Cherokee - spar hardware

A

ateamer

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
2,176
Location
Port St. Lucie, FL
Display Name
Display name:
ateamer
Looking at another PA-28 ad. As with my post last week, looking for comments and opinions. This one has some troubling log entries:
- Last year at annual, they found 10 incorrect spar attachment bolts, along with the wrong washers and rusty nuts.
- Had to clean and repair a nosewheel problem due to a rusty axle tube.
- SB 1006 has been complied with, and no corrosion was found.

The price is okay at first glance, but between those issues and jurassic radios, I am leaning toward it not even being worth a two-hour drive to look at it.

What is the chance that removing and replacing the wing bolts will cause cracks in the future?
 
ateamer said:
Looking at another PA-28 ad. As with my post last week, looking for comments and opinions. This one has some troubling log entries:
- Last year at annual, they found 10 incorrect spar attachment bolts, along with the wrong washers and rusty nuts.
- Had to clean and repair a nosewheel problem due to a rusty axle tube.
- SB 1006 has been complied with, and no corrosion was found.

The price is okay at first glance, but between those issues and jurassic radios, I am leaning toward it not even being worth a two-hour drive to look at it.

What is the chance that removing and replacing the wing bolts will cause cracks in the future?
Click to expand...
Is it the main spar attachment bolts or the forward wing attachment mount? I would think the plane would be permanently grounded if the main wing spar bolts were wrong.

But when's the last time this plane flew?
 
ateamer said:
What is the chance that removing and replacing the wing bolts will cause cracks in the future?
Click to expand...
If done properly, none.

ateamer said:
they found 10 incorrect spar attachment bolts, along with the wrong washers and rusty nuts.
Click to expand...
Be curious to know what "incorrect" hardware was installed. There seems to be an increasing amount of hardware swapping, when in fact the original hardware was in fact correct.

Why is the SB1006 write up troubling?
 
Bell206 said:
If done properly, none.


Be curious to know what "incorrect" hardware was installed. There seems to be an increasing amount of hardware swapping, when in fact the original hardware was in fact correct.

Why is the SB1006 write up troubling?
Click to expand...
The log entry didn’t say what spec or type of hardware was removed, but noted that the washers were incorrect and the bolts did not have a minimum of one thread showing past the nuts.

The SB1006is a positive - it passed inspection.
 
Have they also done the eddy current inspection? I wouldn't necessarily call a no a deal-breaker but if they've done that and SB1006 it's pretty much had every inspection that can be done and in my mind that's better than never having been looked at.
 
cowman said:
Have they also done the eddy current inspection? I wouldn't necessarily call a no a deal-breaker but if they've done that and SB1006 it's pretty much had every inspection that can be done and in my mind that's better than never having been looked at.
Click to expand...
No eddy current inspection.

If I’m not mistaken, that one’s not mandated yet, right? Still in the NPRM stage?
 
Bell206 said:
If done properly, none.


Be curious to know what "incorrect" hardware was installed. There seems to be an increasing amount of hardware swapping, when in fact the original hardware was in fact correct.

Why is the SB1006 write up troubling?
Click to expand...
There was washer gate where the incorrect washers were shipped with the correct part number. But unsure how you get the bolts wrong.
 
ateamer said:
No eddy current inspection.

If I’m not mistaken, that one’s not mandated yet, right? Still in the NPRM stage?
Click to expand...
The new rule seeks to *modify* when the ECI is due. The current rules set it at 5000 factored service hours IIRC.

What's the TTAF for the plane, how many 100hour inspections? If the new rule proposal passes it will change the time until your ECI is due using the CSH calc.
 
There are several things that trigger the eddy current inspection already, I thought maybe someone might have thought to just do it and get it out of the way if the bolts were out of the holes already but it(probably) isn't a requirement.
 
Got an answer. No eddy current inspection. The wings were removed in the past and the plane put in storage after the engine had been stolen, and later recovered. This is starting to have more red flags than a dynamite factory during a forest fire.
 
ateamer said:
Got an answer. No eddy current inspection. The wings were removed in the past and the plane put in storage after the engine had been stolen, and later recovered. This is starting to have more red flags than a dynamite factory during a forest fire.
Click to expand...
I concur.... This sounds like a Florida Man airplane story to me!
 
Racerx said:
But unsure how you get the bolts wrong.
Click to expand...
From what was noted above, it appears the bolt length was suspect. While technically as long as the crown of the bolt extends past the self-locking portion of the nut, its good. However, the old rule of 1 to 3 threads past the nut is pretty cemented in most peoples minds.
 
Those "old rules" tend to get folks hung up without facts but 43.13 says 1 thread. "All bolt installations which involve self-locking or plain nuts should have at least one thread of the bolt protruding through the nut." From 7-37.
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
I concur.... This sounds like a Florida Man airplane story to me!
Click to expand...
I did read a story of an IO 540 getting snagged off a plane while it was in the hangar. All bolts and parts the thief deemed non-essential were laid out neatly. Apparently they're sought after for air boats so it very well could have been Florida man
 
Bell206 said:
If done properly, none.


Be curious to know what "incorrect" hardware was installed. There seems to be an increasing amount of hardware swapping, when in fact the original hardware was in fact correct.

Why is the SB1006 write up troubling?
Click to expand...
take a look at SB1366 it deals with the wrong washers being installed at the factory over several years.
 
unsafervguy said:
take a look at SB1366 it deals with the wrong washers being installed at the factory over several years.
Click to expand...
The washers were installed upside down. They have a radius on one side, flat of the other. Radiused side was supposed to be where the nut was. Actually, that was what the OP's mechanic was addressing.
 
This sounds like a “rebuild” project. IMHO if you’re an A&P and can work on it yourself, have a place to work and the tools, experienced at buying and selling airplanes, and you can get this ridiculously cheap, it might be a plane for you.
 
Hang 4 said:
The washers were installed upside down. They have a radius on one side, flat of the other. Radiused side was supposed to be where the nut was. Actually, that was what the OP's mechanic was addressing.
Click to expand...
Reference Post #11, it wasn’t a factory error on this plane. The owner had the wings removed to move and store the plane when the engine was stolen a couple of years ago. When the wings were reinstalled, they used the wrong hardware.

I received more info from the seller. It shows that the stolen and recovered engine was reinstalled and annualed, but nothing about an IRAN. So it’s a firm no-go for me. With the engine being who knows where, I wouldn’t fly behind it without a teardown inspection.

The hunt continues. Probably should’ve never sold the RV-8. I doubt we’re really going to travel much, anyway. And of all the planes I’ve flown, none ever ignited something inside me like that RV-8 did. Maybe someday in the future I can have another.
 
WDD said:
This sounds like a “rebuild” project. IMHO if you’re an A&P and can work on it yourself, have a place to work and the tools, experienced at buying and selling airplanes, and you can get this ridiculously cheap, it might be a plane for you.
Click to expand...
I’m not an A&P, don’t have the inclination to go through the expense and effort to become one, and just want to fly. If I ever have a project plane, it’d have to be a second plane.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WDD
You’re an RV guy? Hey - what about buying an RV 9? You and wife sit side by side, good IFR X Country aircraft.
 
WDD said:
You’re an RV guy? Hey - what about buying an RV 9? You and wife sit side by side, good IFR X Country aircraft.
Click to expand...
One of my neighbors has a -9. We were actually talking yesterday about my wife flying with him to see of it’ll work. Useful load and size of the baggage area seem to be enough for what we’d bring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WDD
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top