What's involved to purchase A/C with missing logs?

kontiki

kontiki

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
1,122
Display Name
Display name:
Kontiki
Ref subj, I see them out there, priced low. How much of a hassle is it?

Thanks,
 
Like all others, just write the check. Doh.
 
Several schools of thought and I feel sure others will chime in. What logs are missing? How long ago? How much flight time since they went missing, etc. the big 'gotcha' are potentially costly AD's that need to be complied with. Be concern will be selling the plane on the back end.
 
You simply deal with the aircraft missing logs. My aircraft's (1997 Velocity) logs were lost in 2004. The mech just did a write-up stating the logs were lost and did an annual (not sure if that's required) putting it back in an airworthy state. You can bet your insurance will want to know that you're buying an aircraft without logs too. Of course this is going to affect your ability to sell it later. I didn't mind with mine because I'm pretty sure I'll never sell it. The regs say the logs are supposed to be transferred with the aircraft during a sell so I'd at least have the previous owner have an A&P do a fresh annual and some entry about the logs missing.
 
You have an IA do a full inspection and start a new set of logs. Lots of this and that to research and verify depending on model.
 
Threefingeredjack said:
:yeahthat:


AND negotiate how much of that expense the seller is going to carry.
Click to expand...

Normally we are talking a repo or seizure event where the answer is "0". There is also a resale hit so be sure you're gonna get your money's worth out of flying.
 
N2124v said:
What logs are missing? How long ago? How much flight time since they went missing, etc. the big 'gotcha' are potentially costly AD's that need to be complied with. Be concern will be selling the plane on the back end.
Click to expand...
What he said. No way to answer that question reliably without a lot more information.
 
Wayne got it right.

Like all others, just write the check. Doh.

No one asked how much it would cost to replace the logs or make the aircraft airworthy.
 
BT, if the logs are missing then you can easily used the money saved to pay for a pre-buy. If it goes well then you can have the logs started from new. I'd at least have him pay for an annual and IA sign off. I think more important is checking the accident history. That might show a previous accident that they were trying to hide. Don't stop there either. As with my aircraft it had an incident history not revealed to me by the seller (not pleased). Of course get a title search on the plane as well. When it comes down to it if your set on the aircraft (like I was) you can deal with some minor flaws to get your dream plane.
 
Velocity173 said:
BT, if the logs are missing then you can easily used the money saved to pay for a pre-buy. If it goes well then you can have the logs started from new. I'd at least have him pay for an annual and IA sign off. I think more important is checking the accident history. That might show a previous accident that they were trying to hide. Don't stop there either. As with my aircraft it had an incident history not revealed to me by the seller (not pleased). Of course get a title search on the plane as well. When it comes down to it if your set on the aircraft (like I was) you can deal with some minor flaws to get your dream plane.
Click to expand...

On some models of aircraft you will spend several thousand bucks trying to determine compliance with part 39 of the FARs.

The Franklin engine for example has an AD saying if the engine was overhauled by the Franklin engine club you must tear it down to determine if the correct main and rod bearing are the correct ones because they were using Tractor bearing in them. No records saying when it was overhauled and by who.... tear it down. to prove compliance with the AD.

There are several crank shaft ADs proving which is installed might be a problem.

Several Aircraft have crack inspections which require special equipment to inspect which the average A&P in the field won't have on their truck.

bunch of cylinder ADs which require the cylinder maker and their serial numbers to know if the AD applies. Some time the S/N can't be seen with out removal of the cylinder.


When you buy the Good deal with out maintenance records, can you fly it home?
 
I guess until we find out what type aircraft we're dealing with here, it will be hard to give advice. Hopefully it's a Meyers 200 or an experimental and he won't have to worry about the ADs.
 
A bit off topic, but following on Tom's post:
What if the plane was "imported" and had to go through all the hoops to get a US registration and AW certificate ... does that process require proving compliance with ADs (even the tricky ones like camshaft ADs)?

Wondering if the plane's records aren't, in a way, born again after going through that process.
 
JoeSelch said:
A bit off topic, but following on Tom's post:
What if the plane was "imported" and had to go through all the hoops to get a US registration and AW certificate ... does that process require proving compliance with ADs (even the tricky ones like camshaft ADs)?

Wondering if the plane's records aren't, in a way, born again after going through that process.
Click to expand...

Short answer Yes, difficulty determined by where it comes from.

