February 19, 2025 - No. 08 In This Issue : EAA Addresses G100UL Use In E-AB Aircraft : Lack of brake fluid leads to plane crashing into hangar : Russia unveils plasma rocket engine prototype : Bomber squadron uses “birdbath” to keep B-1B Lancers mission ready during BTF 25-1 : GE Aerospace deploys AI-enabled tool to enhance aircraft engine inspections : New Report: Abolish Joint Requirements Process, Replace with Bottom-Up Approach : POWERING ASIA’S AVIATION FUTURE : Mooney crashes on new owner’s first flight : FAA rejects modifications to Piper rudder AD : Best Of The Web: Rudder AD Explained (Piper rudder AD) : Lower-Cost Piper Rudder Fix In The Works EAA Addresses G100UL Use In E-AB Aircraft Association notes that Experimental-Amateur Built aircraft are not included in STCs. Mark Phelps Updated Feb 11, 2025 5:59 PM EST Last week, the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) weighed in on the controversy surrounding G100UL unleaded aviation gasoline from General Aviation Modifications Inc. (GAMI). As an advocacy group for Experimental-Amateur Built (E-AB) aircraft, among others, EAA’s statement focused on specific concerns for E-AB builders and operators. While EAA noted that G100UL has been authorized for use in “most certified aircraft” through the Approved Model List Supplemental Type Certificate (AML STC) process, EAA reminded its members, “It is important for owners of E-AB aircraft to remember that STCs only apply to type-certificated aircraft. E-AB aircraft do not have type certificates and, thereby, are not covered by an STC.” The statement also noted that some materials used in E-AB aircraft are different from those found on certified aircraft and it’s possible those materials were not considered in granting the STC. “Testing protocols for STCs are proprietary, and to date a list of materials tested has not been shared with owners and operators,” EAA wrote. Among the components cited by EAA as of concern are fuel tank sealants, gaskets, O-rings and hoses as well as any other materials that could come into contact with the fuel either through normal operation or in the event of a spill or leakage. EAA provided links to information made available from GAMI on installation instructions, instructions for continued airworthiness and routine refueling hygiene. Lack of brake fluid leads to plane crashing into hangar By General Aviation News Staff February 14, 2025 · 2 Comments The Cessna 425 pilot reported an uneventful flight and landing at Bismarck Municipal Airport (KBIS) in North Dakota. After taxiing to the ramp, he proceeded to stop the airplane in front of a marshaller. After moving the throttles toward the ground idle position, he observed the airplane turn left and reported that the right brake was inoperative. He moved both propeller levers to the feather position and both throttles toward the reverse (beta) position. The airplane continued forward and hit a hangar, which substantially damaged the left wing. While the pilot was not injured, the two passengers sustained minor injuries. Post-accident examination of the braking system revealed the brake master cylinders were nearly empty of brake fluid, with no leaks observed. A review of maintenance logs revealed that the pilot, who was also a mechanic, recorded completion of the Phase 3 inspection of the Cessna 425 maintenance manual on May 21, 2022. The Phase 3 inspection includes servicing the brake master cylinders. The pilot/mechanic reported that during this inspection he checked the brake pads and checked for leaks around the brakes and the master cylinders. He depressed the brake pedals to find there was resistance, however he did not check the fluid levels of the master cylinders during the inspection. Probable Cause: A loss of braking due to inadequate servicing of brake fluid by the pilot/mechanic, which resulted in a loss of airplane control on the ground. NTSB Identification: 106701 Russia unveils plasma rocket engine prototype Staff Writer February 12, 2025 Rosatom scientists have developed a laboratory prototype for a plasma electro-reactive rocket engine based on a magnetic plasma accelerator with elevated traction parameters (at least 6 Newtons) and specific impulse (at least 100 km/s). The work was carried out as part of a comprehensive programme for the development of atomic science, technology and technology in Russia, which in 2025 became part of the national project, New Nuclear & Energy Technologies. The average power of such an engine operating in pulse periodic mode reaches 300 kW, enabling spacecraft to achieve speeds beyond the reach of chemical engines, and also allowing efficient use of fuel, reducing its demand tenfold. “Currently the flight to Mars using ordinary engines can take almost a year in one direction, which is dangerous for astronauts due to cosmic radiation exposure,” said Alexei Voronov, First Deputy General Director for Science at the Troitsk Institute of Innovative & Thermonuclear Research (Triniti – Triotskii Institut Innovatsionnikh i Termoyalernikh Issledovanii), part of Rosatom’s scientific division. “The use of plasma engines can reduce the mission to 30-60 days making it possible to send the astronaut to Mars and back. The creation of a prototype is one of the most important stages of the