Time to replacet tires

[BDPetersen]

Doubt if you find many airline tires that aren't retreads. Intrestingly, they are also leased. (At least they used to be.)

[Shadrach]

1 hour ago, jetdriven said:

can anyone point to an example of a retread aircraft tire separating and causing "a bad day" ? or is this more OWT like bladders leaking, and LOP burns valves?  I hear that too but no proof of such occurences.  And even if the tread did fly of,  does that render the carcass not capable of holding air?

 

It's an OWT. 

[StevenL757]

John, I've been through about 4 sets on the Ovation since owning it.  Had the Michelin Air and loved them.  They wore very well.  Switched to the Goodyear FC3, thinking I could do better, and was disappointed.  A much rougher ride, more expensive, and they did not wear anywhere near as well as the Michelins.

Cross check this with Brian, but I'd strongly suggest the Micheln and the Air Stop tubes...filled with nitrogen.

Regards, Steve

[M20F]

1 hour ago, Shadrach said:

It's an OWT. 

I have personally seen a MU2 and a King Air both experience gear door/aileron/etc. damage from treads coming off and bouncing onto the underside of the wing.  The most obvious example of a retread separating would be the Air France Concorde flight where the FOD caused the tread to separate and led to a catastrophic loss.  You will not get a separation like this on a new solid tire.  

In the world of commercial airliners a retread is infinitely less expense than a new tire and if that tire fails, it will likely have no impact to the safety of flight because you have multiple tires on the landing gear which is designed to suffer single tire failures.  When we are talking a GA airplane though a tire loss is a bit more catastrophic and the difference in cost between a retread and new tire is very small.  Given the $$ difference I would rather just spend $60 and throw away 2 mains every 2-3 years.  This is just my logic.

Edited March 8, 2016 by M20F

[kpaul]

2 hours ago, jetdriven said:

can anyone point to an example of a retread aircraft tire separating and causing "a bad day" ? or is this more OWT like bladders leaking, and LOP burns valves?  I hear that too but no proof of such occurences.  And even if the tread did fly of,  does that render the carcass not capable of holding air?

 

I have never had an airplane tire come apart in some 5000+ hours, I have however seen what a retread separating does to a stock trailer at 65 mph.  It will rip sheet metal off before you can get stopped.  If it did happen to your aircraft landing in the 70 mph range you could end up with significant damage to the gear, brake line, gear door. 

In my prior maintenance life even tires that came back with large chunks ripped out of them did not delaminate.  The usual cause was landing in a crab on a grooved runway.

[Hank]

19 minutes ago, M20F said:

. . . the difference in cost between a retread and new tire is very small.  Given the $$ difference I would rather just spend $60 and throw away 2 mains every 2-3 years.  This is just my logic.

Good Lord! How are you burning through tires that fast? I bought my plane in June 07, replaced the nose tire with another Condor in the fall of 08; then replaced all three in Dec '12 or '13 (I forget, need to check the logs). My mains are GoodYear Flight Customs, either I or II, as the III is horribly expensive and the only benefit I could see was a 140-knot speed rating but I can't land that fast or even lower my gear . . . I've been averaging 80-90 hours per year, and about 125 when I was taking Instrument lessons. None of the tires were new when I bought the plane. 

[Shadrach]

4 hours ago, M20F said:

II buy the cheapest tires possible, they are airplane tires not car tires.  I have noted no difference between expensive tires and cheap tires on water, snow, etc.  I probably change mains every 2-3 years and put a new tube in as well (cheapest one possible).  My nose tire is dry rotting (it is 5yrs old) and will get replaced this spring.  Never had a leak, blow out, etc. in 27yrs.  In the transition from winter to fall I usually have to add some air, other than that easy as pie.

I have never used retreads but if you do get a bad one (and it does occur) they will separate and you will have a bad day.  For a GA jet or an airline the cost differential is immense between retreads and new tires, they can also handle a single wheel loss much better than we can.  I would just as soon put on a cheap solid tire and not worry about it, the price is about the same (or less).

