Appropriate Prop Strike Engine Log Entry?

[ReconMax]

I'm looking at a plane to buy. I know it had a prop-strike approximately 70 hours ago. The pilot apparently realized he forgot to put the gear down as his prop started to impact the asphalt, "ever-so-slightly". He applied full power and went around and landed "normally."

I'm looking at the logs and the only mention of the incident is in the prop book which I find acceptable. They sent it out and had it reworked. The only mention in the engine log is as follows;

• Aviation Shop Name, address and phone
• Plane Tail Number
• SN# and Tach
• Date

1. Complied with AD 04-10-14
2. Dissembled the engine sent out crankshaft for inspection. Reinstalled crankshaft using new rod and main bearings PN# SL11020M03, SL13884A M03, SL13212A Mo3. Installed a new bolt PN# AN8-14A and lock plate PN# SL10352, Assembled the engine using all new gaskets. Replaced 4 each piston pins PN# AEL14077-1.
3. Installed the engine using new engine mounts PN# J-9613-40
4. Ground run leak check satisfactory
5. This aircraft is approved for return to service in regards to Work performed.

Mechanic Name and A&P #

There is no mention in the aircraft log.

The engine is a Lycoming IO-360-A3B6D.

I wonder if this is a typical log state for such an event. I don't have the experience to know. Also, I don't want to identify the plane, owner or shop so I left that info off of the entry above.

The engine is over halfway through it's TBO and was previously installed in another airplane since it's last SMOH.

First, I wonder if the log books should mention the incident more clearly. They don't say why the procedures above were implemented, nothing about a prop-strike. Also, I wonder why an owner would not just do a complete rebuild, resetting the engine to 0 SMOH in a situation like this.

Does anyone have any thoughts on the log entries? Are they typical in a stuation like this? I've been told that a prop-strike or even a gear-up landing should not necessarily be a deal-killer if repairs were done properly.

Regarding the shop that did the engine work, I suspect they are reputable but are not Mooney specific.

Thanks for any input you guys have...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Andy95W]

That seems appropriate. I suppose they could have noted in the airframe logs that the engine was removed and installed with new engine mounts, but I think what they did was suitable and appropriate. The engine log entry was a little sparse, but it seems to include all the information required.

Per the AD, the crankshaft doesn't have to be inspected and the engine reassembled with new gaskets, so the owner did more than the minimum.

The insurance company likely wouldn't pay for a full engine overhaul, which would probably be about double the price.

Andy

A&P/IA

041014.PDF

[jaylw314]

1 hour ago, ReconMax said:

I'm looking at a plane to buy. I know it had a prop-strike approximately 70 hours ago. The pilot apparently realized he forgot to put the gear down as his prop started to impact the asphalt, "ever-so-slightly". He applied full power and went around and landed "normally."

...

There is no mention in the aircraft log.

The engine is a Lycoming IO-360-A3B6D.

I wonder if this is a typical log state for such an event. I don't have the experience to know. Also, I don't want to identify the plane, owner or shop so I left that info off of the entry above.

The engine is over halfway through it's TBO and was previously installed in another airplane since it's last SMOH.

First, I wonder if the log books should mention the incident more clearly. They don't say why the procedures above were implemented, nothing about a prop-strike. Also, I wonder why an owner would not just do a complete rebuild, resetting the engine to 0 SMOH in a situation like this.

Does anyone have any thoughts on the log entries? Are they typical in a stuation like this? I've been told that a prop-strike or event a gear-up landing should not necessarily be a deal-killer if repairs were done properly.

Regarding the shop that did the engine work, I suspect they are reputable but are not Mooney specific.

Thanks for any input you guys have...

Remember, maintenance logs are for documenting the work/repairs performed only.  They are NOT a forum for documenting findings, the reason for the repair or the event triggering the repair.  Those are not legally required to be in the maintenance record, nor should they be--after all, how much credence can you really give to the (unsupported) statement that the prop impacted the asphalt "ever-so-slightly"?

Edited June 5, 2019 by jaylw314

[carusoam]

Essentially,

Andy, one of MS’ resident A&P/IA has given the guidance of what was needed and provided... 

There was a prop strike, maintenance performed, plane returned to service...

For background, you can read up on what Lycoming calls a prop strike, and what the proper procedures to follow are.

Some light prop strikes have had internal damage that doesn’t show up until some crack propagates and important things fall apart...

Fortunately, engine manufacturers know this and have provided procedures to turn the unknown into the known...

So... read what was done, compare it to what the engine manufacturer says... move forwards or move on...

