Jump to content

Need advice / sharing my concerns with someone


redbaron1982

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

I not trying to be uncaring and I’m not expecting or demanding that all buyers already have that knowledge, I sure didn’t when I got interested in airplanes. But it is available if you ask, look around, and do your research. In fact it’s more available now than at any time in human history. No one has to do all that, but if they don’t , as we see here, it can lead to problems.

@LANCECASPER

I guess my writing skills are failing to adequately communicate my point.  So, I'm going to try one more time.

The above is certainly true for aircraft.  It is NOT true for other modern equipment purchases; e.g. automobiles.  I suppose the size of that market and competition has driven improvement.  I guess that's not the case with aircraft.

My point:  The CONTINUED expectation that buyers must posses the technical skills you have in order to purchase an aircraft IS contributing to the DECLINE of GA.  To raise the defense of "that's just the reality of the situation' merely serves to perpetuate that decline.  This debate got started when someone dared suggest that we need to collectively change our philosphy on this.  I agree.  It's okay you don't.  Just don't expect that GA will grow in that environment.  People will spend their money pursuing endeavors where they are treated better.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

I not trying to be uncaring and I’m not expecting or demanding that all buyers already have that knowledge, I sure didn’t when I got interested in airplanes. But it is available if you ask, look around, and do your research. In fact it’s more available now than at any time in human history. No one has to do all that, but if they don’t , as we see here, it can lead to problems. I feel bad for the individual, No one wants that for him. Sometimes the tuition paid for the education received is very steep.

In this business just like any other, on every transaction a person with money meets a person with experience. When the transaction closes they exchange what they have. The person who had the money now has the experience and the person with the experience now has the money.

While that might not seem fair, there are no guarantees that you will get fair treatment in life. Therefore I choose to accept the situation way it is right now rather than the way I would like it to be someday: caveat emptor, buyer beware. The buyer needs to do their own homework to not get taken by the seller or the shop doing the pre-buy or anyone they are giving their money to. I don’t really think either the seller or shop tried to deceive him in this case - it’s just an unfortunate set of circumstances. 

This will all pass once the airplane is looked at by someone that has done this type of thing before, successfully and reasonably. Again, I would get it away from that shop though if it was me. 

I consider myself someone that get informed before doing something. But also I assume people do what they are supposed to do. For me a prebuy should inspect for major issues so to protect the buyer from getting burnt. Actually I don't care for a prebuy to tell me that fuel caps are not placard with the fuel quantity, how much it could be to fix that? I'd rather expect them to tell me anything major with the airframe, avionics or power plant. 

I get that one thing is to suppose and another thing is what's written. 

But let's assume another scenario, following your logic, you should become a surgeon before undergoing surgery so you can tell the surgeon all the things he should take care of so you don't die while the surgery. 

 

  • Like 5
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, redbaron1982 said:

But let's assume another scenario, following your logic, you should become a surgeon before undergoing surgery so you can tell the surgeon all the things he should take care of so you don't die while the surgery. 

 

BINGO!

You did a much better job in that one paragraph, than I have done in two posts!

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MikeOH said:

@LANCECASPER

I have to echo @corn_flake's sentiments on this.  Your post was a well reasoned one for someone FAMILIAR with the intricacies of airplane ownership, but expecting, practically demanding, that all buyers must have that level of experience to purchase an aircraft is one of the reasons why GA is declining.  Consumers have become used to a much higher level of expectation with automobile purchases; GA is stuck in the mentality of 1920s car ownership!  Defending that 'old school' model is exacerbating the death of GA.  Look no further than how Cirrus entered, and now dominates, the market for an example of how to grow GA.

Jury is still out to one degree on that...

let’s see how a cirrus stands up to 50 years of use!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, redbaron1982 said:

Thanks y'all for the comments and suggestions, specially those looking forward! :) The pre-buy is already done and cannot be changed, eventually, in the future, I could be more specific on telling the "experts"  how to inspect an aircraft!

Somewhere I read that there maintenance manual for M20J are of available to the regular public (for free), is that so? Is there anywhere where I can get those just to learn more about the aircraft? I have some mechanical knowledge, but on cars (I'm building a FFR Roadster), not much on aircrafts.

