It's your engine

bnt83 said:
There is a guy that is trying to sell a 1968 Cardinal with an engine he "freshly overhauled" (15 years ago) that never flew and was never signed off. My position on the pricing was the engine needs to come apart, paperwork audited, ADs checked, and basically overhaul it again though it may not need much if any machining.
Click to expand...

Was this aircraft tied out on some salty beach, or in a heated dry hangar in the southwest?

Previous history has a lot to do with what we do on any engine return to service.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
really?....sounds like more inspection than needed. :eek:
Click to expand...

That is all it needs, but the engine shops usually don't work that way. They do not know the quality of the overhaul, so assume the worst case and price accordingly.
 
The insurance company can recommend shops, but ultimately the owner decides. If the owner wants Tom to do the work, the owner need only to tell the adjuster. The company will pay what they feel is fair value, regardless of who does the work.
 
warthog1984 said:
To limp it home, maybe. As a permanent fix, no.
Click to expand...

There was a guy who stood a 172 up on it's nose once, new prop, no tear down, new wing tip, it was flown about 2hrs back to the school it came from and has been in service ever since best I know.

Follow all the REQUIRMENTS from the FAR, manufactor, etc.
 
Chip Sylverne said:
The insurance company can recommend shops, but ultimately the owner decides. If the owner wants Tom to do the work, the owner need only to tell the adjuster. The company will pay what they feel is fair value, regardless of who does the work.
Click to expand...

Exactly, we are waiting the adjuster's reply.
 
James331 said:
There was a guy who stood a 172 up on it's nose once, new prop, no tear down, new wing tip, it was flown about 2hrs back to the school it came from and has been in service ever since best I know.

Follow all the REQUIRMENTS from the FAR, manufactor, etc.
Click to expand...

But then it easily could read, in the accident report, " witnesses at the airport reported that the aircraft had climbed about two hundred feet when it sputtered and quit. Pilot died at the scene, passenger died in the hospital later" . ( but they died doing what they loved) sort of like Russian roulette but in airplane.
 
Tom-D said:
That is all it needs, but the engine shops usually don't work that way. They do not know the quality of the overhaul, so assume the worst case and price accordingly.
Click to expand...
They may or may not. But the insurance company is likely only going to pay for the R&R, teardown, reassembly and then any repairs directly related to the incident necessitating the teardown. They aren't going to overhaul the engine for you, just because you had a prop strike.
 
Chip Sylverne said:
The insurance company can recommend shops, but ultimately the owner decides. If the owner wants Tom to do the work, the owner need only to tell the adjuster. The company will pay what they feel is fair value, regardless of who does the work.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
It wasn't that long ago that we just did a simple run-out on the flange and put the engine back into service with a prop repair or replacement only. I've done many temporary in field repairs and flew it back home on a ferry permit to finish the repairs.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Don't confuse a teardown inspection with an overhaul.
Click to expand...

Never do, but many engine shops pricing there is little difference.

When they open the engine for the service bulletin compliance they will inspect every thing prior to reassembly, and when they find out of tolerance parts that are not accident related, guess who will pay for them.
 
Tom-D said:
Never do, but many engine shops pricing there is little difference.

When they open the engine for the service bulletin compliance they will inspect every thing prior to reassembly, and when they find out of tolerance parts that are not accident related, guess who will pay for them.
Click to expand...
but you just said everything was like brand new....and we all know the quality of your work, so what could go wrong? :D

Are you insinuating that a teardown inspection is darn near like an OH inspection?:yikes::nono:


Sheeeew....they made the wrong log book entry in my logs.....:hairraise::goofy:
 
Last edited:
Checkout_my_Six said:
but you just said everything was like brand new....and we all know the quality of your work, so what could go wrong? :D

Are you insinuating that a teardown inspection is darn near like an OH inspection?:yikes::nono:


Sheeeew....they made the wrong log book entry in my logs.....:hairraise::goofy:
Click to expand...

Maybe the OP is seriously concerned what might be disclosed by a teardown from another mechanic....:dunno::confused:.......:redface:
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
Are you insinuating that a teardown inspection is darn near like an OH inspection?:yikes::nono:
Click to expand...

Well. it is VERY similar. I had to replace a few cylinders on an IO-520D in a Cessna 185. It had been 25 years since new.

I opted for a "prop strike" inspection at the same time because of the age and low time of the engine (400hrs) I took it to P-Ponk. All the seals and bearings were replaced and they told me that other than the cylinders, a prop strike inspection and MOH are much the same, except the oil pump does not get overhauled.

The cost, however, was much less.
 
