What puts chips on the face of a propeller?

midwestpa24 said:
Those scratches really don't strike me as something from a running propeller strike. My guess is a ladder from fueling possibly. The surrounding scratches would indicate to me an attempt to cover it up by whoever the offending party was.
Click to expand...

Like above, I hear what you're saying, but both blades? Feels like it would take some serious negligence to hit the ends of both blades with the prop stopped.
 
Last edited:
arnoha said:
Like above, I hear what you're saying, but both blades? Feels like it would take some serious negligence to hit the ends of both blades with the prop stopped.
Click to expand...

A frame ladder, tipped up against the prop? Really just guessing here. I just can't see how something would hit that part of the blade when spinning. A rock chip is usually on the leading edge, or the other side of the blade.
 
how about something like catching a wayward grounding clip during startup after fueling? Or a metal fuel tester? Gouging both ends of the prop looks like some sort of slower speed event. Grasping at straws here.
 
donjohnston said:
Some look at something and mentally flip a coin as to whether it needs reporting.
Click to expand...
And, some of us realize that we only have the airplane for an hour, and if we were to take the time to write up everything that we find during a preflight, there would be no time left to fly.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
And, some of us realize that we only have the airplane for an hour, and if we were to take the time to write up everything that we find during a preflight, there would be no time left to fly.
Click to expand...
And some are just way too anal.
 
arnoha said:
Been doing this about 5 years as well. And, yeah. Some renters are diligent. Some are...less so. I probably don't see the flights that choose to fly on questionable observations.
Click to expand...

One time I was checking the fuel bills and saw someone fueled up after returning from a trip with only THREE GALLONS remaining. I looked it up on flightaware just to make sure he wasn't giving fuel to someone else. Club manager had a conversation with the guy. He got booted out of the club.
 
arnoha said:
That's pretty aggressive to call me a dick head for using a common piece of slang.
Click to expand...

I didn't call YOU a dick head, I said it's a supposedly clever thing dick heads write. If/when I call you a dick head it will be much more pointed.

schmookeeg said:
Are there other abbreviations in common use that trigger you also?
Click to expand...

Abbreviations? Not sure, but "Rocket Surgery" is way up there.
 
Any missing Ladders or Step/Stools. I did watch a plane taxi into an aluminum Saw horse once. Wrapped the horse around the blade and threw it and impressive distance. Really didn't do much to prop other than a few scratch maybe not even as bad as what you are seeing. The prop was obviously much harder aluminum than the Saw horse aluminum, did nothing to the leading edge of the prop.

Brian
 
Ravioli said:
Abbreviations? Not sure, but "Rocket Surgery" is way up there.
Click to expand...
That's just a tongue-in-cheek mixing of "brain surgery" with "rocket science," but it has been overused to the point that it doesn't even merit a chuckle anymore.
 
Ravioli said:
I didn't call YOU a dick head, I said it's a supposedly clever thing dick heads write. If/when I call you a dick head it will be much more pointed.



Abbreviations? Not sure, but "Rocket Surgery" is way up there.
Click to expand...
But @Ravioli he wrote it... this is a forum. You say you didn’t mean it but you did call him a dick head.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
But @Ravioli he wrote it... this is a forum. You say you didn’t mean it but you did call him a dick head.
Click to expand...

I see your point. Apologies to @arnoha, who may not have known that not everyone knows what AMUs are, or that some number of people interpret it the way I do.
 
arnoha said:
Been doing this about 5 years as well. And, yeah. Some renters are diligent. Some are...less so. I probably don't see the flights that choose to fly on questionable observations. They'd get caught later and I wouldn't know how many flights went forward with the issue still in place. But I definitely see the piddly observations. The club has to investigate every one. And I get a bill for nearly every one. You put that pen to paper and I'm out around $50 right there. Most of the time, I have no qualms with that. $50 beats having the plane fall out of the sky and the tragedy that would entail...
Click to expand...

