Fuel tank leak after hard off field landing

[Top Heavy]

What are the chances of a hard off field landing being the cause of a fuel tank leak. The plane is an M20M that had a catastrophic loss of oil covering the windscreen and all side windows resulting in a zero visibility off field landing with the gear down which actually tore off the right wheel on the same side as the fuel leak. There was no propeller strike but because of oil starvation this resulted in a factory re manufactured engine. Fortunately the mechanic's insurance company who was responsible for this major faux pa, covered the expenses.

Immediately after I picked up the aircraft after the repairs, I notice a leak on the inboard underside aspect of the Right wing. Prior to this incident, I had never had any fuel tank problems on this '92 Mooney Bravo. The obvious question is could this leak have been caused by the hard off field landing and as a result be the responsibility of the mechanic's insurance company. This issue has not been evaluated by the mechanic but he says it is not possible that this could have been the result of the traumatic landing. For obvious reasons I am skeptical. I have also noticed a not insignificant amount of black particulate matter when I sump this tank.

[Jeff_S]

I would suspect that any hard landing that was sufficient to tear of the wheel could stress the seams of the fuel tank. They're all pretty tightly integrated in that area, but without knowing exactly where your leak is it's difficult for us to diagnose.  Black particulate matter sure sounds like it could be old tank sealant that's coming loose, but it could be other things as well. Was the tank drained and totally dry during the repair (I would guess so)? Some say that keeping that sealant moist is critical to keeping it intact, so even if the original event didn't cause the leak, the required repair processes MAY have induced the leak, which would all tie back to the original covered event as well.

 

Insurance is a tricky beast so you really need to get an expert's opinion on that.  If you're in the AOPA Legal Plan you can talk to an attorney.  Good luck.  And BTW, it goes without saying that if you were the lucky individual who put the plane down in that oil streaked condition, good on ya' mate!  Well done.

[Seth]

In my opinion, and I'm not a mechanic, the two very well could be related.  However, the argument could be made the other way as well.

 

You already know the logic.  There is a history of Mooney wing tanks that leak when the sealant is disrupted by heat, age, or other means.  A landing that rips the right wheel would have enough force to translate some of that to the spar, which is sealed as part of the fuel tank.  Frankly, I'd be worried about other torsional twisting or damage if the tank is now leaking.  Did the rest of the airframe get looked at after the hard landing due to oil catastrophe?  

 

If you were flying during this incident - great job of getting down safely.  If it was a ferry pilot or mechanic's shop - I'm glad they too didn't get hurt (except financially insurance premium wise).

 

If the leak is coming from the right side, there was no leak prior, and the wheel was ripped off in a hard landing, it will be hard to prove they are not related.  Unfortunately it will also be hard to prove they are related.

 

-Seth

[N201MKTurbo]

I've always thought hard landings could affect the sealant. I don't think there is any way to prove it one way or the other. I have done tank repairs where most of the sealant is super bonded to the metal, but some of it will peal right off. The properly bonded sealant will most likely withstand whatever abuse you give it, but the poorly bonded sealant could fail with the stress of a hard landing.

 

Think of this scenario: you are sealing a brand new tank. You have meticulously cleaned the metal with MEK per the instructions. you subconsciously rub your brow with the back of your gloved hand getting forehead grease on the back of your glove. While applying the sealant the back of your glove touches a bare metal surface. The sealant will not bond properly to the oil left behind.

 

Sealing a tank is more art then science. It is pure craft work.

 

IMHO

[Cruiser]

It is not clear as to when the tank started leaking?

Before you took possession and after it was signed off airworthy, returned to service?

 

Regardless, if you saw the leak before you flew the plane make the claim for repairs, if it developed after you took possession and flew it, contact the insurance company and file the complaint with them as latent/hidden defect not corrected. You may want some expert technical input from Mooney International.

[N33GG]

In your case, I'd say the chances are 100%!

[Steve65E-NC]

I don't believe you will get much argument from the Insurance company on this.  You may want to involve your own insurance company to put pressure.  If a wheel was torn off, it is possible that a seam in the tank was actually torn open.  Black stuff may be dirt from the outside. Do not delay in pursuing this.

