Another failed cessna high wing retract

bnt83

bnt83

Final Approach
Joined
Dec 31, 2012
Messages
9,938
Location
Lincoln NE
Display Name
Display name:
Brian
From the CPA, a 182RG landed this week with the nose down and locked but the mains hanging helplessly.




The Failure? Hint: The owner thinks that the hydraulic hoses may be 34 years old ie original, but he isn't sure.




Details - The gear "down" hose of the nose gear actuator was found to be leaking at the point where the hose contacts the nose gear actuator as it passes over it. A mechanic should have found the chafing long before it failed.
 
So the failure was in the "conventional" portion of the system?

Who'd a thunk it?
 
Owner just replied, he is not sure but he does know they are older than 12 years (the time he has owned the plane)
 
all fluid hoses need to be on a regular replacement cycle. . . . 12 years is not it.
 
Pretty obvious the leading cause of cessna gear failure is poor maintenance...

There are plenty of other aircraft with shot wiring, switches, and even those Comanche cables that are in the same boat.
 
And retract buyers wonder why the insurance quotes tend to be hi :goofy:
 
I forget the age my IA wants to change hydraulic hoses, I do know he likes to change fuel and brake lines in 5 years, longer if they are a certain type. I know some owners won't do it and they find another IA to do the annual. At least he is nice enough to tell them before the plane comes in. What I am trying to say that sometimes owners shop IA's to fit their budget and somethimes bad things happen.
 
Luvrv8 said:
I forget the age my IA wants to change hydraulic hoses, I do know he likes to change fuel and brake lines in 5 years, longer if they are a certain type. I know some owners won't do it and they find another IA to do the annual. At least he is nice enough to tell them before the plane comes in. What I am trying to say that sometimes owners shop IA's to fit their budget and somethimes bad things happen.
Click to expand...

how'd ya like those quartering gusty tailwinds and cross winds at CMA on Sat - my puter was telling me it was 140@22 until about 100' up and then it 'calmed down' to 190@12 . . . made for a fun approach to land @ CMA about 2p Sat!
 
bnt83 said:
A mechanic should have found the chafing long before it failed.
Click to expand...

But that involves taking off the aluminum cover over the actuator to get a look. At least 8 or ten screws, too many for a lazy mechanic. Sometimes I have taken inspection covers off airplanes, covers that need to come off every annual to check control systems and such, and found the screws rusted in there solidly, not having been out in many years, yet the control systems have been certified as "airworthy." Scary.

I think some owners probably get billed for twice the hours that were actually spent on the job.

Dan
 
Dan Thomas said:
But that involves taking off the aluminum cover over the actuator to get a look. At least 8 or ten screws, too many for a lazy mechanic. Sometimes I have taken inspection covers off airplanes, covers that need to come off every annual to check control systems and such, and found the screws rusted in there solidly, not having been out in many years, yet the control systems have been certified as "airworthy." Scary.

I think some owners probably get billed for twice the hours that were actually spent on the job.

Dan
Click to expand...

Don't even get me started on the fuel tank covers of 150. 152, 170, 172, 175 180, 185....... Those tend to lean towards rarely if ever being removed...
 
Dan Thomas said:
But that involves taking off the aluminum cover over the actuator to get a look. At least 8 or ten screws, too many for a lazy mechanic. Sometimes I have taken inspection covers off airplanes, covers that need to come off every annual to check control systems and such, and found the screws rusted in there solidly, not having been out in many years, yet the control systems have been certified as "airworthy." Scary.

I think some owners probably get billed for twice the hours that were actually spent on the job.

Dan
Click to expand...

Or the people that use the "cut rate" IA that will do an annual cheap (essentially a walk around the airplane) and quick sign off of the logs.
 
bnt83 said:
And retract buyers wonder why the insurance quotes tend to be hi :goofy:
Click to expand...

I don't, I think my insurance rates are quite reasonable.
 
My retract insurance is cheaper than our car insurance. I don't think it is that high. And I even fly one of these super-duper-dangerous Cessna retracts...

