Just venting about my V35's annual/engine replacement

[Peter R.]

If there were ever a day where I was feeling low about aircraft
ownership, today would certainly be a candidate.

My V35 is in the beginning stages of an engine replacement and annual.
The rebuilt engine has yet to arrive (probably another two weeks out)
but the mechanics were able to start the annual and preparation for the
new engine. One of the first tasks was to pull the two-bladed prop and
ship it off to a prop company for evaluation.

When the mechanics pulled the prop, they discovered a 3-inch crack in
the spinner and two incorrectly-sized bolts used to bolt the prop to the
hub by some unscrupulous mechanic during the last prop overhaul, which
resulted in elongation of the bolt holes in the prop hub. Most likely
the prop hub is beyond tolerances and will need to be replaced. The
spinner will certainly need to be replaced given the size of the crack.

I am very thankful that this damage was discovered on the ground rather
than in the air in the form of some type of failure of the prop hub,
bolts, or spinner. But, this is appears to be a multi-thousand US
dollar surprise and the bulk of the work hasn't even started yet.

Just venting...

--
Peter

[zatatime]

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:17:09 -0500, Peter R.
> wrote:

>If there were ever a day where I was feeling low about aircraft
>ownership, today would certainly be a candidate.
>
>My V35 is in the beginning stages of an engine replacement and annual.
>The rebuilt engine has yet to arrive (probably another two weeks out)
>but the mechanics were able to start the annual and preparation for the
>new engine. One of the first tasks was to pull the two-bladed prop and
>ship it off to a prop company for evaluation.
>
>When the mechanics pulled the prop, they discovered a 3-inch crack in
>the spinner and two incorrectly-sized bolts used to bolt the prop to the
>hub by some unscrupulous mechanic during the last prop overhaul, which
>resulted in elongation of the bolt holes in the prop hub. Most likely
>the prop hub is beyond tolerances and will need to be replaced. The
>spinner will certainly need to be replaced given the size of the crack.
>
>I am very thankful that this damage was discovered on the ground rather
>than in the air in the form of some type of failure of the prop hub,
>bolts, or spinner. But, this is appears to be a multi-thousand US
>dollar surprise and the bulk of the work hasn't even started yet.
>
>Just venting...


Wow, I'm sorry. Hopefully not beyond your monetary means to take care
of, and that's all they find.

Good luck.
z

[Dan Luke]

"Peter R." wrote:
>
> When the mechanics pulled the prop, they discovered a 3-inch crack in
> the spinner and two incorrectly-sized bolts used to bolt the prop to the
> hub by some unscrupulous mechanic during the last prop overhaul, which
> resulted in elongation of the bolt holes in the prop hub. Most likely
> the prop hub is beyond tolerances and will need to be replaced. The
> spinner will certainly need to be replaced given the size of the crack.

Ouch! My condolences. I guess I shouldn't whine so much about what a
battery just cost me.

What kind of engine replacement are you doing? Factory o'haul or...?
--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

[john smith]

Is the crack on the inside of the spinner?
I am courious as to how it was not visible during preflight.
Is it a chromed spinner? (Do they come any other way on a Bonanza? :-)

Peter R. wrote:
> If there were ever a day where I was feeling low about aircraft
> ownership, today would certainly be a candidate.
>
> My V35 is in the beginning stages of an engine replacement and annual.
> The rebuilt engine has yet to arrive (probably another two weeks out)
> but the mechanics were able to start the annual and preparation for the
> new engine. One of the first tasks was to pull the two-bladed prop and
> ship it off to a prop company for evaluation.
>
> When the mechanics pulled the prop, they discovered a 3-inch crack in
> the spinner and two incorrectly-sized bolts used to bolt the prop to the
> hub by some unscrupulous mechanic during the last prop overhaul, which
> resulted in elongation of the bolt holes in the prop hub. Most likely
> the prop hub is beyond tolerances and will need to be replaced. The
> spinner will certainly need to be replaced given the size of the crack.
>
> I am very thankful that this damage was discovered on the ground rather
> than in the air in the form of some type of failure of the prop hub,
> bolts, or spinner. But, this is appears to be a multi-thousand US
> dollar surprise and the bulk of the work hasn't even started yet.
>
> Just venting...
>

[Ron Natalie]

Peter R. wrote:

> Just venting...
>

Tell me about it. I fly my plane back when I purchased it. Local mechanic
says "I think there's something odd about the prop." Fly it up to prop shop.
Young guy comes out and says "Gee..hold on." Goes back inside and gets a
guy about 90 years old and he comes out and says "yep, this isn't installed
right." Fortunately, no damange was done. Just a bit of labor to take the
thing off and put it right.

