brcase
En-Route
What does the mechanic you will use to maintain it and comply with the next annual think about the aircraft? He's the one who will let you know about any red flags now or let you know in a year.
Some Questions about PA28
- Thread starter Tobias Göller
- Start date
Silvaire
En-Route
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2012
- Messages
- 4,613
- Display Name
Display name:
Silvaire
Not really. It doesn't mean the aircraft won't need any work in the next 12 months, it just means the aircraft won't need an inspection for 12 months. An annual inspection has to be done regardless of whether or not there is anything wrong with the airplane so wouldn't it be preferable to haver it due in 12 months rather than 3?
Hi Tobias,
do an AD search here https://ad.easa.europa.eu/search/advanced/result/
and verify all of them are signed off in the logs.
The PA28 Spar design is something coming more and more into focus. It’s a fatigue/structural issue. Nothing to be alarmed but it is good to know about it (minuscule influence compared to other accidents, for now).
The Warrior was the first of the new, improved models which used a new semi-tapered laminar flow wing to provide a little better performance. The wing would prove so popular that within a few years it would be used on the entire Cherokee fleet.
The wings accomplished several things. They offered a nicer, lighter and crispier control feel than the previous "Hershey Bar" wings. Climb rate improved because of the higher aspect ratio of the new wings. And they looked a wholc lot better.
No doubt they also increased the cost of the plane. The original constant- chord wing was chosen partly for its production economy. It could be cut from one piece of aluminum and, because of its short, stubby quality, could easily be packed in crates for overseas shipping. The new wing abandoned these "advantages."
The new wing was 35 feet long with an area of 170 square feet, compared to 30 feet and 170 square feet on the Cherokee
140.
A problem soon developed. A Warrior doing a barrel roll in
Sweden in 1974 shed its wing. A check showed that the original Warrior wing would not withstand the 5.7 g load required by the FAA, so an emergency AD was issued limiting gross weight until a beef-up kit was added to the wing.
The design was changed and models after serial number 74- 15538 received the new wing. No more problem.
Each wing used an I-Beam spar connected at the center with two plates. The FAA, however, was concerned about the strength of the design and ordered additional testing before production began.
"The first cycling test was arranged to give loads of one g - that is, level flight in smooth air" according to Weick. "We continued the tests with the same loading, however, after 300,561 cycles without evidence of failure, the loading was
increased to 1.25 g and the tests continued.
"In all, more than 400,000 cycles were finally applied.
Detailed measurements of the bolts and the holes after the tests showed no measurable differences between the conditions after the
tests and the conditions before the tests were started. "The joints were than approved for production, but we were very careful to specify close tolerances on both the bolts and
holes so they would always have a snug fit.
"The joints gave excellent trouble-free service and were so
strong they could be used without modifications on later models of Cherokees which were much heavier than the original." - Cherokee Tribe.
The Hershey bar Cherokees (140, 150, 160, 180) aren’t affected. The tapered wing models (151, 161, 181) are, as are all Arrows. Some quote from a letter of an NTSB person circulating the web calls the 28-235 as most prone to spar failure.
Long story short, an eddy current might be a good idea, especially on a plane based at a grass field. The PA28 gear goes straight to the spar as I’m sure you know.
You can declare an AMP based on MIP acc. Part-ML and skip a lot of unnecessary costs. There’s no limit to running anything on condition, apart from ADs and airworthiness limitations (the PA28 has none).
Reading your story, especially about the current owners, my feeling is you have the chance to buy a great, economical plane.
Happy to connect if you want to exchange more info!
do an AD search here https://ad.easa.europa.eu/search/advanced/result/
and verify all of them are signed off in the logs.
The PA28 Spar design is something coming more and more into focus. It’s a fatigue/structural issue. Nothing to be alarmed but it is good to know about it (minuscule influence compared to other accidents, for now).
The Warrior was the first of the new, improved models which used a new semi-tapered laminar flow wing to provide a little better performance. The wing would prove so popular that within a few years it would be used on the entire Cherokee fleet.
