How do you find a GOOD mechanic?

Flying Lizard

Flying Lizard

Pre-Flight
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
40
Location
Minneapolis, MN
Display Name
Display name:
Flying_Lizard
I took my Super Decathlon up, just after the annual inspection, a couple weeks ago. The motor quit at 400' on climb-out; it's still amazing to me that I'm still alive and in one piece. I completely expected to land off field, but as I kept turning, the possibility of making the field just kept looking better and better. My intention was to have the crash where the emergency crew and ambulance would have easier access. As luck would have it, the bird stayed up long enough to do a 180 and land on a taxiway.

Anyway, I got tugged back to the shop, mechanics popped the cowling and we see the gas line is loose. Engine baffles were replaced during the annual and that line was right in the way. Now I'm feeling lucky not just to have avoided death, and a 24 hour surgery to have fence posts and plane parts removed from my body, but I also somehow managed to avoid a few years in a burn unit. I'm feeling very lucky indeed.

There are several mechanic shops on my field. I realize they're all staffed by humans that will make mistakes. Although I've used this mechanic for many years, and I like him, I'm thinking my health might be better if I change to a different shop. But how do you evaluate these different shops?

Perhaps it's a simple case where any change could hardly be a bad decision. But I really would like to make some kind of informed, reasoned decision. I'm gathering price quotes and plan to visit the shops to look for general tidiness, but beyond that, I'm pretty clueless what to look for, or what to ask. I'd really appreciate any helpful suggestions you folks might have.
 
Anytime an aircraft comes out of maintenance a detailed preflight is in order. Most owners do no more than sump the tanks and check the oil.

Get involved with your aircraft maintenance and ask lots of questions.
 
I like the idea of taking the Mechanic with you on the 1st flight after maintenance.
 
I'm sure he feels as bad about it as you do. Shops hate to lose a good customer over something stupid. Their procedures broke down, and whoever was doing the work (or inspecting it later) just went to sleep at the switch. There could be some plausible explanation that at least makes it more palatable, but anybody who's been around a shop knows that stuff sometimes happens. I would talk to him about it and see what he has to say. Or if you've already done that and don't feel the answer was satisfactory, or that you're not getting the truth, it may be too late for that.

If his shop has done your work for a long time, has he been the wrench, or somebody who works there? Who screwed up your repair? Have we located the culprit? What does he have to say about it? What were the circumstances?

If anything, you should be pretty sure they will be even more careful with your airplane in the future. My advice is to consider all the options, including staying with the existing shop, as you grind through this issue. Glad you emerged (at least physically) unscathed.

(
Flying Lizard said:
I took my Super Decathlon up, just after the annual inspection, a couple weeks ago. The motor quit at 400' on climb-out; it's still amazing to me that I'm still alive and in one piece. I completely expected to land off field, but as I kept turning, the possibility of making the field just kept looking better and better. My intention was to have the crash where the emergency crew and ambulance would have easier access. As luck would have it, the bird stayed up long enough to do a 180 and land on a taxiway.

Anyway, I got tugged back to the shop, mechanics popped the cowling and we see the gas line is loose. Engine baffles were replaced during the annual and that line was right in the way. Now I'm feeling lucky not just to have avoided death, and a 24 hour surgery to have fence posts and plane parts removed from my body, but I also somehow managed to avoid a few years in a burn unit. I'm feeling very lucky indeed.

There are several mechanic shops on my field. I realize they're all staffed by humans that will make mistakes. Although I've used this mechanic for many years, and I like him, I'm thinking my health might be better if I change to a different shop. But how do you evaluate these different shops?

Perhaps it's a simple case where any change could hardly be a bad decision. But I really would like to make some kind of informed, reasoned decision. I'm gathering price quotes and plan to visit the shops to look for general tidiness, but beyond that, I'm pretty clueless what to look for, or what to ask. I'd really appreciate any helpful suggestions you folks might have.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Early on in my ownership experience, I had a top notch shop make a rookie error and as a rookie, I pointed it out.

Initially, I psised them off for pointing it out but once they understood I was right and was not going to be satisfied with a simple I am sorry, they talked it through with me.