Service

mooney.free.fr/Manuels M20J/M20J/Mooney Service Manuel M20J Vol. 1 of 2.pdf

mooney.free.fr/Manuels M20J/M20J/Mooney Service Manuel M20J Vol. 2 of 2.pdf

Parts

mooney.free.fr/Manuels M20J/M20J/Mooney M20J Illustrated Parts Catalog.pdf

POH - 2 since I don't know whether you have a newer or older serial number

M20J-POH.pdf (nqac.com.au)

M20J_3203B (e-monsite.com)

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, KB4 said:

Seems sufficient to pop more than a few panels and search for corrosion.  Did they break it down?  Are you SOL? Not so fast.  I don’t buy that you need to tell the expert what he/she should inspect on ppi.   But buyers think a ppi is an extensive and comprehensive inspection and it’s NOT.  
 

The only question is—Would the corrosion have been found by a REASONABLE A&P given the same time constraints of 17 hours?  Call a shop or ask local A&P and ask what would you inspect for a ppi with a limit of 17 hours.  

@redbaron1982You said that they charged you 17 hours for a prebuy and were going to charge 17 more to finish the annual.  Do you know how many hours they were into the annual before finding the corrosion?

I am inclined to think that an MSC should have been able to find corrosion during a prebuy that was found a few more hours into an annual...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Kmac said:

@redbaron1982You said that they charged you 17 hours for a prebuy and were going to charge 17 more to finish the annual.  Do you know how many hours they were into the annual before finding the corrosion?

I am inclined to think that an MSC should have been able to find corrosion during a prebuy that was found a few more hours into an annual...

I don't know how many. It was 14 days between the report of the ppi and the annual, with the holidays in the middle. 

Something odd too is that the send the report of the annual by email, not mentioning anything special about the corrosion, other than the item in the report. And the email ended with "please your ok to proceed". 

Again, for me that's odd, why I would tell them that proceed fixing the compass light of I still don't know if the airplane will ever fly again. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, redbaron1982 said:

I don't know how many. It was 14 days between the report of the ppi and the annual, with the holidays in the middle. 

Something odd too is that the send the report of the annual by email, not mentioning anything special about the corrosion, other than the item in the report. And the email ended with "please your ok to proceed". 

Again, for me that's odd, why I would tell them that proceed fixing the compass light of I still don't know if the airplane will ever fly again. 

 

 

Is this plane the same one that you posted about previously in which the A&P borrowed it and had a prop strike?  If so is it the same A&P that for whatever reason missed or overlooked the flaking corrosion on the spar cap during the last Annual?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

Is this plane the same one that you posted about previously in which the A&P borrowed it and had a prop strike?  If so is it the same A&P that for whatever reason missed or overlooked the flaking corrosion on the spar cap during the last Annual?

No, it is not. And the MSC that did the prebuy/annual is not the same that used the maintain the aircraft. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are threads around here that discuss typical hours required to complete an annual…

Often, a three day minimum for one mechanic…. Or 24hrs…

If additional things are required to be fixed… another day can easily be added…

 

A lot of hours are removing and replacing screws… to allow access for the inspection…

The second annual… is where you come ready with new screws and a few pieces of hardware to fix squawks you collect over the year…

 

If you are a hands on kinda guy… you really enjoy seeing everything opened up… and how neat and clean everything really is…

And get to see what people are talking about when they find old grease that hadn’t been cleaned out… or brake fluid that is closer to brown than it is to red…

 

RB,

Are you getting Transition Training with that?

TT is often under discussed similar to PPIs…

The first year of GA ownership takes extra effort, costs a little more…  it is a mountain that needs to be climbed…

If you haven’t discussed insurance in detail… we have a guy for that too…

Best regards,

-a-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, carusoam said:

There are threads around here that discuss typical hours required to complete an annual…

Often, a three day minimum for one mechanic…. Or 24hrs…

If additional things are required to be fixed… another day can easily be added…

 

A lot of hours are removing and replacing screws… to allow access for the inspection…

The second annual… is where you come ready with new screws and a few pieces of hardware to fix squawks you collect over the year…

 

If you are a hands on kinda guy… you really enjoy seeing everything opened up… and how neat and clean everything really is…

And get to see what people are talking about when they find old grease that hadn’t been cleaned out… or brake fluid that is closer to brown than it is to red…

 

RB,

Are you getting Transition Training with that?

TT is often under discussed similar to PPIs…

The first year of GA ownership takes extra effort, costs a little more…  it is a mountain that needs to be climbed…

If you haven’t discussed insurance in detail… we have a guy for that too…

Best regards,

-a-

I got a instructor to do the transition after a post here in MS. I'm planning on doing around 20 hours. We will see how it goes. 

