Piper Arrow trim gets stiff at 150 mph.

[RyanB]

I'm much more of an idiot than dealing with a jack screw. The tires also have visible wear. The spark plugs aren't new, either. The mags are fresh, but I coupled them with used spark plugs! I'm a COMPLETE MORON!

I’m with Glenn, as I originally asserted that the airplane needs to be grounded. If you’re not going to deal with maintaining the airplane, than who is? Are you just going let this go and not have it addressed? It needs to be corrected, end of story.

 

[paramax55]

There is a balance weight in the tail for the PA28s. In fact, there was an AD on them. If I remember correctly, it had to do with cracking of the tube if you didn't have the upgraded one. As far as paint goes, I have a strong suspicion that this airplane has its original paint. As far as balancing goes... I've heard both sides of the story. Yes, the absolute correct way is to remove the control surface and rebalance after painting - no question there. And it's easy to do. I've also heard that our airplanes fly so slow, that you'd never be able to create flutter from painting. One paint shop owner told me "You're taking paint off, and putting paint back on. It doesn't really change things." And they had 3 jets in the shop when I was there. But balancing IS the correct way.

I have thought about the cable being toward the end of its travel on the drum. That could be part of the problem, but it's not the whole problem. I haven't been able to recreate the issue on the ground, which means the load of flying is a contributing factor. I might be able to get someone to add resistance while I move the trim, but it's not scientific without a calibrated hand pushing on it. But it could be informative.

I'll get a new jack screw and drum and I'll go through the proper rigging procedure while I'm waiting on parts to come in. Someone who had done work on this airplane in the past was less than meticulous. It's possible that they had gotten to this trim cable and it's done incorrectly.

 

[paramax55]

I’m with Glenn, as I originally asserted that the airplane needs to be grounded. If you’re not going to deal with maintaining the airplane, than who is? Are you just going let this go and not have it addressed? It needs to be corrected, end of story.

Why do people assume I'm not going to fix the airplane? Just because I'm not going to ground it doesn't mean I'm not going to fix it. Why would I be looking for a part number to NOT fix the airplane?

 

[Fearless Tower]

Why do people assume I'm not going to fix the airplane? Just because I'm not going to ground it doesn't mean I'm not going to fix it. Why would I be looking for a part number to NOT fix the airplane?

You aren’t getting it.

It’s not that people think you aren’t going to fix it. It’s that YOU said it wasn’t a big safety thing and it was fine to keep flying it while you research parts.

 

[TommyG]

If it doesn’t feel right, don’t push it. If you’re not a mechanic. Have a mechanic look at it and determine the safety of the issue.

 

[paramax55]

You aren’t getting it.

It’s not that people think you aren’t going to fix it. It’s that YOU said it wasn’t a big safety thing and it was fine to keep flying it while you research parts.

You are right. I don't get it. It hasn't changed in over 200 hours. I'm not scared that I'm going to fall out of the sky in the next two weeks.

If it doesn’t feel right, don’t push it. If you’re not a mechanic. Have a mechanic look at it and determine the safety of the issue.

Read back on page 1. I did have a mechanic look at it.

 

[GlennAB1]

Alright, the aircraft has had a flight control discrepancy for over 200 hours, and you've deferred maintenance, in accordance with what?

 

[Dan Thomas]

You are right. I don't get it. It hasn't changed in over 200 hours. I'm not scared that I'm going to fall out of the sky in the next two weeks.

I've heard that before. "Been doing that for a long time. It ain't gonna quit." That's from non-mechanically-inclined folks who don't understand wear and tear and the symptoms of same. Sure, it will do that, but for how long? I've taken plenty of stuff apart that was acting up and found that it would have quit altogether within a very few more hours. And we sometimes hear of stuff that did finally fail after the pilot kept ignoring the issue.

Some mechanics will also ignore it. I often find that sort of mistake on airplanes I work on for the first time. Those guys leave themselves wide open to litigation when something finally injures or kills someone.

We will make a log entry when the owner doesn't want to have fixed some issue we consider an airworthiness item. We photocopy that and get his signature on the work sheets. He's on his on hook after that. Even then there are some defects I consider so serious that I will not sign out the airplane at all. Badly worn or damaged flight controls and cracked exhaust systems are two of them.

 

[James331]

You are right. I don't get it. It hasn't changed in over 200 hours. I'm not scared that I'm going to fall out of the sky in the next two weeks.

Have you had an engine failure or full on emergency yet?
Given enough hours flown you will, you like stacking the deck against yourself?

If I'm going to get myself best up, rather have it done by a hot blonde vs done by the instrument panel after my plane craps the bed because of me ignoring issues.

.. And they had 3 jets in the shop when I was there. ..

And that and 1 buck won't even get you on the bus.

Especially based on the other stuff that "shop" said.

 

[Bell206]

This airplane is both safe and legal.

This airplane is not getting grounded for this... [and] If the IA didn't think it was an issue while he was standing in front of the plane...

Paramax:
As I follow this thread, there’s one basic issue you seem to overlook. While in your opinion the aircraft is “safe” and “legal” which doesn’t require it to be grounded, your plane is in fact not airworthy. That is the critical term you should be concerned about.

