Tweet
I'm not over stating anything.
I'm well aware it isn't mandatory, but that, along with a couple others things wasn't the point at all.
Somewhere along the way the cooling issue for the 321, and more than a few 302's (and this apparently having been at least somewhat of an issue for quite a while) is now reduced to "there was a very limited need for additional cooling before"????
There are very few people who actually need to drill anything??? I believe every single person running a 321 now, and in the future, especially in something other than 300SSH will have to drill....that's far from a "few".
So radical tuck is going on now, yet that was the concern for not approving the tube (according to people who were at the meeting). That was one of the points of my post. The reason given doesn't jive.
So, either radical tucking is, or isn't a concern?
"If you don't have issues pumping, then leave the hole alone. For anyone running CSH, CSR and 25SSR...that's probably the case at 3/4." You mean running CSH, CSR, 25SSR with an engine OTHER than a 321, right?
I know the hole was allowed to be a max size before, but I can not give you any particular reason why holes weren't previously inspected, but I'm willing to bet (and at least according to one inspector who has already asked about an inspection tool here and mentioned potential delays in getting inspections done) it will become an issue, or at least an inspected item going forward.
As for opening up holes, I don't have a 321, so from that specific point, none of this affects me at this very moment, so I'll just stop. The decision has been made and that's that. Sorry if I ruffled any feathers.
I'm well aware it isn't mandatory, but that, along with a couple others things wasn't the point at all.
Somewhere along the way the cooling issue for the 321, and more than a few 302's (and this apparently having been at least somewhat of an issue for quite a while) is now reduced to "there was a very limited need for additional cooling before"????
There are very few people who actually need to drill anything??? I believe every single person running a 321 now, and in the future, especially in something other than 300SSH will have to drill....that's far from a "few".
So radical tuck is going on now, yet that was the concern for not approving the tube (according to people who were at the meeting). That was one of the points of my post. The reason given doesn't jive.
So, either radical tucking is, or isn't a concern?
"If you don't have issues pumping, then leave the hole alone. For anyone running CSH, CSR and 25SSR...that's probably the case at 3/4." You mean running CSH, CSR, 25SSR with an engine OTHER than a 321, right?
I know the hole was allowed to be a max size before, but I can not give you any particular reason why holes weren't previously inspected, but I'm willing to bet (and at least according to one inspector who has already asked about an inspection tool here and mentioned potential delays in getting inspections done) it will become an issue, or at least an inspected item going forward.
As for opening up holes, I don't have a 321, so from that specific point, none of this affects me at this very moment, so I'll just stop. The decision has been made and that's that. Sorry if I ruffled any feathers.
Comment