project, since it determines whether such an engine will be suitable for “nuclear tugs” in space and whether it will be possible to reduce the costs of their production overall,” he added. To test the prototype of the plasma rocket engine and similar devices on the site in Troitsk, a large -scale experimental stand has been installed at Triniti. The diameter of the key equipment of the stand – the vacuum chamber – is 4 metres with a length of 14 metres. It is equipped with unique systems for high -performance vacuum pumping and heat removal. Rosatom specialists, within the framework of the national space exploration programme, participate in the development of new nuclear power plants for various purposes, including to provide energy to transport and research spacecraft, as well as equipment and systems for bases located on the surface of other planets. On-board systems and automatic control and navigation systems for spacecraft are manufactured by the Moscow Experimental Design Bureau MOKB (Moskovskoye Opytno-Konstruktorskoye Byuro) Mars, which develops on-board control systems for the Arctic-M spacecraft series and weather satellite Electro-L. The All Russian Scientific Research Institute of Experimental Physics (VNIIEF – Vsorosiiskii Nauchno-Isslodovatelskii Institut Eksperimentalnoi in Sarov and MOKB Mars have developed a control system for the Spektr RG space observatory and participated in the development of telescopes. Spektr-RG is a Russian-German high-energy astrophysics space observatory launched in 2019. In 2024, a team of scientists, including two from VNIIEF, received awards for the creation of the first Russian ART-XC x-ray telescope installed on board Spektr RG. VNIIEF is also developing equipment for space laser communications, which will transmit information up to 45,000 km from Earth to low-orbit satellites. In addition, specialists at the Institute of Physical and Technical Problems (IFTP – Institut Fiziko-Tekhnicheskikh Problem has developed a unique gamma-ray installation capable of reproducing space radiation. This makes it possible to test electronic components in conditions as close as possible to those in space. Another enterprise – the Specialised Research Institute of Instrument Engineering (SNIIP – Spetsializirovannii Nauchno-Issledovatelskii Institut Priborostroyeniya) devised the Matryoshka module which records the effect of cosmic radiation on the human body. For 20 years, it has recorded the distribution of dose loads in various International Space Station compartments. Bomber squadron uses “birdbath” to keep B-1B Lancers mission ready during BTF 25-1 • Published Feb. 7, 2025 • By Senior Airman Brittany Kenney • 28th Bomb Wing Public Affairs ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE, S.D. -- U.S. Air Force B-1B Lancers assigned to the 34th Expeditionary Bomb Squadron, Ellsworth Air Force Base, S.D., went through their first clear water rinse upon returning from a training mission during Bomber Task Force 25-1 at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, Jan. 27, 2025. All aircraft stationed within 1.25 miles of salt water require a clear water rinse at least once every 15 days unless washed first according to Air Force technical orders, and the Guam Strike Clear Water Rinse Facility, or "birdbath," was first constructed on the Andersen AFB flightline in May 2013 to comply with that requirement. “Andersen has one of the most severe environments for aircraft in terms of salt water,” said Master Sgt. Aaron Fletcher, 34th EBS production superintendent. “It’s crucial that we rinse the aircraft after each flight to avoid corrosion, as once that starts, it’s a lengthy process to fix.” The bombers move through the rinse facility upon landing, prior to parking, and receiving routine maintenance. The facility is integrated into the flightline and consists of 8 water cannons that spray water along the sides of the aircraft, as well as a system of spray bars that supply water to rinse the underside of the aircraft. "Bomber Task Force deployments are labor intensive," said Lt. Col. Christopher Varnier, 34th Bomber Generation Squadron commander." Considering the high maintenance tempo and inevitable challenges that arise when servicing the bombers, utilizing the birdbath system is a tremendous manning tool. It allows the maintainers to focus on more skill-intensive procedures to enable the mission." The 34th EBS conducts weekly flying missions that make the birdbath critical in enabling the aircraft to remain mission capable in order to meet U.S. Indo-Pacific Command objectives. GE Aerospace deploys AI-enabled tool to enhance aircraft engine inspections • February 14, 2025 • 9:32 am • MRO & Production • GE Aerospace GE Aerospace has begun rolling out a new AI-enabled inspection tool designed to improve accuracy and consistency in assessing key components of narrow-body aircraft engines. By streamlining the inspection process, this technology aims to return engines to service more quickly amid increasing air travel demand. The AI-enabled blade inspection tool assists trained technicians in capturing images of turbine blades, which generate much of an engine's thrust. The AI then helps technicians identify which images to review, ensuring greater consistency in spotting potential issues