Can you (and others with leaseback experience) clarify some of this for me? My CFI is the sole proprietor of a small flight school with himself as the only full time instructor and a fleet of two or three airplanes for instruction and rental, and he has asked if I'd be willing to lease my PA28-140 to him. He showed me the agreement he and a partner of his use to lease their own Cherokee back to the flight school through their LLC. I don't currently have an LLC, and am not real excited about forming one... don't want a business, another tax return to fill out, more complexity in life, etc... but I don't want to lose my house and personal investments in a lawsuit, either.

The agreement he's proposing leaves the owner of the aircraft responsible for virtually ALL expenses, including damage caused by renters. My insurance cost would be about $4000/yr (compared to the current $700/yr as a non-commercial use private pilot) with a $1000 deductible. In the posts above, I've seen quite a few posts indicating that damage would be the renter's responsibility. Is that typical and what my CFI is proposing atypical, or (very likely) are there points here that I'm missing?

Assuming there's no major damage or repairs, I'd stand to break even and start turning a profit at around 150 hours based upon the rate he's offering to pay me, but the possibility of damage by renters is very real and it doesn't sit well with me that I'd be responsible for someone else's mistreatment of my aircraft.

Comments? and ... thank you.
 
At the end of the day, any damage is up to you to repair. In a perfect world, the renter would pay for any damages either out of pocket or with their own renters policy. But in my experience, I've only run across a handful of renters that such a policy.

As for your calculation on the break even, you probably need to factor in higher than expected repair costs. Stuff just... breaks more often on leaseback.

$4,000 for a commercial, rental policy. Between 2000 and 2005, I was paying around $7,000. Even considering mine was a high performance retract. So 20 years later, $4,000 is pretty darn good.

All that said, I would not go the leaseback route were I to do it all over again.
 
There are copious threads on leaseback. I poked around because I remember one had someone's first year costs on a similar plane. I came up empty.

But if you peruse the existing threads you may come to the conclusion that it will reduce your total cost of ownership (some) but probably not become a profit center.

YMMV
 
Do most lease arrangements put the risk of damage on the owner? The leasee is responsible for vetting and monitoring renters, it seems to me that the risk of a renter causing damage should be borne by it as well. Otherwise the incentives are wrong....
 
Renters never have any money, why sue them? The clubs insure because they know the renters just leave if the clubs when make the renters are required to pay.
 
arnoha said:
On the dent...it's on both blades. Another reason I doubt it was while the prop was stationary.
Click to expand...
In my maintenance experience, that damage would have occurred with the prop stationary. When running, the damage is more aligned with the chordline of the prop, and very much toward the leading edge. In your first picture the chatter marks visible in the scrape indicate that something was scraped across that at a relatively low speed. Chatter disappears, or at least gets a lot farther apart, at higher surface speeds.

I'm wondering if the prop shop will find a blade bent a little, putting it out of track.

Then there's this: https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_...e5f8683a0a4686256e9b004bc295/$FILE/041014.pdf

Excerpt:

(i) For the purposes of this AD, a propeller strike is defined as follows: (1) Any incident, whether or not the engine is operating, that requires repair to the propeller other than minor dressing of the blades.
......
(j) The preceding definitions include situations where an aircraft is stationary and the landing gear collapses causing one or more blades to be substantially bent, or where a hanger door (or other object) strikes the propeller blade. These cases should be handled as sudden stoppages because of potentially severe side loading on the crankshaft flange, front bearing, and seal.

If a blade is out of track there might be concern about the crank itself.
 
Last edited:
arnoha said:
Yeah, reminds me...need to look into protection for the leading edge. Seems like the right time to see what's available.

