donkaye Posted October 3, 2018 Author Report Posted October 3, 2018 On 10/1/2018 at 3:32 PM, Mooneymite said: From the description of how the accident took place, it would appear that the nose gear progressively retracted rather than collapsed, so any shock to the crank shaft was mitigated. It collapsed. Quote
donkaye Posted October 3, 2018 Author Report Posted October 3, 2018 35 minutes ago, Bravoman said: Have you been given the name of a carrier and the number of their claims dept.(which is always set forth in the policy) or is the shop telling you they have contacted their insurer and are putting them in touch with you? If it is the latter I would insist on the former and get the name and number of their broker as well so that you have a backup to call to get the fires lit in multiple places. Also get the policy number for easy reference. You should have heard from an adjuster by now. None of the above. I'll get it tomorrow. Quote
Niko182 Posted October 3, 2018 Report Posted October 3, 2018 2 hours ago, donkaye said: I looked on the Hartzell site and couldn't find a Bravo Prop. Has one been approved, yet? its being STCed right now. I believe that they have a bravo being used right now for testing. It's not my money, but if it were me theres no reason to go back to the old mccauly. it's a prop from the 70s being used on a plane thats from the 90s, and has practically every single upgrade on it that can be thought of, except the prop. both the MT and the hartzell will do everything better than the hartzell in every aspect. They're both lighter, quieter, faster cruise, better climb, shorter takeoff, and way smoother. I believe the MT is 74 inches, and the Hartzell is 76. lets not forget that either of these props looks way cooler than the mccauly, but thats just my opinion. From what I heard the MT is like a speed brake on the nose when you pull the power, which if used correctly is another advantage. Quote
mike_elliott Posted October 3, 2018 Report Posted October 3, 2018 8 hours ago, donkaye said: I looked on the Hartzell site and couldn't find a Bravo Prop. Has one been approved, yet? Call Danny Glaser at Hartzel, the senior integration engineer (937) 778-4231 Quote
Lance Link Posted October 4, 2018 Report Posted October 4, 2018 Seven days is way too long for no contact. I'd pursue the liability claim with an attorney rather than go through your first party carrier. The attorney may not have to do much. This approach may get the matter resolved most smoothly and quickly for you at what will probably be very little cost, relatively speaking. Worth the grief it will save in my opinion. 1 Quote
donkaye Posted October 4, 2018 Author Report Posted October 4, 2018 Finally, I was given the contact information of the adjustor. I contacted him, and spent quite a while discussing the situation and what I expected. I then spent the afternoon putting together a spreadsheet of what I wanted and assembling the documentation to support it. I emailed it to him. He responded back fairly quickly. He was very nice. He promised to keep me involved in the process. Now it's a waiting game for estimates of tear down and prop costs. Luckily, I'm told all the landing gear parts are used on the Acclaim and Ovation, so there shouldn't be a problem getting those parts. Since the plane is down, I wonder if the engine could be immediately sent back to Lycoming, so I don't have to worry about dealing with the core charge. I'll check tomorrow. Quote
thinwing Posted October 4, 2018 Report Posted October 4, 2018 How many hours on the engine Don? Quote
donkaye Posted October 4, 2018 Author Report Posted October 4, 2018 1 hour ago, thinwing said: How many hours on the engine Don? 1,600.03 Quote
jetdriven Posted October 4, 2018 Report Posted October 4, 2018 4 hours ago, donkaye said: Finally, I was given the contact information of the adjustor. I contacted him, and spent quite a while discussing the situation and what I expected. I then spent the afternoon putting together a spreadsheet of what I wanted and assembling the documentation to support it. I emailed it to him. He responded back fairly quickly. He was very nice. He promised to keep me involved in the process. Now it's a waiting game for estimates of tear down and prop costs. Luckily, I'm told all the landing gear parts are used on the Acclaim and Ovation, so there shouldn't be a problem getting those parts. Since the plane is down, I wonder if the engine could be immediately sent back to Lycoming, so I don't have to worry about dealing with the core charge. I'll check tomorrow. I wouldnt worry about that. You write them a check for 20 grand and if they take the core, they dont cash it. If its complete and operable you shouldnt have any trouble with them accepting it. Quote
alextstone Posted October 4, 2018 Report Posted October 4, 2018 Welcome to my life. And yeah, getting the insurance company to pay the claim on mine was like pulling teeth. I hope they can make your airplane all better, Don. I always dread annuals. Hey now, I'm I dentist so pulling teeth is no big dealSent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk 1 Quote
RobertGary1 Posted October 4, 2018 Report Posted October 4, 2018 You have a significant amount of time to send the core in. I want to say 6 months. I installed the new engine and drug my feet sending the old back to Lycoming. -Robert Quote
FoxMike Posted October 4, 2018 Report Posted October 4, 2018 Don, I looked into a Hartzell prop and found they did not have a product for the Bravo. One of their reps at OSH suggested they might design one for the Bravo but they would need me to let them use my airplane for 6 mos. Mc Cauley had a design for an all composite prop (very light weight). I followed that for a while and watched it die a slow death. So the MT or original McCauley are the only games on the planet for the Bravo. After having the MT for 9 months or so I would not go back to the Mc Cauley. 1 Quote