while reducing inspection times by 50%. The tool is being deployed across more than a dozen GE Aerospace MRO facilities, as well as to customers servicing the CFM LEAP engine. It has already been in use for three years on the GEnx wide-body aircraft engine, where it has demonstrated significant improvements in inspection speed and accuracy compared to traditional borescope methods. GE Aerospace is investing over US$1 billion in its MRO shops over the next five years as part of its commitment to supporting customers and enhancing aviation safety. The company has been integrating AI into its operations for over a decade and holds numerous AI patents within the aviation industry. Its AI applications range from engine monitoring and part inspections to predictive maintenance insights. To ensure responsible AI use, GE Aerospace adheres to strict guidelines emphasising human oversight, data integrity and transparency. New Report: Abolish Joint Requirements Process, Replace with Bottom-Up Approach Feb. 14, 2025 By John A. Tirpak The Department of Defense should “burn down” its formal process of setting requirements that meet joint service needs and replace with a more bottom-up, iterative process, two analysts with Pentagon and industry experience argue in blunt terms in a new paper from the Hudson Institute. The Joint Capabilities and Integration Development System, or JCIDS, is a time-consuming, “low-value-added” bureaucratic mess that is “a burdensome layer of ceremony, divorced from the real decisions that shape America’s future military edge,” write William Greenwalt and Dan Patt. Greenwalt served as deputy under secretary of defense for industrial policy and worked for both Congress and industry before becoming a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Patt worked at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and in the technology industry before becoming a senior fellow at Hudson. Created in 2003, JCIDS was meant to connect and harmonize requirements between the services. But while it was crafted with good intentions, it has been an impediment to cutting-edge capabilities and created “entrenched parochial interests,” Greenwalt and Patt claim. Despite 10 attempts over the last two decades to reform it, it has become a process-bound bureaucracy that adds, at a minimum, two years to the development of new capabilities while forcing services to stick with obsolete requirements set by committee. As an alternative, the authors promote what they call a “Joint Operational Acceleration Pathway,” based on their premise that if a service discovers a capability with joint benefits which will enlarge that branch’s budget, it will pursue it. These capabilities would be discovered through experimentation and prototyping at the tactical and operational level, coming to service budgets through the regional combatant commanders. Eliminating JCIDS would free up “energy, time and talent to focus on genuine innovation and rapid adaptation,” Greenwalt and Patt claim. JCIDS, they say, is a “breeding ground for process tyranny.” For example, even if a requirement has been validated through the process, there’s no guarantee resources will be provided for it. There is also no accountability for filling capability gaps, and the JCIDS process doesn’t “retire old wish lists that no longer match emerging threats,” they wrote. Rather, the process “imposes yearslong validation delays” on technological advancements, while U.S. adversaries can move much more quickly. The authors also note there’s no mechanism in JCIDS to terminate a developmental program that has clearly been overtaken by events; rather, it “accumulates an ever-expanding inventory of so-called validated needs with no strategic triage.” Moreover, “military officers and staffers spend countless hours quibbling over formatting and definitions; a single comment can stall progress for months,” Greenwalt and Patt write. The system “locks developers into rigid technical specifications before testing new ideas in the field, removing critical decision space from both program managers and industry innovators. Meanwhile, cross-service decisions and prioritization happen elsewhere.” Most innovation in the Pentagon bypasses JCIDS entirely, the authors note, by coming through as a Joint Urgent Operational Need or as a mid-tier acquisition initiative, both of which aim to leap the “valley of death” between good ides and a service requirement. The authors also held up Rapid Capabilities Offices as an example of how to speed development by skipping the usual system of setting and vetting requirements, while being subjected to minimal oversight. “These processes succeed largely by enabling individual leadership, securing dedicated funding, and letting technical trades and performance evolve with learning,” the authors said. “Meanwhile, JCIDS focuses on staffing documents that have no real positive impact.” The process of entering a new need into the JCIDS process and getting a budget-ready, validated requirement out the other end can be laborious: • A capabilities assessment and sponsor review can last 5-15 months • Getting staffing and comments, resolving disputes and submitting the revised requirement is another 2-3 months • Review by the Functional Capabilities Board, with a