Ben Legere Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 I can't find a reference anywhere... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tusker Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Come on Ben......don't give you the problem of searching in the book!!!......just put in some new ones!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickshoes Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 I am gonna side with tusker on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLOWCLVL Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 It only takes 5 mins to get one and put it in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Legere Posted July 14, 2011 Author Share Posted July 14, 2011 Just as I thought, nobody could answer. Thanks guys! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lkuest Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 I know for a fact that you are not allowed to have any camlocs missing within 4 feet of the intake, but I cannot remember where I read it. You could interpret that as, if I'm not allowed to have camlocs missing within 4 feet of the inlet, it must mean that I am allowed to have camlocs missing behind 4 feet of the intake. Other than that, I'd go by the definition of "panel closed and secured", which, since it isn't addressed in a TO, could be interpreted based on the 7-level inspecting it. The problem I have with replacing a camloc is that there is a reason it is missing in the first place. Simply putting a new one in a hole could create another FOD hazard. If the problem is a cracked or broken camloc retainer, you should replace it before inserting a new camloc. If it is one of those crappy plates that get riveted on, you need to remove the cowing, send it over to sheet metal, and get a new one riveted in that will probably go bad soon anyway. My world view is if the Air Force cared that much about the cowling fasteners, they'd have designed better hardware that doesn't crack and fall apart so easily, or a camloc retaining plate that doesn't wear out so quickly. As it stands, have fun repeatedly grounding the entire fleet due to crappy panel hardware. The alternative is allowing a 7-level to determine what "secured" means. I've heard a good rule of thumb is three in a row, five total, and any missing on the leading edge is cause for the cowling to be removed for repair, but use your own judgement. If it comes off in flight, it obviously wasn't "secured". Of course, you could always use the logic that, since you cannot find a limit, the limit is zero and are not allowed to have any missing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyclark Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Just as I thought, nobody could answer. Thanks guys! You don't have to play by American League rules there, Ben. It isn't written anywhere because there aren't any "limits" for missing hardware on external panels. If one or more are missing, it gets annotated in the forms under a red diagonal. It would be up to the aircrew to decide if it were a safety of flight issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NATOPS1 Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Ben, One sure way to generate ridicule is to make statements like this. You are pretty new to the forum and I hope this “lesson” will serve you well. If you ever have a question (and you have had a few) it is easy to NOT answer (or help you as I see it), if your not a team player. So use caution on the board as we have a long memory.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1300 Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 You know, over the years; I have seen questions come up like this from guys and wondered how the request ever got generated. Sometimes, it is because the technician wanted to know. Most times, it was because an "incident" happened at work where the technician was asked. Since I was USAF and spent time maintaining an aircraft for a training sqadron, I have seen some really rediculous "incidents" come up. Between sudent pilots, student engineers, and student loadmasters; the pettiness of questions knew no bounds. Perhaps, we old farts should make an effort to consider that when we see questions that make our eyes roll back into our heads. We were all students at one time too, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NATOPS1 Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Ben, One sure way to generate ridicule is to make statements like this. Just as I thought, nobody could answer. Thanks guys! You are pretty new to the forum and I hope this “lesson” will serve you well. If you ever have a question (and you have had a few) it is easy to NOT answer (or help you as I see it), if your not a team player. So use caution on the board as we have a long memory.... Steve your so right I too remember the %^&* STUPID questions I was asked and have tried very hard over the years to limit the questions to subjects that need to be covered, lesson to be learned. I think the question is valid as I don't know of a reference that addresses specifics of missing fasteners other than stress panels/points... and missing bolt criteria. Basic rule I use is none missing on a leading edge of a panel and no more than three in a row but I'm sure that was a training point made some 30 years ago.... The fact that Lkuest "remembers" or uses basicly the same numbers makes me think they are reference to something... it made perfect sense to me and no follow on questions were asked therefor I had much more important things to learn... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyclark Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 I checked through all of the old B-2 series of books and there was nothing in there regarding missing fasteners either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizzard Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 kinda related i guess, i was on a trip once, I think from Langley to pope to maybe benning, somethin like that. had a bunch of brass on board, maybe from TAC Hq, I can't recall, Anyway went out to start engines, they called engine three it started turning,just about the time the blades went to full blurr( not a technical term) the panel above the prop stood straight up. I called a stop start, which they did. told 'em why, the AC, a major I can't remember his name was just all over me for doin' such a good quick job. You woulda thought I had saved his kids or something. Maintanence was called, they , apparenty, tightened the panel locks or whatever was loose and away we went. I just did what I thought was the right thing, just like anybody else woulda, but never did find out why it decided that was a good time to pop up. That was probably our third engine start of the day, too. I can still see that thing poppin' up like a 'gator's mouth. Giz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metalbasher Posted July 18, 2011 Share Posted July 18, 2011 As a sheet metal guy, god knows I replaced too many camlocks to count over the years. I too have asked this same question and have never seen a reference. Was always told none missing on the leading edge, panel corners and no more than two-three in a row. I do know there are aircraft out there (F-16 and others) that provide panel diagrams in the books and specifically show on the diagrams which holes must be filled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyclark Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 Sounds like a good PIWG item. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3_Super_Bee Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 Navy has a 25% rule. Though like yours it seems to be buried in some off the wall general maintenance manual no one can seem to remember which one. I have read the paragraph relating to it, but couldn't tell you for the life of me what freekin' book its in. LOL, not that it would do you any good since your Air Force. But here along with the rest, a little common sense. None on the leading edge, or on the corners to be missing, Depending on the panel, I'd probably want one fastner each way from the corner faster install too. Also if the panel only has 4 fasteners the 25% rule would probably be out of the question. I was an All Systems QAR on the P-3. QAR?? You ask? Well don't want to hijack because I'm wondering what the hell a Level 7 is myself so asked the question HERE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 Found this in the 1C-130H-10 paragraph 2-68 Cowling Installation. Note: On cowl panels Part Number 362544-1L, and -1R, the uppermost forward and aft camloc fasteners can be removed and the holes patched in accordance with TO 1C-130A-3. The forward cowl must have a minimum of eight camlocs on the forward end and two camlocs on the aft end to adequately secure the panels to the engine nacelle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tusker Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Standard practices mixed with comment sense!!!!....It's got to be secured!!......LOL!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lkuest Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Found this in the 1C-130H-10 paragraph 2-68 Cowling Installation. Note: On cowl panels Part Number 362544-1L, and -1R, the uppermost forward and aft camloc fasteners can be removed and the holes patched in accordance with TO 1C-130A-3. The forward cowl must have a minimum of eight camlocs on the forward end and two camlocs on the aft end to adequately secure the panels to the engine nacelle. Found that a while ago, but I didn't think to post it because it comes out of a backshop TO on building up the QEC. I interpret it as quick-securing the cowling, because you will likely have to open the cowling back up again many times. The part number in the note is for the upper engine cowlings with the hinges, so there is no way this reference would pertain to normal flightline operations. That note is also in the 16W14-12-3, another QEC T.O. The patched camloc holes are a common sight as the camlocs are so close to the pivot point of the cowling that they tend to get caught and ripped out during routine engine maintenance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bischoffm Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 if you follow the 16W14-12-3, it means you don't have to have any on the lower edge to call the panel secure. I think that protection from the wind on the ground not air flow!! There is still NO book telling it's OK or NOT OK to fly with any fasteners missing! Like it has been said common sense rules for those who have any! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustangchief Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 16W(engine overhaul) Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 I can't recall the ref either......no leading edge, no more than 3 in a row and less than 25% is what I remember. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.