N801BH said:
Maybe the OP is seriously concerned what might be disclosed by a teardown from another mechanic....:dunno::confused:.......:redface:
Click to expand...

My new parts are no different than anyone else.
 
A major overhaul and prop strike is not the same work scope. Implying they cost the same is false, assuming the engine is in good condition and the prop strike didn't break expensive pieces.

Most of the high priced items on this list won't be replaced during a prop strike inspection/repair.






Quotes for a prop strike inspection/repair at or near the price of an overhaul is the sign they don't want your business IMHO.

 
The Plan.

Is to replace the crank and rods with spares which are now in Aircraft Specialities, replace the prop, repair or replace the cowling, carb, and airbox. After the 170 is flying again, we will have the damaged crank, rods and gears inspected by Aircraft specialties.

And of course, new bearings to fit the different crank.

It will be as good or better than it was prior to the incident.
 
bnt83 said:
A major overhaul and prop strike is not the same work scope. Implying they cost the same is false, assuming the engine is in good condition and the prop strike didn't break expensive pieces.

Most of the high priced items on this list won't be replaced during a prop strike inspection/repair.
Click to expand...

I believe you forget who's decision that is.
 
Tom-D said:
The Plan.

Is to replace the crank and rods with spares which are now in Aircraft Specialities, replace the prop, repair or replace the cowling, carb, and airbox. After the 170 is flying again, we will have the damaged crank, rods and gears inspected by Aircraft specialties.

And of course, new bearings to fit the different crank.

It will be as good or better than it was prior to the incident.
Click to expand...

Care to share the FAA / NTSB case number ??:dunno:
 
So a guy has a prop strike that warrants an inspection and the engine is low time. What to do? In 7-8 years what's more valuable, an engine with 500 SMOH with 300 since prop strike inspection or an engine with 300 SMOH? Pay it now or pay it later.
 
Tom-D said:
Only in the prices.

BUT

If done correctly, it will equal the requirements of 43.2.
Click to expand...
and this is why I got such a smoke'n deal on my last plane.....it was torn down & inspected 350 hrs ago....with over 1,100 hrs SMOH.....:D
 
Jimmy cooper said:
But then it easily could read, in the accident report, " witnesses at the airport reported that the aircraft had climbed about two hundred feet when it sputtered and quit. Pilot died at the scene, passenger died in the hospital later" . ( but they died doing what they loved) sort of like Russian roulette but in airplane.
Click to expand...

Not really.

If it's inspected IAW the manufactors manual and OK, it's OK.

I still treat it as a first flight and will put it through it's paces above the airport.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
and this is why I got such a smoke'n deal on my last plane.....it was torn down & inspected 350 hrs ago....with over 1,100 hrs SMOH.....:D
Click to expand...

Engine manufacturers have listed so many mandatory replacement parts to call it a major, I'm leaning more and more just calling mine a "repair" when I split the case on my first run engine. I still lean towards new cylinders tho. All my accessories are very new.

IDK, hard to decide.
 
bnt83 said:
Engine manufacturers have listed so many mandatory replacement parts to call it a major, I'm leaning more and more just calling mine a "repair" when I split the case on my first run engine. I still lean towards new cylinders tho. All my accessories are very new.

IDK, hard to decide.
Click to expand...

Here is what happens in that scenario.

later in the engines life, you might want to sell the aircraft, when looking thru the longs the new buyer sees the repair, and wants to know why that isn't a overhaul. and suspects you are hiding some thing.

You must have put an under sized crank in it. Yad Yad

The engine in question will be signed off as->
this engine complies with FAR 43.2 after compliance with TCM bulletin ______. Plus the info required to comply with 43.9. Time date all that yack yack.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
Here is what happens in that scenario.

later in the engines life, you might want to sell the aircraft, when looking thru the longs the new buyer sees the repair, and wants to know why that isn't a overhaul. and suspects you are hiding some thing.

You must have put an under sized crank in it. Yad Yad

The engine in question will be signed off as->
this engine complies with FAR 43.2 after compliance with TCM bulletin ______. Plus the info required to comply with 43.9. Time date all that yack yack.
Click to expand...


A future buyer will see the accident in the airframe logs.....

It should read something like " replaced front cowling, carb heat box, prop, engine mount sent out for inspection, IRAN, new spinner, inspect firewall for damage, repaint front of plane. Etc Etc Etc......


And..............

That is assuming the nose over was actually reported and the wreckage was not just rolled back into a hangar and fixed with the hangar door down...And not documented....:rolleyes:
 
N801BH said:
A future buyer will see the accident in the airframe logs.....

