Need advice / sharing my concerns with someone

[Guest]

9 hours ago, redbaron1982 said:

@M20Doc so maybe this repair, being in the stub is south of the 150 hours of the other ones mentioned that were in the main spar? I'm just trying to find some hope here while I wait for mooney reply...

I’ve never done a repair like this.  In Canada spar repairs are listed as specialized work and only duly licensed shop can do them.  In the US I don’t believe you have the same restrictions.  I would be asking Mooney if installing a reinforcement is allowed as opposed to outright replacement.  If Mooney says no, ask a DER for an opinion.

On the surface of it this is not a death sentence for the plane, it can be repaired.

Clarence

[redbaron1982]

Following up on this, Mooney have replied to the shop, saying that this will require replacing the stub spar cap. And the shop doesn't feel comfortable doing it. They are helping me contacting Don Maxwell and Dougsh for quotes on the work. I've also contacted a few days ago swta.net, still waiting to hear from then.

No I need to get a ferry permit and a ferry pilot.

And of course, try to get something from this MSC out, because I still consider them responsible for this. At least a refound on the prebuy and annual inspection.

[philiplane]

An initial consult with a DER would be worthwhile. You would be surprised at what is repairable. Even when the factory says rip it all apart and do an invasive procedure, that can sometimes do more damage along the way. 

[redbaron1982]

1 minute ago, philiplane said:

An initial consult with a DER would be worthwhile. You would be surprised at what is repairable. Even when the factory says rip it all apart and do an invasive procedure, that can sometimes do more damage along the way. 

Because of this I'm waiting also the response from swta, anyway, if repairing is 10k and replacing is 15k, I'd rather go with replacing the whole part. I know that is a cliche, but safety if my number one priority. More when I plan to fly with my family onboard.

[Jerry Pressley]

If all else fails it can be flown here to a good shop and fly back home with an exchange wing for $14,000.  exhaust all other channels first.  

[redbaron1982]

1 minute ago, Jerry Pressley said:

If all else fails it can be flown here to a good shop and fly back home with an exchange wing for $14,000.  exhaust all other channels first.  

The airplane has TKS, so I don't think it would 14k to replace the whole wing. Thanks though for the information.

[MooneyMitch]

I'm excited for you!  You'll get beyond this and have a great Mooney to enjoy. 

[philiplane]

24 minutes ago, redbaron1982 said:

The airplane has TKS, so I don't think it would 14k to replace the whole wing. Thanks though for the information.

This is the ahah moment...TKS is corrosive. Wherever it gets inside, it causes problems. Especially where it can pool, and work on exposed metal. 

[jetdriven]

28 minutes ago, redbaron1982 said:

The airplane has TKS, so I don't think it would 14k to replace the whole wing. Thanks though for the information.

I think the TKS panels for the wing are probably 20 grand, a used wing that has any real Pedegree is probably 20 grand and it's probably more than that to swap the wing over. Not to be a Debbie downer but swapping the wing on a j model is  40K at least. Said, I think the entire stub spar can be swapped out in the airplane with the wing in place. It's not cheap but it can be done.

[Aerodon]

1 hour ago, redbaron1982 said:

Because of this I'm waiting also the response from swta, anyway, if repairing is 10k and replacing is 15k, I'd rather go with replacing the whole part. I know that is a cliche, but safety if my number one priority. More when I plan to fly with my family onboard.

Also think future resale value.  A poorly described log entry or repair becomes a red flag.  I nice clean entry stating corrosion found, stub spar replaced goes a long way to providing comfort to a future buyer.

Aerodon

[Guest]

1 hour ago, philiplane said:

This is the ahah moment...TKS is corrosive. Wherever it gets inside, it causes problems. Especially where it can pool, and work on exposed metal. 

So I’m trying to follow along here.  The TKS fluid came out of the panel, jumped across the wheel well opening, landed back on the wing skin, crept into this panel, climbed up on to the spar flange and then started inter granular corrosion?  

I’ve seen small areas of filiform type corrosion immediately at the TKS panels on several airplanes.

I always though that this type of corrosion was caused by improper heat treatment at the extrusion stage leading to a break down of the metal at a molecular level.

Clarence

[philiplane]

11 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

So I’m trying to follow along here.  The TKS fluid came out of the panel, jumped across the wheel well opening, landed back on the wing skin, crept into this panel, climbed up on to the spar flange and then started inter granular corrosion?  

I’ve seen small areas of filiform type corrosion immediately at the TKS panels on several airplanes.

I always though that this type of corrosion was caused by improper heat treatment at the extrusion stage leading to a break down of the metal at a molecular level.

