Prop Strike

[T. C. Downey]

If that is an 0-300 there is no requirement for tear down. the Continental has only a service bulletin saying the engine should be disassembled and all steel parts be checked for cracks.

That Prop tip looks like minor damage to me.
http://www.tcmlink.com/pdf2/SB96-11B.pdf

I don't know how you might accomplish the SB, Tom, if you don't tear it down. How else would you magnetic particle inspect the connecting rods and dye penetrant check the crankcase? ?
"The crankcase must be stripped and fluorescent penetrant inspection performed, paying particular attention to the forward crankcase bearing support and adjacent structure.
4. Connecting rod bolts and nuts must be replaced regardless of condition.
5. On counterweight equipped engines, replacement of all counterweight pins, bushings, end plates and snap rings is required regardless of their condition. Counterweight bushing bores in both counterweights and crankshaft must be inspected in accordance with the criteria contained in the latest revision of SB00-3.
6. Inspect all engine-driven accessories in accordance with the accessory manufacturer's instructions.


Waterboy, the AD states, " At the next cylinder removal from the engine, or engine overhaul,
whichever occurs first, after the effective date of this AD, inspect the
cylinder rocker shaft bosses for cracks,,,"

Ask your insurance man the following: "Exactly HOW do you suggest to reassemble this engine (which was mandatorily disassembled) without complying with this AD... and please place your proposal "IN WRITING", and include how you propose to continue to insure the aircraft when your plan is followed, in light of the fact that the ins. co. proposed plan is in contradiction to the mfr's instructions and the certifying authority's directives?"

While it is not the insurance underwriters obligation to IMPROVE your engine unnecessarily... it IS the responsibility of the underwriter to pay for all costs required to minimally accomplish the required work of repairs. Since the engine MUST be completely disassembled in order to accomplish the work (see the quoted instructions above), and since the AD inspection is a requirement of any disassembly/reassembly of the engine, ...then the insurance is obligated to pay all those reasonable costs. IMO. The cylinders are being removed to accomplish the mandatory prop strike inspection and in order for the engine to be returned to service, the AD must be complied.

If the ins. co. still refuses to accomplish the work properly, then ask if your policy provides for arbitration ...?? ... or does the ins. co. provide for attorneys costs for defense against prosecution by the federal authorities when the improperly performed work comes to their attention... ???

Insist upon written responses. BTW, who exactly IS your insurance agent/underwriter?

Did you forget that SBs are not required to be complied with in part 91 ?

[edbooth]

Never once did any of the insurance companies pay for extra performance of AD’S or maintenance that was above and beyond the scope of the sudden stoppage inspection or what was required to return the aircraft to before the accident

So tell me how you reinstall cylinders subject to an AD without performing the AD. They have to be removed for the inspection, they have to be inspected before reinstallation. No different than new gaskets. This is not about improving anything.

Bruce, I think that's what they call the consumer being caught between a rock and a hard place

[T. C. Downey]

Never once did any of the insurance companies pay for extra performance of AD’S or maintenance that was above and beyond the scope of the sudden stoppage inspection or what was required to return the aircraft to before the accident

So tell me how you reinstall cylinders subject to an AD without performing the AD. They have to be removed for the inspection, they have to be inspected before reinstallation. No different than new gaskets. This is not about improving anything.

I agree with metal masher, it gets done Bruce, but the insurance companies will not pay for it. I simply add the time to the bill submitted to the insurance company, but not as a separate item on the bill. I have never seen an insurance company pay for AD compliance

OBTW Continental does not need a PMA to manufacture their cylinders IF -- IF -- these cylinders have a PMA mark, they are not continental cylinders.

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

.... it gets done Bruce..... but the insurance companies will not pay for it. I simply add the time to the bill submitted to the insurance company, but not as a separate item on the bill.

Ah now we are getting to the meat of the story. It gets payed by the insurance co but they don't know it.

[minton]

Plenty of good advise going around on this one, some not so good.

You are the guy who makes the choices on how to persue it to a point but you must also comply with the acceptable practices and procedures outlined by the MFG and FAA if you are to prevail. Knee jerk reactions will get you into a place where things are done out of order or no documentation is accomplished by certified folks at critical points. The judge will throw it out on those grounds. For a proper inspection and documentation certified engine shops are the best choice as they have all of the tech manuals, MFG information, expertise and tooling. They can also accomplish "certified documentation" of any findings as the FAA, NTSB and insurance companies often request such documentation from them.

That must be a formal request by you or council.

It might have to be done out of pocket at first.

It's nothing to go through lead by armchair quarterbacks.

