John Wayne
Airworthy?
- Thread starter timwinters
- Start date
Geico266
Touchdown! Greaser!
Airworthiness in this case is a "legal" definition, not an opinion. If the plane was inspected and put back into service with the proper log book entries it is legally "airworthy". To determine the airworthyness of an airplane by one photo is "unprofessional" at best.
I have specifically asked you questions about the plane;
1. Has it been flown since the repair?
2. Was the repair inspected and signed off in the log book.
You have ignored both question and continued to play little girl games. What ever, I'll know never to take you serious again.
Last edited:
Geico266
Touchdown! Greaser!
I still don't have enough information to make that determination. I asked questions that have yet to be answered.
Last edited:
I have enough experience with damaged sheet metal structures to not fly that.
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
Well, I can't answer that question...what I can tell you is that I talked to the A&P, IA who did the last two annuals this afternoon.
When I asked him about the empennage damage his response was...
"What empennage damage?"
Does that give you a hint?
Geico266
Touchdown! Greaser!
So for 2 years the plane has been flown and signed off by an A&P, IA.
Does that give you a hint as to the airworthyness?
And I will ask the same question for a 4th time. What does the log book say about the repair? I would guess it should say something about it and the extent of the investigation of the skin damage.
Last edited:
RotorAndWing
Final Approach
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,496
- Location
- Other side of the world
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotor&Wing
So for 2 years the plane has been flown and signed off by an A&P, IA.
Does that give you a hint as to the airworthyness?
And I will ask the same question for a 4th time. What does the log book say about the repair? I would guess it should say something about it and the extent of the investigation of the skin damage.
Would you leave that skin on your RV?
Geico266
Touchdown! Greaser!
I would replace it for cosmetic reasons alone.
The question of airworthness "as is" would be decided by talking to Vans engineering. I certainly wouldn't classify it as "un-airworthy" from 1 photo.
The point is of this story is the plane WAS, and IS airworthy.
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
Actually, no, none at all. I know the reputation of this particular A&P and that reputation is that he uses his pencil far more than he uses his eyes. I didn't know he was involved with this airplane until this afternoon.
This plane belongs to a deceased pilot (acquaintance) and I offered my services to his family to give them a estimate of the value but now, honestly, I have no desire to even see the logbooks. Seeing them might make me culpable.
I think...no...I know...I'm backing away slowly from this one, especially since I now know that this A&P is involved.
RotorAndWing
Final Approach
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,496
- Location
- Other side of the world
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotor&Wing
So for 2 years the plane has been flown and signed off by an A&P, IA.
Does that give you a hint as to the airworthyness?
And I will ask the same question for a 4th time. What does the log book say about the repair? I would guess it should say something about it and the extent of the investigation of the skin damage.
For the sake of argument, I will bet a crisp $100 bill there is nothing in the logbook.
(A) The IA will not make a sign off that could cook his goose.
(B) If it ever sees light with the FAA, he will simply claim "It wasn't that way when I did the annual!"
Been down this road one too many times.
Geico266
Touchdown! Greaser!
I call that area the "tail cone" or "fuselage" . The "empanage" portion is anything that protrudes past the tail cone.
I would replace it for cosmetic reasons alone.
The question of airworthness "as is" would be decided by talking to Vans engineering. I certainly wouldn't classify it as "un-airworthy" from 1 photo.
The point is of this story is the plane WAS, and IS airworthy.
Exactly, now who are you going to talk to at Ercoupe engingineering? You need a DE to make that call unless guidance on the topic is specifically published. Creases in structural sheet metal are not allowed in any of the material I have seen published.
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
got more pics?....post them.
Jaybird180
Final Approach
So for 2 years the plane has been flown and signed off by an A&P, IA.
Does that give you a hint as to the airworthyness?
And I will ask the same question for a 4th time. What does the log book say about the repair? I would guess it should say something about it and the extent of the investigation of the skin damage.
He didnt say the plane had been flown two years after the damage. He said he talked to the AP who did the last two annuals. No mention of where the annuals and damage relate to the timeline of this aircraft.
Airworthy is a legal definition, who's final determination is made by THE PILOT.
Silvaire
En-Route
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2012
- Messages
- 4,679
- Display Name
Display name:
Silvaire
Being an Ercoupe I can tell you that you're not going to find anything in the "manual" that will provide guidance on this nor will you find much beyond a terse paragraph in AC 43-13-1B but if it were a Cessna you'd find this in their Structural Repair Manual:
So my answer would be YES, it's airworthy.
So my answer would be YES, it's airworthy.
Jaybird180
Final Approach
How does a logbook review make you culpable? Are you bailing on the family?
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
no, just that one...close up anyway...
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
for perspective.....and because the paint is so glossy.....more would be better. That one is not really a fair representation.
But, enough to get the idea.....
someone will buy it for $15K.....
I would replace it for cosmetic reasons alone.
The question of airworthness "as is" would be decided by talking to Vans engineering. I certainly wouldn't classify it as "un-airworthy" from 1 photo.