Same for insurance, I got it from a post here in MS. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am really sorry for the OP's experience... 

I would be pretty mad myself if this was to happen to me... In fact, It easily could have happened to me on my first mooney purchase.  During the PPI, they found some internal damage from a gear collapse inside the wing.  It required two complete wing panels to be removed and replaced and it cost the seller about 35,000.00 to fix.   That was about 1/5th the price of the aircraft.  I shudder thinking that it could have been missed.

On my second Mooney purchase, I bought the aircraft from a MSC that had bought the aircraft for the aircraft to resell.  They had done a lot of work to it including a new propeller and re doing the instrument panel.   I had a PPI done elsewhere due to potential conflict of interest.  On that PPI they missed the fact that the MSC had not installed a switch for the prop heat.  After the sale, while digging into that issue,  we found that the MSC had also put the wrong propeller on the aircraft.  The only thing different with this "wrong propeller" was that the anti ice heated boots were for a 24v system while the aircraft has a 12v system, so the prop was not getting sufficient heat.   The shop that did the pre-buy and annual on that aircraft also missed that the Gear warning horn was non functional... That is straight up on the official Mooney annual punch list and they flat out didn't check it on the gear swing.

I like a few others here have been thoroughly unimpressed with the average quality of mechanics for GA.  Even at the MSC's I have been to.    I had my most recent annual done at a new shop...  I hope they did a good job, But I don't know how I would know.  The place is not near home base so I was unable to spectate.  What I do know is that when I took them the aircraft for the annual, I also gave them a pretty long list of squawks to address....  SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY.....  Yet they did not address a single one of them... It was work/money for the taking.  That doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the thoroughness of the annual.

What urks me is that the FAA prohibits me from doing so much work that I am perfectly capable of doing.  These older aircraft should be more like experimental aircraft... I do my own work on my experimental glider, including engine work.  Heck a few months ago I had the flaps and ailerons off of it as well.  I get it though... some idiot out there would be using wood screws to hold down flappy sheet metal so that means we all have to suffer.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Schllc said:

Jury is still out to one degree on that...

let’s see how a cirrus stands up to 50 years of use!

Hmmmm…well we are nearly half way there. Cirrus has been shipping “plastic” planes for 23 years and Diamond for 24 years. Like Mark Twain, rumors of their premature demise seem to be greatly exaggerated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/8/2022 at 2:18 PM, MikeOH said:

@LANCECASPER

I guess my writing skills are failing to adequately communicate my point.  So, I'm going to try one more time.

The above is certainly true for aircraft.  It is NOT true for other modern equipment purchases; e.g. automobiles.  I suppose the size of that market and competition has driven improvement.  I guess that's not the case with aircraft.

My point:  The CONTINUED expectation that buyers must posses the technical skills you have in order to purchase an aircraft IS contributing to the DECLINE of GA.  To raise the defense of "that's just the reality of the situation' merely serves to perpetuate that decline.  This debate got started when someone dared suggest that we need to collectively change our philosphy on this.  I agree.  It's okay you don't.  Just don't expect that GA will grow in that environment.  People will spend their money pursuing endeavors where they are treated better.

We always hope for better than we have, but common sense says we always live in the reality. People believing otherwise think that just by writing a check to someone that they will always have your best interests in mind. It's actually gone the other direction in our lifetime.  There was a time where you could have gone with that philosophy and it may have turned out ok, and in some cases a person may surprise you and do just that even now. They are definitely out there. Some of them are on this forum. However we wouldn't be three pages into this post if everyone lived by that philosophy. There is no standard for a pre-purchase inspection. It's not in the FARs. It's not even an inspection really according to the FAA's use of that word. It's a "Look and see" basically. Therefore since everyone seems to do it to a different standard,  if you are going to pay your money for one make sure it's done to your standard. Should someone have told him that? Yes. But there are threads on here describing what we are talking about here. What needs to change overall is accepting accountability and holding people you hire accountable. If I hire you  then I better tell you what I want you to do for my money or it's at least partially my fault if I didn't get my money's worth. 

I hate to state the obvious but the biggest problem isn't that they missed it, although that is very unfortunate. The biggest issue looking forward is that issue needs to be remedied. You've got to pull yourself together and collect your thoughts and figure out a plan of action moving forward. To me, leaving it there is not a remote option.

