14 January 24, 2006 "PAC changes reinvigorate 750XL" http://www.flightinternational.com/Articles/2006/01/24/Navigation/177/204290/PAC+changes+reinvigorate+750XL.html ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Feeblemind 1 #15 January 24, 2006 Meanwhile, an airworthiness directive (AD) reducing the 750XL’s maximum take-off weight from 3,400kg (7,500lb) to 3,230kg, issued by the New Zealand CAA on 23 December, has been overcome. The AD was issued after the wing failed ultimate load tests. A modified wing passed ultimate load testing the day after the AD was issued, Hébert says, and the directive has been revised to restore the 3,400kg take-off weight after operators have modified the wing. exerpt from www.flightinternational.com/Articles/2006/01/24/Navigation/177/204290/PAC+changes+reinvigorate+750XL.html Fire Safety Tip: Don't fry bacon while naked Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ltdiver 3 #16 January 25, 2006 Duh, that's why I posted it... ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Feeblemind 1 #17 January 25, 2006 But some folks are Lazy Fire Safety Tip: Don't fry bacon while naked Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tbrown 26 #18 January 25, 2006 A modified wing passed ultimate load testing the day after the AD was issued, Hébert says, and the directive has been revised to restore the 3,400kg take-off weight after operators have modified the wing. And that's generally the purpose of an Airworthiness Directive, to make everybody happy and punch fewer craters. Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #6 December 31, 2005 QuoteThe difference looks like 375 lbs, so I'm thinking less two "average" size jumpers might do it ? There are never more than 15 jumpers on the PAC at Davis. Assuming the max weight refers to full fuel, 17 jumpers and a pilot, I'm assuming that this will not affect normal operations here. But I've been wrong before. Don't know how many jumpers the other PAC's in the US typically fly with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #7 December 31, 2005 We could review the numbers, but very few airplanes can fly will full seats and full fuel and full baggage. They plan it so that pilots can trade off passengers or cargo on longer flights so that they can fill all the fuel tanks. For example King Airs have a total of six fuel tanks: 2 nacelle tanks, then inner and outer wing tanks. Most King Airs - configured for skydiving - rarely fill any more than the nacelle tanks. They only fill the outer wing tanks for end-of-season ferry flights. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot1 0 #8 January 1, 2006 This bit of info was posted in another group here in Nor Cal by [email protected] "For European certification they required a new test on the wing of the PAC 750XL. The test is something like 3.5 G's plus 150%. On the test wing (almost 40,000lbs), It came up 8% of the desired goal. That is why there is a new temporary max weight of 7125 lbs. The factory knew that the wing and spar should easily pass the test, so they knew there was either a manufacturing issue with that one wing or a flaw in the test. Upon investination, they discovered incorect rivits installed in the spar cap. So within 48 hours the factory had a fix and issued a service bullentin. To insure the error could not repeated, they elected to replace the rivits with bolts. Now in the real world, it was never a operational issue. We had to do a new weight & balance. So with a full load of 17 jumpers, you are now limited to 350 lbs of fuel. Since we usually only fly with 15 or 16 as a max, there is no change. The good news is the Factory ID'ed a problem and had it resolved with a fix, retested and had service bullentin issued within 48 hours. That's factory support! Be safe Edwww.WestCoastWingsuits.com www.PrecisionSkydiving.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
btucker 0 #9 January 1, 2006 Awsome - ask a question, get an answer :-) I notice that 7125 (remains) the max landing weight, so probably a non issue for skydiving. -> i.e. Quite often we've had to land after a few minutes - clearence. empty weight is 3100. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZigZagMarquis 8 #10 January 1, 2006 Any word how they're handling this at Taft?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZigZagMarquis 8 #11 January 9, 2006 ... bump... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 291 #12 January 9, 2006 Rather than bumping it, why not contact them? I'd be pretty sure it is done by carrying either less jumpers or less fuel, if they were even operating at max load in the past. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZigZagMarquis 8 #13 January 9, 2006 Quote Rather than bumping it, why not contact them? I'd be pretty sure it is done by carrying either less jumpers or less fuel, if they were even operating at max load in the past. Didn't feel it important enough for me to call and bug them... just currious and thought maybe some of the Taft Locals might want to post and say if they knew. You're probably right though... less fuel, maybe a couple few jumpers until they comply with the AD. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #14 January 24, 2006 "PAC changes reinvigorate 750XL" http://www.flightinternational.com/Articles/2006/01/24/Navigation/177/204290/PAC+changes+reinvigorate+750XL.html ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Feeblemind 1 #15 January 24, 2006 Meanwhile, an airworthiness directive (AD) reducing the 750XL’s maximum take-off weight from 3,400kg (7,500lb) to 3,230kg, issued by the New Zealand CAA on 23 December, has been overcome. The AD was issued after the wing failed ultimate load tests. A modified wing passed ultimate load testing the day after the AD was issued, Hébert says, and the directive has been revised to restore the 3,400kg take-off weight after operators have modified the wing. exerpt from www.flightinternational.com/Articles/2006/01/24/Navigation/177/204290/PAC+changes+reinvigorate+750XL.html Fire Safety Tip: Don't fry bacon while naked Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #16 January 25, 2006 Duh, that's why I posted it... ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Feeblemind 1 #17 January 25, 2006 But some folks are Lazy Fire Safety Tip: Don't fry bacon while naked Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tbrown 26 #18 January 25, 2006 A modified wing passed ultimate load testing the day after the AD was issued, Hébert says, and the directive has been revised to restore the 3,400kg take-off weight after operators have modified the wing. And that's generally the purpose of an Airworthiness Directive, to make everybody happy and punch fewer craters. Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nicolesheridan 0 #19 January 25, 2006 Marc Marc had the Pac in for service the minute he received word of this. I believe all that it required was changing out some of the bolts. At Taft, we carry 17 jumpers with no one flying right seat or 16 with a right seat flyer. 8 will get the Pac in the air."People often say that this or that person has not yet found himself. But, the self is not something that one finds. It is something that one creates"- Thomas Szasz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZigZagMarquis 8 #20 January 25, 2006 Good to hear. The way it read, it didn't sound to me that the "AD" on how to correct the problem was on the street yet, just that the restriction was out, with final directions on how to correct it and comply with the notice was still pending. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
