Cessna 210 Wingspar Closer Look - Special InTheHangar Ep 61
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- Cessna has issued the notice to 210/177 owners. Time to get your wingspar inspected. Is an AD coming? "Cessna" John Efinger shows us the specifics when he opens up the headliner on a 210, showing the exposed wingspar and what to look for.
For more info on John Efinger, check out his website: www.cessnarigg...
![Flying the Vitatoe P210N [Full Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wsCgVDLdKdc/mqdefault.jpg)
Just had a T210L spar cleaned and eddy current tested with good results. $800 for the test, plus labor for my mechanic to open up headliner, clean the spar, and treat it per the service bulletin to make it corrosion resistant. Money well spent.
Dan. My spar in my 177rg looked perfect also. Eddy current found corrosion is several places. While many in the Cardinal community scoffed, I think knowledge is power. Best of luck to you.
Thanks. Glad you found it.
I think in GA the fact that we have a lot old experienced mechanics approaching retirement is going to be a problem, all that knowledge from these old birds is going to go with them.
MrSixstring2k their in lies the 2 part problem. Older techs don’t want to pass on the knowledge as they are afraid the younger talent will run them out. Also GA just doesn’t pay well unless you are a shop and even then the younger guys don’t tend to stick around they gain the needed experience to get a better job and they are out.
I inspected a 4000 hour 210 that had the foam glued to the spar and after removing all the glue, the spar looked like brand new. But upon eddy current inspection, the spar was a mess. I had over 25 corrosion pits on the lower surface that I had to blend out. This took over 15 hours of blending to get all the pits cleaned up and measured. Total job was just over 40 hours start to finish. So even if it looks like the spar is perfect, it might not be. We have the pictures to prove it.
Interesting
Hi Dan from Australia, just wanted to say congrats on your channel - it's getting better & better - Love that fact that you cover a wide range of intresting aviation topics - very diverse & cool, Thanks for all your hard work.
Glad to have some viewers from Australia!! Thanks for watching. One day, I sure would like to visit AUstralia.
Taking Off: Australia is a wonderful Country. Not too dissimilar to the U.S. in many respects. 🇦🇺
Just our beaches are much nicer 😊👌
If you do come over to visit, I advise that you spend some time pre-planning your trip - it’s a massive Continent!
Whew... that was good news. Also a good visual and explanation.
FYI SEL-57-8 has been out with some new info and procedures a while back. I also have the zinc factory addition on my T210N - so do not expect any issues at MPI.
Very interesting Dan. Thanks for the info. Makes you feel better about your 210 for sure.
Very much so!
Why didn't Cessna zinc chromate all wing sparse , for that matter many other components in there air frames
In the video it is stated that the Australian 210 had 6000 hours, this is incorrect. The aircraft had 12,174 hours and had accumulated the 6000 hours during its time in Australia.
Hadn't seen where this statement was made in this Video? Just skimmed through it as "I was present" but don't recall Dan make that statement either? Hadn't read the Australian report recently but do recall high time Airframe as you mention. "High Time" in relation to average private Ownership fleet.
@@cessnarigging You are correct John, my apologies wrong video - Cessna 210 177 Wing Spar Bulletin - InTheHangar Ep 47 is where it is stated at 6000 hrs.
@@johnpatrick4983 That's O.K, you had me wondering where that came from! ... I recall reading the hours were close to what you stated when I read the initial reports as they were released as well.
The mechanic said that this particular Cessna 210 Wing Spar was "perfect". What things was he specifically looking at to draw that conclusion? Is there a checklist of things to inspect and consider in order to determine whether a wing Spar is still viable?
Visual inspection showed zero corrosion. No further action required.
Also, the spar in this aircraft was delivered from Cessna with the spar Alodined and painted with the correct corrosion inhibiting zinc chromate primer.
Got my high performance in one of these eons ago. I always heard the issue was that it was basically an unsupported wing..no struts. Anyway, I remember it being a wonderful flying airplane.
Seeing this video I wonder what the spar looked like in the C210 that Scott Crossfield died in.
Jackson Rogers thank you for the feedback I was aware that his was a 210A; effectively a 182 with a Io470 and retractable gear.
TheFalconJetDriver yes, to be specific, the 210A has wing struts, so no bending loads on the center spar. Totally different design that doesn’t have this issue.
I'm definitely no longer a 210 driver or passenger. The possibility that the wing could snap off without notice if we hit turbulence is too much for me. When Cessna designed those things, they should have calculated how strong that center spar needed to be to ensure it would never fail, then doubled that
they do double it. Standard for wing structure is 2 and 1/4 times max design load. The issue is fatigue damage is a whole other animal.