As far as I can tell I'm still the only one in this post who has given him the contact info for someone that can help him out of this mess. It's a carbon copy of what happened about three years ago and it turned out just fine. But the person took swift decisive action and got it to a shop while it was still "in annual" that he could work with. Should the shop have caught the corrosion? For sure. But I definitely wouldn't have the shop that didn't catch it do the work on it. I would try to get my money back for the pre-buy. But that's a battle you can work out later. If it was my airplane it would be on Flight Aware on the way to a shop that has worked with a DER before to get this type of thing remedied. The fact that the shop happens to be in the home state of the buyer is a huge plus. (swta.net)

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


But let's assume another scenario, following your logic, you should become a surgeon before undergoing surgery so you can tell the surgeon all the things he should take care of so you don't die while the surgery. 

A more accurate analogy would be purchasing a used vehicle from either a private party or a dealer. As a condition of sale, you take the vehicle to a shop and ask them to conduct a pre purchase inspection (it’s actually a common thing). What do you expect that shop to look at/perform/do?

Same thing happens with home inspections. What the average purchaser think is covered in a home inspection is not what they are purchasing.

Trust is earned, not given.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@LANCECASPER   I'm sure the OP of this thread appreciate your help on actually resolving his specific situation. 

As a relatively new owner of GA aircraft (3 years), I'm simply astonished by the lack of desire to change things to ensure the survival of GA.  If we look hard enough across all GA aircrafts, the story of new comers misplaced their trust on some shops happens all the time.  If we truly enjoy GA, keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result is not a good plan.  The change may take a long time, and possibly beyond our life time.  But, taking the first step to acknowledge the problem will benefit the future generations well.  

I'll get off my soup box and let's talk about actionable items to avoid future occurrence of similar situation.  If shops can't be trusted to do their job, perhaps we need to have intermediary to act on buyer's behalf.  I imagine this could be a broker.  Or perhaps a network fo MSer to guide the new comers.  I would be willing to volunteer my time near my geographic location - CA.  

In the example of IT/Internet, if pioneers of internet kept the status quote of the 90s, instead of having this discussion in an online forum, we would still be sending letters with stamps using postal services!  :P 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LANCECASPER said:

We always hope for better than we have, but common sense says we always live in the reality. People believing otherwise think that just by writing a check to someone that they will always have your best interests in mind. It's actually gone the other direction in our lifetime.  There was a time where you could have gone with that philosophy and it may have turned out ok, and in some cases a person may surprise you and do just that even now. They are definitely out there. Some of them are on this forum. However we wouldn't be three pages into this post if everyone lived by that philosophy. There is no standard for a pre-purchase inspection. It's not in the FARs. It's not even an inspection really according to the FAA's use of that word. It's a "Look and see" basically. Therefore since everyone seems to do it to a different standard,  if you are going to pay your money for one make sure it's done to your standard. Should someone have told him that? Yes. But there are threads on here describing what we are talking about here. What's what needs to change overall is accepting accountability and holding people you hire accountable. If I hire you  then I better tell you what I want you to do for my money or it's at least partially my fault if I didn't get my money's worth. 

I hate to state the obvious but the biggest problem isn't that they missed it, although that is very unfortunate. The biggest issue looking forward is that issue needs to be remedied. You've got to pull yourself together and collect your thoughts and figure out a plan of ahead moving forward. To me, leaving it there is not a remote option.

As far as I can tell I'm still the only one in this post who has given him the contact info for someone that can help him out of this mess. It's a carbon copy of what happened about three years ago and it turned out just fine. But the person took swift decisive action and got it to a shop while it was still "in annual" that he could work with. Should the shop have caught the corrosion? For su re. But I definitely wouldn't have the shop that didn't catch it do the work on it. I would try to get my money back for the pre-buy. But that's a battle you can work out later. If it was my airplane it would be on Flight Aware on the way to a shop that has worked with a DER before to get this type of thing remedied. The fact that the shop happens to be in the home state of the buyer is a huge plus. (swta.net)

I'm thinking how to handle this forward and what type of conversation I'm going to have with the MSC on Monday. 

The current situation is:

The airplane has no prop, because on the pre purchase they detected a minor grease leak. They contact MT and the prop was under warranty so now the prop is in a shop for inspection/repair. 

