Interested in a Comanche 250?

[Chip Sylverne]

I may just go with an owner supplied part. (Australian replacement.)

ICS is reporting that all the paperwork has finally been submitted for the aussie horn stc. Friend of mine had dinner with the designer, and saw the genuine article. Says it's a right stout piece of kit.

Course, the tube and part then have to be available to purchase.

 

[EdFred]

ICS is reporting that all the paperwork has finally been submitted for the aussie horn stc. Friend of mine had dinner with the designer, and saw the genuine article. Says it's a right stout piece of kit.

Course, the tube and part then have to be available to purchase.

I *thought* that the existing tubes and arm could be used.

 

[JHW]

Or replace the parts with new and be good for ten years. My plan is to milk the 100 hrs and hope for an amoc in the meantime. Very few horns have been found cracked, and research by ICS has shown the root cause may have been overtorquing of the bolts at the factory. My gut is that more damage will be done by continually r&ring than inspecting once and leaving well enough alone.

Rumor has it compliance cost is around $3k plus parts.

you need to put an airflow switch on the belly and change to tracking time by hobbs

 

[weilke]

Or replace the parts with new and be good for ten years. My plan is to milk the 100 hrs and hope for an amoc in the meantime. Very few horns have been found cracked, and research by ICS has shown the root cause may have been overtorquing of the bolts at the factory. My gut is that more damage will be done by continually r&ring than inspecting once and leaving well enough alone.
.

My impression of this issue is that this was one IA who manufactured a 'problem', the fix of which he benefits from financially.

There are a couple of thousand Comanches flying, some of them older than dirt. If thls part was indeed prone to failure, the landscape should be littered with planes that nosed in for no good reason and have only 1/2 of the fitting left. I don't doubt that they crack, I doubt that the cracks are structurally significant enough to warrant an invasive procedure.

 

[EdFred]

My impression of this issue is that this was one IA who manufactured a 'problem', the fix of which he benefits from financially.

There are a couple of thousand Comanches flying, some of them older than dirt. If thls part was indeed prone to failure, the landscape should be littered with planes that nosed in for no good reason and have only 1/2 of the fitting left. I don't doubt that they crack, I doubt that the cracks are structurally significant enough to warrant an invasive procedure.

To date there has not been an inflight failure.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

I *thought* that the existing tubes and arm could be used.

Arms are an interference fit, so they can be reused, but need to be installed in the horn using a press and some particular procedures. The tube and horn are individually match drilled and reamed, so, already having been reamed once, it's very unlikely the existing holes in the tube will be able meet tolerance in alignment with the holes in the replacement horn. That's the story I'm getting, anyway.

 

[EdFred]

Hmmmm, the video I saw on youtube of the installation I thought they used existing, but I didn't watch it that close. I got a buddy that works in an aluminum shop. Pretty sure I could have him get me some rolled Al.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

My impression of this issue is that this was one IA who manufactured a 'problem', the fix of which he benefits from financially.

There are a couple of thousand Comanches flying, some of them older than dirt. If thls part was indeed prone to failure, the landscape should be littered with planes that nosed in for no good reason and have only 1/2 of the fitting left. I don't doubt that they crack, I doubt that the cracks are structurally significant enough to warrant an invasive procedure.

You and just about everyone else except the FAA..

 

[Lawreston]

I can't answer that question. The a&p was flying it pretty regularly when I was interested, and one of the posts above mentioned 80 hours till the tail ad is due, so it must have flown at least 20 hours since October or November. Not sure exactly when that ad came out off the top of my head.

Just checked, October 22, 2012. I tossed my notes, so I cant tell you the tt or tsmoh as of last March or April. IIRC, the compressions were very good, oil changed at regular 50 hours intervals. The a/p and no ad prop was a big plus. My impression was it was a nice, solid airframe, not a pristine show bird but well cared for, all paperwork in order, no long periods out of annual, clean logs, no history of major repairs. I have no in- person impression because it wasn't local and I didn't go to see the bird because my offer was considerably below the asking at the time, about where it is now, and Mo rejected it out of hand.

I don't remember in which recent month we "lost" Morris("Mo"), but right up to a week or so before he succumbed he went flying in his baby, though I suspect buddy Tom was the PIC. The plane was his #1 (mechanical) passion.

HR

 

[mnewb1]

whatever became of this plane?

 

[EdFred]

Mine is still for sale.

http://webpages.charter.net/edfred/comanche/

 

[flyingcheesehead]

whatever became of this plane?

Still registered to the same guy, unless it got sold to someone else named Morris.

The idea of buying it, putting in a new panel with lots of Garmin toys, and overhauling the engine when it becomes necessary is quite appealing. It's not exactly going to be Av Shiloh's, but it'd still be really nice.