Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Gary Welch on July 8, 2018 at 10:42pm

Thanks for the reminder about not relying in a single airport for a fuel stop. It's not something I've thought of in a while but it's an important one.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gary Reed on July 9, 2018 at 8:58pm

Good point to always have an Alternate, even when the weather calls for Severe Clear. 
I hadn't thought about it that way.  Thank you for sharing.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Austin on July 10, 2018 at 4:27pm

Interesting ... depending on the extent of aircraft damage, this might have been an "incident" and would not have to be reported to the FAA with all the subsequent delays!  Apparently, the NTSB/FAA are only interested in accidents with "substantial damage" defined as “damage or failure which adversely affects the structural strength, performance, or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and which would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component. Engine failure or damage limited to an engine if only one engine fails or is damaged, bent fairings or cowling, dented skin, small punctured holes in the skin or fabric, ground damage to rotor or propeller blades, and damage to landing gear, wheels, tires, flaps, engine accessories, brakes, or wingtips are not considered "substantial damage." 

However, once someone contacts the FAA ... Pandora's box is opened!  ;>)

John

N750A

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robert Riat on July 10, 2018 at 7:17pm

Thanks for the info John,

   I am on our airport board (69k) but didn't get there until several different law agencies were

on site and the FAA had already been called.  The owner was on the phone a couple of times

with them and (this was Sunday) they finally told him that they considered it an incident, but still

wanted to see it this week.  Up until that last call, we were not supposed to touch it.

   After a few ideas I hauled my telehanldler out there, removed the cowl, from the hook on the engine.               raised the front of it up, put a small 4 caster furniture mover under the rear tie down and with wing walkers

and a guy sort of steering the tail we took it down the runway and into his hanger and up on jacks. For

a bunch of old country boys, it worked pretty slick.  

  Maybe you can tell me -- I always thought a prop strike meant an automatic engine tear down for a

crank check. The aluminum three bladed prop was still turning when he touched down, bending all the

tips, and the owner is telling me since it's Continental he may not have to tear it down.  I didn't say 

anything....

     Flew a friend to Oshkosh today to mark his spot for his Luscombe and they thought it was hot there.

I live in Kansas and I thought it was cool!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Austin on July 11, 2018 at 8:37am

That's what usually happens - even though there are no injuries, etc., well-meaning people call all sorts of law enforcement and federal agencies, who usually in-turn call the FAA since they don't have a clue what to do, and once the FAA  is notified, everything's in limbo until they get around to making a determination and closing their file.  If cooler heads prevail and realize it's just an "incident," it saves a lot of down-time and is then just a matter of getting the darned thing off the runway and calling their insurance company!

Unfortunately, when the FAA "still wants to see it," that opens up the pilot and plane to the FAA stumbling onto inadvertent regulation violations and even more grief.  Beware when someone show's up and says the nine most terrifying words in the English language: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help!" Haha!

The aluminum three bladed prop was still turning when he touched down, bending all the

tips, and the owner is telling me since it's Continental he may not have to tear it down. 

I am not an A&P, but I think the owner is engaged in, ahem ..., extremely wishful thinking!  ;>)

Wonder why he wouldn't want it torn down?  The practical fact is that his insurance will pay for it and if it were me, I'd be forever paranoid flying that engine if it hadn't been torn down!

John

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Earnest Fontenot on July 11, 2018 at 9:09am

"I'd be forever paranoid flying that engine if it hadn't been torn down"

John, in a case where the owner tries to "get away" with something like that, the paranoia won't last forever...........

Earnie

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gary Reed on July 11, 2018 at 9:14am

Don't know where he got his "Continental" info about the engine teardown. Definitely Wishful Thinking. I found this and am including the salient points.

Teledyne Continental Service Bulletin SB96-11B

"Following any propeller strike, complete disassembly and inspection of all rotating engine components is mandatory . . ."

"Propeller strike is: 1) Any incident, whether engine is running or not that requires repair of the propeller . . . or 2) any incident while engine is operating in which (propeller contact) results in a loss of RPM . . ."