review by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council, and finalizing the paperwork takes another 2-7 months • Total time: 8-25 months • The authors noted that programs exiting the process in 2015 spent an average 17 months in it, with a low of 8.3 months and a high of 30 months. Rather than try to reform the process, Greenwalt and Patt concluded that JCIDS “has failed too completely to be rescued by another committee’s review or a fresh coat of bureaucratic paint. … No new [Key Performance Parameters], no revised membership, no inspired PowerPoint deck or new formatting appendix can salvage it.” Instead, they argue that the Pentagon needs to act fast to meet the strategic needs of the moment. They urged senior leaders to end JCIDS with colorful, forceful language: “Put it out of its misery. … Bury it and salt the ground so that nothing resembling it ever grows back.” Instead, Greenwalt and Patt claim their decentralized approach would start with “real-world experimentation and prototyping campaigns” to keep DOD in tune with and aligned to operational demands. There would be a fund to get programs going—a “Joint Acceleration Reserve” that “steps up to adopt and scale a proven cross-service concept.” These initiatives would be vetted by a “dedicated execution hub would run iterative try-and-see efforts in realistic operating environments with actual uniformed operators, bringing together commercial prototypes, emerging tech from labs, well-integrated existing service systems, and [Combatant Command] user feedback,” they wrote. If a concept proves out, it would get the Joint Acceleration Reserve funding. In turn, the services would have an incentive “to pick up joint or cross-domain solutions and invest in them for the long haul.” The paper endorses the concept of “operational imperatives”—like those set by former Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall—which they define as “concise statements of critical warfighting challenges identified by combatant commands and backed by DOD leadership.” “This problem-centric focus would free innovators and operators to experiment with diverse solutions rather than adhere to an inflexible blueprint,” they added. POWERING ASIA’S AVIATION FUTURE As Asia Pacific’s leading Rolls-Royce engine maintenance provider, Singapore Aero Engine Services (SAESL) continues to set benchmarks for cutting-edge solutions and operational excellence. Mooney crashes on new owner’s first flight By General Aviation News Staff February 12, 2025 · 11 Comments On Feb. 12, 2023, a Mooney M20K Encore sustained substantial damage when it was involved in an accident near Lakeway, Texas. The pilot was not injured in the crash. The pilot reported that he had recently purchased the airplane and was relocating it to his home base at Outlaw Field Airport (KCKV) in Clarksville, Tennessee. During the preflight inspection, he did not observe any anomalies. He reported that the airplane had 57 gallons of fuel onboard at takeoff and the engine oil was at a sufficient level for flight operations. A review of ADS-B data showed that the airplane departed from Kestrel Airpark (1T7) in Spring Branch, Texas, and traveled to the northeast. The pilot noted that while in flight, the engine had a low manifold pressure reading and then the engine sustained a total loss of power. The ADS-B data showed that the airplane performed a 180° turn as it approached the Colorado River just to the north of Bee Cave, Texas. The pilot then maneuvered the airplane north toward Lakeway Airpark (3R9) in Lakeway, Texas. Unable to make the airport, he performed a forced landing to a golf course just to the north of 3R9. During the forced landing, the plane hit trees and a wood fence, then came to rest upright near a diesel generator, sustaining substantial damage to the fuselage and both wings. An FAA inspector responded to the accident site. A large amount of engine oil was observed trailing rearward on the underside of the fuselage. The engine oil level was checked at the accident site and oil was not observed on the dipstick. Examination of the engine revealed a hole in the corner of the No. 6 piston, however the No. 6 cylinder was intact. The piston had eroded crown material and a darkened periphery. The engine case was found intact. The top spark plugs from the Nos. 3, 5, and 6 cylinders and the bottom spark plugs from the Nos. 3 and 5 cylinders were found in a “worn out — normal condition.” The right magneto timing was found at 22°. According to the engine manufacturer, it is supposed to be at 20°. The left magneto timing was found at 15°, rather than 20°. The oil breather tube was found intact and the slot was not blocked. Engine oil was found splattered in and around the oil breather tube area, including traveling rearward on the area underneath the oil breather tube. Before purchasing the plane, the pilot had an inspection performed by a mechanic. One of the findings on the undated inspection list stated that “spark plugs are worn past limits.” Additionally, all cylinders were borescoped and the cylinders were listed as “all appear normal.” The pilot reported that there were no indications that the magneto timing was checked during the pre-buy inspection. He also told investigators that the airplane had been run with