The airplane has no muffler because it was showing signs of corrosion and a new muffler is on it's way. 

The airplane is technically until last they of February airworthy as per the last annual. 

I'm not sure if after this annual the airplane is still airworthy, I mean, they would have to enter in the log book that an inspection was done but not the result itself, because that would render the airplane not airworthy. Sounds shady. 

So, again, I'm still trying to figure out what type of conversation and what to request to the shop on Monday. And of course, first thing,.for them to share the pictures of what they found. 

Any suggestion on how to handle this is appreciated. I'm considering flying it to your recommended MSC but again, I'm not sure if the airplane is AW or not. Also, I'd be losing 4.5k for the annual/prebuy that were a complete waste of money. 

Edited by redbaron1982
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

Hmmmm…well we are nearly half way there. Cirrus has been shipping “plastic” planes for 23 years and Diamond for 24 years. Like Mark Twain, rumors of their premature demise seem to be greatly exaggerated. 

I don’t think I suggested cirrus was going to fail. Quite the opposite , it’s pretty obvious they figured out what the market wants, and are filling the need. 
I don’t think the carbon fiber airframes are going to be airworthy as long as metal, but we shall see!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, redbaron1982 said:

I consider myself someone that get informed before doing something. But also I assume people do what they are supposed to do. For me a prebuy should inspect for major issues so to protect the buyer from getting burnt. Actually I don't care for a prebuy to tell me that fuel caps are not placard with the fuel quantity, how much it could be to fix that? I'd rather expect them to tell me anything major with the airframe, avionics or power plant. 

I get that one thing is to suppose and another thing is what's written. 

But let's assume another scenario, following your logic, you should become a surgeon before undergoing surgery so you can tell the surgeon all the things he should take care of so you don't die while the surgery. 

 

https://resources.savvyaviation.com/wp-content/uploads/articles_eaa/EAA_2014-11_prebuy-dos-and-donts.pdf

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel bad for the OP. I really do. Let's keep it all in perspective. No one died. No one has been told they are terminal. Nothing here is not fixable. It is a matter of money. Money hard earned, money that seeks to be wisely spent. The suggestion to close it up and take it to a shop heavy on Mooney airframe repair experience like DMax etc while you still can, may be the wisest decision. Try to get the most for your money this time. I know you feel like you tried and failed, but the second time will work out for you, I am sure. The old saying, "Once burned is twice learned" is never truer than in aviation.

Once fixed, fly her and care for her like the first love she is. You will never come out of this deal restored or even break even, so enjoy the ride because you paid a premium for it.  Might as well make it a good one.  

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

I don't want to continue looking into the past, but reading to this article, some take aways:

1)

"First, the pre-buy examination* must be done by a shop or mechanic with extensive expertise with the specifi c aircraft make and model involved. Since the mechanic will have only a limited amount of time to examine the aircraft, it’s essential that he know exactly where to look for problems—i.e., what this model’s most common and serious problems are."

 "Ideally, the pre-buy should be done at a factory-authorized service center or type-specifi c specialty shop."

I chose a MSC, officially published in mooney.com. I think I did the right call here.

2)

"Second, the shop or mechanic chosen to perform the pre-buy must have no prior history maintaining the aircraft and no prior relationship with the seller or (if applicable) the seller’s broker"

Again, the MSC I selected had no previous history with the airplane, the broker or the seller.

3)

"Third, the pre-buy needs to be done within a reasonable distance of where the aircraft is located."

It was a 40 minutes fly from the home airport of the aircraft.

4)

"Once the pre-buy shop has been chosen, the next order of business is providing specifi c guidance to the mechanic on the desired scope and detail of the examination"

This one I didn't do.

5)

"While there are a lot of variables, we generally figure a pre-buy examination should require roughly:"

"Eight hours of labor for a retractable or advancedtechnology normally aspirated piston single like a Bonanza or Cirrus"

I paid for 17 hours, more than twice the 8 hours suggested in this article. 

6) Takeaways, apart froom the ones mentioned above:

"The pre-buy and any ferrying expenses should be paid for solely by the buyer. Never agree to have the buyer and seller split the costs of the pre-buy, because in that case the seller will want to control the location and scope of the pre-buy"

"Never structure a pre-buy as an “inspection”—particularly not as an “annual inspection.”

"Once you’ve bought the aircraft, it sometimes makes sense to convert the pre-buy into an annual inspection."

