Damage History - What would you do?

N

njflyer

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jan 1, 2022
Messages
3
Display Name
Display name:
njflyer
I'm looking at a late 60s aircraft. Current owner said there was no damage history. While digging into history I found it has a record of substantial damage from it's first year in service. A student pilot crashed on landing. I found a 337 for replacement of the bulkhead in online databases, it was filed by a reputable shop that is still in business (but has no records back that far), states bulkhead was factory replacement, lists part number and that it was replaced in accordance with ac 43.13-1.

However, I found no 337 in logs/binders and nothing in log books for airframe (engine logs don't go back that far). Current owner states they were unaware of damage. My A&P says pre-buy is looking good and he doesn't think it would be a reason not to buy plane but might be point to renegotiate price over.

Is the 337 that was filed by a reputable shop that is still in business enough to overcome the fact that the logs make no mention of the incident?

Thanks!
 
50+ year old repair, this is a non-issue. Can the A&P even tell there was a repair done? Do both the S/N and N-number from the 337 you found match the plane (always a chance for a paperwork mix up)?

With virtually any 50 year old plane, there is either known damage history or damage history that is "unknown".
 
It's long been my opinion that damage which was properly repaired years ago should have no effect on the sales price of an aircraft. If the repair cannot be detected by inspection and its existence has had no affect on appearance or performance for half a century, it can be ignored. That this one was done by a reputable shop using factory parts makes it a non event.

Many people make the argument that the prospective buyer will take a hit when the aircraft is sold some time in the future, and therefore a reduction in the sales price is reasonable. That future buyer will be faced with the same issue as the OP. It's a given that an aircraft that doesn't have damage history is rare.

Is this event which occurred long ago really relevant to aircraft value? No. In a fleet that is decades old, it's just another logbook entry.
 
At the risk of being roasted... I understand that some believe/claim that damage history is avoided by replacing parts with new parts. For example, if you put a completely new prop and engine on a plane that had a prop-strike, why would you still have prop/engine damage history associated with the airplane?
 
Because log books document the history. The what is usually indicative of the why.
 
Logbooks are there to document the work that was performed, not why it was done. You can oftentimes read between the lines and figure out why some of the work was performed but not always. As an example, an old Bonanza I had got a paint job, and engine overhaul and a propeller conversion all at once in the mid 1960s. No mention of why the work was performed, which is how it should be. A close look at the aircraft and an online investigation suggested that it had a gear up landing. No big deal, that was 45 years prior at the time.

It is a bit hard to tell from the initial post if the 337 found online in a records search was related to the incident when the aircraft was new or not but just an FYI, depending on who repaired it and how they repaired it may or may not trigger the need for a 337 for the repair.
 
I would not be overly concerned about the damage history. I'm not sure about whether or not the 337 is sufficient or what. If I were in your shoes, I would try to find out the 337 question but not be too worried about the old repair. Since the shop that did the repair is still in business, why not visit with them.
 
The actual damage and repair have no bearing unless you want to use it as leverage to get the seller to lower the price at which point he can either capitulate or say no and just sell it to someone else.
 
My 1968 Navajo had something (probably a hangar) hit the tail section over 42 years ago. Everything back of the cabin door was replaced using factory jigs by a reputable shop and well documented. The way I see it, the rear quarter of the plane is a 1979 model. The sucker flies straight as an arrow and beats the book numbers for cruise. At my former airline we had a DC9 model 30 that had a wing replaced after an accident. That one was never rigged correctly. It seemed impossible to fly wings level with the ball centered.
 
njflyer said:
I'm looking at a late 60s aircraft. Current owner said there was no damage history. While digging into history I found it has a record of substantial damage from it's first year in service. A student pilot crashed on landing. I found a 337 for replacement of the bulkhead in online databases, it was filed by a reputable shop that is still in business (but has no records back that far), states bulkhead was factory replacement, lists part number and that it was replaced in accordance with ac 43.13-1.

However, I found no 337 in logs/binders and nothing in log books for airframe (engine logs don't go back that far). Current owner states they were unaware of damage. My A&P says pre-buy is looking good and he doesn't think it would be a reason not to buy plane but might be point to renegotiate price over.