The wings accomplished several things. They offered a nicer, lighter and crispier control feel than the previous "Hershey Bar" wings. Climb rate improved because of the higher aspect ratio of the new wings. And they looked a wholc lot better.
No doubt they also increased the cost of the plane. The original constant- chord wing was chosen partly for its production economy. It could be cut from one piece of aluminum and, because of its short, stubby quality, could easily be packed in crates for overseas shipping. The new wing abandoned these "advantages."
The new wing was 35 feet long with an area of 170 square feet, compared to 30 feet and 170 square feet on the Cherokee
140.
A problem soon developed. A Warrior doing a barrel roll in
Sweden in 1974 shed its wing. A check showed that the original Warrior wing would not withstand the 5.7 g load required by the FAA, so an emergency AD was issued limiting gross weight until a beef-up kit was added to the wing.
The design was changed and models after serial number 74- 15538 received the new wing. No more problem.
Each wing used an I-Beam spar connected at the center with two plates. The FAA, however, was concerned about the strength of the design and ordered additional testing before production began.
"The first cycling test was arranged to give loads of one g - that is, level flight in smooth air" according to Weick. "We continued the tests with the same loading, however, after 300,561 cycles without evidence of failure, the loading was
increased to 1.25 g and the tests continued.
"In all, more than 400,000 cycles were finally applied.
Detailed measurements of the bolts and the holes after the tests showed no measurable differences between the conditions after the
tests and the conditions before the tests were started. "The joints were than approved for production, but we were very careful to specify close tolerances on both the bolts and
holes so they would always have a snug fit.
"The joints gave excellent trouble-free service and were so
strong they could be used without modifications on later models of Cherokees which were much heavier than the original." - Cherokee Tribe.
The Hershey bar Cherokees (140, 150, 160, 180) aren’t affected. The tapered wing models (151, 161, 181) are, as are all Arrows. Some quote from a letter of an NTSB person circulating the web calls the 28-235 as most prone to spar failure.
Long story short, an eddy current might be a good idea, especially on a plane based at a grass field. The PA28 gear goes straight to the spar as I’m sure you know.
You can declare an AMP based on MIP acc. Part-ML and skip a lot of unnecessary costs. There’s no limit to running anything on condition, apart from ADs and airworthiness limitations (the PA28 has none).
Reading your story, especially about the current owners, my feeling is you have the chance to buy a great, economical plane.
Happy to connect if you want to exchange more info!
bluerooster
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2011
- Messages
- 2,074
- Display Name
Display name:
shorty
I time my oil changes by the amount used. 1 qt in 50 hours.
Tobias Göller
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2022
- Messages
- 125
- Display Name
Display name:
SCNR
Hi Domenick,
Sorry (to all) for not reacting sooner... it's been a busy few weeks (and manflu hit me, too)...
Yes, the warrior really is a fighter. It fights against gravity, (drag and some forces you might never even have heard of)... I have seen there is an STC around for a 180 HP engine (which I will consider once the engine is due to be replaced). Other than that... no, it's not a rocket. but it will get you to your destination (eventually).
in addition... I am very lucky to be quite light... (154lbs), my wife is not really heavy at 130lbs... and my kids are around 110lbs (together)... as we mostly use it as a 3- or 2- person aircraft weight is not that big of an issue.
The dakota would be nice... but the fuel burn (and the requirement for avgas) is a concern, especially in the northern part of europe. Not necessarely from a price perspective... but availability has become an issue more and more over the last couple of years.
Electric Mags: I wouldn't switch out both... but as one of them is due anyways... I would consider switching that one (and sending the other one in for overhaul, then switch out the second mag and keep the old mag as a spare).
according to many people I have talked to the electronic mags do save about 10% of gas - which will translate in more range. This would probably be my first mod... I fly over open water regularly and the last thing I want to have is a magneto quitting on me there.
Buying an airplane is a bit a compromise... cost, mission profile, availability all does contribute to the aircraft chosen.