I've done all of that.

So again, having read that article, would have changed much what I've done. Ok, I give it that I may have listed to the shop the list of things I wanted them to take care of (actually I did that, but where basic things that I looked my self when I went to see the airplane). Or maybe I'd have asked for a detailed list of activities to be performed, and if something big was missing, I may have asked them to include it.

The document says "A prebuy should be target to find showstoppers", I paid a official MSC 17 hours of labor, I would have expected them to do that.

I know, people don't do what they are supposed to do, it happens to me every day, my own team, my internal clients and suppliers, they don't do what they are supposed to do, many times.

So I take that, I should have had everything on written, I should have treat the MSC as if they were doing the first pre buy of their life and were completely new in the buisness. The thing is, that I was the "new" here, trying to buy my first airplane.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is nothing in the maintenance manuals that says "inspect every inch of the spar, and all stringers, longerons, and skins for corrosion". If there were, that inspection alone would probably take 50 hours. So you are relying somewhat on the experience of the shop, and much more on chance, to find something serious like corrosion. Most of that 17 hour budget would be consumed by checking the paperwork, the engine, and the avionics & landing gear. There would be very little for what are termed "special inspections". Corrosion inspections are detailed & specialized, and there are no checklists for most planes. So it's hard to fault the seller, and it's even harder to fault the shop given that they would not have had adequate time to review every nut, bolt, rivet, and crevice. The best you can do is look for a reasonable repair cost, and ask the seller to contribute. Maybe he cooperates, but don't expect it.

As others have mentioned, a thorough pre-buy would be so expensive that no one would do it. The reality is that you are buying a 40 year old machine that doesn't owe anyone anything. There is always risk in that, and that's why the price of an older plane is not the same as a brand new one. I figure that if I buy a 40 year old Mooney for $100K, I am $550K below the cost of a new one. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, redbaron1982 said:

I'm thinking how to handle this forward and what type of conversation I'm going to have with the MSC on Monday. 

The current situation is:

The airplane has no prop, because on the pre purchase they detected a minor grease leak. They contact MT and the prop was under warranty so now the prop is in a shop for inspection/repair. 

The airplane has no muffler because it was showing signs of corrosion and a new muffler is on it's way. 

The airplane is technically until last they of February airworthy as per the last annual. 

I'm not sure if after this annual the airplane is still airworthy, I mean, they would have to enter in the log book that an inspection was done but not the result itself, because that would render the airplane not airworthy. Sounds shady. 

So, again, I'm still trying to figure out what type of conversation and what to request to the shop on Monday. And of course, first thing,.for them to share the pictures of what they found. 

Any suggestion on how to handle this is appreciated. I'm considering flying it to your recommended MSC but again, I'm not sure if the airplane is AW or not. Also, I'd be losing 4.5k for the annual/prebuy that were a complete waste of money. 

While this sucks, and “there but for the grace of god go I”, my plan would be to get them to put the prop and exhaust  back together as soon as possible, button everything else up and move it.  If you want to get a better feeling, have an independent A&P look at the corrosion and tell you what he thinks.  Have a cfi fly it to TX with you.  Get the airplane to SWTA or DMax.  Yeah it’ll cost a little in the short run but lead to much better resolution.

You won’t even need to pay for another annual.  Theoretically, the new shop can address the list provided by the shop that did the inspection and sign it off.  There’s a Mike Busch article about this around somewhere.

Edit: @corn_flakeis right, it’s not airworthy, but they don’t have to repair it.  You can likely still ferry it.  Here’s the article I mentioned…

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

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@redbaron1982

Sorry to break the bad news.  Technically, once you start the annual inspection, the aircraft is no longer airworthy until an IA signs off as AW.  This is the reason why Savvy suggest not to structure PPI as an annual.  

Now, a bit a better news.  A list of discrepancies or AW issues should not be recorded in the log book.  IA at the MSC should simply sign off in the log book indicating annual inspection has been completed in accordance FARAIM...  and found aircraft to be un-airworthy.  A list of AW should be given to you in a separate sheet.  At this point, you can find another A&P to review and address the AW issues.  You can either have the A&P address all the issues, or at the A&P's discretion, he can assist you in obtaining a ferry permit assuming if the aircraft can be safely flown to a repair facility of your choice.  

Mike Busch cover this exact topic in one of his webinar.  Search YouTube for his video.    

  • Like 4
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.