So the engine logs are missing.
The seller has no idea how much time is on the engine - only had the plane a few years.
Airframe logs show ~1700, tach ~1400.
Compressions all in 70s (Lycoming O-320).
What do y'all think?
Thanks: 0
Likes: 0
So the engine logs are missing.
The seller has no idea how much time is on the engine - only had the plane a few years.
Airframe logs show ~1700, tach ~1400.
Compressions all in 70s (Lycoming O-320).
What do y'all think?
Someone has to come up with logs or start new ones and attest to them? And find supporting docs like receipts inspection sheets to back it up.... There is a procedure spelled out for doing this somewhere.... Can't make it airworthy/annual it without.... Gonna be fun......$$$........$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Or a core for a factory engine.....
Why couldn't you comply with all the ADs, do a normal annual on it starting a new engine log stating the old one is lost and TT & TSMO is unknown then fly it as long as it passes a annual.... part 91 of course.
Dave
If you know a common sense maintenance guy at the local FSDO I would ask them what the procedure is BEFORE you purchase the aircraft. You need to know right now what the cost of this issue is before you can accurately appraise the aircraft.
Thanks for the suggestions.
I thought you could just fly it part 91 as long as it passes the annual.
Can't one just treat it as a past TBO engine and once majored it would be all reset?
If this motor is in a 7GCB for Sale, I would not get near it. Especially for the price he's asking, and last I checked only the Factory or STC can up the gross, You can call Jeremy at ACA to double check.
As I understand it, you need a data plate, total time, time since last major, and a record of stuff done to the engine during the last year. That is for an unmodified engine - if modified you need the 337s.
There are more airplanes out here with incomplete logs than there are with logs all the way back, and it is not a big deal for engines - remember, this is my opinion, based on my notes from those IA seminars.
Do not make the mistake of stating "estimated time 1500 hours" in the new log. You need to "know" the total time. Still opinion.
Look in the airframe log and try to find anywhere they noted the engine times in the airframe log. Once you have that you can figure the engine times from the airframe logs. The airplane didn't go flying with out the engine.
Also you can find where the engine was installed you will have the same info. If it has been overhauled in the past and they documented that in the airframe log when re-installing the engine you can use that. You could also assume (I know, bust my chops for assuming) that if the last annual was performed properly that all the ADs were complied with at that time.
In most cases when logs are missing they are all missing. It is somewhat curious that only the engine logs are AWOL. If the compressions are good and the dataplate is there, If the crank is..... well you get the picture. Due diligence cant be done on the web. There may be nothing to this .......or....... there could be alot to this. Its your risk and only our opinion. Good Luck!
You guessed it - tell me more....Originally Posted by shouldhunt
..........
Very interesting thread in many ways!
re: missing engine logs
Just because the aircraft was annualled doesn't mean that it is airworthy or that the engine AD's have been complied with or that the next IA will consider it airworthy with the same paperwork. There are AD's that apply to the O-320's that are internal and cannot be checked easily. The oil pump AD can be checked by pulling a magneto, however, what about the AD's on piston pins and previous prop strikes? Also consider the resale value...
You are doing your homework by researching before you buy, congratulations.
Vickie
When I bought my Cub, I sent a $10 money-order to the FAA and they sent me a CD with tons of information on my airplane that included all previous 337's and various other maintenance entries that had been previously submitted and filed with the FAA. There is a lot of information on the CD dating all the way back to the day it rolled out of Lock Haven. Might be worth checking into.
I fly IFR (I Follow Roads).
A friend of mine checked into the 7gcb, and no one knows when the motor was put in or what it was out of. Also another friend said it was prop struck a couple of years ago in the arctic out of Happy Valley if I recall correctly and beat on pretty bad flying guided hunters. Have Seller take it to Mike MCS repair on this site or another trusted shop and get a full appraisal and annual done, if he has nothing to hide. Also, in the future, I will not purchase a plane that I cant in fly until it comes to full temp. Good luck, but I would say keep looking.
Not me... I'm off airport....I just do Just rebuilds ect..... But thanks for thinking of me....
Well, thanks for the heads up (or thumbs down in this case).
I figured if I accounted for the fact that the engine needs to be replaced into the price, it might be a nice bird and maybe get a few years out of it before a major OH.
Sounding closer to your line of work, the more this thread goes on Mike!
Jacek, I may have found a bird for you down here... will do more digging.
George
I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!
just looking at craigs list and came across a 1969 plane ad with this in it..... "No Damage history. Logs start in 2005 with installation of new engine and prop"
ya no history.....
There is a high winged Piper in my hangar which was brought in to install floats. The most recent airframe log is lost. The IA who did the most recent annual made his entry on the last page of the old log book. The previous page to his entry shows that the engine is an 0-235. Yet the engine installed is a 0-320 which was approved by an STC assigned to this airplane years ago. The airplane was totally rebuilt prior to that annual. There are other items which are not correct as well. I can not sign off this plane as I will then own that previous IA's screw up. I see two options- one is that the IA correct his mistake or two I ask the FAA to help me correct it. I don't want to do that as I have known that IA for years and until now thought that he was very good with paperwork. So the plane sits. Until the owner gets this straightened out, it is only a collection of parts. It's sad because it could be flying.