The point is of this story is the plane WAS, and IS airworthy.
There was a Mooney recently that got red-tagged by a roaming FSDO inspector for far less damage than that. It had some very mild wing tip damage, had been signed-off for years, etc. and now he is in a pickle.
I still maintain it isn't airworthy, even with just one photo. And yes, I analyze aircraft structure for a living...
How? Those were all creases which are defined by 'sharp corners'. Just because you press them out some, you do not return the strength to the material.
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
Yes.
He bought it a mere two years ago and they know what he paid for it (I don't, I didn't think it was my place to ask). I'm going to simply tell them to use that as a guide since he's only put about 70 hours on it.
To reiterate, yes, I'm bailing. I have a very low tolerance for liability, especially when offering free advice and/or assistance, especially since my all time favorite saying is: No good deed goes unpunished.
And believe me, I've been punished my fair share of times as a result of being benevolent. Call me jaded.
And that'd be accurate probably.
Jaybird180
Final Approach
I would recommend caution with that approach. For example, my C-172S is considered by the manufacturer as semi-monocoque so the strength requirements differ.
Also, this was post-"buff right out" damage. And we do not have any benefit of a view of the internal structure for view of stress cracks. I dont know if Ercoupe's have internal anti-corrosion treatments applied to the surface, which could have cracked or flaked away due to impact of a hangar door.
I wouldn't fly it like that.
I don't understand why they just don't replace the skin, sheet metal is relatively cheap, for sure not worth dying over. It's not even a particularly difficult skin to replace, a good sheet metal guy would give the plane back in a few days.
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
it could be worse.....
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
so....why would that require a DE or DER as you say?
RotorAndWing
Final Approach
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,496
- Location
- Other side of the world
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotor&Wing
it could be worse.....
I've seen that before.
Replacing sheet metal (in accordance with the service manual and/or 43.13, etc.) would NOT require a DER since the skin replacement restores it to the original as-designed configuration, ie in conformance with the type design. Doing some sort of repair or using as-is would require a DER to generate the data to approve the disposition.
Redneckpilot
Pre-Flight
Jaybird180
Final Approach
The wrinkle is not the issue per se. In this case the skin is part of the structural strength of the airframe, and that's the issue at hand - is it strong.
FastEddieB
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2013
- Messages
- 11,542
- Location
- Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA
- Display Name
Display name:
Fast Eddie B
First, I'd be hesitant to fly that plane without a serious inspection by a competent mechanic to determine its airworthiness.
Admittedly, its probably just fine, but the word "probably" always raises my hackles.
As far as worse...
This Bonanza landed at N. Perry in Hollywood, FL after hitting some turbulence on the way in:
Just to emphasize that the skin IS an important part of the strength of the overall structure. And I'm not competent to draw the line that says how much damage is too much.
Admittedly, its probably just fine, but the word "probably" always raises my hackles.
As far as worse...
This Bonanza landed at N. Perry in Hollywood, FL after hitting some turbulence on the way in:
Just to emphasize that the skin IS an important part of the strength of the overall structure. And I'm not competent to draw the line that says how much damage is too much.
Redneckpilot
Pre-Flight
Do the wrinkles on the B-24 lessen the structural strength of the ship?
Not opining just curious...always wondered about that.
weirdjim
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2008
- Messages
- 4,171
- Location
- Grass Valley, CA (KGOO)
- Display Name
Display name:
weirdjim
It means you've only got one? And you know how to use it? Did I miss something?
Jim
weirdjim
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2008
- Messages
- 4,171
- Location
- Grass Valley, CA (KGOO)
- Display Name
Display name:
weirdjim
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
Geico266
Touchdown! Greaser!
Have you ever heard of a plane owner getting two annuals done and not flying the plane at all?
Jay, your conclusion was the plane had not been flown before Tim answered the question. Once again your ability to reason needs work.
Last edited:
Geico266
Touchdown! Greaser!
Timmy, the question was not weather the A&P looked at the plane, the question was how many hours has the plane flown since the repair. Jay concluded zero hours.
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
I would just call that oil canning. Not "creased" damage that was beaten back out into shape like the skin of the Ercoupe.
Geico266
Touchdown! Greaser!
Just curious Timmy, if this is your conviction why did you waste the widows time even looking at the plane?
Do you realize you have publicly trash this plane and the A&P, IA that did the inspections? He can now sue you for slander? And the widow can sue you for misrepresenting the aircraft as legally "un-airworthy?
How many Ercoupes with a deceased owners are for sale in your area?
By posting this information and allowing rampent unsubstainciated speculation about the Ercoupe's condition and the A&P, IA's "pencil whipping" annuals you have opened yourself up to the possibility of the very litigation you wanted to avoid.
Just saying.
Have a nice day!
Last edited:
That wouldn't require anything but an A&P. What requires a DER is to calculate the strength of that creased up skin, and that would be more expensive than replacing the skin.