The owner of the shop called me three times or so (my "rememory" ain't what is used to be), gave me a truthful explanation, the mechanic called and gave me his side of the story and I was satisfied that this was not their MO.

I am still with them today and trust them completely. They now run my aircraft to the front of the line when I call (last two annuals in two days), wash it every time I show up and do what they say for what I consider a fair price.

My initial reaction was to ball them out and find the elusive "someone else" but I was advised by someone with 30 years flying experience to give them an opportunity to explain...about like what Wayne suggests...

Glad I listened. Good luck.
 
wabower said:
I'm sure he feels as bad about it as you do. Shops hate to lose a good customer over something stupid. Their procedures broke down, and whoever was doing the work (or inspecting it later) just went to sleep at the switch. There could be some plausible explanation that at least makes it more palatable, but anybody who's been around a shop knows that stuff sometimes happens. I would talk to him about it and see what he has to say. Or if you've already done that and don't feel the answer was satisfactory, or that you're not getting the truth, it may be too late for that.

If his shop has done your work for a long time, has he been the wrench, or somebody who works there? Who screwed up your repair? Have we located the culprit? What does he have to say about it? What were the circumstances?

If anything, you should be pretty sure they will be even more careful with your airplane in the future. My advice is to consider all the options, including staying with the existing shop, as you grind through this issue. Glad you emerged (at least physically) unscathed.

(
Click to expand...
Good advice.

My mechanic installed a new oil cooler a few years ago. Soon after I was flying and got a splatter of oil on the windsreen. I was close to the home airport and all other indication were in the green. I landed and looked under the cowl and oil was coming out of one of the connections to the cooler.

Thinking it was just a loose coupling I brought it back to the shop. They informed it was a crack in the oil cooler caused by over tightening. This was there fault. Before I even had a chance to say anything they were telling me that they will make this right, on their dime, and apologized for the problem. That alone made me willing to continue to do business with them. They screwed up, but they made it right. I am not happy with the screw up to begin with, screw ups are not their normal operating procedure. It was isolated and I am willing to forgive.

This is situation with the OP is far more serious than mine. I have to wonder if this is something that could have been caught on a very thorough pre-flight. I know when I have had major engine work done I test every connection I can touch to see if it is tight before flying. I then do a long run up, followed by another inspection of the engine compartment.
 
brcase said:
I like the idea of taking the Mechanic with you on the 1st flight after maintenance.
Click to expand...

I recall being told (on a tour) that the British navy had a shipyard in Hong Kong that maintained their fleet. They supposedly required the shipyard workers to go along on test dives of newly overhauled submarines - as a means of assuring quality work.

Dave
 
Best way to find a good mechanic is to go through a bunch of bad ones first. :nonod:

BTDT
 
About 10 years ago a good pilot friend was killed along with his passengers in an Israeli Aircraft Industries Westwind II.

The aircraft had just come out of a shop who did some kind of tail inspection that included disconnecting the jack screw(s).

They were descending into Teterboro and lost all elevator control. My friend was able to keep it in the air for about 30 minutes before the impact.

Inspection of the tail indicated it was reinstalled incorrectly. Not only that, but the serial number of the aircraft precluded it from the inspection.

I do remember that my friend was excited about getting rid of the dumpy flying Westwind and into a Falcon 50, that they to pick up the next day.

Don't get me going, I have more.............
 
Years ago, when I was with the 101st, they guaranteed every parachute to work properly. If it didn't, all you had to do was take it back for a complete replacement.

You could also challenge a parachute you were suspicious of, and the rigger was obliged to jump it. If it worked just fine, you had better be ready for a fight, he was coming after you. That was also guaranteed.

Having the mechanic fly with you after maintenance is no guarantee at all, much like the parachute.

Dan Mc. by far has the best advise: "How about hiring one mechanic to check the other's work? I've done that and am pleased so far..."

You usually spend at least a few thousand dollars on an annual, why not pay another repair shop a few hundred to look the work over? You can bet that knowing you were going to do that, every time, your mechanic will not want them to catch a screw up.

Great advise.