 

Light prop strikes happen.  Your protection is based on the proper work being done.  No need to assume somebody else’s problem.

If having a PPI done... spend the extra effort to make sure these details are covered properly.  Trust, but verify... - R. Reagan 

 

As far as a PP / owner looks at it...

Depending on how many hours are on the engine already, it often makes sense to OH while the engine is off and opened up... close to 2k hrs OH usually makes financial sense...  1k hrs... probably could make sense, most likely not....  <1k hrs... performing an OH on an engine that has no damage shown in the inspection.... wouldn’t make much technical or financial sense...

The inspection process comes with a cost.  R & R the engine, ship it out or tear it down....  about 10amu retail... to find out it is A-OK...

Thanks to the guys above for supplying really good info...

PP thoughts only, not a mechanic... had the ground strike my prop while I was out of town....

Best regards,

-a-

 

[Brandon]

This wouldn't happen to be N217RW would it?

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/33140611/1983-mooney-m20j?dlr=1&if=1

This was the plane flown in videos by Aviation101 on youtube. A couple BBQ runs and such. I know he mentioned the plane was owned by a friend and he was using it while his Cessna(main plane) was being serviced. From the youtube videos to now in the ad, it seems like its had a panel upgrade also. 

[ReconMax]

No. This particular plane isn't officially on the market yet. Thanks to everyone for your input. It sounds like the log entry is okay. I'll proceed as if the repair is properly documented and let my mechanic determine if it was properly implemented. I don't know if I found my plane yet but we'll see.

[Guest]

I’ll have to disagree. You should be asking for details on connecting rod bolt and nut replacement.  If the rods were pulled from the crank so it could be NDT’d it should have gotten new rod bolts and nuts. They are a stressed and stretched fastener, normally used once.

Attached are portions of SB 240 and 533.  Documentation of the finds is required.

Clarence

[ReconMax]

Thanks Doc. That complicates it for me. I have the repair mechanic's number and will give it to my mechanic and I'll ask him to address that issue with him. Thanks for raising the concern.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, ReconMax said:

Thanks Doc. That complicates it for me. I have the repair mechanic's number and will give it to my mechanic and I'll ask him to address that issue with him. Thanks for raising the concern.

I amended my post with more details.

Clarence

[ReconMax]

14 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

I amended my post with more details.

Clarence

I guess if all those things were done, they would have been recorded right? Are the missing entries reason enough to pass on by? Is it possible that those things are generalized by this entry in the log?

Complied with AD 04-10-14

I looked up AD 04-10-14. It's pretty detailed about what should happen. Is it sufficient to just enter Complied with AD 04-10-14 into the logs? If so, then why mention replacing a single bolt?

I'm just trying to get to a go/no-go decision on whether or not to engage my mechanic officially...

 

 

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, ReconMax said:

I guess if all those things were done, they would have been recorded right? Are the missing entries reason enough to pass on by? Is it possible that those things are generalized by this entry in the log?

Complied with AD 04-10-14

I looked up AD 04-10-14. It's pretty detailed about what should happen. Is it sufficient to just enter Complied with AD 04-10-14 into the logs? If so, then why mention replacing a single bolt?

I'm just trying to get to a go/no-go decision on whether or not to engage my mechanic officially...

 

 

Quite often the pen is the enemy of the maintainer and some details are omitted and sometimes they just aren’t done.  I would be asking for more details to aid in your decision.

Clarence

 

[ReconMax]

It's not really funny; how much ambiguity can emerge from a documentation system intended to remove it...

 

[Hank]

@ReconMax, my Mooney was geared up by the previous owner ~2002/2003. Repairs are well documented in the logs, with annuals signed off by 4 different IAs. My IA for the last 4 years retired, the new guy (IA #5, annual #17 since the incident) found an improper repair to a belly tube. So I ferried it to an MSC (after waiting for an opening), so the damaged tube can be cut out and a new one welded in.

Sometimes "stuff" happens, despite well documented repairs with a solid inspection history. Check carefully, get a good PPI. Hope everything works out well for you. 

Edited June 6, 2019 by Hank

[Andy95W]

I have absolutely no problem deferring to Clarence on nearly any of these matters.  As I said, the logbook entry was pretty sparse.  I'm glad Clarence provided specific details.

[RLCarter]

An itemized repair order would hopefully show which parts were replace. Check and see if its with the records for the plane or maybe the shop that did the work could email you a copy

[MB65E]

Maybe the rod bolts are the later version already. 

You’d need to check the PNs of the bolts to verify. I replaced mine with the non stretch bolts. 

We’ll everything stretches eventually...

-Matt