NX1PA
As an IA I can personally correct mistakes made by previous inspectors. Granted, this is a large mistake, but apparently you have all the documentation necessary to make it right?
Skywagon,
I'm not an IA, but can't you just get the CD for the airplane from the FAA and note the paperwork already filed, then do a "Found Installed" for anything that doesn't have paperwork? Obviously you have to make sure it was all installed correctly and make the owner buy any STC's that it's lacking. Do you need the missing logbook if the other paperwork is correct?
Last edited by aviationinfo; 02-23-2011 at 03:11 PM.
I almost bought an airplane a few months ago.
There were lots of mods - plane totally refurbished 5 years ago - $$$$ in just the STCs.
Owner said everything is straight and filed with the FAA.
Ordered the CD from FAA - no new records since the 60s - seller said: they must have been lost in the mail.
Did a pre-buy - IA said there are no STCs nor 337 forms - just logbook entries by the A&P (coincidentally the seller).
IA tells me to hold the sale until the seller can produce the paperwork.
Seller has *his* IA produce a form 337 that essentially lists the mods and under which STCs they were done. Still no STCs are provided.
I show that form to local IA asking if he would pass it at next annual - he said I better talk to the FSDO.
The local FSDO guy laughs (!), tells me to run, and asks me if I want to start an enforcement action - NO!
No sale....
Expensive lesson, but could have been worse, much worse!
(the plane is still on the market).
Bob & aviationinfo,
Yes I could straighten it out. Then I would be assuming all the liability that the other IA was hired and paid to take care of. He is running a full time shop and is in the business. I am retired and doing small things part time. The owner is a lawyer. He needs to straighten it out then I will put the floats on only. One needs to be very carefull with missing and screwed up logs. Those of you who have listened to the FAA legal department talk at IA meetings will understand.
NX1PA
but that is the way to do it...
do not just get a pre buy on something you are looking to buy.
get YOUR IA to do a full annual inspection on it, not nessicarilly to sign it off, but the FULL thing he is gonna do anyway come annual time, so you don't get stuck with fixing other peoples problems.... I refuse to just do a prebuy... full inspection or get someone else...
Skywagon---
Sorry for beating the horse but this stuff is interesting for me. Are you signing off the annual or just the float installation?
OK, even if this isn't the case here---- if the owner is just bringing you his poorly documented plane for a float install, and you only sign for the floats--- does that make you responsible for the airworthiness of everything else?
Thanks
the return to service is only for the work described.... technically
but the widows lawyer after the crash will see it otherwise.....
from a non-mechanic owner, I have to ask: would you want to let a plane out of your shop knowing it has issues? What if the float kit was not completed and a fitting pulls out of the side of the plane? At some point a mechanic can not claim ignorance to issues on condition. Many lives are saved by mechanics noticing problems that they are not actually looking for.
Retired Skywagon??? No, you are just being more selective in your acceptance of customers. Again, I would show the owner, (an attorney especially), and have him walk the books to the previous mechanic for correction. Good for you being thorough
Jacek, I told you!!!!!!!
I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!
A friend pf mine is in a similar situation with a Cub L4 he just bought. The L4 is full restored, award winner and all that. The pre-buy included an annual; everything went well and it was flown 1000 miles to it's new home. My buddy decided to look into the WWII history of the airplane. So, he jots down the serial number from the proper tube inside the fuselage and sends for war records and to Cub Doctor for other history. What does he find out? His serial number does not match the data plate! The fuselage serial number is for an L4B; data plate is for an L4J. His serial number is listed as being that of an L4B currently in a museum. Should the IA have caught this? I would think his insurance could say "no deal" in an accident because the insurance is for an L4J and the fuselage serial number is that of an L4B. I would think that an IA would be pretty leery of signing off a plane where the serial # and data plate do not match. Would this be an "enforcement action" if the FAA gets involved? Bottom line is the plane can't be flown the owner's new home because the paper work mess he discovered makes it un-airworthy. So, who's at fault here? Could this be considered fraud? It sure looks like the paper work and logs are the most important items regarding the sale of an airplane; repairs are easy. What should be done in this case?
Marty57
N367PS
Psalm 36:7 "High and low among men find refuge in the shadow of His wing"
www.marty2plus2.com
Serial number or assembly number? Can be close but out of order.....
In the L4's case it is the serial number printed on the appropriate tube inside the fuselage. That number matches a data plate and N number registered to an L4 currently in a museum. Fuselage number is for a 1943 L4B but the data plate on this L4 lists it as a late 1944 L4j.
Marty57
N367PS
Psalm 36:7 "High and low among men find refuge in the shadow of His wing"
www.marty2plus2.com
Skywagon didn't say he found anything wrong with the airplane mechanically, only that the paperwork wasn't in order. I'm just not clear on whether he actually was asked to perform an annual inspection or not. I would just like to know if he's required to throw a padlock and chain around the prop if he wasn't doing an annual. Actually, I"m not even certain he has to do that if he did perform an annual on it. I would think he could sign something in whatever log exists saying that it didn't pass it's annual for the various reasons, and push it out of the hangar (after being paid of course).
