Mooney_Driver wrote:
BTW, why do you have to put the whole plane on a trailer? The engine fits into a trunk of any larger car and the prop is only good for decoration in some aviation pub anyhow.
I’d second this – when a previous owner of my aircraft taxied it into a car doing MUCH more damage than in this case (engine mounts shagged, the steel tube frame that holds the engine on bent, prop absolutely destroyed and crank shaft obviously bent – the prop had sliced into the car all the way to the A-pillar – the crank bent so much so you could tell without opening the engine) – we removed the engine, sent it off, and mounted the overhauled engine all at the airfield without having to take the aircraft apart (well, except for taking the engine off, of course!)
Ian, I read this whole thing like Rwy20… and I’ve been saying that all along.
You had an event which necessitates a shock load inspection, which can be done within a week or two from delivering that engine to a shop who takes it, gets the job done and sends it back to you. Period. Anyone insisting, without real good reason, that you need to overhaul it, wants to take advantage of you.
Of course the question arises whether it might make sense to zero the engine while it’s off the airplane anyhow. But that is something which is your decision, not any maintenance companies.
Assuming that this was indeed a towbar accident, there is good money to bet that nothing was damaged in the engine at all. The shock load inspection makes sure that this is the case. No less, no more. Anything beyond that is unnecessary at this time. IF they should find that there is damage which has to be rectified and that rectification may as well warrant a full overhaul, that is a totally different ballgame. But for that, the engine has to be on someone’s workbench disassembled. Before that, saying the engine needs an overhaul just does not make sense.
Claim has been denied by Insurers.
Their assessor reckons the damage was pre-existing. ( Prior to the delivery flight )
I have opened a dispute with the insurers. I’m waiting for that to work it’s course then I will let rip in a couple of magazines and on social media.
Plane will be written off whatever happens as I was intent on flying out of Hawarden and locating anywhere else is just not practical for me.
Put one ( and £15k ) in the experience column.
Can anyone suggest where I might get a part 35 ( court acceptable standard ) inspection of the propeller ( McCauley )
It looks like I’m going to be throwing money at solicitors.
Wonder if this has come to a rather sad end – I just saw a series of ads like this on UKGA: https://ukga.com/classified/view?contentId=45398 where someone looks to be parting out a Grumman Traveller.
Tadaaa!! The aircraft is back on the market. local copy Sold by a company in Lithuania, but located in England, and the shock loading inspection has apparently been done by Norvic. I wonder if they re-used that old prop… In any case, I don’t think this is worth 30k€. The avionics are good for a museum.
Nothing wrong with it that a 25k avionics refit would not fix.
An old dented steel prop may sell at decent price for those trendy bars in London (I saw a 3 blades polished & engraved sold at 700£ tough interior decor preference now is for cheap wood), so definitely should not make it’s way back to an aircraft…
The bloke I sold it to certainly didn’t use the old prop. It is being used as a conversation piece in the games room I’m building. Currently in my workshop.
The guy is barely making his money back and as mentioned the aircraft avionics are way out of date.
Got pretty far down the line with suing Andy but couldn’t be arsed. Karma’s a bitch and it’ll catch him one day. Bought myself a nice Krieghoff K80 and I go and make holes in the sky regularly that way instead! :)
Pity really.
