Need advice about a Rocket with a gear up

[bd32322]

In the market for a Mooney, but found this below in the history of the aircraft I am looking at. The part about the bent spar has me concerned. What do you guys think? Its MSC maintained otherwise.

The airplane showed upward crushing to the lower right side of the bottom fuselage between the wings. The carry-through spar and control rods, between the wings, showed upward bending. The right forward landing gear door and exhaust muffler were bent inward and aft. The left main landing gear door was bent outboard and aft. One propeller blade showed some minor nicks and scratches on the leading edge approximately 6 inches inboard of the tip. Flight control continuity was confirmed. Examination of the engine, engine controls and other airplane systems revealed no anomalies.

[carusoam]

Did he live?

That is not an ordinary gear up description...

That has more similarities to an off field landing... Or stalling above the runway (which can happen, once)

Money spent on your independent PPI will be well spent...

Best regards,

-a-

[bd32322]

Did he live?

That is not an ordinary gear up description...

That has more similarities to an off field landing... Or stalling above the runway (which can happen, once)

Money spent on your independent PPI will be well spent...

Best regards,

-a-

Yeah no one injured and it does sound like a dropped/stalled aeroplane. He apparently hit 7 runway lights. Not sure how that causes upward crushing of the spar.

[carusoam]

Ordinary G/Us usually land on the runway and come to a quicker stop than usual.

No runway lights involved with that.

Mooney's are designed with this possibility in mind.

Ground sheet metal bellies, flaps, hinges and antennae are typical with bent props...

Typical G/Us are easy to reliably repair.

It would be expected that somebody may try to represent an accident as a G/U landing...

It is up to the buyer to know the difference.

Seek expert advice or another plane...

For this much plane, I prefer the NDH kind.

Did the logs represent the repairs properly?

Ya know?

-a-

[donkaye]

In the market for a Mooney, but found this below in the history of the aircraft I am looking at. The part about the bent spar has me concerned. What do you guys think? Its MSC maintained otherwise.

The airplane showed upward crushing to the lower right side of the bottom fuselage between the wings. The carry-through spar and control rods, between the wings, showed upward bending. The right forward landing gear door and exhaust muffler were bent inward and aft. The left main landing gear door was bent outboard and aft. One propeller blade showed some minor nicks and scratches on the leading edge approximately 6 inches inboard of the tip. Flight control continuity was confirmed. Examination of the engine, engine controls and other airplane systems revealed no anomalies.

 

I wouldn't touch the plane with a 10 foot pole!  That steel I beam was stressed to 9.5G  during a Mooney Company stress test before the jig failed.  Imagine the force to cause it to bend.

[bd32322]

@carusoam, the logs showed all the parts that were replaced, mostly skins and flaps. No mention of spars and repairs were done by a non-msc, which is understandable given where the accident took place. I'll chat with the msc that normally maintains the aircraft and see what really happened.

As the matter stands now, I am just going to wait for another plane and take my time selling my J.

[Marauder]

Yeah no one injured and it does sound like a dropped/stalled aeroplane. He apparently hit 7 runway lights. Not sure how that causes upward crushing of the spar.

Put the N number in on this site: http://www.aviationdb.com/Aviation/AircraftQuery.shtm

Sometimes more details about the history can be found.

[cbarry]

Unless you buy it and plan on owning for your lifetime, the next potential buyer will be asking the same questions. This is not necessarily a deal killer, it simply reduces the marketability and thus the price.

[aviatoreb]

Bodi - I looked at the aviation database.  That airplane had a significant IFR landing accident in 1997.  If that is not being represented by the seller then they are hiding something.  A well repaired accident - maybe - but one being hidden by the seller - never.

[Hector]

As a structural engineer I would not purchase an aircraft with significant damage/deformation to primary structure. If the primary structure (spar) showed evidence of bending/deformation and was not replaced it is likely to now have residual stresses that could lead to problems down the road. The combination of normal operating stresses plus the residual stresses MAY still be low enough not to cause fatigue issues for many thousands of hours, but the problem is that you just don't know and that would bother me to no end.

[bd32322]

Unless you buy it and plan on owning for your lifetime, the next potential buyer will be asking the same questions. This is not necessarily a deal killer, it simply reduces the marketability and thus the price.

 

I did want the aircraft for the long term - I would agree with you if it had been a gear up - unfortunately it seems serious enough that I will be spooked every time I hit a bump while descending close to yellow arc speeds - not fun for me.

 

Thanks everyone for your inputs!

[triple8s]

I wouldn't touch the plane with a 10 foot pole! That steel I beam was stressed to 9.5G during a Mooney Company stress test before the jig failed. Imagine the force to cause it to bend.

I have always wondered something, I have seen the Mooney spar but not seen the spar in other GA factory built planes. I have seen several homebuilts in various stages of completion and even some war birds being rebuilt and one thing I have noticed I have yet to see a heavier made spar in a 4 seat GA aircraft. Is there a more robust spar in a plane of the same size and weight???

About the rocket, I cant imagine how a gear up landing could get to, much less damage the center of the spar, unless maybe it was bellied in on a field of boulders.

[StinkBug]

I wouldn't touch the plane with a 10 foot pole!  That steel I beam was stressed to 9.5G  during a Mooney Company stress test before the jig failed.  Imagine the force to cause it to bend.

 

 

I've seen and heard mention of this test all over the place, but never seen any kind of documentation, or article, or really anything beyond stories from other pilots. Anyone have a link with more details on this test?

[Marauder]

I've seen and heard mention of this test all over the place, but never seen any kind of documentation, or article, or really anything beyond stories from other pilots. Anyone have a link with more details on this test?

I have never seen anything documented but heard this as far back as my first Mooney Homecoming in the early 1990s. It was told as part of talk on the origin of Mooneys.

I have however seen the picture with a number of Mooney employees standing on the wing.

[DonMuncy]

I heard Bill Wheat (a zillion years with Mooney) tell the story. If my memory is working right, they had a stand on wheels with the wing mounted on it. They were loading the wing with sand bags to see when it would fail. At some point (9.5g?), a wheel on the stand collapsed and they discontinued the test.