Having said all that, the owner should appreciate a conscientious IA who can point him in the right direction.
I have told the owner and he has agreed to go to the IA in question. To date he has not done so. I did find that the elevator cables were wrapped around each other. No wear yet as it did not fly very much after the annual. It is out of annual so I will have to annual it in addition to installing the floats. But in this case, based on what I have found with only a cursory glance, I require that it be all correct before I start. So it sits. The owner is elderly so I suspect that someday someone will come along who is willing to straighten out the mess. Another "barn find" in the works?
NX1PA
if it needs annual then its your baby nowshould you choose to accept this mission
you get paid by the hour right???
mike mcs,
If I was getting paid by the hour, this would be a good paycheck. This one is a freebee. Therefor I will not work on a can of worms. Once the worms get lined up, then I will touch it.
NX1PA
hmmm, learned something new today. It makes sense and has merit, just didn't ever think about it as it has never applied to me. But, I never thought of an IA as a FAA enforcement type putting a prop lock on my plane. I just thought it would be 'paid for time', no obligation, no liability, no logbook entry. Issues identified would be investigated and options evaluated by the owner.
What happens if I have a A&P/IA perform a pre-buy and they see something unairworthy. Seems the same knowledge and overwhelming obligation could cause a prop lock appear on the sellers plane? Why different.
It is not illegal to own an airplane that isn't airworthy. It isn't my IA's job to prevent me from flying an unairworthy airplane. It is his choice to sign it off as airworthy or not to. That's where his responsibility ends. I've never had a mechanic who didn't want to correct existing problems. That's what mechanics do. If I had one turn me away for unwillingness to correct pre-existing conditions I wouldn't come back.
These comments assume I'm dealing with professional mechanics, not friends doing freebies.
SB
Last edited by StewartB; 02-24-2011 at 12:35 PM.
As this unfolds a bit it's sounding like the owner asked him to annual it and install the floats. The floats aren't the big deal, but why start on them if the guy's a friend and the airplane isn't airworthy anyway? Sounds like that's what's going on. Skywagon is doing him a favor by not wasting time on the floats yet, I think.
I'm pretty sure that if you take an airplane in for an annual and you disagree with the IA, he can just make a logbook entry stating what was done and that the annual is not complete for whatever reasons. The prop lock should only happen if you don't pay him! I was inferring from Skywagon's original post (incorrectly) that he wasn't letting the plane out of his hangar.
If you disagree with the IA then you pay him and move on. It's hard to believe any reasonable person would hold your plane hostage if you settle the bill regardless of what he thinks of it's airworthiness. Especially if you didn't bring him the airplane for an annual. He would find himself in small claims court.
Last edited by aviationinfo; 02-24-2011 at 01:51 PM.
What they told us this year is that the IA writes in the logbook that an annual inspection has been performed and the owner has been given a list of discrepancies. Period. The IA is not supposed to write in the logbook that the aircraft is not airworthy.
Then it was suggested that the IA keep a signed copy of the list.
Further, the point was made that the mechanic has no responsibility for components he has not worked on - the example was changing a tire - the mechanic is in fact responsible for the brake disc. But not for a stabilizer that is falling apart.
I have to tell you that I actually get stuff out of these IA seminars, even though I do enough paperwork to avoid them.
While I am at it, we were told that the Administrative Procedures Act prevents private entities from regulating us. As an example, I submit that if your aircraft has a 337 signed off for Stitts cover, and the date precedes the Stitts change that does not allow automotive enamel as a top coat, then you by law are not bound by the later change. This was not their example, but the idea is the same. I had never thought of it in those terms, and I have had a course in administrative law. So, once again worth way more than the price of admission.
Bob,
All of what you have said is correct. The part that you left out is that if the IA signs the plane off as airworthy he assumes responsibility for everything that was ever done to it prior to the ink drying on his signature back to day one. ( this from Bill O'Brien FAA. remember him?)
NX1PA
Yes - he was a great guy, and owned a J-3. When you sign that the aircraft conforms . . . and is in airworthy condition you are indeed signing that the thing does conform. That means if the engine is not listed in the logs, you have to ascertain some basis for it being there before you sign the "conforms" part.
You can inspect the aircraft, and give the owner a list of discrepancies. That would include "installed engine is not listed on type certificate data sheets. Engine is otherwise airworthy." You do not put that in the log - you merely state that the list of discrepancies was given to the owner.
The key here, as told to us in this year's seminar, is that each aircraft gets one annual inspection each year. The list of discrepancies can be addressed by an A&P, and there is no need for an additional inspection by an IA.
This of course is my opinion of what was said. I took notes, and am experienced in the art of being a student, but it is still third-hand when I type it here.
I find this whole subject fascinating! Being an IA will ultimately require a law degree.
Bob,
So what exactly do you indicate in the logbook when you work on a plane that doesn't conform? You don't say anything about having "completed" an annual, do you, in that case? Is it sort of like the Flight Review where there's no logbook entry for a fail?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks