No tailwheel needed.

How to keep the Cessna 170 flying and airworthy.

Moderators: GAHorn, Karl Towle, Bruce Fenstermacher

bagarre
Posts: 2615
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:35 pm

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by bagarre »

cessna170bdriver wrote:
edbooth wrote:
Aryana wrote:I'm always on the lookout for item #2 as a standalone piece since you can't buy the pressed bolt separately. Doesn't come up very often by itself.
image.jpeg
About 25 years ago someone offered to sell me a completed new tailwheel assembly for 200 bucks... I didn't take it. Talk about a dumb a$$.
Not as dumb as not buying every single set of wheel pants Tom Hull talked Cessna into making in the late 80's for $1200/set...
Given 2.7% inflation and a start date of 1985, $1,200 back then would equate to near $2,700 today.
If that still sounds like a bargain, I have a REALLY nice set of wheel pants to sell you at the 1985 dollar value of $1,200.
User avatar
edbooth
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 3:03 am

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by edbooth »

Bruce Fenstermacher wrote:Ok Ed, I see where you abused that bracket by dragging it on the asphalt all over tarnation. Maybe, just maybe you finished that part off. :(
Bruce, Here is a little better picture. You can see it's mostly trashed.
Attachments
image.jpg
Ed Booth, 170-B and RV-7 Driver
User avatar
c170b53
Posts: 2531
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 8:01 pm

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by c170b53 »

Ed, that damage will buff right out! :D
Jim McIntosh..
1953 C170B S/N 25656
02 K1200RS
bagarre
Posts: 2615
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:35 pm

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by bagarre »

IMG_0007_.3.jpg
It's calling your name ;)
User avatar
edbooth
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 3:03 am

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by edbooth »

bagarre wrote:
IMG_0007_.3.jpg
It's calling your name ;)
Tempting Dave, but I really want a new bracket assembly (this has the critical bolt) and the heavy duty Arm assembly.
Ed Booth, 170-B and RV-7 Driver
bagarre
Posts: 2615
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:35 pm

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by bagarre »

I put the heavy duty steering arm on mine, still steers like crap :lol:

But unknown hours on the king pin is a valid concern. I think yours is the third in 4 years that I've heard of breaking.
Have you inspected the break point? Was there an existing or migrating fracture or was it 100% at once?
Pretty wild that yours fell off on takeoff. That sounds like it might have broken a while ago.

It reminds me of when the rudder broke off on my sailboat. The shaft was failing over time with no indications (the crack was slowly migrating) and one day, on a very calm sail, it just fell off.

I wonder if an NDT of the pin would reveal one ready to fail.
User avatar
edbooth
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 3:03 am

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by edbooth »

bagarre wrote:I put the heavy duty steering arm on mine, still steers like crap :lol:

But unknown hours on the king pin is a valid concern. I think yours is the third in 4 years that I've heard of breaking.
Have you inspected the break point? Was there an existing or migrating fracture or was it 100% at once?
Pretty wild that yours fell off on takeoff. That sounds like it might have broken a while ago.

It reminds me of when the rudder broke off on my sailboat. The shaft was failing over time with no indications (the crack was slowly migrating) and one day, on a very calm sail, it just fell off.

I wonder if an NDT of the pin would reveal one ready to fail.
The bolt is messed up pretty bad, since it broke right where the grease hole was, I'm thinking if an NDT had Been performed it might have revealed a crack starting there. I guess it held up pretty well with 62 years of landings....some of them really challenging to that whole assembly. I have watched these things up close and personal judging spot landing contests.....wow, it's scary. 8O
Ed Booth, 170-B and RV-7 Driver
bagarre
Posts: 2615
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:35 pm

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by bagarre »

We have a life limit on the main spring but I've heard of more king pins breaking than main springs.
Should these be sent in as SDRs? The 170's can't be the only Scott 3200 equipped plane to be experiencing this.

If I get bored enough, I might put some dye on the one I have in the garage. Kind of a shame, I JUST took it apart and re-greased everything.
But it's not much trouble to get one apart on the bench.
bagarre
Posts: 2615
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:35 pm

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by bagarre »

Aryana wrote:
bagarre wrote:Should these be sent in as SDRs?
IMO, no.
To avoid the possibility of an AD or because an SDR is the wrong vehicle to convey the failure to the FAA?
User avatar
edbooth
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 3:03 am

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by edbooth »

Aryana wrote:IMO this isn't a serious failure, malfunction, or defect that constitutes notification to the FAA. Some of these tailwheels have thousands of hours on them, and they were never meant to last forever. What we do know is that they do have a very good track record over the past 60+ years.

Just like the main leaf spring, perhaps we should consider buying new tailwheels after say, 5000 hours/50 years...whichever comes first? Just a thought.
Yeah, what he said ! Mine has (had) approx 6000 hrs.
Ed Booth, 170-B and RV-7 Driver
User avatar
edbooth
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 3:03 am

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by edbooth »

Correction guys.... The bolt that I thought broke at the grease hole did not break there. After further cleaning and inspection, it broke at the shoulder where it is machined down to fit the lower bearing.
Attachments
image.jpg
Ed Booth, 170-B and RV-7 Driver
User avatar
Bruce Fenstermacher
Posts: 10327
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:24 am

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by Bruce Fenstermacher »

Same place mine broke Ed.
CAUTION - My forum posts may be worth what you paid for them!

Bruce Fenstermacher, Past President, TIC170A
Email: brucefenster at gmail.com
bagarre
Posts: 2615
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:35 pm

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by bagarre »

Do you have an high res sectional shots of the break itself?
User avatar
edbooth
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 3:03 am

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by edbooth »

bagarre wrote:Do you have an high res sectional shots of the break itself?
No I don't. It really would not show anything as it evidently broke while taxiing. (About a two mile taxi) The two pieces rubbed together for quite a while and destroyed any evidence of a crack.
Ed Booth, 170-B and RV-7 Driver
User avatar
gfeher
Posts: 571
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2014 9:19 pm

Re: No tailwheel needed.

Post by gfeher »

Anyone know whether the Alaskan Bushwheel bracket assembly with the kingpin bolt at issue here (p/n ABI 3216-00; Spruce p/n 06-00724) is a direct replacement for the Scott bracket assembly with the kingpin bolt (p/n 3216-00; Spruce p/n 06-01291)? I know that the entire Alaskan Bushwheel tailwheel assembly is a PMA direct replacement for the Scott tailwheel, but I don't know whether the individual parts are also PMA direct replacements for their Scott counterparts. From the similarity of the part numbers it would appear that they are. But I don't have any first hand knowledge/experience about it. The Alaskan Bushwheel bracket assembly is over $100 cheaper than the Scott one at Spruce.
Gene Feher
Argyle (1C3), NY
'52 170B N2315D s/n 20467 C-145-2
Experimental J3 Cub Copy N7GW O-200
Post Reply