John
 
Last edited:
Bout to say.. if its an honest (but deadly) mistake, taking the mechanic with you serves no purpose other than you don't die alone in the crash.
 
dmccormack said:
Wow.. rough story!

How about hiring one mechanic to check the other's work? I've done that and am pleased so far...
Click to expand...

Thanks to everybody that replied. I especially like that idea.

My consternation comes from knowing it was a mistake that anybody could make ...although some people might make it daily, and others once in a million years. With that in mind, replacing a sole mechanic with another sole mechanic doesn't plug the hole. I think I need to either hire a 2nd mechanic as you suggest, or look for a shop that has (and follows) procedures that require two people to independently review at least the major items.

I could require a paper trail - something any mechanic is going to be afraid to sign off on, unless they actually made the check and know it's right. It could be a simple checklist with initials, but if it's complete and it's followed, it could be a game changer. It could include items like: Check all fuel line fittings to be tight, check oil filter and drain plug to be tight, etc.

Do maintenance checklists like that already exist? It seems like they should. Could we actually be relying on mechanics to do work that is just as critical as piloting without any checklists? How many of us pilots would be on the wrong side of the grass (or at least have some brown shorts) if we didn't use checklists? Most of us, I bet.
 
After 30 years of aircraft maintenance I have seen so many mistakes made that always could have been avoided. They do make checklists to perform inspections but you don't see any produced to check the work out.

Some of the things I have been doing over the years are.

1)two different mechanics looking over engines and any other critical systems after annual or repairs. You can't believe what you find at times.

2)a delivery check list that checks all of the simple but critical areas of the aircraft base on cold but truthful experiences.

3)I work at MMOPA (Malibu) safety seminars giving the owner every shred of info about what they can do to keep the aircraft safe and reliable.

I promise I will shut up, but as an owner or operator you should make every attempt to learn what you can about your aircraft and be in control. Sometimes you will be more informed that the maintenance people.

Kevin
 
brcase said:
I like the idea of taking the Mechanic with you on the 1st flight after maintenance.
Click to expand...

My grandfather told me that in WWII the guy packing the parachutes would have a pack picked at random and then he would go jump. Good QC plan:D
 
Run and look for leaks........anytime the cowl came off the Archer and now the Sundowner it gets a run up followed by opening up and doing the visual for connections and leaks.

The field where my annual is done does not provide for much of an off field landing unless your chopping wood......it's always on my mind when I'm going up for the first flight after annual. I believe in high speed taxi's and double checking with the touch and see method.

Glad your flight ended well despite the pucker factor.
 
Last edited:
When I was a young avionics tech in the Navy, I used to think QC was the pain in the neck big brother, always looking over your work. Then I became a QC inspector and changed my tune after seeing the occasional "that could have killed me" screw-up - I was also Post-Maintenance Check Flight aircrew.


I think that kind of QC program could have great benefit in GA, but at the same time, would add a bunch of cost to every maintenance action. I guess hiring your own QC Inspection after maintenance, as noted above, is the same thing - just not mandatory.
 
This reminds me of the old saying "Whats the difference between a Doctor and a Mechanic"



A doctor buries his mistakes, a mechanic never lives his down.
 
brcase said:
I like the idea of taking the Mechanic with you on the 1st flight after maintenance.
Click to expand...

IMO that oft repeated concept has little merit. If your mechanic is so uncertain of the quality of his work that he would hesitate to fly in an airplane he recently worked on, he's not likely to stay in that business for long. IME all A&Ps believe they do good work and aren't likely to make any serious mistakes. I think the idea that a perceived health risk as a consequence for a mistake on his part would somehow increase his vigilance would be almost insulting to most mechanics and on the flip side, I'm certain that with some owner/pilots the mechanic's chief fear on a post maintenance flight would be all about the pilot's skills and judgment.
 
I make a point of taking part in any maintenance that goes on with my plane, assuming that the time allows for it.

Everyone makes mistakes. The first flight after maintenance is always going to be the most risky, especially if they touched the engine. A friend of mine had an engine fail on him right after takeoff after annual. Similar deal, except he was in a twin. Flew the plane on one until he could build some more altitude and then turned around and landed. Not fun. One mistake doesn't make for a bad shop - it's how the mistake was handled and the fact that the mistake is not the norm. Always do a thorough pre-flight and be extra careful after maintenance.

