My new E

[Browncbr1]

40 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

Insurance companies pay for a complete case split and an inspection of the whole crank, rods, accessory gears, etc. For good reason, because prop strikes can cause cracks in many places on crankshafts and the only way to know is to remove it and have it inspected, then reassemble with new bearings etc. Insurance companies don't quibble on this, they pay it because of the liability of not knowing. It's good, sound practice, but not all owners have this done. But I personally wouldn't fly an engine where it wasn't completely inspected in that manner. 

A buyer can go a long way toward peace of mind by asking for the work order for the magnaflux and dimension check of the crank, rods, cam, accessory gears, wrist pins, and oil pump.  Then the receipts for the bearings, wrist pin bushings, rings, gaskets, labor for all of the above, etc. If they don't have that, then pass. It's not worth your life to save 8 grand. 

Right, but I'm just sharing what was claimed about an 87 J that came from the same place. 

[jetdriven]

9 minutes ago, Browncbr1 said:

Right, but I'm just sharing what was claimed about an 87 J that came from the same place. 

What happened to that 1987 M20J

[flyboy0681]

22 hours ago, chrixxer said:

Starting to casually watch the usual places (TaP, Controller, BS, Lasar)...

 

I feel your pain brother. The jury is still out whether my insurance company will pay to fix my J, but I've been looking in the usual places too just in case and it's slim pickens.

But like everyone tells me, you can always buy another airplane, but you can't buy a new you.

[N9201A]

(Yeah, we walked away from that “parallel parking” job wearing nothing but lap belts.) All adds up.


Well done! When the machine fails, it's all about sacrificing it as needed to save the humans. Would that any one of us to whom this unfortunate event occurs does as well.

[chrixxer]

On 9/26/2017 at 6:33 PM, N601RX said:

Wasn't this engine involved in a propstrike within the last 100 hrs?

Last engine log entry (1-21-2017, same date as the annual): "Changed oil using 8 quarts of Aeroshell 100. Changed oil filter. Compressions 72/72/74/76//80. Checked for leaks after teardown to CW AD 2004-10-14 disassembly as required. replaced gear, bolt and lockplate. checked dowel pin and associated parts. reassembled using new gaskets, reinstalled on aircraft."

That was 103.94 tach hours ago, as it sat in Glendale.

Edited September 28, 2017 by chrixxer

[flyboy0681]

17 minutes ago, daver328 said:

@chrixxer

We're all very happy that you and a passenger were able to walk away from a forced landing in urban terrain.

No doubt, your perspective on maintenance, airmanship has changed forever.

I just know how I would feel the next time I got in an airplane and took to the skies? It been a long time since that day ... but it's still clear in my mind. We were lucky - we were right over a grass strip the crop dusters used. And the engine never completely quit it just wouldn't produce more that about 1409-1500 RPM ...

the plane was rented, at least to us, the FAA was very cordial ... I guess I answered their questions satisfactorily?

Same thing here. Back in New Jersey (KCDW) in the early 80's I rented an Archer and experienced reduced power a minute or so after takeoff. I was eyeing Interstate 80 but decided to head back to the strip and landed in one piece. I hung out at the FBO for a couple of hours and hopped in a Warrior for what was to be my longest runup ever. In the end the problem turned out to be a cracked cylinder.

[N6758N]

1 hour ago, chrixxer said:

Last engine log entry (1-21-2017, same date as the annual): "Changed oil using 8 quarts of Aeroshell 100. Changed oil filter. Compressions 72/72/74/76//80. Checked for leaks after teardown to CW AD 2004-10-14 disassembly as required. replaced gear, bolt and lockplate. checked dowel pin and associated parts. reassembled using new gaskets, reinstalled on aircraft."

That was 103.94 tach hours ago, as it sat in Glendale.

Where is the log entry/work order from the teardown? If that isn't in the logbooks then he probably didn't do it. 

[Guest]

Interesting that Lycoming SB 475C calls for crankshaft gear inspection/ replacement after a prop strike as define by an FAA AD, yet Lycoming has SB 533C for prop strike inspection.  I think the FAA has it wrong.

Clarence

 

[ragedracer1977]

On 9/28/2017 at 8:00 AM, N6758N said:

Where is the log entry/work order from the teardown? If that isn't in the logbooks then he probably didn't do it. 

You just read it, IMO.  AD 2004-10-14 is the "sudden stoppage" inspection 

[takair]

10 hours ago, ragedracer1977 said:

You just read it, IMO.  AD 2004-10-14 is the "sudden stoppage" inspection 

I think N6758N might be saying that the wording is strange.  That log entry seems to be addressing the leak check and is worded as if another entity may have done the tear down.  The way it is worded, I would have expected a previous entry indicating engine tear down, assembly and installation IAW with the AD and the MM.  Maybe someone was just trying to conserve ink.