Hello.
I viewed your video regarding 210 wing spar issues.
My question is,
Does the wing spar issue applies to Aircrafts with cantaleaver wings,
Or
Strutted wings
Or
Both type of aircraft????
I am asking these questions because I was thinking of getting a cessna 210
Your reply is greatly appreciated
Applies to the Cessna 177 and the 210 only. There’s another one for the strut cessnas about a different issue.
Hi,, can this be an issue with the 210's that have wing struts? My buddy just bought a 1963 210c , Thanks
Not sure on those early model 210's, but it will be spelled out in the AD.
Not to mention these Aircraft are getting to be 40 and 50 years old.
What is the orange, silicon 3 inch double walled flex hose for? I use the same stuff on the exhaust of my pellet stove.
That is the silicone woven fiberglass ducting for his fresh air-air conditioning system. This replaced the original black cloth woven ducting that is susceptible to corrosion. I probably changed that hose 10-12 years ago & still looks like new.
This is only for cantilever Cessnas right?
Yes. Although since, they've released a different AD for the struts on the other Cessnas (but totally unrelated).
That Australian 210 wasn't operated in any kind of extreme condition. It was cruising in level flight when the spar failed
No it wasn’t. flightaware.com/live/flight/VHSUX
Pphhhttt, those things were spent THOUSANDS of hours low level mapping doing wing overs after every mapping run. with a big ass boom stuck to its butt, bigger engine (Blackmax conversion) and aftermarket aux fuel tanks.
Airplanes do not have to be old to have corrosion . I have worked on 5 year old planes that have severe corrosion . There are many variables ..
I would rathere safe then sorry
why not just replace it with a carbon fiber spar?
Flyboy68 easier said than done. Labor to R&R is at least $15k. Testing and certifying a new part would be cost prohibitive considering the small size of the fleet and the number of aircraft that actually need it. Aluminum is fine as long as you paint it. Cessna never bothered on the early ones because they never thought they’d still be in service 50 years later.
Just 00:50 seconds in and he displays stereotypical american arrogance as if it would not have happened in the USA, somehow the aircraft being in 'another country' supposedly not operated within limits was somehow responsible for the failure. Last time I saw typical american arrogance like that was the 737 max. 'if it were US trained pilots they would not have crashed' Look how that turned out, still grounded worldwide over 1.5 years later . . .
You say that with such arrogance!
@@chriscusick6890 Do you need help catching up in the rear?
I would not fly in a 210 if you paid me
Oh too bad. I LOVE my 210.
@@TakingOff To many major issues wing spar and crank being to two big ones My stepfathers father died in his 210L when he had a crank failure sad thing is he had sold his 337 only a few month before in favor of the lower costs on the 210. Look up N5060V.
soundman447 Sorry for your loss but the 210 has a better safety record that most other similar types. As for the crank, the same engine flys in probably 100 other different aircraft so you can’t really blame the plane! Lycoming also had broken crank issue with the 540 late 90s- early ‘00s. Lot of pilots got to log some glider time behind those, too!
@@SkylaneGuy the 210's record is not better than most singles. Lets look at the next plane down in the Cessna line the 182 the last numbers I have seen on the fatal accident rate per 100,000 hours for the 182 is 0.82 vs 1.37 for the 210 and the 182 fleet is almost 3 times the size of the of the 210 fleet. The plane that has the closest safety record is the Model 35 Bonanza but yet again the fleet is twice the size of the 210.
@@soundman447 ...condolences for your stepfathers passing but you left some key facts out of the story...the prop separated from the crankshaft and struck the tail..it had nothing to do with the design or safety record of the 210 model
** from the NTSB report
**Bench binocular microscope examination of the fracture face revealed crack arrest marks typical of a fatigue cracking. The fatigue crack emanated from multiple origins at the external surface of the aft fillet radius from the propeller flange... ." The accident airplane had been involved in a propeller strike incident in which the propeller was damaged. The propeller was removed and sent for inspection and overhaul. According to the maintenance logbooks, a teardown inspection of the engine was not completed as required by Teledyne Continental Motors Service Bulletin SB-96-11. At the time of the accident the engine had accumulated 573.6 hours since the propeller strike event**
**Probable Cause: The fracture of the crankshaft due to fatigue, the propeller separating from the airplane while in-flight, which resulted in the propeller striking the empennage structure and flight controls, yielding the airplane uncontrollable. Contributing factors to the accident were the previous damage to the crankshaft, the company/operator management disregarding the engine manufacture's service bulletin mandating an engine teardown inspection after a propeller strike event, and the inadequate inspection of the engine by the company maintenance staff**