[DXB]

If it was your mechanic's negligence exclusively that caused that oil leak, his insurance company is damn lucky not to be paying a much more expensive death settlement to your estate. Certainly the benefit of the doubt should go to you here unless they can prove otherwise.  Stories like this give me chills- great job on pulling through a very difficult situation.  I suspect there's a lot of leverage on your side - maybe any legal experts on here can weigh in.

[N33GG]

I hate court and try to avoid it at all costs.

In this case, I would lawyer up right now. FWIW

[Shadrach]

I have often said that if the landing is hard enough to cause a leak, it's likely something will be bent.  I would certainly push to have the leak included in the claim. My concern would be that if it is patched, you will continue to chase it every few years.  They can patch it, but now that you have a piece of delaminated sealant, it is possible that it will continue move.

[MB65E]

If I was the guy who goofed up working on it, I would be scraping sealant as we speak to keep the owner happy. I'm suprised the guy is even arguing with you.

-Matt

[N33GG]

I have no use for a mechanic that would be in denial. Maybe the leak is coincidence, but there is every reason to believe the hard landing either caused or mightily contributed to the problem. I would have an attorney write a very stern letter to get his attention. And I would hate to be in his position on this situation.

[DonMuncy]

The original post indicated his insurance carrier was involved. I wouldn't waste my time trying to convince the mechanic. Work on the insurance adjuster.

[Bravoman]

If I was the guy who goofed up working on it, I would be scraping sealant as we speak to keep the owner happy. I'm suprised the guy is even arguing with you.

-Matt

That's what I was thinking. They almost kill you and they want to give you a hard time on obvious consequential damage? If you suffered any injuries, even bumps and bruises that is a sufficient predicate for a personal(bodily) injury claim. Depending on the egregiousness of the negligence it could also serve as a predicate for punitive and exemplary damages. Don't forget the diminution in value to the aircraft which is part of the property damage claim. If you were my client they would happily be taking care of your fuel tank repairs!

[Shadrach]

What Don says ^^^^^!

[N33GG]

The original post indicated his insurance carrier was involved. I wouldn't waste my time trying to convince the mechanic. Work on the insurance adjuster.

Agreed. You're right on Don.

[Top Heavy]

Thank you for all of your sage advice. It certainly confirms my conclusions.

To answer some of the questions raised above:

At the time of the incident the plane was 90 hours post a 2,000 hour non factory overhaul. I was at about 4,000 ft. AGL and managed to set down on a runway but because of zero visibility I ran off the end into heavy mud (no prop strike).This resulted in a 100 yard very bumpy ride and avulsion of the right gear. The FAA investigated the "off field" landing the next day and immediately determined that the etiology of the catastrophic loss of oil was due to a failure to secure a set screw resulting in rotation of the shaft upon which the prop gears are mounted. Rotation of the shaft wound out the access plug directly in front of it (which had not been safety wired at overhaul). The result was to immediately evacuate 10 qts. of oil directly into the propeller and back onto the windscreen. The mechanic received sanctions from the FAA.

[Bravoman]

Agreed. You're right on Don.

I was of course speaking of dialogue with the insurance company. As I am sure Don will confirm, insurance carriers(as much as I love them because they ultimately pay all my bills) are not there to do you any favors. They often times need a little encouragement to do what is correct under the circumstances. The adjuster would have a lot more incentive to keep the claimant happy if he knows that in exchange for getting a complete release all the carrier needs to do is fully and properly repair the aircraft. I would certainly make it clear that if they let things spiral out of control it would get far more expensive for them. I don't apologize for how I get results for my clients. I am sure everyone on this board would want the same thing for themselves if there was even a hint of getting jerked around like they are trying to do to Top Heavy, especially after managing to escape with his life in an objectively life threatening situation that the carrier's insured created.

Regards, Frank

[N33GG]

It would suck to be the mechanic. The insurance company might declare that there is no proof that this happened due to the landing. I would not let either the mechanic or insurance company jerk me around. But it is appropriate to give the insurance company the opportunity to make everything right first. If they don't, it would suck to be the insurance company.

An insurance policy gives the insurance company the right to take care of you. Then, it gives you the right to sue them to make them take care of you. Nothing more, and nothing less.