[ragedracer1977]

1 hour ago, takair said:

I think N6758N might be saying that the wording is strange.  That log entry seems to be addressing the leak check and is worded as if another entity may have done the tear down.  The way it is worded, I would have expected a previous entry indicating engine tear down, assembly and installation IAW with the AD and the MM.  Maybe someone was just trying to conserve ink.

Not sure.   Log entries, in my limited experience, seem to be as brief as possible.  That one says they took the engine apart, replaced parts, checked others, all in accordance with the AD, reassembled, and checked for leaks.   Looks fine to me

[takair]

21 minutes ago, ragedracer1977 said:

Not sure.   Log entries, in my limited experience, seem to be as brief as possible.  That one says they took the engine apart, replaced parts, checked others, all in accordance with the AD, reassembled, and checked for leaks.   Looks fine to me

I don't disagree, but the wording could have been a little better for such a significant job.

[jetdriven]

Who actually did the work and who signed it off, the seller?  Are there any invoices or 8130-3 for the gear or the lock plate, or the bolt?  

[PTK]

Someone please correct me if I’m wrong but here we have a perfect example of a plane that had a teardown inspection “done” under dubious circumstances at best, that proceeded to fall out of the sky, right?

[N201MKTurbo]

So, do we know why the engine quit? One may have nothing to do with the other. 

[Hank]

2 hours ago, PTK said:

Someone please correct me if I’m wrong but here we have a perfect example of a plane that had a teardown inspection “done” under dubious circumstances at best, that proceeded to fall out of the sky, right?

What we have is a plane with prop strike history and recorded repair in the logs, that suffered engine failure a year later, cause not yet determined.

I see nothing indicating "dubious" circumstances other than a predisposition against the seller . . . .

[Guest]

Compliance with the AD and SB does not require "tear down" of the engine.  You have to remove the engine accessories as required, remove the accessory cover and comply with the AD and SB.  Reinstall the cover and reinstall the removed accessories, mag/ mags, fuel pump, vacuum pump, oil filter etc.  It doesn't require removal of the engine or tear down.

Would those who've done this job please raise your hand?

Clarence

Edit:. If the gear fell off the back of the crankshaft I seriously doubt that the engine would have continued to windmill as reported by the pilot, who said it took a while to realize that it had quit.  There is simply not enough room in the accessory section for gears to rattle around.

Edited September 30, 2017 by M20Doc

[PTK]

5 hours ago, Hank said:

What we have is a plane with prop strike history and recorded repair in the logs, that suffered engine failure a year later, cause not yet determined.

I see nothing indicating "dubious" circumstances other than a predisposition against the seller . . . .

What info do you have on the history? What are the exact details? Was it a prop strike or was it sudden stoppage? Why did it need “...teardown to CW AD 2004-10-14 disassembly as required. replaced gear, bolt and lockplate. checked dowel pin and associated parts. reassembled using new gaskets, reinstalled on aircraft.”

If you cannot answer these questions, and you can’t because there’s zero documentation, then it is dubious. 

 

[Guest]

All of this speculation is ridiculous.  From the AD here are the propeller strike definitions.  

Perhaps the prop hit a hangar door etc.  Th engine may not have been damaged, but still requires inspection of the gear train even though there was no sudden stoppage which could damage or loosen the gear.  It would seem in some cases the cure may be more hazardous than the disease.

 

Definition of Propeller Strike

(i) For the purposes of this AD, a propeller strike is defined as follows:

(1) Any incident, whether or not the engine is operating, that requires repair to the propeller other than minor dressing of the blades.

(2) Any incident during engine operation in which the propeller impacts a solid object that causes a drop in revolutions per minute (RPM) and also requires structural repair of the propeller (incidents requiring only paint touch-up are not included). This is not restricted to propeller strikes against the ground.

(3) A sudden RPM drop while impacting water, tall grass, or similar yielding medium, where propeller damage is not normally incurred.

(j) The preceding definitions include situations where an aircraft is stationary and the landing gear collapses causing one or more blades to be substantially bent, or where a hanger door (or other object) strikes the propeller blade. These cases should be handled as sudden stoppages because of potentially severe side loading on the crankshaft flange, front bearing, and seal.

Clarence

[N601RX]

41 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

Compliance with the AD and SB does not require "tear down" of the engine.  You have to remove the engine accessories as required, remove the accessory cover and comply with the AD and SB.  Reinstall the cover and reinstall the removed accessories, mag/ mags, fuel pump, vacuum pump, oil filter etc.  It doesn't require removal of the engine or tear down.

Would those who've done this job please raise your hand?