My 2 cents.

Do you have a link to some data or an accident caused by retread failure? please share if you do.

Aircraft retreads go through a extensive NDT (shearography) before being released for service. I have never heard of an aircraft retread failing do to a defect. There is NFW that the airliners or the military would use them if they failed at a higher rate or had a more dangerous mode of failure than standard tires. According to TRIB, 80% of all aviation tires in use in the US are retreads. Goodyear, Michelin and Bridgestone all have retreading divisions. 

[M20F]

Just now, Hank said:

Good Lord! How are you burning through tires that fast? I bought my plane in June 07, replaced the nose tire with another Condor in the fall of 08; then replaced all three in Dec '12 or '13 (I forget, need to check the logs). My mains are GoodYear Flight Customs, either I or II, as the III is horribly expensive and the only benefit I could see was a 140-knot speed rating but I can't land that fast or even lower my gear . . . I've been averaging 80-90 hours per year, and about 125 when I was taking Instrument lessons. None of the tires were new when I bought the plane. 

As I posted above my nose tire is ready for replacement after 5yrs due to dry rot.  The mains usually dry rot out after 2-3yrs in part because I park outside and I am conservative when it comes to tossing off a $60 tire.  Tires in GA rarely wear out, either somebody chirps the brakes on landing and puts a bald spot on them or they dry rot out.  You need to fly a lot of hours (more than 99% of us will) to actually wear the tread out.  Thus why I don't bother spending a lot of money on expensive tires.

[Hank]

Just now, M20F said:

As I posted above my nose tire is ready for replacement after 5yrs due to dry rot.  The mains usually dry rot out after 2-3yrs in part because I park outside and I am conservative when it comes to tossing off a $60 tire.  Tires in GA rarely wear out, either somebody chirps the brakes on landing and puts a bald spot on them or they dry rot out.  You need to fly a lot of hours (more than 99% of us will) to actually wear the tread out.  Thus why I don't bother spending a lot of money on expensive tires.

I beg to differ. My nose tires are generally treadless (or durn close to it) when I replace them, and I've yet to flat spot one. My mains were bald on the outside,with a little tread in the inside, when I replaced them. No dry rot. So both happen. I do keep mine in a hangar, twice the price here in Alabama compared to WV. But the winter is worth it!  

[Shadrach]

1 hour ago, M20F said:

I have personally seen a MU2 and a King Air both experience gear door/aileron/etc. damage from treads coming off and bouncing onto the underside of the wing.  The most obvious example of a retread separating would be the Air France Concorde flight where the FOD caused the tread to separate and led to a catastrophic loss.  You will not get a separation like this on a new solid tire.  

In the world of commercial airliners a retread is infinitely less expense than a new tire and if that tire fails, it will likely have no impact to the safety of flight because you have multiple tires on the landing gear which is designed to suffer single tire failures.  When we are talking a GA airplane though a tire loss is a bit more catastrophic and the difference in cost between a retread and new tire is very small.  Given the $$ difference I would rather just spend $60 and throw away 2 mains every 2-3 years.  This is just my logic.

I'm pretty sure that your information on Concorde is dated and incorrect. I thought the final report found that the fire started 1000s of feet prior to the metal plate. I believe the tire failed due to a missing wheel-spacer.  I'm not an expert on how tires (retread or not) come apart at 200mph. Are you suggesting that a standard tire would not disentigrate at 200mph? I didn't now Concorde used retreads, but that would be more of a vote for retreads than against them in my book. 

"it will likely have no impact to the safety of flight because you have multiple tires on the landing gear which is designed to suffer single tire failures."

Sorry, but this is a crock.  FOD on a runway is certainly a safety of flight issue. Tires disentigrating where jets are sucking in huge volumes of air is not safe nor inexpensive.  It's why they do "FOD walk downs" on carrier decks before and between flight ops.  

