One more would you buy damaged history aircraft?

WannFly

WannFly

Final Approach
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
6,553
Location
KLZU
Display Name
Display name:
Priyo
this is my 4rth jab to buy a plane, honestly, never thought buying a used airplane would be this hard. pulling your own teeth with a rusted plyer without a mirror is easier I think... anyway, found an Archer I like, it has 2 substantial damage history 20 yrs back, by the same pilot. first he damaged the left wing, and the next yr the right wing to balance it out :). he was 72 then. then he donated the plane to AOPA and ASI maintained the plane for next 15 years. I am guessing ASI would not run it 300 hrs per year and plaster the plane all over their photoshoot and training videos if the wings were not fixed (2nd accident the wing was replaced with factory new)

here are some words from AOPA

"Occasionally, a donated aircraft stays with the foundation. N8121K, a well-loved 1978 Piper Archer, belonged to Lou Torres and for all the reasons cited above, he decided to give her to us. For more than a decade 21K flew 300 hours a year serving as an avionics testbed and photo platform. We installed angle-of-attack equipment, GPS gear, and photographed multifunction displays from all perspectives. Images of her engine compartment, instrument panel, landing gear, and more will live on for years in AOPA Pilot and Flight Training magazine articles and Air Safety Institute online courses. She introduced many people to the world of flight and served as trainer and transportation vehicle. Piper 21K has now gone on to a new home and continues to fly, bringing pleasure to yet another pilot."

here is the plane: https://www.trade-a-plane.com/searc...=ARCHER+II&listing_id=2250699&s-type=aircraft

one last thing for ya all... it has AOA Indicator.. now beat that :happydance:

what do ya'll think?
 
Haha I'm a skeptic so my first thought was, "AOPA finally found a buyer! They couldn't dump the thing for years!"

Sorry. Just feeling saucy today.
 
denverpilot said:
Haha I'm a skeptic so my first thought was, "AOPA finally found a buyer! They couldn't dump the thing for years!"

Sorry. Just feeling saucy today.
Click to expand...
ha. yeah they already found someone to dump it few years back
 
Damage history can make it harder to sell, like any other blemish, 20 year old damage doesn't worry me like 1 year old damage. My 182 had a wing replaced when it was a year old, that was in 1978 and it seems to be holding up pretty well. :D If everything else about it is what you want, I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep over it. If it's a project that you are going to sink a bunch of money into to make it perfect, I would probably pass.
 
New wing would not concern me...the repaired wing would...what was the damage?

My flight school has a plane that had a repaired bent wing. Although it was "airworthy" my CFI refused to fly it sayin that it was a death trap and never handled the same in critical phases of flight even though it was repaired.
 
I think it would be harder to find a 40 year old plane / 6700 hour plane WITHOUT damage than with damage...I agree with John...20 year old damage doesn't bother me much either.
 
Maybe it's nothing, maybe it's something.

Find out exactly how it was damaged and exactly what was done to fix it, verify during prebuy, and during the test flight before prebuy, do some stalls, great way to check rigging.

If it was repaired good as new it's a non event.







Shawn said:
New wing would not concern me...the repaired wing would...what was the damage?

My flight school has a plane that had a repaired bent wing. Although it was "airworthy" my CFI refused to fly it sayin that it was a death trap and never handled the same in critical phases of flight even though it was repaired.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a pretty dramatic CFI.
 
I dunno. Suppose I'd feel better about that one than a lot of other damaged ones out there.
 
Shawn said:
New wing would not concern me...the repaired wing would...what was the damage?

My flight school has a plane that had a repaired bent wing. Although it was "airworthy" my CFI refused to fly it sayin that it was a death trap and never handled the same in critical phases of flight even though it was repaired.
Click to expand...
the pilot hit a tree. this was repaired in 1996, after which the aircraft has flown about 4500 hrs including all sorts of documented xc's in AOPA/ASI races
 
Shawn said:
New wing would not concern me...the repaired wing would...what was the damage?

My flight school has a plane that had a repaired bent wing. Although it was "airworthy" my CFI refused to fly it sayin that it was a death trap and never handled the same in critical phases of flight even though it was repaired.
Click to expand...
There's a C172 at a club I fly with. It had a wing replaced. To get it rigged right they had to do some radical tweaking to the ailerons. The one on the replaced wing has very different range of travel than the other. Maybe no big deal, but I won't fly it
 
I'd wonder if the wiring was accurately returned to original after that long series of modifications.
 
Shawn said:
New wing would not concern me...the repaired wing would...what was the damage?

My flight school has a plane that had a repaired bent wing. Although it was "airworthy" my CFI refused to fly it sayin that it was a death trap and never handled the same in critical phases of flight even though it was repaired.
Click to expand...

Drama queen. The thing probably wasn't re-rigged very well. There's a lot of airplane out there that aren't quite in rig anymore, and very few owners (hand raised, including me) bother to get it fixed.

Our airplane has a tiny roll to the right. Most rentals I've flown had something similar.

Now the CFI I know who walked out to a Skyhawk with a student a a VERY well known aviation college and as he was standing back watching, noticed the dihedral of the two wings didn't match, and walked inside and got someone else to confirm... that the previous instructor and student had bent the airplane considerably....

That's probably not in the realm of drama queen so much. :)
 
denverpilot said:
Drama queen. The thing probably wasn't re-rigged very well.
Click to expand...

You guys sure make some judgmental assumptions. Part of the problem was the owner's son was also the A/P so the repairs were questionable with the shop's capabilities, but you would never know till you flew it for hours on end as my CFI had. The CFI's point was that once you bend metal, you can't unbend it and have it ever be the same. It might be adequate, but on a wing that is a greater area of concern.