Anyone have experience with products like this? https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/appages/propguard.php

Cheap insurance if it works and has no performance penalty.
Click to expand...
Yes, used it on a Catto and a wood prop. It works well with a few limitations.
It absolutely protects the leading edge from erosion of flying in rain.
That said, after one flight in rain of 30 minutes or more and the tape needs to be replaced as it is eroded.
It adheres well on relatively flat sections of leading edge, but will bunch up on the prop curved tip. Think of trying to fold a sheet over the leading edge - it works fine until you get to a curved prop tip. If your prop tip is a 90 degree end, it will work well.
 
FORANE said:
Yes, used it on a Catto and a wood prop. It works well with a few limitations.
It absolutely protects the leading edge from erosion of flying in rain.
That said, after one flight in rain of 30 minutes or more and the tape needs to be replaced as it is eroded.
It adheres well on relatively flat sections of leading edge, but will bunch up on the prop curved tip. Think of trying to fold a sheet over the leading edge - it works fine until you get to a curved prop tip. If your prop tip is a 90 degree end, it will work well.
Click to expand...

The overhaul shop recommended against. Given what you say, it seems that it's right advice. Given that I'd have to pay shop rates every time it needs repair, it doesn't make sense on a metal prop. Maybe when I own away from leaseback.
 
MuseChaser said:
Can you (and others with leaseback experience) clarify some of this for me? My CFI is the sole proprietor of a small flight school with himself as the only full time instructor and a fleet of two or three airplanes for instruction and rental, and he has asked if I'd be willing to lease my PA28-140 to him. He showed me the agreement he and a partner of his use to lease their own Cherokee back to the flight school through their LLC. I don't currently have an LLC, and am not real excited about forming one... don't want a business, another tax return to fill out, more complexity in life, etc... but I don't want to lose my house and personal investments in a lawsuit, either.

The agreement he's proposing leaves the owner of the aircraft responsible for virtually ALL expenses, including damage caused by renters. My insurance cost would be about $4000/yr (compared to the current $700/yr as a non-commercial use private pilot) with a $1000 deductible. In the posts above, I've seen quite a few posts indicating that damage would be the renter's responsibility. Is that typical and what my CFI is proposing atypical, or (very likely) are there points here that I'm missing?

Assuming there's no major damage or repairs, I'd stand to break even and start turning a profit at around 150 hours based upon the rate he's offering to pay me, but the possibility of damage by renters is very real and it doesn't sit well with me that I'd be responsible for someone else's mistreatment of my aircraft.

Comments? and ... thank you.
Click to expand...

Tom-D said:
Renters never have any money, why sue them? The clubs insure because they know the renters just leave if the clubs when make the renters are required to pay.
Click to expand...

Renters don't have money? You're kidding, right? Nearly every renter of my aircraft is a millionaire if not a multi-millionaire. We're talking about a hobby that burns ten thousand a year...when you're doing it on the cheap. There are no poor walking into the FBO.

So...typically (my situation included), it's a wet lease. Meaning, yeah, the owner is responsible for absolutely everything on the plane. On the flip side, the club does take a fee for operating the aircraft, but it's you that's paying them from revenues, not them paying you for the use of the plane. It's less than ideal, but it's the only deal you're going to get. On that same note, you set the rate for your aircraft. You need to factor in stuff like cost of fuel, cost of insurance, etc. You must include holdbacks for overhauls and inspections, too, when doing the math. Realize you'll be doing 100hr inspections, which are 80% the way to an annual multiple times a year. You'll also not be doing much of the maintenance yourself that you thought you'd be doing, like oil changes, because a successful leaseback means that the cost of paying a mechanic to do it beats the lost opportunity cost waiting for you to be free to do that work.

On damage: yeah, if the renter is found at fault, they will be responsible for those damages by contract. At a minimum, the deductible. At my club, for non-negligent accidents, the deductible is $3000 and the negligent deductible is $5000. The renter owes that. They can also pay into a waiver fund each year and be allowed to skip the deductible. However, if blame can't be assigned, you're on the hook before the club is (unless it's clearly the club's fault somehow). And if the renter skips the bill, it's on you. They'll be kicked out of the club, but that's small solace. If the insurance company decides it's not liable for some reason, it's on you. Welcome to leaseback...in exchange for a chance to make a penny or two with your plane, you take on big risks.