Is the 337 that was filed by a reputable shop that is still in business enough to overcome the fact that the logs make no mention of the incident?

Thanks!
Click to expand...
How many hours were flown after the damage? If it had flown for many years without major issues after a prop strike or other serious damage, I think you should be good.
 
I agree with everyone’s advice to buy the airplane. I’d buy that airplane all day long if it checks out well.
I disagree however about damaged aircraft value. If two airplanes of identical specs are the same price, but one has major repaired damage, the one with previous major damage is less likely to sell first. I think there’s a hit for damage, not much being it’s old, and repaired properly, but a hit nonetheless.
Most buyers would opt for the non damaged airplane at the same price. That in itself affects price.
 
Last edited:
Add me to the list of people who'd have no problem buying a plane with that history. My own plane had everything between the front door post and the firewall replaced at some time in the past. The owner of the avionics shop working on it is very impressed with the quality of the workmanship, and all the new parts are zinc chromated. I know I'm biased because it's mine, but similar to @vcollazo, I think it actually adds to the value.
 
Find me the aircraft that’s been flying around for 60 years that hasn’t been damaged at some point.
 
Previous firewall damage is a very common issue on many 172 and 182 aircraft. Yes, the damage should effect the price 2-3%.
 
Clip4 said:
Previous firewall damage is a very common issue on many 172 and 182 aircraft. Yes, the damage should effect the price 2-3%.
Click to expand...

Why? It happened over fifty years ago, and the damage is long gone. Parts were replaced and there is no remaining evidence of the event.

I get that "the market" supposedly dictates this, but it makes no sense.
 
njflyer said:
Is the 337 that was filed by a reputable shop that is still in business enough to overcome the fact that the logs make no mention of the incident?
Click to expand...
FYI: theres no requirement to have 337 copies of major repairs in the aircraft records. Also "shops" or a CRS are required to keep their records for 2 years and an owner is only required to keep mx records for a year except 411/413 records. I dont see any issues. Damage history tends to be subjective to the buyer and in some cases the aircraft model. Besides the only person who may have an issue is the guy who will sign your next annual. So check with them if you want the real answer for that aircraft. Good luck.
 
3393RP said:
Why? It happened over fifty years ago, and the damage is long gone. Parts were replaced and there is no remaining evidence of the event.

I get that "the market" supposedly dictates this, but it makes no sense.
Click to expand...
If 6exact airplanes were side by side except 5 had no damage history and one did, which would you pick?
 
Clip4 said:
If 6exact airplanes were side by side except 5 had no damage history and one did, which would you pick?
Click to expand...

Ugh, let me think.. There’re priced the same right? I guess since there’s no logbook entry I’ll take the one with crash damage history please. Hehe:)
 
Last edited:
Joe_B1 said:
50 year old damage would not worry me, incomplete logs would.
Click to expand...

There is virtually no 50 year old airplane with no damage history (there might be a few, somewhere...); there is definitely no 50-year old airplane with "truly" complete logs. I think once you're past about 5 to 10 years, everything enters shades of gray. Hangar fairies are real.
 
I've purchased two aircraft with what we believed to be complete/accurate logs and documented damage histories. One had several minor accidents, the other had a gear up landing with prop strike. For each, the damage was over a decade earlier and the repairs were done well. In both pre-buys I paid a well respected and experienced IA to travel to the aircraft and spend two half-days for a thorough inspection. It was money well spent. Missing or fabricated logs might not be the seller's fault, but a previous owner from years/decades before. A good IA will tell you if it's a good airplane or not. Both of my purchases have proven to be solid decisions.
 
Jeff Oslick said:
There is virtually no 50 year old airplane with no damage history (there might be a few, somewhere...); there is definitely no 50-year old airplane with "truly" complete logs. I think once you're past about 5 to 10 years, everything enters shades of gray. Hangar fairies are real.
Click to expand...

Well said. That has been my experience after years of aircraft maintenance and looking at numerous logbooks.

I think the terms “damage history” and “complete logs” have different meanings to different people, which leads to lots of confusion when people are looking at buying aircraft. Look at how many threads have been created on this board that cover this topic, and the responses are almost always the same.
 
