We accept some tattyness with our 1961/1964 rebuilt Jodel for safe,cheap,flying. A Cirrus is probably a cheap alternative to an actively used, but kept in airshow-award-winning condition, Pa38.
Haha thanks! Yeah, for a 36 y/o she’s great! Well, we’re still deciding where to go for annual and ARC but in the meantime all these little problems persist… :( They don’t stop her from flying thankfully, though – they’re just a nuisance.
Your Tommy looked good at Inverness today Have you got your problems sorted – or on the way to being sorted?
Having seen off the woodpeckers from from my future mainspar I will comment further on the PA38.
I seem to remember that the Aileron rigging required the belcrank in each wing to be set with a special tool ( a bit of metal with a slot cut in it) and the neutral being set with a bit of wood with a spacer ( usually a screw ) set in to it, only with all the tools can you be assured of getting the correct differential movement of the ailerons.
One type of damage the PA38 was particularly seceptable to was compression damage to the rear spar carry through frame, move the seats full forward and remove the screws from the aft of the trim in the floor. Any compression damage will be apparent.
A symmetry check may also be worth doing, you need a steel cable and spring balance and check that the same point on the wing tips is the same distance from a few points on the fuselage, the spring balance assuring that you always have the same load on the steel cable.
LEGAL NOTICE
Any advice is given in good faith and should only be carried out by a grown up who is fully qualified and has a note from his mum allowing him/ her to do so.
One thing to check for – perhaps not related to the weird taxi issue because the speed is too low there – is whether the aircraft is accurately rigged.
Most maintenance firms don’t know how to check for this.
All you need is one flap to be 1 degree more angled than the other and the whole thing will fly crooked, with a lot of aileron needed to counteract it. So people then start bending the aileron trim tabs, or better still the rudder trim tab… and they end up with a plane which is quite crooked and flies a few kt slower for the same fuel flow.
There is a procedure for checking it, which starts with checking the wings are screwed on straight. If an aircraft has done a forced landing and had to be carted out on a truck, wings off, it is quite possible that the wings are not quite straight and have a different angle of attack. Half a degree is all you need…
Or something could be bent…
I would not fly a plane which exhibits anything like this, especially if it may have been bent in some incident.
It’s not hard to do the basic checks. Jack it up, level it according to the POH procedure, and with an electronic level check all the angles.
Then level the aircraft and make sure the ball on the TC is precisely in the centre. Rotate the TC in the panel until it is. Note that the TC indication (not the ball) will always be “level” on the ground because it is spring-loaded to the level position 
That will be the starting point for in-flight checks.
When I did the 45kt taxi, I was aware that this is very close to the take-off/stall speed of my aircraft. But I was careful enough not to let it lift off, because the last thing I want to do is get her a few feet off the ground, stall, and then wreck the gear completely. And btw, I’m 18 y/o and I like to get involved with aircraft and learn how they tick – so it’s not just the old timers who do this. And you will all be glad to know that I am in contact with an Engineer at Highland Aviation in Inverness who seems to know about PA38’s, and so all these issues might get looked at by a pro sooner than later. Otherwise the annual is just around the corner in Feb, so either way she will get looked at in earnest soon. ;)
Aerofurb, when adding take-off power yesterday, there was a 15kt left xwind, so technically the nose should have been pulling to the left, right? If you also take into account the slipstream effect of a counter-clockwise rotating prop, it should also be pulling to the left. Beats me…
IAW the MM the fuel and oil hoses are not lifed if they are teflon. They are to be replaced at engine overhaul only. On a GT they normally would be teflon but on an older one possibly not, and rubber hoses do have a life – even sitting on the shelf.
More details in my TB20 writeup – search for “teflon”.
The heater hoses, I don’t know about.
I know of one new owner of a TB who has just been charged £7k to have every single hose replaced with new on its Annual by a CAMO/145 company that didn’t know that particular aircraft. Ridiculous.
We were told exactly the same on the pre-purchase inspection of our TB20 a couple of years ago. The service manual specifies a 12-year (IIRC) life on almost all hoses, and apparently a change in regs under EASA meant that any lifed parts are a mandatory replacement. The CAMO in question said they used to be able to sign off e.g. static hoses on condition, but had been hauled over the coals by a CAA inspector so were no longer able to exercise judgement on the matter.
There was an EASA NPA floating around at the time that would have restored the use of discretion to CAMOs, but it had not become law. I don’t know if that’s changed now. We replaced all the engine and hydraulic system hoses anyway during the first annual. What are the relevant regulations now? It sounds like they must have changed.
Guess its time to feed my next main spar a drop of miracle grow.
I totally agree Peter, but my uber cautious nature means I worry if people are encouraged (depending how posts are interpreted) to do things that they are not capable of or legally allowed to do. Whilst some here are experienced, others aren’t and should not be led astray, in my humble opinion.
I also agree about people being ripped off my unscrupulous engineers that get us good guys a bad reputation and have always encouraged pilots/owners to come and have a look when their aircraft is in bits for maintenance. I know of one new owner of a TB who has just been charged £7k to have every single hose replaced with new on its Annual by a CAMO/145 company that didn’t know that particular aircraft. Ridiculous.
A and C has been involved with GA stuff longer than I have but I’m probably more recent on PA38s than he is (anyway, he also likes wood and that’s just weird… 
).
