CASA backtracks on compulsory SIDS

[pmccarthy]

Received today:

 

We are proposing to exempt operators and maintainers of Cessna aircraft in the broader private and aerial work sectors from the requirements to carry out Cessna SIDs. This brings forward corresponding outcomes from the proposed general aviation maintenance regulations (Part 43).  This will bring us into line with global practices and only the specific SIDs elements required by an airworthiness directive will be mandatory.  

 

This seems to be exactly what the industry was telling them from the outset, now many or most have spent large sums on this.

[Thruster88]

Good and sensible decision based on global evidence. A good many Cessnas have been hibernating waiting for this day. Number of fatal pre SIDS airframe failures from corrosion or cracking in Australia was I think zero. Problems such as door post cracking have always been covered by an AD. A CORRECTLY carried out annual inspection will reveal any problems.  

[Old Koreelah]

On 5/4/2022 at 7:25 AM, Thruster88 said:

Good and sensible decision based on global evidence. A good many Cessnas have been hibernating waiting for this day…

The 206 next door has been locked away out of sight for a decade. Must be one of them. 

[facthunter]

I've seen a few that when you lift the floor you wouldn't want to have been flying it. Only the seaplane Cessna's have corrosion proofing.. Nev

[Thruster88]

4 minutes ago, facthunter said:

I've seen a few that when you lift the floor you wouldn't want to have been flying it. Only the seaplane Cessna's have corrosion proofing.. Nev

There is at least 10-15 access panels in the floor on a single engine  Cessna, it is how they gained hand access for the hand holding the dolly when the solid rivets in the floor were installed. Visual inspection for cracks and corrosion through those same access panels should occur on an annual basis. All the later Cessnas from 75? and on have internal paint,  I think it was an option early but later standard on all. Not being confrontational just what I see at work.

[facthunter]

I guess I've only seen the crook ones. That's logical.  The later Pipers are no better. In the Comanche era they were done well..  Planes should be hangared. You wouldn't leave a lawnmower out in the weather.  Nev

[turboplanner]

It's in relation to Part 43, and when you look at the legal liability it's much less expense on taxpayers for the owner to have responsibility for structural safety than CASA through a programme which might or might not cover the arrays of models, history of storage, and components corroded. Without SIDS the owner can hire a monococque engineer to decide how often to inspect and what to replace.

 

From the posts here we can see that two similar age aircraft could either be corrosion-free, or a basket case not fit to return to the air.

 

From time to time RA people rant about GA people flying 40 to 60 year old aircraft, but often these aircraft when used for touring have more value in the electronics than the rest of the aircraft. A SIDS type inspection+ replace routine produces a touring aircraft not otherwise within reach of most people.

 

I saw a Cherokee 6 bought at a cheap price with obvious corrosion, stripped and all corrosion replaced for $16,000.00, and it finished up as a cheap and reliable aircraft ready to go for another 30 years for a total cost of around $40,000.00