The FAA says an aftermarket tail skid designed to minimize tail strike damage in light aircraft might cause more problems than it solves and has at least temporarily stopped its installation on certified aircraft. The AirKit LLC tail skid, part number 16316, was on a Cessna 172 that had what the agency said was a minor tail strike during a training flight “and the bracket bent backward and upwards. The rudder’s bottom skin panel was compromised by the part penetrating the skin, which then caused the rudder to jam,” the agency said in an Airworthiness Concern Sheet. The pilot was able to get control of the plane, but the FAA says there is the potential for loss of control.
The agency wants operators to check for the skid (which sells for about $100 online and through pilot supply shops) and let them know if they spot any issues with any j-shaped hook design tail skids. The FAA point of contact is Margot Perez Sosa and submissions may be sent to margot.i.perez.sosa@faa.gov. She may also be reached at (316) 941-1287.
“Certifies aircraft’?? Just stick with the tiedown eyebolt.
Does any C-172 with more than a handful of hours on it have a tail tie-down ring without scratches or deformation?
Seems reasonable that an aftermarket part that is likely to deform and can interfere with controls is a bad idea.
Minor Tail Strike? I would have to strike that skid on an anvil with a sledge to bend it like that.
I had that same tail skid in 1982-1999 on a ’59 C-150 that I owned back then and believe me the above comment about needing a sledgehammer over an anvil to bend it is true. 18 years with it on–and I never had a problem. Minor tail strike? That part is obtainable from WAGAERO, AIRCRAFT SPRUCE, ETC.and has been around since the 1950’s. Now the FAA Sees a need to regulate it?
Most likely installed as a minor alteration, if documented at all. After this event, Airkit will surely need to obtain an STC and the price will go boom. Or market strictly to the experimental world.
Yes, I needed no STC; it was not documented by a 337 in the aircraft logbooks, it was simply a DIY by the previous owner who screwed it into the tail tie down ring. Like you have said–the price will go to the moon, and it will only be marketed to the experimental crowd.
It looks like it would instead tear out at its attach point. That’s a lot of leverage.
Wasn’t that tail skid installed backwards?
No, it is installed correctly. The bottom of the ‘ C ‘ faces the aft or rear.
Got some of these tailskids. They’re awesome. No oversight necessary. This example in the photos is some sort of almost crash circumstance. In my opinion