Sure. But they don't do prebuys which is what the OP asked about. Authorized OEM independently owned service centers will do that kind of work but the OEM will not except those smaller reboot legacy OEMs. And as mentioned above, turbine or recip OEMs that take your engine will perform the same work they perform on the engine s they sell outright to the public. And true MROs are at the jet or 121 levels and do not venture into the GA world. So while your examples do have some validity most doesn't apply to the Part 91 side of things. That market is left to the smaller shops and independent APIAs.
Taking you plane back to the factory for a pre buy - thoughts?
- Thread starter k9medic
- Start date
Ed Haywood
En-Route
As others have stated, ACA has a repair station on site at the factory. In addition to servicing aircraft under warranty, they provide inspections, repairs, upgrades, parts, tech support, and restorations for ACA aircraft and predecessor aircraft from Bellanca and Champion that they are the TC holder for.
Having a factory annual done before listing for sale would be a great way to bump the value and maybe skip the pre-buy.
It is common for owners doing restorations to send the bare frame there for inspection, repair, and update to current specs. The repair station gets enough work that they are backlogged almost a year on restorations. Replacement wings are even further out.
It's a shame other manufacturers cannot sort out the legal issues. It is a HUGE plus as an owner to have this resource. Any possible problem that the type can have, they have seen dozens of times, and usually have the fix on hand, often as a kit that they will install or ship with instructions.
Some commenters may be over-simplifying the liability issue. Which manufacturer is better positioned to defend themselves from liability: one that makes active efforts to improve the safety of the older fleet, or one that won't touch anything?
Having a factory annual done before listing for sale would be a great way to bump the value and maybe skip the pre-buy.
It is common for owners doing restorations to send the bare frame there for inspection, repair, and update to current specs. The repair station gets enough work that they are backlogged almost a year on restorations. Replacement wings are even further out.
It's a shame other manufacturers cannot sort out the legal issues. It is a HUGE plus as an owner to have this resource. Any possible problem that the type can have, they have seen dozens of times, and usually have the fix on hand, often as a kit that they will install or ship with instructions.
Some commenters may be over-simplifying the liability issue. Which manufacturer is better positioned to defend themselves from liability: one that makes active efforts to improve the safety of the older fleet, or one that won't touch anything?
Kristin
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2013
- Messages
- 1,610
- Location
- Twin Cities
- Display Name
Display name:
Kristin (The Aviatrix)
Small companies resurrecting ancient airframes are more an MRO with privileges. Jet manufacturers have an entirely different liability profile that owner-flown light aircraft. The OEM's are more than happy to leave their legacy aircraft be, protected by GARA's statute of repose cutting off liability after 18 years.
Kristin
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2013
- Messages
- 1,610
- Location
- Twin Cities
- Display Name
Display name:
Kristin (The Aviatrix)
GARA! Read it and think on it. The major OEM's used to have service facilities in the old days. Half a century ago, people didn't sue every time an aircraft crashed.
Its more than just legal issues. The margins aren't there either. ACA is a niche market just like Waco. Mainstream producers like Cessna, Beech, Bell, Airbus are set up to build new aircraft. Not service old aircraft. OEM service centers are still out there but they are dramatically different than those of the 70s and early 80s. The whole landscape changed when production shutdown in the late 80s except the helicopter side. Personally, I believe the only reason ACA, Waco and others offer those type services is to generate revenue to keep things running as the market for new airframes would not keep it solvent.
Mxfarm
Line Up and Wait
marg
Not only are the margins not there, but having the employee pool to do both doesn’t exist currently.
Dan Thomas
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2008
- Messages
- 10,744
- Display Name
Display name:
Dan Thomas
If Cessna took in an airplane for a prebuy, they'd find stuff. Always will, on old airplanes. Now what? They'd want to fix it up, to get it airworthy. That's expensive. The seller or buyer refuses, and takes the airplane away. It crashes a week later or a year later or a decade later, and Cessna is named as one of the people that had been fooling with it. Into court for who knows how long. Why would Cessna want to get involved with stupid stuff like that? They have enough hassles with people wrecking completely safe, brand-new airplanes and suing them.
ACA or Mooney or whoever is rebuilding airplanes to standards, just like Lycoming rebuilds engines to standards. They don't leave the place with known defects.
ACA or Mooney or whoever is rebuilding airplanes to standards, just like Lycoming rebuilds engines to standards. They don't leave the place with known defects.
Aldeskeukin
Filing Flight Plan
Textron doesn't even want the liability of building new pistons. Which is why they sell so few. They want to sell jets, for obvious reasons - management is aligning itself with shareholders. That said, the whole notion of taking a plane to another airport to allow a mechanic I've never met dissemble in the name of a "pre-buy" is ridiculous. As an AMT I'm happy to let the pre=buyer watch me check compressions and then read the logs and previous annuals, and review costs for same - which are always oddly absent from logged documentation that I see. Beyond that, screw him. I know many A&Ps that I wouldn't let change the oil in my car, much less take a wrench to my plane. This is a mindset among plane owners that needs to evolve.