Clarence

Most of the planes service have TKS, and you'd be amazed at where you find it, inside the plane. It creeps in everywhere, like Corrosion X does, but in a bad way. Any exposed metal will keep corroding when in contact with the TKS fluid. This could be intergranular corrosion due to improper heat treatment, or it could simply be exfoliation of exposed metal at the rivet heads, which continues to corrode and flake in the presence of TKS & rain water. I find exposed metal inside inspection plates all the time. Exposed during a previous re-paint where stripper got in, and never got cleaned out. Throw some TKS fluid onto the mess, and here you are. 

If they sandblast the spot, they'll find out what it is. Intergranular will just keep getting bigger because the metal is porous, but exfoliation will stop when they hit solid metal. If they have solid metal, then that gets ground smooth, and readied for a repair. Personally I'd rather have a small engineered repair, than roll the dice with more damage by drilling out a few hundred rivets. Getting the stub spar out is a huge job, with so much that can go wrong.

Edited January 11, 2022 by philiplane

[redbaron1982]

25 minutes ago, philiplane said:

Most of the planes service have TKS, and you'd be amazed at where you find it, inside the plane. It creeps in everywhere, like Corrosion X does, but in a bad way. Any exposed metal will keep corroding when in contact with the TKS fluid. This could be intergranular corrosion due to improper heat treatment, or it could simply be exfoliation of exposed metal at the rivet heads, which continues to corrode and flake in the presence of TKS & rain water. I find exposed metal inside inspection plates all the time. Exposed during a previous re-paint where stripper got in, and never got cleaned out. Throw some TKS fluid onto the mess, and here you are. 

If they sandblast the spot, they'll find out what it is. Intergranular will just keep getting bigger because the metal is porous, but exfoliation will stop when they hit solid metal. If they have solid metal, then that gets ground smooth, and readied for a repair. Personally I'd rather have a small engineered repair, than roll the dice with more damage by drilling out a few hundred rivets. Getting the stub spar out is a huge job, with so much that can go wrong.

Well I thought the same, "supposedly" Mooney said that as the corrossion impacted more than 10% of the material, it needs to be replaced. For me, from the picture itself, it doesnt look like 10%, anyway there is still not clean aluminum and more grinding should be necessary.

I asked the shop to share with me the reply from Mooney, just to make sure that there is nothing lost in translation.

[DXB]

9 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

@DXB seems to have some insight into the owner of this particular shop "Once you lawyer up, something tells me that this particular shop owner, who is a bit of a magnet for dissatisfaction and drama, is going to dig heels and fight rather than seek the path of least resistance even if its in his own interest."  FlightLevel operates 11 FBO's - they are not a "mom & pop".  At Norwood they led an 11 year legal battle to retain their monopoly and keep a new entrant out.  I don't think the threat of a lawsuit would worry them at all.  https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2020-10-14/norwood-airport-fbo-spat-headed-back-court  https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2021-07-06/norwood-fbo-and-running-after-11-year-battle

To be clear, I've no beef at all with Flightlevel as an fbo chain - my fbo experiences at Cape May, Block Island, and Newport have all been good or excellent. The fbo and "MSC" at Norwood, not so much -  I now land in Bedford exclusively when going to Boston.  But yes, that shop does appear owned by the chain, so that would take it out of the shop's hands - which could be a good or bad thing....

Edited January 11, 2022 by DXB

[philiplane]

11 minutes ago, redbaron1982 said:

Well I thought the same, "supposedly" Mooney said that as the corrossion impacted more than 10% of the material, it needs to be replaced. For me, from the picture itself, it doesnt look like 10%, anyway there is still not clean aluminum and more grinding should be necessary.

I asked the shop to share with me the reply from Mooney, just to make sure that there is nothing lost in translation.

Mooney doesn't own the plane, so they have no control over repairs. They can make a recommendation, but you are also free to use a DER. The 10% loss of material allowance is not even a Mooney-specific thing, it's from the FAA's AC43-13 repair guidance manual. 

The key is to find out if the part has enough solid material left to make a repair possible. And then decide which way to go. FAA DER directory below. You are looking for a structures DER. The MSC should be able to recommend one they've worked with before. Shops use DER's all the time for adding antennas onto pressurized planes, for example. 

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/designees_delegations/designee_types/media/derdirectory.pdf

Edited January 11, 2022 by philiplane

[JWJR]

So this spar that needs replaced. Would this be a part that could be fabricated at the shop or would it have to come from Mooney? Is it in stock on the shelf at Mooney?
If from Mooney make sure you ask for turn around time RB. You seem like a patient fella but knowing what to expect prevents dissatisfaction later and might factor in to what option you choose.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jetdriven]

Mooney can make and ship you this spar cap, or they can make a whole new rear spar for you

[redbaron1982]

Just to understand a littlbe the extension of the repair, in the scenario of replacing the lower stub spar cap. 