a lean mixture in the past. A review of the engine maintenance records showed that the most recent time the spark plugs were cleaned and gapped, and the magneto timing was checked, was during a 100-hour inspection on Oct. 8, 2022, at 2,732.4 hours. A review of data obtained from a J.P. Instruments EDM-700 onboard the airplane at the time of the accident showed an excessively high No. 6 cylinder head temperature reading about 17 minutes before the unit stopped recording data. According to the FAA’s Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge FAA-H-8083-25C, detonation is an uncontrolled, explosive ignition of the fuel-air mixture within the cylinder’s combustion chamber. It causes excessive temperatures and pressures which, if not corrected, can lead to failure of the piston, cylinder, or valves. In less severe cases, detonation causes engine overheating, roughness, or loss of power. Detonation is characterized by high cylinder head temperatures and is most likely to occur when operating at high power settings. A common operational cause of detonation is listed as: Operation of the engine at high power settings with an excessively lean mixture. This document also discusses preignition and states: Preignition occurs when the fuel-air mixture ignites prior to the engine’s normal ignition event. Premature burning is usually caused by a residual hot spot in the combustion chamber, often created by a small carbon deposit on a spark plug, a cracked spark plug insulator, or other damage in the cylinder that causes a part to heat sufficiently to ignite the fuel-air charge. Preignition causes the engine to lose power and produces high operating temperatures. As with detonation, preignition may also cause severe engine damage because the expanding gases exert excessive pressure on the piston while still on its compression stroke. The document further discusses both detonation and preignition and states: Detonation and preignition often occur simultaneously and one may cause the other. Since either condition causes high engine temperature accompanied by a decrease in engine performance, it is often difficult to distinguish between the two. Using the recommended grade of fuel and operating the engine within its proper temperature, pressure, and RPM ranges reduce the chance of detonation or preignition. Continental Motors published Mandatory Service Bulletin MSB94-8D Magneto to Engine Timing on Feb. 17, 2010, which discusses the importance of maintaining correct magneto timing and states: Incorrect timing, in addition to producing a rough running engine, can lead to detonation, preignition, and internal engine damage or failure. Failure to properly maintain the magneto, harness, and spark plugs will lead to internal engine damage and failure. Probable Cause: A total loss of engine power due to detonation and preignition in the No. 6 cylinder. NTSB Identification: 106726 To download the final report. Click here. This will trigger a PDF download to your device. FAA REJECTS MODIFICATIONS TO PIPER RUDDER AD Final rule allows 2-10 years to replace rudders February 13, 2025 By Jim Moore The FAA rejected calls to limit the scope of an airworthiness directive published in final form on February 13, affecting an estimated 31,000 vintage Piper aircraft, all of which will need new rudders (or an approved alternative method of compliance) within the coming two to 10 years to remain airworthy. A Piper PA–12 on floats became nearly impossible to control after the airplane's rudder post fractured above the upper hinge (circled) on June 8, 2020, causing the top of the rudder to fold over in flight. NTSB photo. The final rule, effective March 20, is largely unchanged from the proposed version published in October 2023, and the FAA rejected a range of arguments from AOPA and others seeking to limit the scope, or rescind the AD. The FAA "anticipates that many operators will reinforce their rudders by using the alternative method of compliance (AMOC) process rather than replacing them," the agency wrote, further reducing the demand for replacement rudders from about 6,500 aircraft that the FAA believes remain in service with 1025 carbon steel rudder posts installed.The FAA agreed to give certain vintage Piper owners more time to complete the required replacement of any rudder assembled with a rudder post made of 1025 carbon steel, creating a fourth compliance category with a 10-year deadline applicable to aircraft with no beacon light mounted on the rudder post and an engine of less than 100 horsepower. The final AD applies to virtually all high-wing Piper models, from J-series Cubs through PA–22 Tri-Pacers. The directive was prompted by NTSB investigation findings in two incidents of in-flight rudder post fractures in 2020 and 2021 involving a Piper PA–12 and a PA–14, both equipped with rudder posts made of 1025 carbon steel. Both aircraft were flown in Alaska, and both landed safely following the rudder fracture. The NTSB issued a report on those investigations in 2022, noting five known cases of Piper PA–12, PA–14, and PA–18 rudder post fractures, all involving aircraft with aftermarket beacon or strobe lights installed on the top of the rudder post. The FAA rejected the assertion from commenters including The Short Wing Piper Club that