Is this a pencil-whipped annual?

[Paul kgyy]

I'm looking for a good V-tail, 1970-ish vintage. There's a 69 model
nearby. Here is the report from the last airframe annual:

"Checked all controls and cables. Performed gear retraction test.
Repacked wheel bearings and checked brakes. Installed new air filter
element. Installed new ELT battery. ELT inspected in accordance with
FAR 91.207(d) and found to operate properly. Replaced instrument air
inlet filter. Checked all applicable AD's - see list of aircraft
records this date. Complied with the following AD's:.... "

This looks like a really short list for a 40 year old airplane. When
I annual my Arrow, the list of items is about 4 times that size.

[Newps]

Paul kgyy wrote:

> I'm looking for a good V-tail, 1970-ish vintage. There's a 69 model
> nearby. Here is the report from the last airframe annual:

Get a 64 or 65 S model and you get one that is both faster and has a
lower empty weight and therefore a higher useful load. As you look get
the empty weights from those you are interested in. Mine has an empty
weight of 2030. Go check out this website and it will answer a lot of
your questions. I can also answer some if you want.

http://lists.kjsl.com/pipermail/beech-owners/




>
> "Checked all controls and cables. Performed gear retraction test.
> Repacked wheel bearings and checked brakes. Installed new air filter
> element. Installed new ELT battery. ELT inspected in accordance with
> FAR 91.207(d) and found to operate properly. Replaced instrument air
> inlet filter. Checked all applicable AD's - see list of aircraft
> records this date. Complied with the following AD's:.... "
>
> This looks like a really short list for a 40 year old airplane. When
> I annual my Arrow, the list of items is about 4 times that size.


Mine is a little longer but lists 4 or 5 things that were fixed. It
lists 4 AD's that were complied with and those are
1.) Magnesium Rudder Horn
2.) Aft Fuselage Bulkhead
3.) Mag Switch
4.) Lube of Uplock Rollers

[RST Engineering]

No, what you've got is an annual from somebody who knows what an annual is
supposed to be. Your list of items for the Arrow has items that by the
definition of annual are not necessary. I'll bet "change the oil" is on the
list. So is "replace/gap/test plugs". Likewise "Lubricate all hinges".

Suggest that you read FAR Part 43 Appendix D and see how many of the items
on YOUR list are covered in Appendix D. Most of the things on annual lists
are preventive maintenance and there is nothing wrong with that. Usually it
is far easier to do these little things while the engine is being inspected,
compression run, and flight surfaces inspected. However, "Required" and
"good idea" are not synonomous.

By rights the IA didn't have to repack the bearings, install the air filter,
or install the ELT battery. However, the ELT battery did have to be within
code date when (s)he did the annual or be in violation of 91.207.c.2 .

At one time I was under the impression that packing the wheel bearings was
one of the requirements for an annual but unless it is hidden away
somewhere, it doesn't appear to be in the current FAR.

Jim

--
"If you think you can, or think you can't, you're right."
--Henry Ford

"Paul kgyy" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I'm looking for a good V-tail, 1970-ish vintage. There's a 69 model
> nearby. Here is the report from the last airframe annual:
>
> "Checked all controls and cables. Performed gear retraction test.
> Repacked wheel bearings and checked brakes. Installed new air filter
> element. Installed new ELT battery. ELT inspected in accordance with
> FAR 91.207(d) and found to operate properly. Replaced instrument air
> inlet filter. Checked all applicable AD's - see list of aircraft
> records this date. Complied with the following AD's:.... "
>
> This looks like a really short list for a 40 year old airplane. When
> I annual my Arrow, the list of items is about 4 times that size.
>

[BT]

define pencil whipped.. he could have written everything and done nothing

He referenced the "Checked all applicable AD's - see aircraft records this
date. Complied with following ADs..." I presume he listed them out. He
could have just as easily said, The Annual was complied with, see work order
# and had all of the details on his company work order that was printed by
his accounting computer.

BT

"Paul kgyy" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I'm looking for a good V-tail, 1970-ish vintage. There's a 69 model
> nearby. Here is the report from the last airframe annual:
>
> "Checked all controls and cables. Performed gear retraction test.
> Repacked wheel bearings and checked brakes. Installed new air filter
> element. Installed new ELT battery. ELT inspected in accordance with
> FAR 91.207(d) and found to operate properly. Replaced instrument air
> inlet filter. Checked all applicable AD's - see list of aircraft
> records this date. Complied with the following AD's:.... "
>
> This looks like a really short list for a 40 year old airplane. When
> I annual my Arrow, the list of items is about 4 times that size.
>

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:28:14 -0700, Paul kgyy >
wrote:

>I'm looking for a good V-tail, 1970-ish vintage. There's a 69 model
>nearby. Here is the report from the last airframe annual:
>
>"Checked all controls and cables. Performed gear retraction test.
>Repacked wheel bearings and checked brakes. Installed new air filter
>element. Installed new ELT battery. ELT inspected in accordance with
>FAR 91.207(d) and found to operate properly. Replaced instrument air
>inlet filter. Checked all applicable AD's - see list of aircraft
>records this date. Complied with the following AD's:.... "
>
>This looks like a really short list for a 40 year old airplane. When

Mine is a 59 straight tail and the list is usually short like this. My
mechanic keeps a complete list of ADs on computer for the Deb with the
dates complied. So he only needs hit a few keys and there's the
required list if any. The annual itself is relatively short, but he
does do a number of PM items not required. Plugs last for years even
at over a 100 hours per year. Brakes and tires...likewise.