[cnoe]

 

Buying cheap tubes is ill advised IMO, but if you've made it 27 years doing so then congrats are in order. Lower gear doors aren't cheap and the last new desser tube I bought sheared a stem in <1 year (with properly inflated tires) chewing up my right door. At least now it matches my left. I'd rather save money buying retreads than cheap tubes.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Shadrach]

6 minutes ago, cnoe said:

 

Buying cheap tubes is ill advised IMO, but if you've made it 27 years doing so then congrats are in order. Lower gear doors aren't cheap and the last new desser tube I bought sheared a stem in <1 year (with properly inflated tires) chewing up my right door. At least now it matches my left. I'd rather save money buying retreads than cheap tubes.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I've always bought the best tubes available. I currently believe those to be Michelin Airstop. 

[larryb]

Tire cost is an insignificant percentage of the ownership cost, at least for me. It isn't a place I want to compromise on, so I'll buy the best I can find. That said, I also try to go easy on the tires and brakes. I make no attempt to brake hard and make the first turnoff.

[Shadrach]

2 hours ago, Hank said:

Good Lord! How are you burning through tires that fast? I bought my plane in June 07, replaced the nose tire with another Condor in the fall of 08; then replaced all three in Dec '12 or '13 (I forget, need to check the logs). My mains are GoodYear Flight Customs, either I or II, as the III is horribly expensive and the only benefit I could see was a 140-knot speed rating but I can't land that fast or even lower my gear . . . I've been averaging 80-90 hours per year, and about 125 when I was taking Instrument lessons. None of the tires were new when I bought the plane. E

It really depends on operations. I fly as much for fun as speed. That means, I'll go do 6-7 landings in an hour after work or on a Sunday morning. Many Mooneys do less than 50 landings a year. I average more landings than hours in a year and that is why I'm ready for tires every 3-5 years. Like yours, all three of my tires will wear through the tread. Mike probably isn't doing a tremendous amount of pattern work. I have been flying for 18years but on the last year or so have been really rediscovered pattern work as fun.

[M20F]

8 hours ago, cnoe said:

Buying cheap tubes is ill advised IMO, but if you've made it 27 years doing so then congrats are in order. Lower gear doors aren't cheap and the last new desser tube I bought sheared a stem in <1 year (with properly inflated tires) chewing up my right door.

Things are TSO'ed for a reason, a cheap tube meets the same standards determined to be safe and then some as does a really expensive one.  I have seen a fair amount of people with bad stems, bad tubes, etc.  Speculation on my part (and not implying this was the result of your failure) but a lot of that comes from improper installation not a bad tube.

A retread is also TSO'ed and will provide the same level of required performance as a solid tire.  The only difference is if something causes the tread to separate (improper inflation, FOD, etc.) it is going to fail.  A small level of risk but one that I think isn't worth saving $10-20 if anything depending on the tires you are buying.    

9 hours ago, Shadrach said:

Sorry, but this is a crock.  FOD on a runway is certainly a safety of flight issue. Tires disentigrating where jets are sucking in huge volumes of air is not safe nor inexpensive.  It's why they do "FOD walk downs" on carrier decks before and between flight ops.  

I didn't say FOD isn't a safety issue, I said " In the world of commercial airliners a retread is infinitely less expense than a new tire and if that tire fails, it will likely have no impact to the safety of flight because you have multiple tires on the landing gear which is designed to suffer single tire failures".  If you have a dozen main landing wheels, losing one isn't good but the extra tires provide redundancy.  On a GA plane you only have one tire a side, losing one is going to cause some loss of control and potentially put you in the grass or a runway light.

6 hours ago, Shadrach said:

It really depends on operations.

Correct point, # of landings has a big impact.  I should have been clearer.

I realized a long time ago that when it comes to planes people are irrationally passionate.  Nothing wrong with a retread it, nothing wrong with a $200 6x6, and nothing wrong with a $75 6x6.  They are all TSO'ed.  Just sharing my point of view on the topic, not trying to change opinions (though like most I think my opinion is the right one!).

