Narrative:

During a scheduled wkend inspection on sep/xx/97 on aircraft XXX (air carrier airline) in a maintenance hangar in ZZZ, the ailerons were removed for a scheduled bearing and hardware right&right and inspection. Each aileron at one attach points was found to be oblong. The r-hand aileron was repaired that day. The next day when the aileron was not repaired, it was explained to me that the company did not have the proper reamer to repair in accordance with the repair drawing. How the other side was repaired is a mystery. I was told to inspect and issue a deferral, which I allotted a 140 hour dmt to allow the company time to purchase the reamer. When 140 hours past, the company still did not have the reamer (available at most hardware stores) but explained that it was on order. I inspected the attach point and requested an extension, which was granted by the quality control supervisor for 70 hours. After 70 more hours the reamer was still not purchased. The maintenance supervisor on duty wanted an extension again, and was upset that I requested the spring tab be removed for further inspection. Before removal, I noticed an unacceptable amount of free-play and minor binding from the tab to the aileron. When it became obvious that it must be fixed, a reamer was 'found' and the attach point was repaired in accordance with esr #8-27-97-699, which allowed the bushing to take away the free-play, but due to excessive hold oblongness, the reamed hole was not in the true center of the attach point. Instead of .144 inch of metal equally around the attach point, there was .180 inch on the top and only .085 inch on the bottom which is where the load is against. When I explained this was unacceptable, rather than replace the fitting and take the cancellation an engineering order was issued to allow the aircraft back into service. This now is apparently going to be the permanent repair. No further inspection or repair has been issued to my knowledge, even though the engineer never physically saw the damage. As you can see from the copy of the attached photo, not enough material is supporting the attach point in the load area. I feel the repair was only sufficient for a short time repair (1 day) and it is only a matter of time until the fitting cracks. There are only 3 attach points on the trim tab.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A DH8-100 WAS RETURNED TO SVC WITH THE L AILERON ATTACH POINT IMPROPERLY REPAIRED.

Narrative: DURING A SCHEDULED WKEND INSPECTION ON SEP/XX/97 ON ACFT XXX (ACR AIRLINE) IN A MAINT HANGAR IN ZZZ, THE AILERONS WERE REMOVED FOR A SCHEDULED BEARING AND HARDWARE R&R AND INSPECTION. EACH AILERON AT ONE ATTACH POINTS WAS FOUND TO BE OBLONG. THE R-HAND AILERON WAS REPAIRED THAT DAY. THE NEXT DAY WHEN THE AILERON WAS NOT REPAIRED, IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME THAT THE COMPANY DID NOT HAVE THE PROPER REAMER TO REPAIR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REPAIR DRAWING. HOW THE OTHER SIDE WAS REPAIRED IS A MYSTERY. I WAS TOLD TO INSPECT AND ISSUE A DEFERRAL, WHICH I ALLOTTED A 140 HR DMT TO ALLOW THE COMPANY TIME TO PURCHASE THE REAMER. WHEN 140 HRS PAST, THE COMPANY STILL DID NOT HAVE THE REAMER (AVAILABLE AT MOST HARDWARE STORES) BUT EXPLAINED THAT IT WAS ON ORDER. I INSPECTED THE ATTACH POINT AND REQUESTED AN EXTENSION, WHICH WAS GRANTED BY THE QUALITY CTL SUPVR FOR 70 HRS. AFTER 70 MORE HRS THE REAMER WAS STILL NOT PURCHASED. THE MAINT SUPVR ON DUTY WANTED AN EXTENSION AGAIN, AND WAS UPSET THAT I REQUESTED THE SPRING TAB BE REMOVED FOR FURTHER INSPECTION. BEFORE REMOVAL, I NOTICED AN UNACCEPTABLE AMOUNT OF FREE-PLAY AND MINOR BINDING FROM THE TAB TO THE AILERON. WHEN IT BECAME OBVIOUS THAT IT MUST BE FIXED, A REAMER WAS 'FOUND' AND THE ATTACH POINT WAS REPAIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ESR #8-27-97-699, WHICH ALLOWED THE BUSHING TO TAKE AWAY THE FREE-PLAY, BUT DUE TO EXCESSIVE HOLD OBLONGNESS, THE REAMED HOLE WAS NOT IN THE TRUE CTR OF THE ATTACH POINT. INSTEAD OF .144 INCH OF METAL EQUALLY AROUND THE ATTACH POINT, THERE WAS .180 INCH ON THE TOP AND ONLY .085 INCH ON THE BOTTOM WHICH IS WHERE THE LOAD IS AGAINST. WHEN I EXPLAINED THIS WAS UNACCEPTABLE, RATHER THAN REPLACE THE FITTING AND TAKE THE CANCELLATION AN ENGINEERING ORDER WAS ISSUED TO ALLOW THE ACFT BACK INTO SVC. THIS NOW IS APPARENTLY GOING TO BE THE PERMANENT REPAIR. NO FURTHER INSPECTION OR REPAIR HAS BEEN ISSUED TO MY KNOWLEDGE, EVEN THOUGH THE ENGINEER NEVER PHYSICALLY SAW THE DAMAGE. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE COPY OF THE ATTACHED PHOTO, NOT ENOUGH MATERIAL IS SUPPORTING THE ATTACH POINT IN THE LOAD AREA. I FEEL THE REPAIR WAS ONLY SUFFICIENT FOR A SHORT TIME REPAIR (1 DAY) AND IT IS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME UNTIL THE FITTING CRACKS. THERE ARE ONLY 3 ATTACH POINTS ON THE TRIM TAB.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.