[markjen]

Sorry to hear about this, but if you're putting in a rebuilt engine, this
will seem fade to become background noise level by the time you are done.
Good luck,

- Mark

[Peter R.]

Ron Natalie ) wrote:

> Goes back inside and gets a
> guy about 90 years old and he comes out and says "yep, this isn't installed
> right." Fortunately, no damange was done. Just a bit of labor to take the
> thing off and put it right.

Wow. As if we don't have enough to worry about without adding an
unscrupulous and/or incompetent mechanic into the mix.

--
Peter

[Peter R.]

Dan Luke ) wrote:

> What kind of engine replacement are you doing? Factory o'haul or...?

Factory overhaul. The engine should be arriving sometime over the next
two weeks.

Someone else just told me a story where their engine core that they
exchanged was rejected by the engine overhaul company, for an unexpected
additional cost of around US $6,000. I never thought that a core would
be rejected. Sheesh.

--
Peter

[JDupre5762]

>Someone else just told me a story where their engine core that they
>exchanged was rejected by the engine overhaul company, for an unexpected
>additional cost of around US $6,000. I never thought that a core would
>be rejected. Sheesh.
>

How about two engine cases rejected? Lycoming has apparently adopted a policy
that if an engine case has been reworked by anyone other than an a Lycoming
approved facility they will reject the case as unairworthy. Funny thing is
they never told the distributor or the customer until after the fact. The
cases were reworked at a previous overhaul by an FAA approved shop and process.

I have a customer who has this problem and of course my employer is left
holding the bag. Talking to an overhaul shop they say they are hearing about
this more and more and equate it to Lycoming's recent production problems. It
is believed they are trying to improve cash flow by forcing people to pay for
new Lycoming parts at every turn. Might work in the short term but in the long
term no one with any sense is going to go for factory new or overhaul if they
risk losing the value of the core.

As of now they are not even sure they still have the old cases to return to the
owner.

John Dupre'

[Nathan Young]

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:06:13 -0500, Peter R. >
wrote:

>Dan Luke ) wrote:
>
>> What kind of engine replacement are you doing? Factory o'haul or...?
>
>Factory overhaul. The engine should be arriving sometime over the next
>two weeks.
>
>Someone else just told me a story where their engine core that they
>exchanged was rejected by the engine overhaul company, for an unexpected
>additional cost of around US $6,000. I never thought that a core would
>be rejected. Sheesh.

I've always wondered if there isn't a scam lurking with core
exchange... If a company is having hard financial times, I can't
think of an easier way to generate short term revenue.

[[email protected]]

On 25-Nov-2004, (JDupre5762) wrote:

> How about two engine cases rejected? Lycoming has apparently adopted a
> policy that if an engine case has been reworked by anyone other than an a
> Lycoming approved facility they will reject the case as unairworthy.
> Funny thing
> is they never told the distributor or the customer until after the fact.
> The
> cases were reworked at a previous overhaul by an FAA approved shop and
> process.


There may be something to this. Recently we swapped the IO-360 in our Arrow
for a Lyc. factory rebuilt ("zero time") engine purchased through their
distributor, AirPower. We are very satisfied with the new engine, but
Lycoming wanted to withhold $3000 from our $10,000 core deposit because, as
they claimed, the case was not reusable because of some ambiguously
described cracks. Lycoming supposedly documented the dye penetrant tests,
used to find the cracks, with pictures before they scrapped the case (or
maybe it was only half the case -- I am not sure). At any rate, our
mechanic was suspicious of the description we were provided, as in his
experience that particular problem is rare on an IO-360. Furthermore, he
had thoroughly gone over the old engine during the plane's annual just a
couple of months previously. We asked for copies of the pictures, but
somehow they were not available -- possibly "inadvertently" destroyed. To
make a long story short we settled with Lycoming and AirPower for a $1500
adjustment rather than the original $3000 they wanted. In retrospect we
perhaps should have held out for refund of the entire core deposit.

-Elliott Drucker

[Ron Natalie]

wrote:
> In retrospect we
> perhaps should have held out for refund of the entire core deposit.

I always insist on reutrn of unservicable cores. Partly because between
Margy's classroom and some other people, we have no problem getting rid of
aviation "junk" but further to help head off this sort of nonsense. If the
core disappears darned if I'm going to eat the core charge. If they don't
pay me for it, it's mine.

We have a particularly disreputable instrument shop in this area that tends
to gratuitously misplace unservicable cores. Of course, this is only the
tip of the disaster that they are.