AD for tail pitch trim assembly

[jfalisi201]

Hi all, Has anyone else recieved the AD dated 3/20/12 for mandatory inspection and reporting back to the FAA of trim assembly issues with the tail mounting bolts on all models? Jim

[DonMuncy]

Jim,

I am not aware of any directive to report back to the FAA. Perhaps you are seeing the Service bulletin from Mooney asking that you return the card for the factory so they can track the problem. If so, that is not mandatory, although I think it is a good idea. There is a possibility I could be wrong and I just didn't see it.

And yes, virtually everyone here is aware of it, and most of us have already complied.

[Ncbosshoss]

SUMMARY: We are issuing an airworthiness directive (AD) for all Mooney Aviation Company,
Inc. (Mooney) Models M20B, M20C, M20D, M20E, M20F, M20G, M20J, M20K, M20L, M20M,
M20R, M20S, and M20TN airplanes that supersedes an existing AD that is applicable to certain
Model M20R and M20TN airplanes. The existing AD currently requires inspecting the tail pitch trim
assembly for correct positioning and proper attachment and inspecting the Huck Bolt fasteners for
proper security with repair as necessary for certain Models M20R and M20TN. That AD also
requires sending the inspection results to the FAA and Mooney. This AD retains all of the actions,
except the reporting requirement from the previous AD and adds airplane models to the applicability.
This AD was prompted by a report of an incident on a Mooney Model M20TN airplane regarding
failure of the tail pitch trim assembly, which could result in loss of control. We are issuing this AD to
correct the unsafe condition on these products.

[DonMuncy]

It appears that I was wrong. There is mention of a report to the FAA. However, it seems form the wording that the reporting requirement is not necessary under this latest AD. At least, that is how I read it. Does anyone else have a different opinion.

[danb35]

AD 2012-03-52, dated 2/29/12, applied to certain R and TN models, and required reporting to Mooney and to the FAA.  AD 2012-05-09, dated 3/20/12, supersedes 2012-03-52, applies to all models B-TN, and does not require reporting to anybody.  Thus, no reporting to the FAA is required for any model at this time.

[co2bruce]

Had mine checked,  all OK. Took all of 10 minutes. Peace of mind is a wonderful thing. I sometimes have to wonder about the penny pinching around here. This is our lives and our loved ones lives on the line. If you can’t afford a half hour of service maybe flying isn't the best the best hobby for you?? OK I have my flame retardant suit on.

  

[pmj341]

Per Mooney M20-313A the card needs to be faxed or mailed to Mooney AC.

a description of work performed and what was found, if nothing found no further action required.

If stack or hucks are loose the plane is grounded and CW M20-314A is required.

the original M20-313 only included those planes named in the AD, but Mooney neded to find out how long this

issue has been occuring, so they included all M20's back to 1964.

Once all the flying Mooneys are reported by filling and mailing the cards, they will have an idea as to when

the improper stacking occured.

[danb35]

Quote: pmj341

Per Mooney M20-313A the card needs to be faxed or mailed to Mooney AC.

[johnggreen]

Quote: co2bruce

Had mine checked,  all OK. Took all of 10 minutes. Peace of mind is a wonderful thing. I sometimes have to wonder about the penny pinching around here. This is our lives and our loved ones lives on the line. If you can’t afford a half hour of service maybe flying isn't the best the best hobby for you?? OK I have my flame retardant suit on.

 

[aviatoreb]

Quote: co2bruce

Had mine checked,  all OK. Took all of 10 minutes. Peace of mind is a wonderful thing. I sometimes have to wonder about the penny pinching around here. This is our lives and our loved ones lives on the line. If you can’t afford a half hour of service maybe flying isn't the best the best hobby for you?? OK I have my flame retardant suit on.

 

[pmj341]

Quote: danb35

The SB "requires" this (in quotes because, at least in the US for Part 91 operators, no SB is truly mandatory), but the AD doesn't.  I'm sure it would help them out, but it isn't required for AD compliance.

[jfalisi201]

Thanks for the replies, I'm taking it up to Air-Mods (N87) for a check up. The post was more out of curiosity to see if any one had an issue, not if I should have it checked out. Sorry for the confusion. Jim

[kellym]

Quote: pmj341

The SB "requires" this (in quotes because, at least in the US for Part 91 operators, no SB is truly mandatory), but the AD doesn't.  I'm sure it would help them out, but it isn't required for AD compliance.

[231flyer]

A video scope is a much better tool to inspect the huck bolts especially the bottom row.  I assume most A&Ps will have some kind of video scope in their kit.  Harbor Freight sells one for a hundred bucks and useful for most applications (although too big to fit the spark plug hole to inspect valves).  Also as others have indicated the paint buildup on the hinge assembly may need to be removed to properly inspect the shim (spacer plate) and hinge assembly.

It took my mechanic 15 minutes to inspect and another 15 minutes to complete the write up.  I had already removed the fairing/cover and inspected the trim components.  He also lubed (LPS 2) the entire assembly before buttoning up.  

IMHO this is an excellent chance for most owners to assist in the AD/SB compliance process.  

[danb35]

Quote: pmj341

Well the AD will get changed to include all the AC, just like the 313A does.

[kellym]

Quote: 231flyer

A video scope is a much better tool to inspect the huck bolts especially the bottom row.  I assume most A&Ps will have some kind of video scope in their kit.  Harbor Freight sells one for a hundred bucks and useful for most applications (although too big to fit the spark plug hole to inspect valves).  Also as others have indicated the paint buildup on the hinge assembly may need to be removed to properly inspect the shim (spacer plate) and hinge assembly.

[721lp]

Had mine inspected about a week ago. My A&P/IA also mailed a response back. All good. 

[John Pleisse]

Anybody know how many hits so far? Still just the four? I don't want to call and bug the FAA guys in SAT....anybody spoken to them or the factory lately?

[jelswick]

Mine is an annual with this just checked and cleared end of last week.

[Hank]

I'm curious, too. My plane has logged 41½ years since being properly assembled at the factory.

All I've heard of are two 2006/2007 turbos, a 1990 J and an E/F that sat around for 12 years after a tail strike and was improperly restored without even using huck bolts.

[Seth]

I had mine looked at - all clear.  1983 M20J Missile 300.

 

-Seth

[Mooneymite]

.

 

Not a single short-body discrepancy yet?

Makes sense.  

These airplanes have been flying for more than 30 years without this problem cropping up.  While this AD was warranted for the long bodies, the short bodies should have been left out and just covered by the SB unless there was actual evidence that:

1.) There had been any mis-assembled.

2.) That a mis-assembly posed a serious problem in a short body.

I still think this AD was over-kill for the short body fleet.  "Within 10 hours" after flying for more than 30 years?  Give me a break!

Let's see if ANY short body discrepancy ever shows up.

 

 

.

[nels]

I just recently bought my 66 Mooney and just got the registration the other day. Will the FAA send me a notice of the AD?

[OR75]

Quote: Mooneymite

.

 

Not a single short-body discrepancy yet?

Makes sense.  

These airplanes have been flying for more than 30 years without this problem cropping up.  While this AD was warranted for the long bodies, the short bodies should have been left out and just covered by the SB unless there was actual evidence that:

1.) There had been any mis-assembled.

2.) That a mis-assembly posed a serious problem in a short body.

I still think this AD was over-kill for the short body fleet.  "Within 10 hours" after flying for more than 30 years?  Give me a break!

Let's see if ANY short body discrepancy ever shows up.

 

[OR75]

Quote: nels

I just recently bought my 66 Mooney and just got the registration the other day. Will the FAA send me a notice of the AD?