Hard Landing / Substantial Damage

Roger Roger said:
Advantage of the engine mount is that it's easy to change proactively when you do a routine engine change. If you're changing the engine anyway it's another 5 bolts and pull the nose gear out and you can send the mount off to the welding shop to get stripped, NDT, repaired, etc. with a firewall fix, you're just getting started at that point...

I don't know much about the 4 seater class, but as a mech it's not even close in the 6-seater arena. PA32>C200 series all day erry day.
Click to expand...
I would say that.

We had a high timed Arrow at the FBO/school I worked/flew at.

Landing gear actuator broke the mount and it was out of service for months while the Engine mount was being repaired. A mount is a 6 month lead time item to order from Piper.

Same school years later had a student drop a 172 on its nose on a solo and required a lower firewall replacement and repair and that took about 6 weeks altogether. Mind you it was a '97 172R with 9k hours on it... it's not as expensive as everyone is making it out to be, there biggest cost was the prop strike, not the firewall damage.
 
Tyler Pinkerton said:
I would say that.

We had a high timed Arrow at the FBO/school I worked/flew at.

Landing gear actuator broke the mount and it was out of service for months while the Engine mount was being repaired. A mount is a 6 month lead time item to order from Piper.

Same school years later had a student drop a 172 on its nose on a solo and required a lower firewall replacement and repair and that took about 6 weeks altogether. Mind you it was a '97 172R with 9k hours on it... it's not as expensive as everyone is making it out to be, there biggest cost was the prop strike, not the firewall damage.
Click to expand...
Apples to oranges. Compare issues with the Arrow to a 172RG. Arrow wins all day erry day.
 
Tyler Pinkerton said:
I would say that.

We had a high timed Arrow at the FBO/school I worked/flew at.

Landing gear actuator broke the mount and it was out of service for months while the Engine mount was being repaired. A mount is a 6 month lead time item to order from Piper.

Same school years later had a student drop a 172 on its nose on a solo and required a lower firewall replacement and repair and that took about 6 weeks altogether. Mind you it was a '97 172R with 9k hours on it... it's not as expensive as everyone is making it out to be, there biggest cost was the prop strike, not the firewall damage.
Click to expand...
All bets are sort of off when it comes to flight schools because a 9000hr 172 with damage history rents for 130 an hour and a pristine 172 with low time and no damage history rents for.... 130 an hour [emoji14]

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 
@Pilot Fighter , @Plata , @deadstick

My apologies, I didn't realize it was a late model Skyhawk. The ratio of repair to hull value is a little different in that case.

Although in my experience, I've seen something as new as a 5 year old Skylane go to the graveyard due to propeller strike & firewall damage.
 
Bear said:
Airframe and Powerplant (A&P) mechanic able to address the repair procedures used to bring this (N2104H) or any aircraft back on line with ‘buckling’ damage.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/R...ID=20150325X24417&AKey=1&RType=Final&IType=CA

"A routine maintenance inspection was conducted on the airplane and the mechanic noticed substantial damage. Buckling was present in the lower firewall and the floor under the rudder pedals, consistent with a hard landing. No hard landings were reported to the operator. The circumstances, crew, and timeline surrounding the damage is unknown. It is unknown if there were any pre-impact mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airframe or engine that would have precluded normal operation.”

http://flightaware.com/photos/view/563408-606b6fe1d50b49d09600144666a00ef07e95fa64/aircrafttype/C172
Click to expand...
Harrumph, what's been happening at CIA?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top