3 ms·

> Unless the design of the sensor would make it inaccurate after being reassembled (I'm skeptical of this, it wouldn't make sense for a few reasons) this is kin

> Unless the design of the sensor would make it inaccurate after being reassembled (I'm skeptical of this, it wouldn't make sense for a few reasons) this is kind of a dick move to the aircraft owners that they're probably doing in the name of "look how careful we're being" I think your cynicism is uncalled for. FAA found an issue that is life threatening to pilots and passengers, just because pilot/mechanics are aware about how careful they are with their planes, does not mean that you invalidate the actual manufacturing issue that is found with these AOA sensors. "We are aware, we are not stupid, don't tell us what to do." - this is a wrong attitude especially from an Aviation mechanic, unless I am missing something, otherwise please elaborate.

dsfyu404ed 8y ago
>I think your cynicism is uncalled for. FAA found an issue that is life threatening to pilots and passengers, just because pilot/mechanics are aware about how careful they are with their planes, does not mean that you invalidate the actual manufacturing issue that is found with these AOA sensors. I'm saying the stupid thing here is that mechanics/owners have to trash the part and wait for a replacement when the fix is to apply locktite and assemble properly (assuming sensor is undamaged) which is something any mechanic can do. Sure it might be life threatening but having a mechanic fix the sensor is no different than having a factory worker assemble the sensor and having the mechanic install it. The "bad" sensors are almost certainly going to be turned in to the company and remanufactured. That process will consist of checking them and if they're good to go then they will be reassembled properly. This is exactly what a mechanic would do only a different person will do each step of the task. >We are aware, we are not stupid, don't tell us what to do." - this is a wrong attitude especially from an Aviation mechanic, unless I am missing something, otherwise please elaborate. What you're missing is that if the fix is simply a properly assembled part then having the mechanic disassemble the part, inspect it per some spec then assemble it per some procedure is not functionally equivalent to a properly manufactured part, it it literally equivalent to what would happen to the part as part of being properly assembled at the factor. If there isn't something special about this sensor that requires factory conditions to get right the FAA is basically calling the mechanics stupid here. They're basically saying a semi-skilled factory worker can be trusted to assemble the part but a mechanic who disassembles and reassembles even more "critical to aircraft function" stuff all day can't be.
- serf 8y ago
  >I'm saying the stupid thing here is that mechanics/owners have to trash the part and wait for a replacement when the fix is to apply locktite and assemble properly (assuming sensor is undamaged) which is something any mechanic can do. That would NOT satisfy the FAA Corrective Action listed in the linked document. A part replacement is mandated. [0] [0]: (g) Corrective Action(1) Before further flight after receipt of this emergency AD, replace the AOA sensor with an improved AOA sensor, Aerosonic part number 4677-03 Mod 1 or Cirrus part number 32159-004 in accordance with section 11. ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS, paragraphs A, B, and C of Cirrus Design Corporation SF50 Service Bulletin Number: SB5X-34-03, dated April 16, 2019
  - perennate 8y ago
    That is exactly what the parent comment is saying is stupid about the FAA directive. Because parent believes that a mechanic can reassemble the problematic AOA sensor to be at least as good as the "improved" replacement AOA sensor from the factory. (I have no experience here, just pointing out something I think you missed.)

dsfyu404ed 8y ago

>I think your cynicism is uncalled for. FAA found an issue that is life threatening to pilots and passengers, just because pilot/mechanics are aware about how careful they are with their planes, does not mean that you invalidate the actual manufacturing issue that is found with these AOA sensors. I'm saying the stupid thing here is that mechanics/owners have to trash the part and wait for a replacement when the fix is to apply locktite and assemble properly (assuming sensor is undamaged) which is something any mechanic can do. Sure it might be life threatening but having a mechanic fix the sensor is no different than having a factory worker assemble the sensor and having the mechanic install it. The "bad" sensors are almost certainly going to be turned in to the company and remanufactured. That process will consist of checking them and if they're good to go then they will be reassembled properly. This is exactly what a mechanic would do only a different person will do each step of the task. >We are aware, we are not stupid, don't tell us what to do." - this is a wrong attitude especially from an Aviation mechanic, unless I am missing something, otherwise please elaborate. What you're missing is that if the fix is simply a properly assembled part then having the mechanic disassemble the part, inspect it per some spec then assemble it per some procedure is not functionally equivalent to a properly manufactured part, it it literally equivalent to what would happen to the part as part of being properly assembled at the factor. If there isn't something special about this sensor that requires factory conditions to get right the FAA is basically calling the mechanics stupid here. They're basically saying a semi-skilled factory worker can be trusted to assemble the part but a mechanic who disassembles and reassembles even more "critical to aircraft function" stuff all day can't be.

serf 8y ago
>I'm saying the stupid thing here is that mechanics/owners have to trash the part and wait for a replacement when the fix is to apply locktite and assemble properly (assuming sensor is undamaged) which is something any mechanic can do. That would NOT satisfy the FAA Corrective Action listed in the linked document. A part replacement is mandated. [0] [0]: (g) Corrective Action(1) Before further flight after receipt of this emergency AD, replace the AOA sensor with an improved AOA sensor, Aerosonic part number 4677-03 Mod 1 or Cirrus part number 32159-004 in accordance with section 11. ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS, paragraphs A, B, and C of Cirrus Design Corporation SF50 Service Bulletin Number: SB5X-34-03, dated April 16, 2019
- perennate 8y ago
  That is exactly what the parent comment is saying is stupid about the FAA directive. Because parent believes that a mechanic can reassemble the problematic AOA sensor to be at least as good as the "improved" replacement AOA sensor from the factory. (I have no experience here, just pointing out something I think you missed.)