Clarence

Edit:. If the gear fell off the back of the crankshaft I seriously doubt that the engine would have continued to windmill as reported by the pilot, who said it took a while to realize that it had quit.  There is simply not enough room in the accessory section for gears to rattle around.

Is it possible for the gear to fall off?  The gear is restrained by a snug counterbore in one direction and the oil pump shaft in the other. The failure mode is the dowel breaks and gear spins on  crank. There was a local engine several years ago that was assembled without installing the bolt or lock plate. The NTSB concluded it ran that way for about 400 hrs before wearing into the dowel and finally breaking it. 

[PTK]

2 hours ago, M20Doc said:

All of this speculation is ridiculous.  From the AD here are the propeller strike definitions.  

Perhaps the prop hit a hangar door etc.  Th engine may not have been damaged, but still requires inspection of the gear train even though there was no sudden stoppage which could damage or loosen the gear.  It would seem in some cases the cure may be more hazardous than the disease.

 

Definition of Propeller Strike

(i) For the purposes of this AD, a propeller strike is defined as follows:

(1) Any incident, whether or not the engine is operating, that requires repair to the propeller other than minor dressing of the blades.

(2) Any incident during engine operation in which the propeller impacts a solid object that causes a drop in revolutions per minute (RPM) and also requires structural repair of the propeller (incidents requiring only paint touch-up are not included). This is not restricted to propeller strikes against the ground.

(3) A sudden RPM drop while impacting water, tall grass, or similar yielding medium, where propeller damage is not normally incurred.

(j) The preceding definitions include situations where an aircraft is stationary and the landing gear collapses causing one or more blades to be substantially bent, or where a hanger door (or other object) strikes the propeller blade. These cases should be handled as sudden stoppages because of potentially severe side loading on the crankshaft flange, front bearing, and seal.

Clarence

Perhaps it hit the ground causing sudden engine stoppage and engine was damaged. We don’t know and we’ll never know. What we do know is that it fell out of the sky x number of hours after. No speculation there! And zero to minimal documentation. 

[neilpilot]

Interesting speculations, but I'm still not hearing anything factual that even confirms that there was an engine failure. Based on first hand description provided it could have very well been fuel starvation or some other accessory failure separate from the engine. Maybe it would be more appropriate to wait for some more facts before implying that improper repairs follow the previous prop strike contributed to this incident?

[jetdriven]

Inflight engine shutdowns are rare.  The latest Nall Report only tracks the ones followed by incidents or accidents but their rate was .8 per 100k hours.  (Similar rate for fuel starvation or exhaustion) Quadruple that, assume that 3 out of 4 result in no incident or accident and that's one in 25000 hours.  I've seen that number before 

like Chrixxer I have a substantially identical aircraft. I flew a 1964 M20E all day today and so is it. Since I highly desire not to spin and crash land in a tree then a street at night, I'm very curious as to the mode of failure, whatever it may be. To learn from it and to warn others. 

Coukd be a fuel starvation or exhaustion issue. That's an operational issue. Could be the engine disassembled itelf, and given the sellers extreme history and the recency of a prop strike of unknown intensity and less than a full work order from a well-known engine shop, there may be something there.  I don't know about you but if anybody made a log entry in my airplane with zero substantiating documentation and that person had worked on planes  That crashed because of it, and I had their mechanic certificate revoked even before that I would reject anything done as false until proven otherwise. 

  I also agree with Clarence at the definition of a prop strike is always absurd at this point.  Hangar door puts  A small dent on the spinner and we have to do the inspection  procedure. But I have a feeling that this is because this is happened to engines where they had a small impact load sometime later the crankshaft snaps or whatever.  The dowel pin and crank bolt is one inspection, and in some cases it's woefully inadequate, such  as when the engine was producing takeoff power. That's why insurance companies pay the 8k for a REAL TDI And I urge you to demand the same if it's your plane.   Make your choices and you assume the risk of the pilot. But your wife and kids and dog not have the luxury of making that same opinion. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, PTK said:

Perhaps it hit the ground causing sudden engine stoppage and engine was damaged. We don’t know and we’ll never know. What we do know is that it fell out of the sky x number of hours after. No speculation there!

Until the NTSB does its inspection/examination every guess is just a guess.

Do you suppose those who insist on persecuting the vendor for something he did in 1999 will be as quick to offer their public apology on this forum if the cause is completely un related?

I'm not trying to defend his actions of almost 20 years ago, but do you not suppose that he wears that mistake daily?  Every time he looks in the mirror he sees the guy who's judgement resulted in death of his son?

Clarence

 

[PTK]

Documentation is everything. If it’s not properly documented it’s anybody’s guess what was done, if anything, why and how.