If I understand correctly, this does not requires to remove the whole spar, right? being the false/stub spar and the cap, it requires to remove the skin (in this case the lower skin) by drilling out the rivers, remove the cap, also drilling out the rivets, then placing the new cap, rivetting, then replacing the skin, and revetting, right?

I don't want to oversimplify it, my question is if such repair has a high risk of messing other stuff. I understand taking out the main spar, could lead to things not alinged correctly and such, but replacing the lower stub spar cap, can lead to the same problems?

[1980Mooney]

1 hour ago, redbaron1982 said:

Just to understand a littlbe the extension of the repair, in the scenario of replacing the lower stub spar cap. 

If I understand correctly, this does not requires to remove the whole spar, right? being the false/stub spar and the cap, it requires to remove the skin (in this case the lower skin) by drilling out the rivers, remove the cap, also drilling out the rivets, then placing the new cap, rivetting, then replacing the skin, and revetting, right?

I don't want to oversimplify it, my question is if such repair has a high risk of messing other stuff. I understand taking out the main spar, could lead to things not alinged correctly and such, but replacing the lower stub spar cap, can lead to the same problems?

Well you are in luck.  Here is a whole topic on the saga of a stub spar replacement on an M20E (which is basically the same wing) with pictures.

 

[redbaron1982]

7 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

Well you are in luck.  Here is a whole topic on the saga of a stub spar replacement on an M20E (which is basically the same wing) with pictures.

 

Yeah, I've read those two post. There anyway the job was to replace the whole spar and not just the lower cap. I don't thinkg that the spar itself should be removed for replacing the lower cap. And that should save some work.

[LANCECASPER]

9 hours ago, redbaron1982 said:

And of course, try to get something from this MSC out, because I still consider them responsible for this. At least a refound on the prebuy and annual inspection.

You aren't going to like this . . .  but here goes:

It's already been mentioned multiple times by those that work on Mooneys every day that a pre-buy is very unlikely to catch this unless unless by chance you would have known to have specifically asked them to look for it, which few people would have. I wouldn't have before this post on a Mooney this recent. All of us on this forum are learning at your expense. Going forward if someone wants to pay the hours required for this to be part of their pre-buy inspection at least it's out there for everyone to consider.

Here's the part you aren't going to like: In thinking about this over the last few days, the easiest thing in the world for that shop to have done would have been to ignore what they found if they felt that they should have caught it during the pre-buy. They didn't feel that they should have caught it but they still did have the integrity to tell you about it. Their life would have been easier for the next week or two if they hadn't told you. That wouldn't have been ethical but I'm sure it's been done at one point somewhere. It's not like they were trying to get the job for the repair. They don't even feel comfortable doing it. Knowledge is power. Knowing sooner is better. Yeah it would have been better to have known before closing, for sure. But at some point if it goes too long, it may have totaled the airplane. Would the next annual have caught it? Hard to say. Would any annual in the  next five have caught it? Did any of the last five annuals catch it?

So i would definitely give the shop some credit for informing you on what they found during the longer, more thorough annual inspection. Rather than having anger, regret, remorse at this point I would work on channeling that toward at least some gratitude that they told you about it and just concentrate on moving toward a solution. Try to work out something fair for both of you. 

Also not sure why you would need a ferry permit since it's still in annual until the end of February. 

[corn_flake]

@LANCECASPER  Aircraft is consider no longer airworthy when an annual inspection begins.  

[LANCECASPER]

Just now, corn_flake said:

@LANCECASPER  Aircraft is consider no longer airworthy when an annual inspection begins.  

Ok, I stand corrected.

https://resources.savvyaviation.com/wp-content/uploads/articles_eaa/EAA_2012-03_how-to-flunk-an-annual-inspection.pdf

[JWJR]

Correct me if I’m wrong here. The panel was removed for the pre-buy inspection. Ok so the difference between discovery of the corrosion during the pre-buy and discovering the corrosion during the annual was an inspection mirror and 3-5 seconds of labor.( holding a mirror using a flashing and your eyes to see). Hmmm I wonder if it was the same mechanic for both inspections in that panel? If I’m correct then why did he remove the panel during the pre-buy if he was not going to do a proper inspection? It’s like taking the toilet paper off the roll but not wiping your ass? Half ass job


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy95W]

2 hours ago, corn_flake said:

@LANCECASPER  Aircraft is consider no longer airworthy when an annual inspection begins.  

Where in the FARs is that written?  Or is there a legal interpretation letter of clarification?