Talk to other people who use these guys. If they speak highly of the shop, chances are it's a good shop that just slipped up. If they respond properly to what happened, I don't see a reason to stop using them - they should be especially careful with your plane after what happened.

I don't thinking taking your mechanic with you makes a difference. In my case I normally do, but that's because he's also my flight instructor and he knows more about how the systems work than I do (not to mention is a better pilot).
 
Last edited:
In Canada, at least, we have several government-mandated systems that are designed to reduce the human error factors in maintenance. There's first the Safety Management System (SMS) that's a non-punitive reporting system. Any employee can report or confess to some problem, and the management is then obliged to fix it before it occurs again and causes serious damage.

And every mechanic has to have Human Performance in Aircraft Maintenance (HPIAM) training. This focuses on what's called The Dirty Dozen, which look like this:

The “Dirty Dozen”
1. Lack of Teamwork
2. Lack of Communication
3. Lack of Assertiveness
4. Fatigue
5. Stress
6. Distraction
7. Lack of Awareness
8. Lack of Knowledge
9. Lack of Resources
10. Pressure
11. Negative Norms
12. Complacency

Any of these factors can cause errors, and there are usually two or more involved. Being aware of them has reduced much of the trouble.

There's also a requirement that a separate inspection is done to any engine or flight control if it has been "disturbed." That one arose from an accident in which the ailerons on a deHavilland Beaver were misrigged moved up or down together instead of oppositely. It crashed on takeoff.

In Canada a mechanic's license takes four years minimum, no matter what. There's also a requirement for approved or acceptable formal training; simple apprenticeship isn't enough. It's based on the British system, which is much tougher than the US's, and I've heard that Australia's is even harder. Such training teaches the theory behind the work, not just the rote work itself.

Finally, pilots are often their own worst enemies. Owners tend to be cheap, and will pressure a mechanic to hurry up and get the thing done, since he's paying by the hour rather than the job. See item #10, above. Cheapness can also lead an owner to pressure the mechanic to leave out some work that really should be done (like magneto inspections or hose replacements) and when the item later fails, it becomes the mechanic's fault. Many pilots have no idea how critical some of these things can be, and will suspect that the mechanic is just trying to make more money. And, of course, some of them are. They do themselves no favors in the long run when they rip off the customer.


Dan
 
gismo said:
I think the idea that a perceived health risk as a consequence for a mistake on his part would somehow increase his vigilance would be almost insulting to most mechanics and on the flip side, I'm certain that with some owner/pilots the mechanic's chief fear on a post maintenance flight would be all about the pilot's skills and judgment.
Click to expand...
+1.

To illustrate how concerned some mechanics are about making mistakes, I recently spoke to one who worked on the airplanes I flew years ago. We made some small talk then he apologized for the time he had not attached the seat correctly. This had to have happened at least 15 years ago and I had totally forgotten about it. In fact I can say I pretty much have zero recollection, especially about it being him who did it. I think I discovered it during the preflight then called him up and asked him to fix it. I know it didn't cause any problems although it could have.
 
Three words: Owner Assisted Annual
************************************

B I N G O !

Be there, see there... No, you may not be able to tell whether he has the timing set right on the money or if the safety wire has the 'correct' number of twists, but you can look, wiggle, and twist to be sure the mag is going to stay on...
If you looking over their shoulders makes them unhappy, or they say the insurance doesn't allow customers in the shop, THAT is when you need a new mechanic...

denny-o
 
gismo said:
IMO that oft repeated concept has little merit. If your mechanic is so uncertain of the quality of his work that he would hesitate to fly in an airplane he recently worked on, he's not likely to stay in that business for long. IME all A&Ps believe they do good work and aren't likely to make any serious mistakes. I think the idea that a perceived health risk as a consequence for a mistake on his part would somehow increase his vigilance would be almost insulting to most mechanics and on the flip side, I'm certain that with some owner/pilots the mechanic's chief fear on a post maintenance flight would be all about the pilot's skills and judgment.
Click to expand...

