Narrative:

During fueling of the airplane; a split in the upper left wing surface was observed. On inspection by a mechanic; damage was observed to the ribs and gear on the left side as if there had been a hard landing. The last flight was the day before -- a training flight with me as the instructor and a CFI candidate. I performed the preflight and observed no abnormalities. I did not do a postflt inspection. On our flight we practiced short and soft lndgs; but there were no hard lndgs. The FAA was notified and they filed an NTSB report. Although we did not have an accident or hard landing; I am concerned that I will be held responsible since I had the last flight and had the CFI responsibilities. The only scenario I can envision is that there were previous hard lndgs leading to fatigue which finally gave way on our flight. This is the same scenario that resulted in flight school grounding all of their arrows and discovering fatigue requiring repair on these after a similar split and damage occurred during a training flight.callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated a hearing was held with the local FSDO and it was determined the damage occurred during a previous flight's hard landing and was not reported. The reporter was given a letter of reprimand for flying the aircraft after the unrpted hard landing with a landing gear in-transit light on continuously. This incident was not the same situation as discovered at the flight school that grounded the arrows.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A PA28-200 WHILE BEING FUELED IT WAS NOTED A SPLIT IN THE L WING UPPER SURFACE. FOUND DAMAGE TO L WING RIBS AND LNDG GEAR.

Narrative: DURING FUELING OF THE AIRPLANE; A SPLIT IN THE UPPER L WING SURFACE WAS OBSERVED. ON INSPECTION BY A MECH; DAMAGE WAS OBSERVED TO THE RIBS AND GEAR ON THE L SIDE AS IF THERE HAD BEEN A HARD LNDG. THE LAST FLT WAS THE DAY BEFORE -- A TRAINING FLT WITH ME AS THE INSTRUCTOR AND A CFI CANDIDATE. I PERFORMED THE PREFLT AND OBSERVED NO ABNORMALITIES. I DID NOT DO A POSTFLT INSPECTION. ON OUR FLT WE PRACTICED SHORT AND SOFT LNDGS; BUT THERE WERE NO HARD LNDGS. THE FAA WAS NOTIFIED AND THEY FILED AN NTSB RPT. ALTHOUGH WE DID NOT HAVE AN ACCIDENT OR HARD LNDG; I AM CONCERNED THAT I WILL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE SINCE I HAD THE LAST FLT AND HAD THE CFI RESPONSIBILITIES. THE ONLY SCENARIO I CAN ENVISION IS THAT THERE WERE PREVIOUS HARD LNDGS LEADING TO FATIGUE WHICH FINALLY GAVE WAY ON OUR FLT. THIS IS THE SAME SCENARIO THAT RESULTED IN FLT SCHOOL GNDING ALL OF THEIR ARROWS AND DISCOVERING FATIGUE REQUIRING REPAIR ON THESE AFTER A SIMILAR SPLIT AND DAMAGE OCCURRED DURING A TRAINING FLT.CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED A HEARING WAS HELD WITH THE LCL FSDO AND IT WAS DETERMINED THE DAMAGE OCCURRED DURING A PREVIOUS FLT'S HARD LNDG AND WAS NOT RPTED. THE RPTR WAS GIVEN A LETTER OF REPRIMAND FOR FLYING THE ACFT AFTER THE UNRPTED HARD LNDG WITH A LNDG GEAR IN-TRANSIT LIGHT ON CONTINUOUSLY. THIS INCIDENT WAS NOT THE SAME SIT AS DISCOVERED AT THE FLT SCHOOL THAT GNDED THE ARROWS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.