If you'd ask me what my "dream airplane" would be my answer would be "MX7-235". 4 (5) seater, enough power, 70gal of fuel, tailwheel. The downside is: availability (here, they're mostly used as tow planes), fabric (which costs a fortune to redo).... tailwheel (insureance....) in addition, the maules are a bit special regarding spare parts. for a pa28, everything is available. the mx7 is more a bit of a boutique aircraft...
Let's see what the PBI brings to light... I'll keep you posted!
Tobias
Sorry (to all) for not reacting sooner... it's been a busy few weeks (and manflu hit me, too)...
Yes, the warrior really is a fighter. It fights against gravity, (drag and some forces you might never even have heard of)... I have seen there is an STC around for a 180 HP engine (which I will consider once the engine is due to be replaced). Other than that... no, it's not a rocket. but it will get you to your destination (eventually).
in addition... I am very lucky to be quite light... (154lbs), my wife is not really heavy at 130lbs... and my kids are around 110lbs (together)... as we mostly use it as a 3- or 2- person aircraft weight is not that big of an issue.
The dakota would be nice... but the fuel burn (and the requirement for avgas) is a concern, especially in the northern part of europe. Not necessarely from a price perspective... but availability has become an issue more and more over the last couple of years.
Electric Mags: I wouldn't switch out both... but as one of them is due anyways... I would consider switching that one (and sending the other one in for overhaul, then switch out the second mag and keep the old mag as a spare).
according to many people I have talked to the electronic mags do save about 10% of gas - which will translate in more range. This would probably be my first mod... I fly over open water regularly and the last thing I want to have is a magneto quitting on me there.
Buying an airplane is a bit a compromise... cost, mission profile, availability all does contribute to the aircraft chosen.
If you'd ask me what my "dream airplane" would be my answer would be "MX7-235". 4 (5) seater, enough power, 70gal of fuel, tailwheel. The downside is: availability (here, they're mostly used as tow planes), fabric (which costs a fortune to redo).... tailwheel (insureance....) in addition, the maules are a bit special regarding spare parts. for a pa28, everything is available. the mx7 is more a bit of a boutique aircraft...
Let's see what the PBI brings to light... I'll keep you posted!
Tobias
Tobias Göller
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2022
- Messages
- 125
- Display Name
Display name:
SCNR
Hi Patrick,
Very kind of you, thanks! I am aware of that and I know they had to do some checks to comply the ADs. It all seems well so far (according to the paperwork). I am not sure how bad the situation really is. I know of four in-flight failures that may be in connection with wing spar failures... two of them triggered the mentioned AD (another one was in sweden where they mentioned it *could* be a wing spar issue but it more likely was that the pilot spun the aircraft in dense fog).
I think more or less all aircraft of this age will have one ore multiple issues that might arise - it's part of the game (although it suck if it hits you - and still: better be grounded by a mechanic than lose a wing in-flight).
The aircraft is 48 years old now.... there most likely will be issues in the future we don't even know they exist...
What makes me think more positive is: This aircraft has ~4600h with 2400 landings. I regularly fly a PA28 that has 16'000h and about 30'000 landings (despite being 10 years younger).
BTW: The aircraft has always been hangared... never stood outside. And mice are not an issue here, too (aircraft sits on a lift and is hung up)
Tobias
Very kind of you, thanks! I am aware of that and I know they had to do some checks to comply the ADs. It all seems well so far (according to the paperwork). I am not sure how bad the situation really is. I know of four in-flight failures that may be in connection with wing spar failures... two of them triggered the mentioned AD (another one was in sweden where they mentioned it *could* be a wing spar issue but it more likely was that the pilot spun the aircraft in dense fog).
I think more or less all aircraft of this age will have one ore multiple issues that might arise - it's part of the game (although it suck if it hits you - and still: better be grounded by a mechanic than lose a wing in-flight).
The aircraft is 48 years old now.... there most likely will be issues in the future we don't even know they exist...
