Here's to the Mother ****ing FAA

[fantom]

  On 3/22/2014 at 2:56 PM, PTK said:

I'm sorry. Based on what had been posted by op here I just don't see how.

Maybe we can all sign a petition requesting that the same inspector go over your plane with a fine tooth comb when you're not around.

[chrisk]

  On 3/22/2014 at 2:56 PM, PTK said:

I'm sorry. Based on what had been posted by op here I just don't see how.

Maybe I didn't read carefully enough, but it sounds like the FAA wants the wings re-skinned.  I assume this would make it more difficult than taking it to an IA and getting it signed off.

 

As far as the other things.  They are small.  Fix them and move on.

[DaV8or]

  On 3/22/2014 at 2:56 PM, PTK said:

I'm sorry. Based on what had been posted by op here I just don't see how.

 

Based on what's been posted, I can't see how you could throw a fellow Mooney owner under the bus. How big are those dents? How long are those cracks? Have they been stop drilled? Was that data plate really unreadable? (clearly not) As to the missing "fairing" flying your plane with the inner gear doors off has far greater consequences and that is allowed. Is the fairing really required equipment? Do you know?

[WardHolbrook]

Hopefully, this will turn out like the "FAA's Q-Tip Propeller Fiasco", but something tells me it's not. I can tell that not too many here have had the privilege of taking an airplane through a FAA Part 135 Compliance Inspection or NASIP Inspection. They're kind'a like an IRS Compliance Audits only much more intense - Vaseline and rubber gloves come to mind.

 

You have my sympathy and if your airplane is up to snuff you will have no worries, If it's not then you'll just have to bring it up to the point where it is. Also, the fact that it has been signed off previously is meaningless. If it turns out that there have been some discrepancies that were overlooked or signed off during previous annuals those IAs will be in for some quality one-on-one time with the FAA as well, not to mention that there my be cause for you to go after the guy who did your prepurchase inspection - he may have missed some important (to the FAA at least) stuff. Good luck.

[PTK]

  On 3/22/2014 at 5:15 PM, DaV8or said:

Based on what's been posted, I can't see how you could throw a fellow Mooney owner under the bus. How big are those dents? How long are those cracks? Have they been stop drilled? Was that data plate really unreadable? (clearly not) As to the missing "fairing" flying your plane with the inner gear doors off has far greater consequences and that is allowed. Is the fairing really required equipment? Do you know?

Irrelevant.

(And I'm not throwing anybody under the bus! Just going by what he posted. Where are the pics. Grow up!)

[Hector]

I guess I'll reserve judgement here since I have not seen pictures of this damage, specially the dents. I will say though that I would be pretty ticked off if Mooney recommended re-skinning portions of the wing over minor dents that are routinely signed off by A&P's simply because the have determined there is no internal structural damage and they are aerodynamically inconsequential. As an aerospace engineer I have signed off more dents on military aircraft over the last 25 years that I care to remember. The easy/safe answer for Mooney is to say 'replace' but I would hope they care enough about their customers to give such dispositions due diligence. Again, not having seen the damage perhaps they did and their recommendation was based on sound engineering, but I don't know....

[BigTex]

So why can't he have the plane inspected by his IA and have him sign off on the aircraft and move on?  Or does he have now have the FAA inspect all repairs?

[bnicolette]

I would love to see the pictures.  I just think for Mooney to come back with it's not airworthy there must not have been any doubt by looking at the pictures that the damage was severe enough to warrant that.  At least that's what I hope.  If there was any question wouldn't they have said that further investigation would be necessary?

 

Please post some pictures of the wing dents.

[WardHolbrook]

Depending on how bad and where the dents are you might be able to use one of the electronic dent repair systems. We've used them a couple of times on the jets and it doesn't cost much and it works surprisingly well.   

[gregwatts]

Accidents don't usually happen because of one thing. There is always a chain of events. Perhaps.....given the numerous items cited.....the inspector may have decided to err on the side of caution. Mooney gave an "expected" answer to the FAA's inquiry.....remember product liability! Reading the replies from the OP gives me the perception that he is a defiant hothead. I am not, in any way, taking sides.....but maybe......just maybe........an incident or accident.....has been prevented after all this.

[BigTex]

Scott, you coming to the MAPA homecoming? If so, maybe you can talk face to face with Stacey and team.

[bnicolette]

I've apparently elevated Scott's blood pressure to the OP's level and he's taking a sebatical (as he quoted me above).  Sorry Scott.  But, isn't there some manufacturer documentation that shops follow to know exactly how big/"bad" a dent in the leading edge of a wing can be before it needs to be addressed?  I am just assuming that by the pictures Mooney (Stacey) were given by the FAA that he was able to decipher that said dent/dents were bigger than what is allowed?

I don't understand why all the anger at Mooney getting involved.  The decision, well that's debatable.  But when the FAA directly sends them something well then I assume that they have to reply.  And have to reply with more than just............duh.....I don't know what that means for that airplane?

[triple8s]

Mooney just covered their derrière that's all.

[PTK]

  On 3/23/2014 at 1:12 AM, gregwatts said:

Accidents don't usually happen because of one thing. There is always a chain of events. Perhaps.....given the numerous items cited.....the inspector may have decided to err on the side of caution. Mooney gave an "expected" answer to the FAA's inquiry.....remember product liability! Reading the replies from the OP gives me the perception that he is a defiant hothead. I am not, in any way, taking sides.....but maybe......just maybe........an incident or accident.....has been prevented after all this.

