Jump to content

Mooney Corrosion relative to other Makes and Models ?


DCarlton

Recommended Posts

This is a bit philosophical, but I've noticed several people comment on corrosion associated with Mooney's.  It's certainly a real concern and you have to maintain your airplane with your eyes wide open.  However, the Mooney air frame, still after all these years, seems to have a great track record.  I completed SB208 years ago on my plane and found no issues.  I also replaced a flap hinge due to corrosion in predicted areas during repaint but it wasn't a show stopper by any means.  Are Mooney's really any more vulnerable or corrosion prone than Cessna, Piper, Beach or Commander?  It seems like all of those airplanes have had relatively major air frame ADs or corrosion concerns. 

Also, is there a summary or list of corrosion related inspection areas?  Anything other than SB208?  I'm in annual now and I've looked in every hole I can find with a mirror.  I see nothing concerning but don't know exactly where I should be looking.  I'd like to do this myself along with the mechanic.  Thanks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cessnas have a lot of trouble with the carry-through spars on many different models.  Those are the spars across the fuselage that hold the wings on.  Since those are significant structural members the ADs are important and can be expensive to repair if corrosion is found.

The ubiquitous Piper PA-28 also has an AD on inspection of the wing spar attach points.    On many PA-28s there is no inspection access to the required area so sometimes a new inspection panel is cut into the wing to allow access.

I think generally Mooneys fare quite well as far as airframe ADs go.   My hangar neighbor, an IA, was recently doing the annual on his Comanche and commenting about how he has to periodically disassemble the tail in order to gain access to the elevator control horn to do a periodic inspection required by AD.  I think we get off pretty easy in comparison to some.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All aluminum airplanes are subject to corrosion. Detailed inspections and getting after any incipient issues early is important. The 208 SB is for a specific design/manufacturing defect that was corrected in later models and can be easily corrected with one-time compliance. (The defect was a steel tube structure only protected with zinc chromate with fiberglass insulation in close contact below windows that are subject to leaking). BTW, Don Maxwell told me that the most common issue -- and trivial for owners to fix and maintain -- is a poor seal on the pilot's storm window.

Skip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

News Flash!

Metals corrode…

:)

Mooneys are better than most…

The more you know specific planes…. The more you know where to look.

 

Plastic planes have there own age and environment issues…

Care for your bird to keep these issues at bay…

For fun… read up on engine corrosion issues…

Overall, for Mooneys, corrosion occurs slowly over time…  Slow enough it can be found and cured before it gets bad…

Ignored, the corrosion can accelerate… So… when you find it, do something, don’t wait…

 

As a plane owner, you get to learn a lot of interesting things… that you probably didn’t think about before…

PP thoughts only… we have a metallurgist around here…

 

Best regards,

-a-

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2021 at 12:49 PM, EricJ said:

Cessnas have a lot of trouble with the carry-through spars on many different models.  Those are the spars across the fuselage that hold the wings on.  Since those are significant structural members the ADs are important and can be expensive to repair if corrosion is found.

The ubiquitous Piper PA-28 also has an AD on inspection of the wing spar attach points.    On many PA-28s there is no inspection access to the required area so sometimes a new inspection panel is cut into the wing to allow access.

I think generally Mooneys fare quite well as far as airframe ADs go.   My hangar neighbor, an IA, was recently doing the annual on his Comanche and commenting about how he has to periodically disassemble the tail in order to gain access to the elevator control horn to do a periodic inspection required by AD.  I think we get off pretty easy in comparison to some.

 

The stabilator horn AD on the Comanche series affects 180’s, 250’s and 260’s.  The 400 and Twin are exempt form the AD.  It requires removal and inspection every 5 years or installation of a new horn every 10 years.  The first time can be a challenge after that it’s not really a big deal.

Clarence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.