because the aircraft that experienced in-flight rudder post fractures landed safely, the condition is not unsafe: "Just because airplanes have been able to land safely does not mean that rudder post failure would not present an unsafe condition," the agency responded. The FAA also disagreed with commenters who stated that producing replacement rudders for 31,000 out-of-production aircraft is not possible. The FAA created one additional compliance category for aircraft that do not have a rudder beacon light installed. FAA image. "Many of the 31,000 airplanes are not currently in service," the agency wrote. "There are an estimated 13,000 active airplanes in the U.S. fleet, and the FAA estimates that approximately half of those airplanes already have rudder assemblies with 4130N low-alloy steel installed. This reduces the number of rudders needed to approximately 6,500." The FAA notes that Piper Service Bulletin 1379B issued May 7 (an update of a 2022 bulletin on the same topic) provides information on how to determine whether a rudder post is made of 4130N low-alloy steel, which would eliminate the requirement to replace the rudder assembly. Service Bulletin 1379 described how a single drop of nitric acid applied to the metal will produce an instant reaction if the material is 1025 carbon steel, and no reaction otherwise. Generally, aircraft produced before June 3, 1974, were built with 1025 carbon steel rudder posts. The FAA "anticipates" that authorized parts manufacturers "can produce the necessary rudder assemblies within the compliance times of this AD. The FAA cannot base its AD action on whether spare parts are available or can be produced. While every effort is made to avoid grounding airplanes, the FAA must address the unsafe condition." The FAA ruled out the option of conducting rudder post strength tests, noting that such inspection would require the removal of rudder covering material, and load testing is "problematic because the load test could further damage the rudder and contribute to an accident." The agency notes that owners or operators who wish to implement an inspection program in lieu of rudder replacement may submit an AMOC request. The agency also disagreed with challenges to the estimated cost of the required rudder replacement, which remains unchanged from the originally proposed AD: $3,000 per aircraft, including $2,320 for a new rudder assembly (including a post made from 4130N low-alloy steel), and $680 in labor (eight hours at $85 per hour). Best Of The Web: Rudder AD Explained (Piper rudder AD) Piper Rudder Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2025-02-11 Explained (Video) AVweb Editorial Staff Updated Feb 17, 2025 5:45 AM EST Piper groups fought hard against the rudder AD but now that it’s here, strategies are being developed to deal with it. The FAA has issued its final rule requiring new rudders or an as yet undetermined alternative method of compliance. The ShortWingPipers.org and Supercub.org put together this video to explain the whole thing. Lower-Cost Piper Rudder Fix In The Works A cheaper alternative method of compliance is being proposed for Pipers covered by rudder AD. Russ Niles Updated Feb 16, 2025 5:19 AM EST The Short Wing Piper Club is proposing an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) that would blunt much of the cost and inconvenience posed by a sweeping airworthiness directive set by the FAA last week. The AD, which mandates replacement of the rudders with posts made of 4130N low-alloy steel, covers almost all 31,000 high-wing Pipers produced up until the 1960s, but the final number affected will be much lower because of fleet attrition and retrofits already completed. Nevertheless, the final tally will be in the thousands and will cost operators thousands of dollars as written. The club says its AMOC can reduce the cash outlay and potential downtime that would result from a massive backlog of orders for new rudders. What follows is the club's own description of the AMOC. "What we are proposing is to run a reamer up the rudder post. That will remove any weld penetration and corrosion inside the tube. Then we will insert a centerless ground 4130N tube all the way up from the bottom to the top affectively doubling the wall thickness. It will be coated with a corrosion prevention compound when installed. If it is a tail dragger, reinstall the tailwheel steering arm and reinstall the rudder. If it is a tricycle gear, a plug will be installed and retained with a screw. Then reinstall the rudder. If approved the SWPC would make kits available to accomplish this task." The AMOC will have to be approved by the FAA, and SWPC President Steve Carruthers said they're now working on the paperwork to submit. There is still no estimated cost for the kit and its installation. The AD takes effect March 20 and was prompted by fatigue failures that resulted in two non-fatal incidents in Alaska. In both cases, the aircraft were modified and had beacons attached to the rudder. Commenters argued the incident aircraft were not representative of the vast majority of active aircraft, but the FAA said the gradual degradation of the steel posts would eventually catch up to whole fleet and the threat justified fixing the issue before more rudder failures occur. Curt Lewis