Canada is pretty easy, they consider the mandatory service bulletins required to be completed. It's a matter of converting the service bulletins to ADs

and of course they do all our ADs too.

other countries ? no clue.
 
According to a guy who does a fair number of imports from various countries, the required inspection is "equivalent to that of a 100-hour inspection" whatever that means.

Tom-D said:
Short answer Yes, difficulty determined by where it comes from.

Canada is pretty easy, they consider the mandatory service bulletins required to be completed. It's a matter of converting the service bulletins to ADs

and of course they do all our ADs too.

other countries ? no clue.
Click to expand...
 
Is there a provision that allows a complete refurbish to start logs at 0? I read somewhere that Mooney thought years about doing a refurbish program with old M20Js and selling them with new factory warranties, etc. But then realized that they would probably outsell their current models.
 
So - does the annual inspection ensure that any avionics by serial number do not have any mandatory manufacturer issues?

How do you know that any new interior components, carpeting or engine work were done iaw approved repairs?

You do not know any of this and any FSDO inspector can ground you at their whim.

How many hours on the engine? Since when? Prop? Is the hub or blades subject to any AD's or 'recalls' or anything like that?

Done correctly - an annual is not enough. You to re-establish the A/W of every single component and appliance ... .
 
Jaybird180 said:
Is there a provision that allows a complete refurbish to start logs at 0? I read somewhere that Mooney thought years about doing a refurbish program with old M20Js and selling them with new factory warranties, etc. But then realized that they would probably outsell their current models.
Click to expand...

I would imagine only the factory can zero time it.
 
wabower said:
According to a guy who does a fair number of imports from various countries, the required inspection is "equivalent to that of a 100-hour inspection" whatever that means.
Click to expand...
Sort of. The problem is that in Canada, they allow a lot of alterations and maintance practices which the FAA doesn't. If that inspection turns up any work not done to FAA standards (in terms of either what was done, who did it, or how it was approved), that work has to be taken apart and put back together either as it was when it left the factory or IAW FAA procedures/practices. That can get very, very expensive. I know of a Seneca bought for $90K out of Canada -- a steal, the buyer thought, figuring it would have sold for $130K in the US at that time. Then it was inspected. $60K later, it passed the inspection, at which point the owner had a $130K airplane for which he paid $150K.
 
Jaybird180 said:
Is there a provision that allows a complete refurbish to start logs at 0? I read somewhere that Mooney thought years about doing a refurbish program with old M20Js and selling them with new factory warranties, etc. But then realized that they would probably outsell their current models.
Click to expand...
In theory, the manufacturer could "rebuild" and zero-time the airplane the way engine manufacturers rebuild and zero-time engines. In practice, it would be way too costly to be economically viable -- you'd almost certainly be able to build a new one for less. The difference is that engines were designed to be completely disassembled, while airplanes are not.
 
comanchepilot said:
So - does the annual inspection ensure that any avionics by serial number do not have any mandatory manufacturer issues?

How do you know that any new interior components, carpeting or engine work were done iaw approved repairs?

You do not know any of this and any FSDO inspector can ground you at their whim.

How many hours on the engine? Since when? Prop? Is the hub or blades subject to any AD's or 'recalls' or anything like that?

Done correctly - an annual is not enough. You to re-establish the A/W of every single component and appliance ... .
Click to expand...
Actually, an annual inspection has to do all that -- the IA is signing for the whole kit and kaboodle.
 
Ron Levy said:
Actually, an annual inspection has to do all that -- the IA is signing for the whole kit and kaboodle.
Click to expand...


Judging by some of the bragging and horror stories on PoA, I'm not confident it's really happening as it should.


Yeah, what Ron said.
 
Ron Levy said:
Actually, an annual inspection has to do all that -- the IA is signing for the whole kit and kaboodle.
Click to expand...

yeah, but the extent of an annual without logs has to take at least 100 hours . . . .
 
comanchepilot said:
yeah, but the extent of an annual without logs has to take at least 100 hours . . . .
Click to expand...
Again, I think it depends on the specific aircraft. There are a lot of airplanes which need over 100 hours of labor for the annual even if the records are perfect, but probably not those folks here are buying.
 
comanchepilot said:
So - does the annual inspection ensure that any avionics by serial number do not have any mandatory manufacturer issues?

How do you know that any new interior components, carpeting or engine work were done iaw approved repairs?

You do not know any of this and any FSDO inspector can ground you at their whim.