True, But since I alway do owner assisted Condition Inspections (in my case) I am effectively taking my maintenance person with me, also since it is a single place airplane take the mechanic with me isn't an option.

I do however like the procedure Dave Morse showed me when he preparing to test fly the Thunder Mustang I was working on. He would do a two minute full power run-up at an appropriate location on the airport. His thinking is that if it will run for two minutes it would get him to a position where he could dead stick it in. Of course after the two minute run up we removed the cowling and check for leaks prior to flying it.

Brian
 
Dan Thomas said:
In Canada a mechanic's license takes four years minimum, no matter what. There's also a requirement for approved or acceptable formal training; simple apprenticeship isn't enough. It's based on the British system, which is much tougher than the US's, and I've heard that Australia's is even harder. Such training teaches the theory behind the work, not just the rote work itself.
Click to expand...

That creates a tremendous barrier to entry and I'm not convinced would necessarily yield better results. There are no shortage of people who know how to turn wrenches well and how to work on various systems properly. I see no reason why these people shouldn't be allowed to work on airplanes (at least their own). If anything, I think the requirements are too strict in America as-is. Then again, I'm biased because I used to be a mechanic and am prefer doing my own work.

All that extra training and barriers to entry makes certain people feel better, but it doesn't prevent a hose from not being tightened properly. That's the kind of mistake that anyone, regardless of training or experience, can make. Knowing the theory behind the work is valuable for sure, but you're not going to find a lot of engineers who want to be professional mechanics. I'll do it, but you'll have to pay me engineering salary for me to do it (guess how many people will want to do that).
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Knowing the theory behind the work is valuable for sure, but you're not going to find a lot of engineers who want to be professional mechanics. I'll do it, but you'll have to pay me engineering salary for me to do it (guess how many people will want to do that).
Click to expand...
Maybe that's why they call them "engineers" up there. :)
 
Everskyward said:
Maybe that's why they call them "engineers" up there. :)
Click to expand...

blamecanada.jpg


(note: I actually like Canada. Just saying ;) )
 
Many shops are using MX software programs now. I've looked at most of the current offerings, all have included an inspection column for the appropriate party to check and initial. It doesn't mean the hose isn't loose, but it does provide a record of who said they did it and who said they inspected it.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
All that extra training and barriers to entry makes certain people feel better, but it doesn't prevent a hose from not being tightened properly.
Click to expand...

And it makes everything a lot more expensive. Much of it is driven by the legal system, where anyone who touches an airplane could be held liable. The rest is an attempt to preclude fatal errors, of which there are needlessly too many. There are some mistakes made by mechanics who use their own "better" technique or repair, when they don't have the training that tells them why the manual calls for a certain method in the first place. We don't know how much we don't know until we get an education, see?

Dan
 
Dan Thomas said:
And it makes everything a lot more expensive.
Click to expand...

Which means fewer people participate, which makes it more expensive, which...

There are some mistakes made by mechanics who use their own "better" technique or repair, when they don't have the training that tells them why the manual calls for a certain method in the first place. We don't know how much we don't know until we get an education, see?
Click to expand...

In my experience, mechanics who think they know better than the manuals will think they know better than the manuals, training or not. Example: when I was a Jaguar mechanic, my boss was a former Jaguar Master Tech who worked on the V12s since shortly after I was born. Yet on multiple occasions, we would argue about things that the book and engineering logic stated (my side) vs. his "This is how it works" (his side). He'd been trained, he was just convinced that he knew better than the book.

This is why I'm not in favor of all this regulation. It creates problems for people who are good to go without it, and doesn't necessarily make for people who know what they're doing, with or without it.
 
Here's one from yesterday. The King Air manual sets forth the method for calibrating the fuel quantity measuring system with step-by-step details. When a technician followed the instructions to the letter he found himself at a spot where the procedure called for in the manual couldn't be accomplished due to lack of access to the part that was supposedly being measured.