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JEFF COCHRAN on July 11, 2018 at 10:45am

When I had my incident, nose gear, prop tips and a wing tip, I got out and with the help of a few witnesses we held down the tail and pulled it onto a taxiway and out of the way.  Unfortunately for me there was a public road running just past the end of the runway.  A reporter from the local paper driving by witnessed the event and called 911.  I got two sheriffs vehicle, one EMT, one firetruck, and a Georgia Forest Service Vehicle.  The sheriff was mad that I moved the plane but couldn't do anything about it.  After the plane was moved to a vacant hanger, I got online and filed an Aviation Safety Report with NASA.  No one called the FAA and I never talked to them.

And yes I would tear down the engine for inspection.   

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robert Riat on July 11, 2018 at 11:20am

Thanks for the replies -- I assume the majority of pilots would want to have the engine totally inspected even

if it wasn't required.  I have owned and operated lots of equipment in my life and have seen a number of

shafts crystallize and break for of a number of different reasons.  There are enough things to think about

when flying to be wondering if your prop is going to fly away from your plane!

  And yes, our little airport is remote and surrounded by corn fields but even the Kansas Highway Patrol

was there.  In today's world, with social media, most things become well known - quick.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Austin on July 11, 2018 at 12:59pm

In today's world, with social media, most things become well known - quick.

... and of course, media just salivates over being first to report an airplane "crash landing."  So, any little "incident" gets hyped up into a "crash" immediately!  I'm getting off into the weeds here, but one of the major aviation publications referred to the recent Southwest Airlines/Tammy Jo Shultz emergency landing as an "accident!"  I told them I didn't see it that way - it was just darned good piloting!  It also appears your local pilot who landed the Bellanca Viking gear-up did an equally good job!  :>)

John

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mack P. Kreizenbeck on July 11, 2018 at 3:05pm

One of the members of the flying club I belonged to taxied the 182 into some tall grass on a back-country strip - insurance company insisted on an engine tear down. They were the one that paid for the repair, so "since they have seen a thing or two, they know a thing of two".

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Samuel McNair on August 2, 2018 at 11:46pm

Concerning the tear down after a strike, 2 examples that will make you a believer:

C182 prop striking a light steel tow bar at about 1600 RPM. only damaged about 3/4" of tips. Tear down revealed cracked magneto gears and cam gear damage.  An O-320 in an RV clipped a tin runway edge light and took it off the stalk at a fast taxi. Tear down revealed a spiral crack ~1" long in the front main bearing area.  Both engines shows zero run out when "dialed".  Don't bet your life on a prop strike.

When the bungee failed on my 801 causing a rudder and FLG steering lock up and a nose gear collapse, the local FSDO gave me an interview, checked my paperwork, and gave me a clean bill of health. They even complimented me on my decision to not try to go around with a compromised aircraft and for "flying into the crash" and not letting a wing tip catch or the nose drop at higher speed.   Great guys.  NTSB was positive on the report about the bungee failure analysis.  Sent me a nice note. 

Several months later out of the blue I get contacted by FAA enforcement to discuss my "sanctions". The FAA person admitted over the phone that they had not read the report, and (I quote) "It doesn't matter".  I had to surrender my license, they gave me a temporary student license and I had to  take 4 hours of remedial training, and retake the TO & Landing part of my commercial check ride. After nailing the 100' box at +/- 5 knots, crossing the numbers at 50 feet  +10/-0  feet in a strange aircraft in 28 knot gusty winds, they tried twice to bust me for flying an unairworthy aircraft. First because there had been a squawk on the log sheet for inoperative stall warning and there was no A&P release for repairing it (sucking the bug out with a hanky over the hole). The second time (I had to cancel the first ride when winds went over 30 knots) another attempted bust because the vacuum gage went lightly above the green arc during just  the TO& C phase (it was only 10"F out and oily relief valve filter socks get stiff in the cold). It took hours arguing with an airworthiness specialist to not get busted for being unairworthy. It cost me time off form work, ~$1000, and my dignity.  

So much for the "kinder and friendlier FAA" myth. 

• ▶ Reply