How many hours on the engine? Since when? Prop? Is the hub or blades subject to any AD's or 'recalls' or anything like that?

Done correctly - an annual is not enough. You to re-establish the A/W of every single component and appliance ... .
Click to expand...

Is there any way to start operatiing/maintaining the aircraft as an Experimental?
 
kontiki said:
Is there any way to start operatiing/maintaining the aircraft as an Experimental?
Click to expand...

Why would you want to? Just buy an experimental. If your thinking about getting around the ADs as I suggested, I was mostly kidding. I operated two experimentals and I not only comply with engine ADs but airframe Service Bulletins (SBs). Yes with an experimental you don't have to comply with ADs but you still must address the AD so that the aircraft is operated in a safe manner. With a homebuilt whatever method you choose to maintain your aircraft still has to address the AD. I just play it safe and comply with the AD as dictated by the FAA or the SB as dictated by the manufacturer. You don't want to be messing around with liabilities when the courts or your insurance carrier starts poking around your logs and checking to see how you addressed the ADs. Just get them done and not worry about it.
 
Velocity173 said:
Why would you want to? Just buy an experimental. If your thinking about getting around the ADs as I suggested, I was mostly kidding. I operated two experimentals and I not only comply with engine ADs but airframe Service Bulletins (SBs). Yes with an experimental you don't have to comply with ADs but you still must address the AD so that the aircraft is operated in a safe manner. With a homebuilt whatever method you choose to maintain your aircraft still has to address the AD. I just play it safe and comply with the AD as dictated by the FAA or the SB as dictated by the manufacturer. You don't want to be messing around with liabilities when the courts or your insurance carrier starts poking around your logs and checking to see how you addressed the ADs. Just get them done and not worry about it.
Click to expand...

My thoughts:
1 - If having no logs kills resale value later, might as well make maintaing the aircraft a little bit easier.

2 - If undocumented work on carpet and furnishings maintenence could become a problem, maybe just obviate all of it by operating it as an experimental.

I would not overlook any AD. They are all safety related.

But when the landing light quits for the first time, it would be nice to just install an LED lighting system and rock on.

Maybe savings like that for remaining life of my medical or service life of airplane could offset the loss of resale value.

Then too, maybe part it out at the end of the line.
 
kontiki said:
Is there any way to start operatiing/maintaining the aircraft as an Experimental?
Click to expand...

Not really - at least not in the way that Experimental-Amateur Built planes are operated.
My understanding is that you can take it to Experimental - but, the idea is that you truly are experimenting and the operating limitations are restricted ... small test flight area, etc.

I'm sure the experts will be along shortly.
 
Last edited:
kontiki said:
Is there any way to start operatiing/maintaining the aircraft as an Experimental?
Click to expand...
Essentially, no. You can't just wave a wand over a production certified aircraft and operate it as though it were an Experimental-Amateur Built type. There are other subsets of Experimental for things like exhibition (Bob Hoover's Shrike Commander was in that group), Research and Development (new aircraft type not yet certified) and things like that, but none of them apply to this case. See 14 CFR 21.191 for the full list and how they apply.
 
kontiki said:
My thoughts:
1 - If having no logs kills resale value later, might as well make maintaing the aircraft a little bit easier.

2 - If undocumented work on carpet and furnishings maintenence could become a problem, maybe just obviate all of it by operating it as an experimental.

I would not overlook any AD. They are all safety related.

But when the landing light quits for the first time, it would be nice to just install an LED lighting system and rock on.

Maybe savings like that for remaining life of my medical or service life of airplane could offset the loss of resale value.

Then too, maybe part it out at the end of the line.
Click to expand...

There's a non-inconsequential difference between complying with ADs in the manner certified airplanes are directed to comply and the manner in which an experimental is allowed to "address" said ADs. Worth thousands of dollars a year. And I disagree, not all ADs are tempered in safety. Looking at the ones for my aircraft this year (first annual since purchase), these things are laden with CYA red tape. Non critical and do more harm to the aircraft (de facto destructive inspections) than if they left it the hell alone. Ex-AB allows you a lot of breathing room in that regard. And AB are not falling out of the sky for structural reasons any more than certified, so the argument of maintenance oversight is debunked.

I just got to afford the entry price to the experimental aircraft of my needs and I'm getting off the bus. I've only been an aircraft owner for 3 cumulative years (2 aircraft) so even accounting for the higher acquisition price, the lifetime savings I stand to gain by going experimental is monumental over a 20 year period of ownership.
 