[nels]

Interesting topic. I just had an annual done and they insisted I replace my main tires as they said they were dry rotted at four years old. This topic gets me thinking about dry rot on a younger tire. The dry rot, or cracking, in my tires was between the tread not the side wall. It seems to me, at least in my case, I would be better off just wearing down the presumably dry rotted tread rather than recapping or buying new.  Sometimes I think this airplane stuff gets way too carried away! Properly inflated tires are a must and I would think under inflated tires is the biggest cause of tire failure.

[Yetti]

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=30

[nels]

13 minutes ago, Yetti said:

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=30

Thanks, Yetti. Good read. Now I think my tires were just fine and could have been left alone.

Back to my first post; if sidewalls are ok what's wrong with wearing down the OD instead of buying new or recap? It almost sounds as if cosmetics might be the reason tires often get changed out.

[Yetti]

Most of the "road alligators"  ie the long pieces of tread off tires that are lying along the road are recaps off big trucks.  I would happier with single molded price point tire than a reconstituted recap tire with around the same price.  Not sure what makes a more expensive tire more special other than marketing feel good stuff.

 

I would think tires are going to have cracks in between the treads after a year or so.

[N201MKTurbo]

12 hours ago, Hank said:

 My mains were bald on the outside,with a little tread in the inside, when I replaced them.

You should swap the tires side to side each annual when you do the wheels so they wear evenly.

[carqwik]

I don't have a dog in this fight.  I just replace my tires with new when they wear out....  Originally put on the Michelin Air's with their non leak tubes...the tires were ok but the no leak tubes did leak and had to put air in every month.  Switched to the Goodyear FCIII with their no leak tubes...and rarely put air in the tubes.  Always surprised when I check tire pressure and see it hasn't changed.

My thought process is that might as well invest in the best tires appropriate since it is a single point of failure with costly expense for damage repair.  Have no idea of a lower cost option is any better but given the long life I get out of a set of tires, the cost differential isn't material. 

[cnoe]

13 hours ago, larryb said:

 I make no attempt to brake hard and make the first turnoff.

I agree with this procedure for the most part but several times I've done just the opposite either to be polite or to save my arse (I'm feeling a bit British today).

We have daily regional jet service at my home field and when I'm crossing the FAF inbound and hear a CRJ-700 call in 12 miles out on the ILS I'll keep my speed up all the way onto short final and use brakes to clear the runway (for him AND me).

And then last week my wife and I were approaching the airport in MVFR after cancelling our IFR clearance and found ourselves racing a C182 and an RV-something to the runway. We all cooperated but I got there first (gotta love a Mooney) and I again braked to clear the runway as the others landed right behind me. Nobody had to wait, and I was the first one to reach the self-service pump ($2.91/gal).

But yeah, if nobody's crowding me I keep my big fat feet off the brakes for sure.

 

[chrisk]

4 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

You should swap the tires side to side each annual when you do the wheels so they wear evenly.

You must be doing your own annuals.  With $80 tires, it cost close to a tire to swap tires side to side.  --But I totally agree if I was doing an owner assisted annual.

[N201MKTurbo]

16 minutes ago, chrisk said:

You must be doing your own annuals.  With $80 tires, it cost close to a tire to swap tires side to side.  --But I totally agree if I was doing an owner assisted annual.

You are supposed to inspect the wheels and wheel bearings at every annual. The only way to inspect the wheels is to disassemble them. This requires removing the tire. Does your guy neglect this part?

[chrisk]

58 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

You are supposed to inspect the wheels and wheel bearings at every annual. The only way to inspect the wheels is to disassemble them. This requires removing the tire. Does your guy neglect this part?

It's ignorance on my part.  I knew they had to remove the wheel, and I knew they had to look at the bearings, but I didn't know they had to remove the tire. I assumed it was like a car tire.  -- Given that, I agree, tires should be rotated at annual.