So he called tech support at the factory (which, starting next week will charge $125 per hour for the same service that has been free since the early '50's --go figure) and talked to the wizard. The guy dug in his little private notebook and found that the procedure shown in the manual should have been changed long ago because Beech knows it doesn't work, but had evidently been included in the most recent revision of the M/M in error. The book is probably right most of the time, but CRM applies to shop guys too. Knowing how and when to use all the resources available can be just as important to them as it can be for pilots.

Ted DuPuis said:
Which means fewer people participate, which makes it more expensive, which...



In my experience, mechanics who think they know better than the manuals will think they know better than the manuals, training or not. Example: when I was a Jaguar mechanic, my boss was a former Jaguar Master Tech who worked on the V12s since shortly after I was born. Yet on multiple occasions, we would argue about things that the book and engineering logic stated (my side) vs. his "This is how it works" (his side). He'd been trained, he was just convinced that he knew better than the book.

This is why I'm not in favor of all this regulation. It creates problems for people who are good to go without it, and doesn't necessarily make for people who know what they're doing, with or without it.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Here's one from yesterday. The King Air manual sets forth the method for calibrating the fuel quantity measuring system with step-by-step details. When a technician followed the instructions to the letter he found himself at a spot where the procedure called for in the manual couldn't be accomplished due to lack of access to the part that was supposedly being measured.

So he called tech support at the factory (which, starting next week will charge $125 per hour for the same service that has been free since the early '50's --go figure) and talked to the wizard. The guy dug in his little private notebook and found that the procedure shown in the manual should have been changed long ago because Beech knows it doesn't work, but had evidently been included in the most recent revision of the M/M in error. The book is probably right most of the time, but CRM applies to shop guys too. Knowing how and when to use all the resources available can be just as important to them as it can be for pilots.
Click to expand...

Yep, agreed. Still comes back to my point about the training doesn't guarantee much of anything.
 
i found a good mechanic by hanging out at the airport a lot.
 
As a mechanic heres my thoughts on this. If you can find a mechanic who is also a pilot and aircraft owner who has built or restored aircraft you couldn't do better,they're in it for the love of aviation. Pay them well and consider yourself lucky to have them working on your plane.For those that don't have that option I would look for someone in the over 35 age bracket thats been doing this for 10 plus years. Long enough to have grown up,picked up some skills and learned some patience hopefully. This might sound bad to some but I'm serious, and I've met a lot of guys in aviation that have chosen this. Someone who is child free doesn't have the distractions or costs that come with having kids. Now, two things a good mechanic should always do, and that is to" double wrench check everything" if they do this simple task believe me they'll find something they left loose eventually, and they won't forget it, and they'll double check forever. It would've dicovered your loose line! Secondly a good mechanic will alway completely hand clean everything on the engine with a rag and soap or solvent. A complete wipe down will put your hand in contact with everything on that engine and believe me you'll find stuff that a visual inspection won't. So ask if they do those two simple things when they are inspecting your aircraft. I am also an advocate of the owner assisted annual, not only does it cut down on the incredible amount of labor involved in opening up and closing an aircraft for inspection, it won't take long to figure out if you are dealing with a reasonable and competent person, and that goes both ways. As an owner you should want to learn more about your aircraft, and as a mechanic you also want the aircraft owner to know more about their aircraft.
 
K1kiwi said:
For those that don't have that option I would look for someone in the over 35 age bracket thats been doing this for 10 plus years. Long enough to have grown up,picked up some skills and learned some patience hopefully. This might sound bad to some but I'm serious, and I've met a lot of guys in aviation that have chosen this. Someone who is child free doesn't have the distractions or costs that come with having kids.
Click to expand...
I think this is a really off-the-wall way to choose a mechanic to begin with, but even if it wasn't, it seems like finding someone in the 35 age bracket who is "child free" would be a challenge in itself. Isn't this the age group which generally tends to have children at home? Even if you had children at 20 they would still only be 15, which can be a troublesome age...
 
K1kiwi said:
Someone who is child free doesn't have the distractions or costs that come with having kids.
Click to expand...

Is that an OK question to ask when looking for a mechanic?

And, if being child-free is good, wouldn't celibacy make for an even better mechanic?


Trapper John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top