What makes me think more positive is: This aircraft has ~4600h with 2400 landings. I regularly fly a PA28 that has 16'000h and about 30'000 landings (despite being 10 years younger).
BTW: The aircraft has always been hangared... never stood outside. And mice are not an issue here, too (aircraft sits on a lift and is hung up)
Tobias
Tobias Göller
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2022
- Messages
- 125
- Display Name
Display name:
SCNR
Hi LesGawlik,
Thanks. Just to clarify: The first flight logbook is missing - the technical documentation from day 1 is there and complete... no recorded "fender bender" (which is not the worst of signs).
Climate: We have a mixed climate here... quite warm in summer (32°C (up to 40°C) in summer) and quite cold winters (-20°C is rare but -10°C is nothing out of the ordinary).
Tobias
Thanks. Just to clarify: The first flight logbook is missing - the technical documentation from day 1 is there and complete... no recorded "fender bender" (which is not the worst of signs).
Climate: We have a mixed climate here... quite warm in summer (32°C (up to 40°C) in summer) and quite cold winters (-20°C is rare but -10°C is nothing out of the ordinary).
Tobias
Albany Tom
En-Route
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2021
- Messages
- 3,497
- Display Name
Display name:
Albany Tom
I've read mixed reports on any reliability increase, too. It doesn't mean they're any less reliable, but I wouldn't assume more reliable without evidence.
Tobias Göller
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2022
- Messages
- 125
- Display Name
Display name:
SCNR
Dear All,
The aircraft has had the prebuy inspection today (as well as the yearly maintenance /100h service).
- Prebuy showed no issues at all (with a clear and written recommendation to buy the aircraft).
- Oil sample was collected (but don't have the result yet)
- Oil Filter: No metal shavings at all... filter came out clean (apart from being used... and oily)
- Oil in the pan was clear, no feelable metal shavings at all (didn't notice before that engine oil was that a good hand cream... ). No visible sparkles...
- Corrosion inspection: All good
- Engine Boroscopy: All well (including camshaft!)
- Paperwork: All is well.
Things I will do:
- Overhaul the prop in the coming year
- Overhaul / change at least one magneto.
so... I am definitively going to buy that aircraft (and yes, the hangar place is a good one, too)
Thanks to *ALL* of you who did help in sharing your wisdom / recommendations / etc.
I am very much looking forward to the next couple of years... I am aware: There *will* be unforseen stuff coming up (the aircraft is almost 50 years old). But as a first aircraft... I think it's manageable without too much a sacrifice (... hell, I fly 160h/year... so... I will probably just shift to whom I am paying my money in the future. "Get rid of the middle-man" in my case might mean: Pay it directly to the mechanic, not the club
Thanks again!
Tobias
The aircraft has had the prebuy inspection today (as well as the yearly maintenance /100h service).
- Prebuy showed no issues at all (with a clear and written recommendation to buy the aircraft).
- Oil sample was collected (but don't have the result yet)
- Oil Filter: No metal shavings at all... filter came out clean (apart from being used... and oily)
- Oil in the pan was clear, no feelable metal shavings at all (didn't notice before that engine oil was that a good hand cream... ). No visible sparkles...
- Corrosion inspection: All good
- Engine Boroscopy: All well (including camshaft!)
- Paperwork: All is well.
Things I will do:
- Overhaul the prop in the coming year
- Overhaul / change at least one magneto.
so... I am definitively going to buy that aircraft (and yes, the hangar place is a good one, too)
Thanks to *ALL* of you who did help in sharing your wisdom / recommendations / etc.
I am very much looking forward to the next couple of years... I am aware: There *will* be unforseen stuff coming up (the aircraft is almost 50 years old). But as a first aircraft... I think it's manageable without too much a sacrifice (... hell, I fly 160h/year... so... I will probably just shift to whom I am paying my money in the future. "Get rid of the middle-man" in my case might mean: Pay it directly to the mechanic, not the club
Thanks again!
Tobias