Roger (K8RI)

>I annual my Arrow, the list of items is about 4 times that size.

[Ron Natalie]

RST Engineering wrote:

> By rights the IA didn't have to repack the bearings, install the air filter,
> or install the ELT battery. However, the ELT battery did have to be within
> code date when (s)he did the annual or be in violation of 91.207.c.2 .

Of course, all the IA needs to do is note the discrepancy in the
airworthiness of the battery (as Jim does well know). Afterwards
the owner/pilot can come through and replace that battery and return
the aircraft to service.

[Dave[_5_]]

It might just be a well-maintained aircraft that needs very little. Or
the IA may be less than diligent or simply a man of few words. Hard to
know. Hire a mechanic you trust to go over it with a fine-toothed comb
if you are seriously considering it.

David Johnson

[Denny]

On Nov 3, 5:33 pm, Dave > wrote:
> It might just be a well-maintained aircraft that needs very little. Or
> the IA may be less than diligent or simply a man of few words. Hard to
> know. Hire a mechanic you trust to go over it with a fine-toothed comb
> if you are seriously considering it.
>
> David Johnson

My $12K annual a couple times back amounted to 1 rather small half
page, worded almost verbatim to what you posted, even though the work
done was extensive (at my orders), though he did list the replaced
airworthiness items and the yellow tag numbers...

denny

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 16:33:07 -0800, Denny > wrote:

>On Nov 3, 5:33 pm, Dave > wrote:
>> It might just be a well-maintained aircraft that needs very little. Or
>> the IA may be less than diligent or simply a man of few words. Hard to
>> know. Hire a mechanic you trust to go over it with a fine-toothed comb
>> if you are seriously considering it.
>>
>> David Johnson
>
>My $12K annual a couple times back amounted to 1 rather small half
>page, worded almost verbatim to what you posted, even though the work
>done was extensive (at my orders), though he did list the replaced
>airworthiness items and the yellow tag numbers...

Yah, and you have two of almost everything<:-))

Roger (K8RI)
>
>denny

[[email protected]]

On Nov 4, 5:33 pm, Denny > wrote:
> On Nov 3, 5:33 pm, Dave > wrote:
>
Generally if well cared for these airplanes need very little.

While not legally required, I believe it is good practice to check
the gear rigging per the shop manual each year rather than simply
see that it goes up and down. Logging things like down lock tensions
are evidence that this has been done. I'd also like to see specific
notes that the struts and shimmy damper have been properly
topped off with hydrolic fluid.

Bill Hale, BPPP instructor



> > It might just be a well-maintained aircraft that needs very little. Or
> > the IA may be less than diligent or simply a man of few words. Hard to
> > know. Hire a mechanic you trust to go over it with a fine-toothed comb
> > if you are seriously considering it.
>
> > David Johnson
>
> My $12K annual a couple times back amounted to 1 rather small half
> page, worded almost verbatim to what you posted, even though the work
> done was extensive (at my orders), though he did list the replaced
> airworthiness items and the yellow tag numbers...
>
> denny

[John[_9_]]

On Nov 1, 4:28 pm, Paul kgyy > wrote:
> I'm looking for a good V-tail, 1970-ish vintage. There's a 69 model
> nearby. Here is the report from the last airframe annual:
>
> "Checked all controls and cables. Performed gear retraction test.
> Repacked wheel bearings and checked brakes. Installed new air filter
> element. Installed new ELT battery. ELT inspected in accordance with
> FAR 91.207(d) and found to operate properly. Replaced instrument air
> inlet filter. Checked all applicable AD's - see list of aircraft
> records this date. Complied with the following AD's:.... "
>
> This looks like a really short list for a 40 year old airplane. When
> I annual my Arrow, the list of items is about 4 times that size.


A pencil whipped annual entry usually goes like this. "Annual
inspection complied with this date. Signed XXXXX" and usually the
name and number are illegible. The above entry seems o.k. to me
concise and to the point. Locally the Feds want to see a reference
to what type of checklist was used i.e. the factory or a 43 Appendix
D list. The entry may contain that but it is unclear from the excerpt
posted.

John Dupre'