Replacing aged hydraulic hoses was done by the seller as part of my pre-buy process (recommended because they were more than 5 years old) and I also had both the nose and main gear actuators rebuilt this year for peace of mind. One of the actuators was leaking slightly internally and amazingly enough as far as we could tell it had the original 35 year old O-rings in it. With any retract system it is important to be proactive about maintenance. I don't want old cracked rubber hoses and seals on my airplane, especially when the replacement hoses are not even that expensive.
 
spinfire said:
My retract insurance is cheaper than our car insurance. I don't think it is that high. And I even fly one of these super-duper-dangerous Cessna retracts...

Replacing aged hydraulic hoses was done by the seller as part of my pre-buy process (recommended because they were more than 5 years old) and I also had both the nose and main gear actuators rebuilt this year for peace of mind. One of the actuators was leaking slightly internally and amazingly enough as far as we could tell it had the original 35 year old O-rings in it. With any retract system it is important to be proactive about maintenance. I don't want old cracked rubber hoses and seals on my airplane, especially when the replacement hoses are not even that expensive.
Click to expand...

I would have done the same thing you did.


A factory cessna 210M has 2 uplock actuators, two downlock actuators, three landing gear actuators, 3 door actuators, an accumulator, powerpack and about a dozen hoses. Lots of rubber that needs to be replaced.
 
bnt83 said:
Don't even get me started on the fuel tank covers of 150. 152, 170, 172, 175 180, 185....... Those tend to lean towards rarely if ever being removed...
Click to expand...

Oh, now there's an exciting topic. Taking the covers off 30-year-old airplanes can be fun, especially if you don't want to have to replace a lot of anchor nuts in those spars. Cessna wants those opened up every 1000 hours or three years, too, and I know why. I have found the rubber cushion strips for the tank crumbling and flopping around in there loose, with the tank getting thin spots in it from chafing on the hat sections or straps. Or the short rubber hose connections for the vent crossover totally rotted out (...why do I smell fuel in the cockpit?") and so on.

Dan
 
Dan Thomas said:
Oh, now there's an exciting topic. Taking the covers off 30-year-old airplanes can be fun, especially if you don't want to have to replace a lot of anchor nuts in those spars. Cessna wants those opened up every 1000 hours or three years, too, and I know why. I have found the rubber cushion strips for the tank crumbling and flopping around in there loose, with the tank getting thin spots in it from chafing on the hat sections or straps. Or the short rubber hose connections for the vent crossover totally rotted out (...why do I smell fuel in the cockpit?") and so on.

Dan
Click to expand...


Its very sad.
 
Dan Thomas said:
Oh, now there's an exciting topic. Taking the covers off 30-year-old airplanes can be fun, especially if you don't want to have to replace a lot of anchor nuts in those spars. Cessna wants those opened up every 1000 hours or three years, too, and I know why. I have found the rubber cushion strips for the tank crumbling and flopping around in there loose, with the tank getting thin spots in it from chafing on the hat sections or straps. Or the short rubber hose connections for the vent crossover totally rotted out (...why do I smell fuel in the cockpit?") and so on.

Dan
Click to expand...

But but but,

It's like the Grumman nose fork removal at annual, so hard to do it must not be of value.

Also like the nose fork it is easier if done regularly, though the tank cover never seems to get to the level of easy, just less hateful.
 
Skylane81E said:
But but but,

It's like the Grumman nose fork removal at annual, so hard to do it must not be of value.

Also like the nose fork it is easier if done regularly, though the tank cover never seems to get to the level of easy, just less hateful.
Click to expand...


Consider an oldie, like a 59 or 60 where its clearly obvious the tank covers have never been off and the screws have never been replaced....
 
Don't forget how many folks say don't bother re-rigging a Twin Cessna at annual, it's just a pain...

Hey why won't the gear come down...
 
Skylane81E said:
PREPARE THE EZ-OUTS!!!!
:lol:
Click to expand...


LABOR

tumblr_kys4orLeA71qzx7cl.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top