It's working for me. The 172SP was specifically chosen because it rents extremely well. Even so, I break even. Do not think it will line your pockets. And you'll need closer to 300 hours, not 150, to get there. But...my clientele is the kind you want. Engineers, doctors, executives, typically. Very experienced, careful CFI. Established and large club with experienced leadership. You'll have to evaluate who you'll be renting to and make your own choice.
 
arnoha said:
Renters don't have money? You're kidding, right? Nearly every renter of my aircraft is a millionaire if not a multi-millionaire. .
Click to expand...
I'd guess that you are not the norm. Most of the renters I see are kids trying to keep their jobs.

you are a very lucky guy.
 
arnoha said:
Renters don't have money? You're kidding, right? Nearly every renter of my aircraft is a millionaire if not a multi-millionaire. We're talking about a hobby that burns ten thousand a year...when you're doing it on the cheap. There are no poor walking into the FBO...
Click to expand...
I have a feeling that the average renter at our airport has greater financial means than is typical at the average GA airport nationally.
 
Tom-D said:
I'd guess that you are not the norm. Most of the renters I see are kids trying to keep their jobs.

you are a very lucky guy.
Click to expand...
We pay for it in the cost of living.
 
Tom-D said:
I'd guess that you are not the norm. Most of the renters I see are kids trying to keep their jobs.

you are a very lucky guy.
Click to expand...

Palmpilot said:
I have a feeling that the average renter at our airport has greater financial means than is typical at the average GA airport nationally.
Click to expand...

I am a lucky guy. I do not argue with that. Holy hell: I'm both a pilot and I own a mf'ing plane! That alone is enough, but there are so many other things, too. This is what I wake up to each morning: https://www.wunderground.com/dashboard/webcam/arnoha/1

Yeah, I know I'm lucky. I'm very thankful for it.

And, yeah, @Palmpilot , I know this spot is not normal. There aren't too many other places where this is a successful plane on leaseback: http://www.wvfc.org/a/wvfc.org/template-2/aircraft/n513pz (Way, way too rich for my blood.) But, in a way, that's actually underlines the point more: most places, the folks able to spend on flying are even closer to the top earners in the area than here.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Just so you know... every time I use AMU in a conversation I feel like I’m being a dick.
Click to expand...

Why? It's a little cliched, but as far as I know, there aren't any evil connotations associated with it. It's just a way of getting around the taboo of talking about money and income and price and cost. A little obfuscation makes it go down a little smoother with a touch of socially-acceptable verbiage.
 
arnoha said:
Why? It's a little cliched, but as far as I know, there aren't any evil connotations associated with it. It's just a way of getting around the taboo of talking about money and income and price and cost. A little obfuscation makes it go down a little smoother with a touch of socially-acceptable verbiage.
Click to expand...
I don’t know. I think we already have enough acronyms. Its also kinda lame to have as many unnecessary things like AMU being used in general conversation about flying. Just adds to the crap new people have to learn. That said I still use AMU and all the other unneeded stuff. I think it’s kinda a dick move. Not enough to stop though. Just the tip I guess.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
I don’t know. I think we already have enough acronyms. Its also kinda lame to have as many unnecessary things like AMU being used in general conversation about flying. Just adds to the crap new people have to learn. That said I still use AMU and all the other unneeded stuff. I think it’s kinda a dick move. Not enough to stop though. Just the tip I guess.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...I can see that. Basically, it's the "in-speak" problem, where a group uses jargon and obfuscation to identify who is "in" and who is "out". And excluding people, especially in a hobby that could absolutely use a huge infusion of new blood, is a dick move.

Alternately, a rich vocabulary adds to the richness of the culture around a group. There are shades and meanings and subtlety. Aviation is absolutely rife with this. Would you read a novel written in only the simplest way possible?