Right on!

This is no joke.

Could it be the airplane is indeed non-airworthy and he doesn't know it?

They may have potentially saved his life. Instead of being grateful he comes on a public forum cursing at the FAA and Mooney?! Why?

The FAA inspector found serious discrepancies and did the responsible thing. He went to the manufacturer to get their opinion.

And why did he not post pictures along with his hot air if he feels the FAA and Mooney are wrong?

[DaV8or]

At this point he is probably talking to a lawyer and they are advising him stop posting in a public forum altogether. We may not see pictures, or hear the rest of the story until it's all over one way or another.

[aaronk25]

It took all I has to resist letting a couple people have it, but I'm glad I didn't, after all it does is divide mooney friends. Even some of the posters that got my blood boiling have contributed useful knowledge in past topics.

Bluehighwayflyer ------your right on the money on this one.....thanks!

[chrisk]

To be clear the attached photo is not the plane from the OP.    It is a picture of a plane I was looking at buying some time ago.  It's obviously hanger rash and if it passed an annual, I wouldn't worry about flying it.   I'm just wondering what the general consensus is:

 

• Is it airworthy?  
• Is this something that could be written up on a ramp check?  "Dented leading edge, evidence of corrosion, evidence of skin separating (Bottom of leading edge)" 
• Could the last rib be damaged? 
• What would Mooney say if asked?
• Would you fly it?

 

 

 

 

[WardHolbrook]

It's common practice to contact the manufacturer in the event of aircraft damage to get their verdict on airworthiness and/or repair strategies. Some have said that Mooney was simply covering their nether region - perhaps, but the likelihood is that they took a close look at the photos and found the damage to be problematic. The fact that one or more AIs have given it their blessing means nothing if it is indeed found to be unairworthy. In fact, if it is determined to be unairworthy those same AIs can expect some FAA sanctions or actions against their certificates. My hope is that our friend will go to the meeting with the proper attitude. Those  "M....F....ing FAA" comments won't win him much sympathy down at the FSDO. If he gets too belligerent they could even find a way to go after him for operating an unairworthy airplane. I wish him well with this.  

[PTK]

  On 3/23/2014 at 7:48 PM, chrisk said:

To be clear the attached photo is not the plane from the OP. It is a picture of a plane I was looking at buying some time ago. It's obviously hanger rash and if it passed an annual, I wouldn't worry about flying it. I'm just wondering what the general consensus is:

• Is it airworthy?
• Is this something that could be written up on a ramp check? "Dented leading edge, evidence of corrosion, evidence of skin separating (Bottom of leading edge)"
• Could the last rib be damaged?
• What would Mooney say if asked?
• Would you fly it?

No

Yes

Yes

Remove and replace damaged skin, inspect for further damage

No

[WardHolbrook]

  On 3/21/2014 at 11:00 PM, N601RX said:

Here is a dent repair solution. Has anyone ever tried it, or seen it in action?

http://www.fluxtronic.com/index.php

That's the unit I referred to in an earlier post. It's a freaking magic box! Several years ago the Falcon 50 I was flying was in the shop for a routine inspection and a mechanic's rolling tool cabinet was accidentally pushed into the leading edge of one of the wings. The dent was about 1" long, but it was in a critical area and would have otherwise required replacing the slat at a cost of over $100,000. (Yes, $100K +) A call to the factory put us onto some guy that went around the country pulling dents out of airplanes with one of those boxes. I think he charged the maintenance shop $500 to do it. It didn't take him very long and when he was finished it looked absolutely pristine. 

[WardHolbrook]

  On 3/23/2014 at 11:07 PM, PTK said:

No

Yes

Yes

Remove and replace damaged skin, inspect for further damage

No

That would be my assessment as well.

[DonMuncy]

What does that fancy machine cost.h We all need one of those in case we get a dent.

[DaV8or]

  On 3/23/2014 at 11:55 PM, DonMuncy said:

What does that fancy machine cost.h We all need one of those in case we get a dent.

 

With the FAA's apparent attitude towards dents, I could make a fortune with one of those boxes and a ball peen hammer! Hmmm...

 

[DaV8or]

  On 3/23/2014 at 7:48 PM, chrisk said:

 

• Is it airworthy?  
• Is this something that could be written up on a ramp check?  "Dented leading edge, evidence of corrosion, evidence of skin separating (Bottom of leading edge)" 
• Could the last rib be damaged? 
• What would Mooney say if asked?
• Would you fly it?

 

 

I'm not an expert, or authority, but hey, it's the internet, so here's my opinion-

• In the eyes of the FAA and likely MAC, no, it is not airworthy. In the real, non academic world, yes it's airworthy.
• Yes. I think a whole lot of things can be written up in a ramp check.
• I believe you are looking at the last rib. Is it damaged?
• Mooney would replace it all most likely. Why wouldn't they?
• Yes, but after reading this thread, only if I knew I would never get ramp checked.

[Hank]

And people wonder why GA is in a steep decline!! Ain't nothing wrong with that wing that some touchup paint won't fix.

 

As for the OP, the letter says that the dents "may be unairworthy." If an IA looking at the aircraft says that it is airworthy, how can anyone else [including the factory] judge it unairworthy based on some emailed photographs? That's how IA's earn their money, and it's why an IA certificate is so tough to get.