donkaye Posted October 4, 2018 Author Report Posted October 4, 2018 1 hour ago, FoxMike said: Don, I looked into a Hartzell prop and found they did not have a product for the Bravo. One of their reps at OSH suggested they might design one for the Bravo but they would need me to let them use my airplane for 6 mos. Mc Cauley had a design for an all composite prop (very light weight). I followed that for a while and watched it die a slow death. So the MT or original McCauley are the only games on the planet for the Bravo. After having the MT for 9 months or so I would not go back to the Mc Cauley. Thank you. I'm looking into the the MT. It's a 4 blade. Apparently the differential over a new McCauley is not that great. 2 Quote
alextstone Posted October 4, 2018 Report Posted October 4, 2018 9 minutes ago, donkaye said: Thank you. I'm looking into the the MT. It's a 4 blade. Apparently the differential over a new McCauley is not that great. Don, when you refer to differential, are you meaning performance or price or both? Alex Quote
donkaye Posted October 4, 2018 Author Report Posted October 4, 2018 1 hour ago, alextstone said: Don, when you refer to differential, are you meaning performance or price or both? Alex Price. 1 Quote
Niko182 Posted October 4, 2018 Report Posted October 4, 2018 3 minutes ago, donkaye said: Price. Also a pretty significant delta in performance. Shorter takeoff. Smoother operations. A knot or 2 increase in airspeed in the na levels and a couple knots faster at cruise in the flight levels. Better climb. Lighter. 1 Quote
fantom Posted October 4, 2018 Report Posted October 4, 2018 Don....just read the entire thread, and so sorry for your aggravation. Snuff happens, and this stuff stinks. Hoping the insurance adjuster takes care of you and your baby. Good luck, my friend. A commercial flight to Longview should be a treat. Quote
carusoam Posted November 1, 2018 Report Posted November 1, 2018 On 9/28/2018 at 10:26 AM, Txbyker said: I wonder why Mooney issued the 2008 Service Instruction to use an A-Frame hoist up to the "L" models but not the long bodies. Russ M20-114.pdf Expect that the long Body engine mount has a jack point designed into it. It isn’t readily obvious... just a hole that accepts a jack point... on the pilot side. There is a decal on the outside of the cowl that simply says Jack Point... It should say jack point is under cowl... Best regards, -a- Quote
steingar Posted November 1, 2018 Report Posted November 1, 2018 I just remember when I had my little snafu (and I didn't have the luxury of blaming on anyone but me ). The adjuster was so bad I switched insurers. He wanted the mechanic, then me, basically anyone but him to do his job. Had I any money I probably would have hired a mouthpiece, the have their uses. Truly sorry for your situation Don. Hope they make it right. Quote
thinwing Posted November 1, 2018 Report Posted November 1, 2018 Haven't heard anything about how it's going with repairs...curious ,did they find you a loaner aircraft Don? Quote
donkaye Posted November 2, 2018 Author Report Posted November 2, 2018 On 10/4/2018 at 12:24 PM, FoxMike said: Don, I looked into a Hartzell prop and found they did not have a product for the Bravo. One of their reps at OSH suggested they might design one for the Bravo but they would need me to let them use my airplane for 6 mos. Mc Cauley had a design for an all composite prop (very light weight). I followed that for a while and watched it die a slow death. So the MT or original McCauley are the only games on the planet for the Bravo. After having the MT for 9 months or so I would not go back to the Mc Cauley. How long did it take to get the MT from placing the order till it came? What did you use in the meantime? Why did you even think about the MT in the first place? Thanks. Quote
donkaye Posted November 2, 2018 Author Report Posted November 2, 2018 5 hours ago, thinwing said: Haven't heard anything about how it's going with repairs...curious ,did they find you a loaner aircraft Don? Slowly, but until it gets close to having the engine shipped (December 4th it is supposed to be completed) I have been biding my time. No loaner although I have been offered to use a couple of my student's airplanes if I need one. Right now I am in San Antonio having just completed my first training of a student in the new Acclaim Ultra. One nice airplane. I needed to be at 15" to get near 90 knots on downwind (gear and approach flaps) in the pattern. It just wants to go fast. 3 Quote
M016576 Posted November 2, 2018 Report Posted November 2, 2018 That’s a real bummer- not something one would expect from a MSC that’s so highly regarded. Looking at the bright side, though- at least you won’t have to worry about a new motor or prop for a while after all this is over. In some ways, it’s kind of lucky- I guess it’s all a matter of perspective. Glad no one is hurt, sad you’re out of an airplane for a while. Quote
FoxMike Posted November 2, 2018 Report Posted November 2, 2018 Don, I ordered on Monday after OSH and the prop arrived in Deland in early December. It took another week for MT Deland to get it assembled. I flew down early January to have it installed. My McCauley was serviceable. I have since sold it. What made me aware of the MT STC was a few of my friends owned them on other aircraft and raved about the smoothness. I looked over the STC on the MT website and decided to give it a try. So far no regrets. If you decide to do it you will probably have to rent a prop for a while. Maybe someone starting an engine overhaul might want to rent you one for a while. A prop shop might have one in stock you could use for the months it takes to get one from MT. It probably will be worth the extra hassle. If you come through Denver on your way home I will take you for a ride. I will be in Caribbean from Nov. 7th til the 19th. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.