And this communication is absolutely a bar to entry.

I don't have an answer. Just musing. Can you have both at once if you do it right or is it always a matter of finding the right balance?

Though, we should probably figure it out before this hobby comes from together...
 
arnoha said:
Hmmm...I can see that. Basically, it's the "in-speak" problem, where a group uses jargon and obfuscation to identify who is "in" and who is "out". And excluding people, especially in a hobby that could absolutely use a huge infusion of new blood, is a dick move.

Alternately, a rich vocabulary adds to the richness of the culture around a group. There are shades and meanings and subtlety. Aviation is absolutely rife with this. Would you read a novel written in only the simplest way possible?

And this communication is absolutely a bar to entry.

I don't have an answer. Just musing. Can you have both at once if you do it right or is it always a matter of finding the right balance?

Though, we should probably figure it out before this hobby comes from together...
Click to expand...
Jargon. Yes. That’s the word I was looking for earlier. Had a CRS moment
 
Ravioli said:
I see your point. Apologies to @arnoha, who may not have known that not everyone knows what AMUs are, or that some number of people interpret it the way I do.
Click to expand...

In the Agricultural world AUM's are "Animal Units". If a pasture is rated at 25 AUM 's it means 25 head of cows with calf at side allowed and usually for a set period of time .
If dyslectic easy to mix up.
 
3393RP said:
YouTube and $30K Cherokee tighten up his panties pretty good.
Click to expand...

Not to mention sexually biased insults. And the perennial favorite: butt-hurt.

Thanks for keeping the list growing!
 
Update:

The damage was deemed not unairworthy. So, renter is off the hook. And no evidence of a prop strike, so no engine inspection. Mostly good news.

Unfortunately, they found corrosion on the back of the hub and declared that unairworthy. $1500 to fix the corrosion or $1800 to overhaul. That's an easy choice. So, I'm on the hook for the two grand or so to overhaul. I don't believe the prop had ever been overhauled in its 4500 hours, so, not the end of the world. Engine is due in 300 hours, would probably have been done then anyway.
 
arnoha said:
Update:

The damage was deemed not unairworthy. So, renter is off the hook. And no evidence of a prop strike, so no engine inspection. Mostly good news.

Unfortunately, they found corrosion on the back of the hub and declared that unairworthy. $1500 to fix the corrosion or $1800 to overhaul. That's an easy choice. So, I'm on the hook for the two grand or so to overhaul. I don't believe the prop had ever been overhauled in its 4500 hours, so, not the end of the world. Engine is due in 300 hours, would probably have been done then anyway.
Click to expand...
fixed pitch props never to be overhauled. each time a prop is overhauled it closer to hang it on the wall.
 
Ravioli said:
Not to mention sexually biased insults. And the perennial favorite: butt-hurt.

Thanks for keeping the list growing!
Click to expand...
How about “Karen”? I got called that one on here last week.
 
Even when I knew who damaged my plane when it was on leaseback, I was still out the money. A renter decided he was so afraid of hitting a parked jet on the ramp that he ran my wing tip over the top of a parked Commanche. I would have escaped damage if the prop on the other plane had been horizontal, but I got a 6" deep gash in the wing. The commanche needed a new prop and to have the tip tank-shaped groove removed from the top of his cowling. At least I got the deductible out of the clown who did it. Unfortunately, that didn't begin to compensate me for the loss of use or the money expended flying the plane to and from the repair shop (some other renter got free rental time at my expense taking me back and forth from the paint shop).
 
I came back to my plane at a fly-in to a smudge of yellow paint on my Hatz's prop. Actually the fly-in organizer searched me out to tell me before I saw it, which I appreciated, and had already had their local IA look at it and pronounce it airworthy. Apparently a Stearman taxied a bit too close and barely brushed it with a wingtip. No big deal.

I've since replaced the prop for other reasons, and the old one, still with the yellow smudge, hangs on the hangar wall as a spare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top