The OP was looking for damage history options...IMO replaced wing is no problem. Bent wing...I am moving on as a low time pilot first airplane purchase. Too many potential variables lurking below the surface.
 
Last edited:
I almost feel bad for you enough to sell you my Archer. No GPS in mine though. I'm about to be unable to use mine for a few years, but that's for another thread...
 
Shawn said:
You guys sure make some judgmental assumptions.
Click to expand...

So it's okay for the CFI to make those about the owner's son, but not us about him? LOL. Got it.

Either the thing got repaired correctly or it didn't, but if he didn't think it was airworthy I'm not going to argue with him not flying it.

If he watched other people flying it and said nothing to the FSDO, I have a problem with that.

Wonder if he would have crowed about how he was "right" if the thing folded a wing with another CFI and student on board it, who didn't know what he claimed to know about it, or if he'd have actually felt bad that he didn't report it.

People learn by example. What did you learn by him saying he wouldn't fly it, but not saying anything to anyone other than you about it?

In your mind was his refusal to fly it but letting everyone else fly it and keeping his special knowledge about it to himself, an example of doing the right thing or doing the wrong thing?

That's the basis for my criticism. Either it was airworthy and just out of rig, or it wasn't airworthy and other actions should have been taken by someone entrusted with the title of "CFI".
 
denverpilot said:
People learn by example. What did you learn by him saying he wouldn't fly it, but not saying anything to anyone other than you about it?
Click to expand...

...again with the freakin assumptions.

You are creating a false storyline out of thin air filling in the gaps with your own incorrect assumptions between few facts that I provided to simply trying to make the point that you can't unbend metal and it always be as good as factory new...which may or may not be an problem of concern...especially in a wing.

Trying to give the OP some real context and experience to form his opinion on vs "well if it still flies, it is good" mentality some of you are projecting.

...and to answer your question of what did I learn without litigating that plane and actions taken...I learned that "airworthy" can be subjective from A/P to A/P and never blindly trust just one opinion.
 
Last edited:
guy guys... relax.. can we get back to topic at hand.. I donno if you guys read my post.. but thins thing has a freaking AOA indicator :rollercoaster:
 
NealRomeoGolf said:
I almost feel bad for you enough to sell you my Archer. No GPS in mine though. I'm about to be unable to use mine for a few years, but that's for another thread...
Click to expand...
don't know the context... but sorry to hear if you are unable to fly :(:(
 
Shawn said:
...again with the freakin assumptions.

You are creating a false storyline out of thin air filling in the gaps with your own incorrect assumptions between few facts that I provided to simply trying to make the point that you can't unbend metal and it always be as good as factory new...which may or may not be an problem of concern...especially in a wing.

Trying to give the OP some real context and experience to form his opinion on vs "well if it still flies, it is good" mentality some of you are projecting.

...and to answer your question of what did I learn without litigating that plane and actions taken...I learned that "airworthy" can be subjective from A/P to A/P and never blindly trust just one opinion.
Click to expand...

What assumption?

You said a flight instructor wouldn't fly it because it wouldn't fly right.

The only assumption I made front that was that other people were flying it.

Airworthiness has a standard, and the A&P gets a say, but the AI gets more, and the FSDO gets even more.

If there's some "owner's son" signing things off that a local CFI doesn't think is airworthy, that's a pretty "big deal". Especially if said CFI is watching other people fly it and talking to students about it.

What's the correct course of action? Telling you as his student not to fly it, is only one of them.

I don't think a story about a CFI who didn't find it enough of a problem to get the thing grounded, is much worth when discussing whether a typical aircraft with repaired damage history is worth buying.

Most damage IS repaired to a standard. Or it's not airworthy.
 
N747JB said:
Damage history can make it harder to sell, like any other blemish, 20 year old damage doesn't worry me like 1 year old damage. My 182 had a wing replaced when it was a year old, that was in 1978 and it seems to be holding up pretty well. :D If everything else about it is what you want, I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep over it. If it's a project that you are going to sink a bunch of money into to make it perfect, I would probably pass.
Click to expand...

don't think I am going to put a lot of money into it. it pretty much has everything I want. that GDL 90 wont meet the ADSB mandate, but from what I hear, there are several STC-ed ones (ADSB-OUT) coming in a year or so which are under 1000 and currently being tested with FAA. all I am going to put in is an engine monitor
 
Mine had a pretty bad base to final incident in '83 (non fatal) Two new wings. It's flow beautifully for me since I've had it the last few years. As others mentioned it was a long time ago and it's been flying since. If it was more recent or hadn't flown as much, I'd be more concerned.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
 
Old damage with many hours since flown is a non issue IMHO, as long as it was fixed and documented correctly is what matters. I would imagine this repair was done right considering who has owned it since.
 
Almost any damage to a wood or metal airplane is repairable to airworthiness and usually to like-new specs or very close. It may or may not be economically feasible, but it's rarely impossible in a practical sense. As others have said, I consider old damage, properly repaired by a decent mechanic who used the right materials, inspected and signed off by an honest IA, and having passed the test of time, to be a non-issue.

Rich
 
It's the damage that was fixed without documentation on the plane with clean logs that should really scare you.
 
You need to look into it more, but I don't turn a plane down for damage history. In fact, sometimes the planes I've flown with damage history fly much nicer than planes without. It all depends on who repairs it and how good of a job they do. The Aztec and 310 both had damage history. The 414 does not. The 310 was the nicest flying 310 I had ever flown.

So, look closer.
 
Not just check that the paperwork was in order and that it looks good. Fly it and make sure it flies STRAIGHT...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top