Ron Levy said:
Sort of. The problem is that in Canada, they allow a lot of alterations and maintance practices which the FAA doesn't. If that inspection turns up any work not done to FAA standards (in terms of either what was done, who did it, or how it was approved), that work has to be taken apart and put back together either as it was when it left the factory or IAW FAA procedures/practices. That can get very, very expensive. I know of a Seneca bought for $90K out of Canada -- a steal, the buyer thought, figuring it would have sold for $130K in the US at that time. Then it was inspected. $60K later, it passed the inspection, at which point the owner had a $130K airplane for which he paid $150K.
Click to expand...



actually the Scope and detail of a 100 hour and an annual are the same. knowing that we also know the all GA aircraft must have an annual with in the past 12 calendar months, and to be airworthy they must have part 39 complied with, that includes all appliances and engine plus airframe ADs.

We all know that there are some dog aircraft in Canada, and you can probably spend a lot of money on that type of aircraft trying to bring into compliance no matter where it came from.

It has been my experience that when you shop north of the border the same rules apply, the cheap ones are the ones you can't afford.

The maintenance rules up north are more stringent than down here, up there the AMEs can't do field overhauls the engine overhaul must be completed by a CRS. Each aircraft must have an annual just like down here and pass the same airworthiness requirements as down here. and then it will get a new Airworthiness certificate CofA issued by the AME with inspection authority.
 
hindsight2020 said:
There's a non-inconsequential difference between complying with ADs in the manner certified airplanes are directed to comply and the manner in which an experimental is allowed to "address" said ADs. Worth thousands of dollars a year. And I disagree, not all ADs are tempered in safety. Looking at the ones for my aircraft this year (first annual since purchase), these things are laden with CYA red tape. Non critical and do more harm to the aircraft (de facto destructive inspections) than if they left it the hell alone. Ex-AB allows you a lot of breathing room in that regard. And AB are not falling out of the sky for structural reasons any more than certified, so the argument of maintenance oversight is debunked.

I just got to afford the entry price to the experimental aircraft of my needs and I'm getting off the bus. I've only been an aircraft owner for 3 cumulative years (2 aircraft) so even accounting for the higher acquisition price, the lifetime savings I stand to gain by going experimental is monumental over a 20 year period of ownership.
Click to expand...

IF .. IF you have a recently built and certified E-AB you will have the new format letter of limitations that WILL make ADs apply to your home built as well as FAR 43-D as required inspection requirements for the condition inspection.
 
Ron Levy said:
In theory, the manufacturer could "rebuild" and zero-time the airplane the way engine manufacturers rebuild and zero-time engines. In practice, it would be way too costly to be economically viable -- you'd almost certainly be able to build a new one for less. The difference is that engines were designed to be completely disassembled, while airplanes are not.
Click to expand...

I've done a few restorations with up grades, there was money there a few years ago, but in this market not so much.
 
Ron Levy said:
Again, I think it depends on the specific aircraft. There are a lot of airplanes which need over 100 hours of labor for the annual even if the records are perfect, but probably not those folks here are buying.
Click to expand...
But a lot of that work can be completed by the owner when they are smarter than a crescent wrench.
 
And some could care less. When the owner's billing rate is higher than the shop rate, the owner is money ahead by staying in his own office while the plane is in the shop.

Tom-D said:
But a lot of that work can be completed by the owner when they are smarter than a crescent wrench.
Click to expand...
 
Tom-D said:
But a lot of that work can be completed by the owner when they are smarter than a crescent wrench.
Click to expand...
Folks who own planes that take more than 100 hours of inspection to do an annual don't take a wrench to their own airplanes -- they pay others to do that.
 
Ron Levy said:
Folks who own planes that take more than 100 hours of inspection to do an annual don't take a wrench to their own airplanes -- they pay others to do that.
Click to expand...
Mostly because the aircraft that require that much time are on a continuous airworthy program or a progressive inspection cycle.

and your local FBO/A&P-IA isn't equipped to do the work, any idea what the support equipment costs for the larger aircraft?

They aren't in the market we were talking about.
 
wabower said:
And some could care less. When the owner's billing rate is higher than the shop rate, the owner is money ahead by staying in his own office while the plane is in the shop.
Click to expand...

I'll bet those owners don't loose their logs either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top