Jeff Oslick said:
There is virtually no 50 year old airplane with no damage history (there might be a few, somewhere...); there is definitely no 50-year old airplane with "truly" complete logs. I think once you're past about 5 to 10 years, everything enters shades of gray. Hangar fairies are real.
Click to expand...
My archer is a 1979 model and the logs go back to then. I am not saying that they are totally complete (I have no way of knowing) but they do go back that far.

As far as damage history, I have to agree, a 50 year old plane with no damage is a truly rare bird. My plane had some significant damage back in 1980 and it was repaired. The plane flies great and I have complete confidence in it. So to the OP, old damage is not an issue if it was repaired properly. But large holes in the log history is a concern.
 
njflyer said:
I'm looking at a late 60s aircraft. Current owner said there was no damage history. While digging into history I found it has a record of substantial damage from it's first year in service. A student pilot crashed on landing. I found a 337 for replacement of the bulkhead in online databases, it was filed by a reputable shop that is still in business (but has no records back that far), states bulkhead was factory replacement, lists part number and that it was replaced in accordance with ac 43.13-1.

However, I found no 337 in logs/binders and nothing in log books for airframe (engine logs don't go back that far). Current owner states they were unaware of damage. My A&P says pre-buy is looking good and he doesn't think it would be a reason not to buy plane but might be point to renegotiate price over.

Is the 337 that was filed by a reputable shop that is still in business enough to overcome the fact that the logs make no mention of the incident?

Thanks!
Click to expand...
I would not hold it against the new owner because as you said the records are incomplete/missing. It might however give you a bit of leverage on price negotiations.

If' it's flown for hundreds or thousands of hours since that incident there's virtually no likelihood the bird is in any way compromised but any crash history usually substantially reduces the resale price.
 
Bob Noel said:
At the risk of being roasted... I understand that some believe/claim that damage history is avoided by replacing parts with new parts. For example, if you put a completely new prop and engine on a plane that had a prop-strike, why would you still have prop/engine damage history associated with the airplane?
Click to expand...
Because it happened and could have effected the engine, mounts, and other components.
 
If it was repaired properly and been flying with no issues why would I care?
 
Bob Noel said:
why would you still have prop/engine damage history associated with the airplane?
Click to expand...
FWIW: because its still a repair. Any replacement like that without a stated reason only opens up more questions.
 
I'm not expressing myself very well, which isn't surprising, I were a engineer not a public speaker... I would think there would be a difference between a repaired part and a completely new part.

In both cases, all related damage must be considered and fixed (parts repaired or replaced with new)... absolutely... I wouldn't suggest otherwise.
 
Bob Noel said:
... I would think there would be a difference between a repaired part and a completely new part...
Click to expand...

But the aircraft is an assemblage of "parts" so replacement with a new part is still a repair of the overall structure. The firewall is part of the fuselage, you don't buy a new fuselage because of a wrinkle in the firewall. The problem is that although general aviation aircraft are mostly hand built they are constructed in a jig that usually is not available during a repair but due to the overall shape of an aircraft there are some basic measurements that can be taken to determine if it is true to form.
 
A Trim Tab on most Cessna Ailerons is a tip- off of an improper repair. The SM details a simple method of assuring correct Wing “ Wash-out”. It can also be readily checked during a Pre-buy IF you have the simple tools.

I saw some clowns partially reskin a C-172 w/o using these items. Very wing heavy even with full adjustment of the eccentrics. It as sold that way.

fyi- Most T&B installs have slotted holes to center the ball.
 
I bought a Cessna 150 once. The logs seemed to be all there dating back to the day it rolled off the assembly line. Had an engine vibration, which I assumed to be the prop out of balance. It was in rough shape anyway so I pulled it and sent it to Sensenich for repair. At the same time, the carb was acting funny, so pulled it off for IRAN. While the cowling was off, I noticed a slight wrinkle on the firewall. After doing some more digging I ran across an NTSB report. The airplane had made an off airport landing resulting in substantial damage firewall forward. Nothing in the logs about any repairs, or replacements. Prop shop told me that the runout on that prop was borderline irreparable, but they were able to get it right. After a little more digging, I found that the same thing happened to it a couple of years later. Still nothing in the logs about any major repairs.
 
I would buy it and fly it. After 50 years successfully flying the airplane not sure you can negotiate a lower price
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top