NPRM needs your attention

[Bruce Byerly]

 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/18/2025-20085/airworthiness-directives-twin-commander-aircraft-llc-airplanes

This appears to be a visual inspection and/or data collection/cya exercise but there is no advice on recurring frequency and the $85/hr labor rate alone demonstrates some combination of the FAA’s lack of competence, intelligence or intentions.  I don’t know the answer but will happily post our responses to this and the previous request for comments and highly encourage operators to do the same.

[SKYFLYER]

So 695B is not affected by this?

[Bruce Byerly]

So 695B is not affected by this?

That is correct.

[donv]

So is this a one-time inspection?

Can you provide us with your comments?

Thanks for staying on top of this!

[donv]

It does seem like the hopeful view is that this will be limited to firefighting aircraft only.

[Bruce Byerly]

A couple of months ago I sent this.  There have been other updates which I will try to share.  It’s very important that we speak up. 

Lekebis Russell
Aviation Safety Engineer (Airframe)
East Certification Branch
1701 Columbia Ave.
Atlanta, GA 30337
(404)474-5510
Lekebis.m.russell@faa.gov
Statement Regarding Twin Commander Fleet Safety and Ongoing Support
Background: Owner of 2 Commander Service Centers, Owner of multiple Commanders turbine and
piston, ATP with approximately 8,000 hours PIC in over 350 serial number Twin Commander aircraft for
post-maintenance flight check, demonstration, ferry, experimental test flying for STC certification as well
as business, personal and commercial operations.
As an owner and operator of Twin Commander aircraft since 1954 and as the current owner of two
authorized Twin Commander service centers our longstanding focus has been on the safe, practical, and
effective support of the Twin Commander fleet.
We trust that the FAA will give thoughtful and deliberate consideration to the technical data submitted
by Twin Commander and its operator network. Based on decades of operational experience and ongoing
dialogue with engineers both current and former who have supported the fleet since its original
production, it is my professional opinion that we are not facing an immediate safety of flight emergency
in properly maintained aircraft.
Twin Commander Aircraft is actively and responsibly working to develop updated inspection and repair
criteria grounded in factual field data. This process is being carried out in close coordination with service
centers and operators, reflecting a collaborative and proven approach that has successfully addressed
safety concerns over many decades.
We believe this continued partnership between manufacturers, service providers, and operators
represents the most effective and responsible path forward.
Thank you for your consideration.

[Bruce Byerly]

From DOM side:

Lekebis Russell
Aviation Safety Engineer (Airframe)
East Certification Branch
1701 Columbia Ave.
Atlanta, GA 30337
(404)474-5510
Lekebis.m.russell@faa.gov
 
In regard to the Airworthiness Concern Sheet, dated May 27, 2025, concerning AD95-13-02, SB218. We have been paying particular attention to the visible structures in Fuselage Stations 386, 409, 429, & vertical stabilizer skins since early 2018 at each annual/150 hour inspection. This includes more than 50 models of Twin Commander’s ranging from 690A’s through 695B aircraft and found no cracking in the structure that is visible through inspection panels and access through the aft fuselage. The inspections have been performed with a mirror & flashlight and not non-destructive testing methods. There are areas in the vertical stabilizer structure above the repair, part 2, of SB218 that are not visible. We do inspect the outer skins, rivets and structure above the repair to the best of our abilities with no defects noted. We also still perform the bolt torque check at FS409.56 per SB206 that we believe to be essential to prevent cracking.
 
We do have several Twin Commanders that have a 5” diameter inspection panels installed on the right-hand side of the vertical stabilizer above the repair from part 2 of SB218 through an engineering order from GTEC. All the areas above the repair have been visibly inspected with no defects noted.
 
We have 2 aircraft that we maintain that still require the 500 hr inspection of the tail because part 2 of SB218 has not been complied with. One is a 690C, and the other is a 695A. Both aircraft had no cracks or defects noted at the last 500 hr inspection. All the aircraft we maintain are 91 and a few 135 operators.
 
In conclusion, I am not saying there is not a cracking issue in the fuselage stations noted in the Airworthiness Concern Sheet that requires paying particular attention during inspection process. Adding the 5” inspection panel above the repair from part 2 of SB218 would help in the inspection process of the vertical stabilizer. We are not seeing the cracking issue the Forest Service aircraft are experiencing in our Part 91 and 135 operators. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me.
 

[Bruce Byerly]

It does seem like the hopeful view is that this will be limited to firefighting aircraft only.

I believe it is a stretch to think you can segregate uses even though it may make sense.  We are dealing with the lowest common denominator and some of these operators apparently weren’t doing pre flights let alone maintenance that made sense.  So unless operators push for proven solutions and logic, we will be stuck with something that doesn’t make sense, damages the planes, and well, I’ll stop there.  Call me anytime if you’d like to discuss. 

[JMA]

Thanks for all the info Bruce.  We've encountered challenges with the new twin commander ownership and ultimately had to contact the FAA directly.

[donv]

What happened?

[JMA]

Hey Don- Money for just picking up the phone, then more money to provide details on what was needed.  Once settled I can give more specifics, but basically the run around.

[JMA]

Some photos of work being done.  Also it is no longer winner aviation:
https://businessjournaldaily.com/jets-fbo-owners-buy-winner-aviation-assets/?utm_source=Youngstown+Publishing+Company&utm_campaign=a69fd21309-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_10_8_2020_10_2_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d70048470c-a69fd21309-387539399

[donv]

Wow, so did you have cracks in the tail?

Where are you having the work done?

[JMA]

Winner aviation was bought and is now Jets FBO @ Youngstown Warren Airport.
I intend to post the full write up/receipt when completed.  Over 100K thus far.