Every time the aircraft flies it is in violation of the FARs. Not flying takes every Part 91 violation off the table. That would leave only your disassembly of the jackscrew as the issue. And that problem can be rectified with an entry signed by an A&P. I can 100% assure you disassembly of a flight control is not preventative maintenance.

And even though you had your mechanic look at it, that discussion is meaningless without a discrepancy write up by you and a corrective entry by him. It all falls on you as the owner.

So the next time you fly with your trim issue keep in mind you are neither “safe” nor “legal” from a regulatory perspective (i.e., airworthy) and the consequences of that could be endless.

 

[coloradobluesky]

Stiff is relative. I flew a Cessna 185 that had stiff elevator trim. But you could turn it the whole way. IMO it was still airworthy. I'd advise not buying parts until its taken apart. Lubing might fix it or it might be adjustable or maybe just one part, not the whole thing. I dunno. No way to tell until you examine it.

 

[James331]

Stiff is relative. I flew a Cessna 185 that had stiff elevator trim. But you could turn it the whole way. IMO it was still airworthy. I'd advise not buying parts until its taken apart. Lubing might fix it or it might be adjustable or maybe just one part, not the whole thing. I dunno. No way to tell until you examine it.

A 185 trim also will be harder than a 172 or 208B trim due to the design too.

I could legit almost spin the vans trim, never seen that on a wagon or even arrow

 

[Dan Thomas]

Stiff 185 trim is not a good sign. The jackscrews in those airplanes, unless the airplane has been modified as per the service kit, are inaccessible unless the whole tail is taken off the airplane. Fin, rudder, elevators, stab. All of it. The SK puts an access cover in the belly in the jackscrew bay. I have seen illegal access holes there, round holes like you see under the wings, but there's no reinforcing doubler to carry the stresses around the hole. Not safe at all. The stab/elevator loads as well as the tailwheel loads all pass through that skin.

Those jackscrews, being hard to get at, cost money to inspect and overhaul. Lots of money. So they don't get done. They get dried out, the dust boots debond and let in water and dirt, and corrosion sets in. A corroded jackscrew can break, and broken jackscrews can mean an uncontrollable airplane. The chain or cable can break and the jackscrews will then creep to full nose-up, sometimes quite rapidly. The oldest 180s didn't have the detented trim wheel and had plenty of problems with that. Cessna installed springs in the jackscrews, which didn't completely cure the problem.

 

[JAWS]

Stiff 185 trim is not a good sign. The jackscrews in those airplanes, unless the airplane has been modified as per the service kit, are inaccessible unless the whole tail is taken off the airplane. Fin, rudder, elevators, stab. All of it. The SK puts an access cover in the belly in the jackscrew bay. I have seen illegal access holes there, round holes like you see under the wings, but there's no reinforcing doubler to carry the stresses around the hole. Not safe at all. The stab/elevator loads as well as the tailwheel loads all pass through that skin.

Those jackscrews, being hard to get at, cost money to inspect and overhaul. Lots of money. So they don't get done. They get dried out, the dust boots debond and let in water and dirt, and corrosion sets in. A corroded jackscrew can break, and broken jackscrews can mean an uncontrollable airplane. The chain or cable can break and the jackscrews will then creep to full nose-up, sometimes quite rapidly. The oldest 180s didn't have the detented trim wheel and had plenty of problems with that. Cessna installed springs in the jackscrews, which didn't completely cure the problem.

This is a serious safety of flight issue and should garner more of a response from the owner other than ...

It hasn't changed in over 200 hours. I'm not scared that I'm going to fall out of the sky in the next two weeks.

I am sure Alaska Airlines felt the same way!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Airlines_Flight_261

 

[ElPaso Pilot]

I don't get into this situation unless I have a situation in which I'm making a REALLY good ground speed - like a tailwind or cool, dry, dense air.

Not to pile on, but the trim system has no idea what the ground speed or tailwind is. These will have no effect on trim forces.

 

[James331]

Stiff 185 trim is not a good sign. The jackscrews in those airplanes, unless the airplane has been modified as per the service kit, are inaccessible unless the whole tail is taken off the airplane. Fin, rudder, elevators, stab. All of it. The SK puts an access cover in the belly in the jackscrew bay. I have seen illegal access holes there, round holes like you see under the wings, but there's no reinforcing doubler to carry the stresses around the hole. Not safe at all. The stab/elevator loads as well as the tailwheel loads all pass through that skin.

Those jackscrews, being hard to get at, cost money to inspect and overhaul. Lots of money. So they don't get done. They get dried out, the dust boots debond and let in water and dirt, and corrosion sets in. A corroded jackscrew can break, and broken jackscrews can mean an uncontrollable airplane. The chain or cable can break and the jackscrews will then creep to full nose-up, sometimes quite rapidly. The oldest 180s didn't have the detented trim wheel and had plenty of problems with that. Cessna installed springs in the jackscrews, which didn't completely cure the problem.

Gotta read what I wrote, said that jackscrew trim will always be a little "stiffer" than say 172 trim.