X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2010 12:45:50 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from web57510.mail.re1.yahoo.com ([66.196.100.77] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.8) with SMTP id 4413846 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 07:40:44 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.196.100.77; envelope-from=casey.gary@yahoo.com Received: (qmail 13439 invoked by uid 60001); 1 Aug 2010 11:40:07 -0000 DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=mLub7aONunmKy2HEPkch41XVckoPM2bqUlz0gqpZgUyqndrtbepxW7l0fokVat56xKUPh0F28tdGpVHY44+irG8zpn+zTRMT10xxVIbOQr4hMxjWmdPNLIGtH9+bSdZ9gQkhJrOggRn5nP3hclkztaDL6JhYBGMPWAQQz3n/ZM4=; X-Original-Message-ID: <786833.12984.qm@web57510.mail.re1.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: lGVd8msVM1mWY6wUmqE7FrtKEX4TmolYuera5NSsbYaKknw 1qecEDE.krjNCv8mLuhmRpzIYo_NOT68EzE2ZcgN_Uf0SJmZi69X8_WXOr_x jnw2tpraZME4Gdlz8r86GnYoOzmulvhHpii3g5rxftTLs1y.G1OdQckaZ8Ak _GFySGQdN.PeNFD72IMtCCLy0AHmaKOoFcmYdq_4yIIHzKxPTiCuHMS4n4QF lt5T72vJE0VY.lBqH6UaK5.51M3Sn6J3F3HaIm4c6vyY- Received: from [97.122.190.49] by web57510.mail.re1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 04:40:07 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/420.4 YahooMailWebService/0.8.105.279950 References: X-Original-Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 04:40:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Casey Subject: Re: Welcome to Spokane X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-632233807-1280662807=:12984" --0-632233807-1280662807=:12984 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I'm certainly not the expert on this, but why would a teardown be "mandatory" when the engine wasn't running? The purpose of the teardown is to find out if an internal engine part was damaged by the sudden torsional impact due to due to a prop strike. In this case there was no internal movement and therefore no reason to look into the engine. I would think that a check of the flange runout should be all that is required. (and I also just got a call like that. Shorter story, but similar) Gary Casey ES 157, now with a damaged nose wheel pant The line crew was moving the airplane to another tie down after I had departed the FBO. Apparently they attempted to pull the ship onto the nose gear platform of the tug with the propeller lower blade in a near vertical position. As they winched the plane on to the machine the propeller contacted some structure on the machine. They kept pulling until they realized (too late) that something was wrong. The attached picture is the type of tug involved but not the specific model. One does not really want to get a call from an FBO beginning with "there is a problem with your airplane." David Propeller Vs. tug. Tug wins! > >Time since new 260 hours. Propeller repair/over haul starting at around $2,000 >could be very much higher. Engine tear down inspection and mandatory replacement >parts starting at $10,000 could be very much higher not counting removal and re >installation and shipping. Down time 4 weeks minimum. No lawyers involved, yet. --0-632233807-1280662807=:12984 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
I'm certainly not the expert on this, but why would a teardown be "mandatory" when the engine wasn't running?  The purpose of the teardown is to find out if an internal engine part was damaged by the sudden torsional impact due to due to a prop strike.  In this case there was no internal movement and therefore no reason to look into the engine.  I would think that a check of the flange runout should be all that is required.  (and I also just got a call like that.  Shorter story, but similar)
Gary Casey
ES 157, now with a damaged nose wheel pant



The line crew was moving the airplane to another tie down after I had departed the FBO.  Apparently they attempted to pull the ship onto the nose gear platform of the tug with the propeller lower blade in a near vertical position. As they  winched the plane on to the machine the propeller contacted some structure on the machine.  They kept pulling until they realized (too late) that something was wrong.

The attached picture is the type of tug involved but not the specific model.

One does not really want to get a call from an FBO beginning with "there is a problem with your airplane."

David

Propeller Vs. tug. Tug wins! 
 
Time since new 260 hours. Propeller repair/over haul starting at around $2,000 could be very much higher. Engine tear down inspection and mandatory replacement parts starting at $10,000 could be very much higher not counting removal and re installation and shipping. Down time 4 weeks minimum. No lawyers involved, yet. 

--0-632233807-1280662807=:12984--