I'm OK, but plane is broke.

bnt83 said:
read it again,

maintained, rebuilt, or altered in a manner that may have appreciably changed its flight characteristics or substantially affected its operation in flight

There are many operators that require the 91.407 flight documented after a flight control R&R. This could be as simple as replacing an trim tab cable.
Click to expand...

Can I then assume there are some that don't? In either case, I still do not see the given repair as subject.
 
N801BH said:
Glad you guys and the plane is OK.. But......


It is hard to believe the firewall or mount didn't get tweaked...

You are one lucky dude..:yes::yes::yes:
Click to expand...

Still crossing my fingers. It's getting inspected right now.
 
He won the airplane, survived the incident, my money goes on the kid!!!

And just for the record, anyone younger than me is a kid, which leaves the field pretty wide open.
 
He has no spheres if he doesn't change his ID to "Crash"
My daughters nick was "Crashley" because she was always getting injured playing HS sports. It stuck.
 
tmyers said:
He won the airplane, survived the incident, my money goes on the kid!!!

And just for the record, anyone younger than me is a kid, which leaves the field pretty wide open.
Click to expand...

Exactly! Even with repair bills, I'm still ahead of the game.
 
I think the 150 needs nose art symbols, as in a badges of honor as to how many accidents it has survived, or students it has survived.

 
Last edited:
You need to get a taildragger and get rid of that dangerous nosegear once and for all.
 
Silvaire said:
You need to get a taildragger and get rid of that dangerous nosegear once and for all.
Click to expand...

Agree. Got my sport in a Cub, but for some reason I love the 140's. But for some good news, the mechanic called back. They can find no evidence of firewall, engine mount, strut, or structural damage. Lucky me.
 
Here's my theory on what happened. The impact was just enough to cause the wheel damaged and when it rotated at a high velocity it acted as almost a prybar or wedge which spread the fork just enough to pop the bolt at its weakest point. That's why the bolt is broken in one spot and the wheel fell clear of the fork. I think if the bolt broke because of the impact force itself the wheel might have held on at least for a little bit.
Brad

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
 
48dodge said:
Here's my theory on what happened. The impact was just enough to cause the wheel damaged and when it rotated at a high velocity it acted as almost a prybar or wedge which spread the fork just enough to pop the bolt at its weakest point. That's why the bolt is broken in one spot and the wheel fell clear of the fork. I think if the bolt broke because of the impact force itself the wheel might have held on at least for a little bit.
Brad

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Click to expand...

Great first post :yes:

Welcome.

Yes, that is a good scenario. The bolt failed in tension, not shear.
 
alfadog said:
Great first post :yes:

Welcome.

Yes, that is a good scenario. The bolt failed in tension, not shear.
Click to expand...

Possible, but 6500lbs of force are required for that, and the bolt would be noticeably stretched and thinned at the failure point.
 
Clark1961 said:
Bet it took full power to taxi!

Didn't know there was a break-away STC'd mod for the Cezzna nosegear. It aught to help prevent firewall damage. There is one particular 182 RG at BJC that needs it. I think it's had 3 new props in the last 4 years.
Click to expand...
It's not stuck in KRAP right now is it? Due to a prop strike/gear up?



Why is the CFI not taking the primary blame? IMO he should, the student is flying on HIS ticket with him. This wasn't a solo screw up, it was a lesson where the CFI failed to adhear to his duties. He should have called a go-around or taken the airplane. Sorry.
 
So if I was to file a claim with my insurance, would they go after the CFI's insurance company to cover the costs since he was technically PIC?
 
N801BH said:
Look at the bolt closer... it is a classic case of shear failure....:yes:
Click to expand...


Dunno. I spend two years at the P&W research facility in Palm Beach County as a metallurgic lab tech in qc and research labs and I broke a LOT of sh*t. Been a while but I see signs of failure in tension in the second close-up and perhaps a bit of necking on the first.

Remember, the harder the steel the more brittle and the less necking you will see in tensile failure.

Also, I wonder if there was some hydrogen embrittlement going on in that bolt.
 
Last edited:
JB1842 said:
Gonna be? Already am! Isn't that what all pilots are supposed to say?
Click to expand...

Lol, uhhhh... Nope. You missed the runway, you still have to learn how to judge your descent and where your target point should be in the windshield and how to pay attention. I'll also bet dollars to donuts you were looking at the threshold lights; where you look is where your brain and body will take you. You should have observed the threshold lights slowly sinking in your windshield as they got larger. Collision course requires two things, continuous bearing and diminishing range. The only thing that should stay in a continuous spot in your windshield is your aim point. PAPI and VASI lights often don't work, so get used to not needing/using them. That your instructor allowed this to happen means he's an idiot, don't fly with him anymore, the only thing you can learn from idiots is how to be an idiot as well. In aviation being an idiot will get you killed, so just don't go there. For you and the FAA, there will be no problem, I'll bet the CFI gets a 44709 ride.
 
Skylane81E said:
Now that one kind of makes it look like it may have been failed before the hit...
Click to expand...

And if that were the case, might it be possible that he didn't land short at all? That the "impact" of the wheel coming off made them think he landed short?

My first few night landings were horrible and hard on the nose wheel. The ground is definitely at least 5' higher at night and will catch you off-guard...smacking the ground before a proper round out and flare...if you're not careful.

So maybe he didn't land short but rather simply smacked the nose wheel pretty hard causing it to come off due to a pre-failed bolt.

:dunno:

Are there distinct marks on the runway indicating your initial impact point? Was this discussed and I missed it?
 
Last edited:
N801BH said:
Good question.... Hey OP... any pics of the skid marks /scars left on the runway??:dunno::dunno:

:needpics:
Click to expand...

The bend on the rim is consistent with hitting a sharp corner, not a flat runway.
 
alfadog said:
Dunno. I spend two years at the P&W research facility in Palm Beach County as a metallurgic lab tech in qc and research labs and I broke a LOT of sh*t. Been a while but I see signs of failure in tension in the second close-up and perhaps a bit of necking on the first.

Remember, the harder the steel the more brittle and the less necking you will see in tensile failure.

Also, I wonder if there was some hydrogen embrittlement going on in that bolt.
Click to expand...

Bolt is fairly soft, necking would be rather evident
 
I'd like to see pics of the end of the runway as well. Is it banded in concrete?

From the looks of that wheel, any asphalt "corner" would certainly show the point of contact. Shouldn't you also be able to see where the forks touched down?
 
Henning said:
Lol, uhhhh... Nope. You missed the runway, you still have to learn how to judge your descent and where your target point should be in the windshield and how to pay attention. I'll also bet dollars to donuts you were looking at the threshold lights; where you look is where your brain and body will take you. You should have observed the threshold lights slowly sinking in your windshield as they got larger. Collision course requires two things, continuous bearing and diminishing range. The only thing that should stay in a continuous spot in your windshield is your aim point. PAPI and VASI lights often don't work, so get used to not needing/using them. That your instructor allowed this to happen means he's an idiot, don't fly with him anymore, the only thing you can learn from idiots is how to be an idiot as well. In aviation being an idiot will get you killed, so just don't go there. For you and the FAA, there will be no problem, I'll bet the CFI gets a 44709 ride.
Click to expand...

Looking back, I was looking at the threshold lights more than I should have, and wasn't aiming far enough down the runway. Expensive lesson, but hey, at least I can fly again.
 
timwinters said:
And if that were the case, might it be possible that he didn't land short at all? That the "impact" of the wheel coming off made them think he landed short?

My first few night landings were horrible and hard on the nose wheel. The ground is definitely at least 5' higher at night and will catch you off-guard...smacking the ground before a proper round out and flare...if you're not careful.

So maybe he didn't land short but rather simply smacked the nose wheel pretty hard causing it to come off due to a pre-failed bolt.

:dunno:

Are there distinct marks on the runway indicating your initial impact point? Was this discussed and I missed it?
Click to expand...

My mechanic and their mechanic say there are marks on the grass before the threshold, but I couldn't make them out. There were also some tire marks right at the beginning of the threshold so who knows. At the time, both me and the CFI were positive we didn't land short. But it was dark out. I looked for damaged asphalt, but nothing looked like it was fresh. But the impact on the wheel looks pretty convincing that I hit the threshold.
 
JB1842 said:
My mechanic and their mechanic say there are marks on the grass before the threshold, but I couldn't make them out. There were also some tire marks right at the beginning of the threshold so who knows. At the time, both me and the CFI were positive we didn't land short. But it was dark out. I looked for damaged asphalt, but nothing looked like it was fresh. But the impact on the wheel looks pretty convincing that I hit the threshold.
Click to expand...

I ain't buying it..... That ground down front fork left a mark... Somewhere...:yes:
 
bnt83 said:
Take a look at this. It's often missed

§ 91.407 Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration.

(a) No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless—
(1) It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under § 43.7 of this chapter; and
(2) The maintenance record entry required by § 43.9 or § 43.11, as applicable, of this chapter has been made.
(b) No person may carry any person (other than crewmembers) in an aircraft that has been maintained, rebuilt, or altered in a manner that may have appreciably changed its flight characteristics or substantially affected its operation in flight until an appropriately rated pilot with at least a private pilot certificate flies the aircraft, makes an operational check of the maintenance performed or alteration made, and logs the flight in the aircraft records.
(c) The aircraft does not have to be flown as required by paragraph (b) of this section if, prior to flight, ground tests, inspection, or both show conclusively that the maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration has not appreciably changed the flight characteristics or substantially affected the flight operation of the aircraft.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2120-0005)
Click to expand...
This would not apply to landing gear.
 
alfadog said:
That is substantially the same criteria as a major repair or major alteration (337 territory). I imagine that, with what we know so far, this is a minor repair and the student pilot owner can fly it back himself. Not saying it is not a bad idea to have someone more experienced along.
Click to expand...

Repair by parts replacement do not need a 337.
 
What a great thing that the bolt sheared off. By failing, it helped prevent more costly stuff from failing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top