It should read something like " replaced front cowling, carb heat box, prop, engine mount sent out for inspection, IRAN, new spinner, inspect firewall for damage, repaint front of plane. Etc Etc Etc......


And..............

That is assuming the nose over was actually reported and the wreckage was not just rolled back into a hangar and fixed with the hangar door down...And not documented....:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Airport managers are required to report any incident or accident to the FAA.

After that, the FAA will call you.
 
N801BH said:
A future buyer will see the accident in the airframe logs.....

It should read something like " replaced front cowling, carb heat box, prop, engine mount sent out for inspection, IRAN, new spinner, inspect firewall for damage, repaint front of plane. Etc Etc Etc......


And..............

That is assuming the nose over was actually reported and the wreckage was not just rolled back into a hangar and fixed with the hangar door down...And not documented....:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Or they just run a NTSB before they ever even see the logs.
 
"Hypothetically" speaking...
Airport manager does not call the FAA or NTSB.
Insurance would rather not pay for transporting the aircraft by land but will do so if there are extenuating circumstances.
FAA is not keen on issuing ferry permits. Probably depends on local FSDO.
Switching out the prop or flying it with a bent prop tip is risky if you get a ramp check at the destination (unless it happened at the "destination" airport).
Cost of a teardown inspection for a Continental O-470S1B is approx $10,500. If damage is found, parts are additional.
Cost of an overhaul on O-470S1B is approx $26,500. Depends on cylinder choices.
Cost of a factory rebuilt O-470S1B is $27,647. plus shipping with a core exchange.
TBO for factory rebuilt is extended to 1,700 hours vs. 1,500 for overhaul.
Insurance does not pay for any parts/components not directly attributable to the prop strike, i.e., Lord mounts, engine baffling, hoses etc., unless they were damaged as a result of a prop strike.
Insurance pays for the cost of the teardown inspection/repair. They are happy if the owner decides to overhaul or replaces with new or factory rebuilt since they no longer worry about hidden damage.
"Right" thing to do is take conservative approach, ground the aircraft, and either have the plane moved by ground transport or pull the engine for repair/replacement at the site.
 
CapeCodFlyer said:
"Hypothetically" speaking...
Airport manager does not call the FAA or NTSB.
Insurance would rather not pay for transporting the aircraft by land but will do so if there are extenuating circumstances.
FAA is not keen on issuing ferry permits. Probably depends on local FSDO.
Switching out the prop or flying it with a bent prop tip is risky if you get a ramp check at the destination (unless it happened at the "destination" airport).
Cost of a teardown inspection for a Continental O-470S1B is approx $10,500. If damage is found, parts are additional.
Cost of an overhaul on O-470S1B is approx $26,500. Depends on cylinder choices.
Cost of a factory rebuilt O-470S1B is $27,647. plus shipping with a core exchange.
TBO for factory rebuilt is extended to 1,700 hours vs. 1,500 for overhaul.
Insurance does not pay for any parts/components not directly attributable to the prop strike, i.e., Lord mounts, engine baffling, hoses etc., unless they were damaged as a result of a prop strike.
Insurance pays for the cost of the teardown inspection/repair. They are happy if the owner decides to overhaul or replaces with new or factory rebuilt since they no longer worry about hidden damage.
"Right" thing to do is take conservative approach, ground the aircraft, and either have the plane moved by ground transport or pull the engine for repair/replacement at the site.
Click to expand...

Collateral damage to the carb and airbox prevents the aircraft from being flown,
 
Tom-D said:
This is an engine I built, in a 170 that I fly. (occasionally) No I wasn't flying it this time. It was a tail dragger student under instruction.

Charley is a great reference, but he isn't the only one who knows the 0-300-?
Click to expand...
'Round these parts, I'd probably borrow a prop, and fly it to Carlus Gann, and have him give it a good going over.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Just based on personal experience, an adjuster is likely to recommend (and base the estimate) on one of two shops in Mena, AR for an O-300.
Click to expand...
So, now we have insurance companies directing traffic to a shop that they prefer to do business with. IIRC It's your airplane, and you get to decide who does the work, Not the ins. company. Remember, the ins. company is going for the lowest price, not nessicarily the best job. (you get what you pay for, usually)
 
bluerooster said:
So, now we have insurance companies directing traffic to a shop that they prefer to do business with. IIRC It's your airplane, and you get to decide who does the work, Not the ins. company. Remember, the ins. company is going for the lowest price, not nessicarily the best job. (you get what you pay for, usually)
Click to expand...

It wasn't like that at all. The adjuster recommended two shops whose work he was familiar with. And yes, I was free to choose my own, which I did.

FWIW, the two shops he recommended were higher priced than what I went with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top