Aviation lawyer, FAA safety inspector, MFG recommendations, certified engine shop, those would be my choices. Just say'in

Hope you have'nt passed that critical point yet.

Good luck.

[minton]

If that is an 0-300 there is no requirement for tear down. the Continental has only a service bulletin saying the engine should be disassembled and all steel parts be checked for cracks.

That Prop tip looks like minor damage to me.
http://www.tcmlink.com/pdf2/SB96-11B.pdf

I don't know how you might accomplish the SB, Tom, if you don't tear it down. How else would you magnetic particle inspect the connecting rods and dye penetrant check the crankcase? ?
"The crankcase must be stripped and fluorescent penetrant inspection performed, paying particular attention to the forward crankcase bearing support and adjacent structure.
4. Connecting rod bolts and nuts must be replaced regardless of condition.
5. On counterweight equipped engines, replacement of all counterweight pins, bushings, end plates and snap rings is required regardless of their condition. Counterweight bushing bores in both counterweights and crankshaft must be inspected in accordance with the criteria contained in the latest revision of SB00-3.
6. Inspect all engine-driven accessories in accordance with the accessory manufacturer's instructions.


Waterboy, the AD states, " At the next cylinder removal from the engine, or engine overhaul,
whichever occurs first, after the effective date of this AD, inspect the
cylinder rocker shaft bosses for cracks,,,"

Ask your insurance man the following: "Exactly HOW do you suggest to reassemble this engine (which was mandatorily disassembled) without complying with this AD... and please place your proposal "IN WRITING", and include how you propose to continue to insure the aircraft when your plan is followed, in light of the fact that the ins. co. proposed plan is in contradiction to the mfr's instructions and the certifying authority's directives?"

While it is not the insurance underwriters obligation to IMPROVE your engine unnecessarily... it IS the responsibility of the underwriter to pay for all costs required to minimally accomplish the required work of repairs. Since the engine MUST be completely disassembled in order to accomplish the work (see the quoted instructions above), and since the AD inspection is a requirement of any disassembly/reassembly of the engine, ...then the insurance is obligated to pay all those reasonable costs. IMO. The cylinders are being removed to accomplish the mandatory prop strike inspection and in order for the engine to be returned to service, the AD must be complied.

If the ins. co. still refuses to accomplish the work properly, then ask if your policy provides for arbitration ...?? ... or does the ins. co. provide for attorneys costs for defense against prosecution by the federal authorities when the improperly performed work comes to their attention... ???

Insist upon written responses. BTW, who exactly IS your insurance agent/underwriter?

Did you forget that SBs are not required to be complied with in part 91 ?

George is right on the service bulletin point BUT I've had a few near misses by not complying with them along the way. They don't just appear out of thin air but are brought about by reports from the field and overhaul agencies. For my money comply comply comply!!

I hate to see people argueing over issues associated with money when the downside is so final.

[GAHorn]

There are insurance agents... There are insurance adjusters... and there are insurance underwriters. They are different folks with different opinions and different influence/authority in regard to such repairs.

Your agent can influence the viewpoint of the underwriter, as can the adjuster. When a customer/client has been with a particular agency or underwriter for a long time with few/no claims, then that new claim will be viewed with a bit more generosity than will the repetitious claims or the claim of the "bounce-around-price-shopper" who chooses his agent/underwriter with price as the primary object.

An excellent example with which I am personally familiar was the friend who started his IO-470 with the towbar still attached for a ground test-run. The agency (Falcon) prevailed upon the underwriter (Phoenix) to ship that engine halfway across the country to Western Skyways in Montrose, CO who performed a complete tear-down including all ADs. The constant speed prop which was damaged was an out-of-production model, so a new-production McCauley was installed. Guess what? The new prop could not utilize the old style prop governor....so a NEW governor was installed. Guess what? The new prop could not be accomodated by the old-style spinner...so a NEW spinner was installed. All an no cost to the owner, his airplane was significantly upgraded.
A crack not associated with the prop strike was found and the owner was allowed to choose between a weld-repair by DivCo...or an exchange crankcase.
None of this was paid by the owner (who, by the way, had a zero deductible applied since the injury occured while preparing for a test-run...not a test flight, therefore it was a "not in motion" accident.)

Guess what? That customer stayed with that agency.

(And a year or so later went thru a similar experience yet again when the nosegear was collapsed after being driven across a concrete barrier during a landing perfomed at a place other than an airport, and that agency still supported the owner and hired a ferry-pilot to move the aircraft and a newer, later-model, upgraded nosegear was installed....all at no addt'l cost to the owner.)

The pertinent point is to choose your underwriter and agency with care, and to remember that loyalty has it's virtues and that low premium may include low service after the sale.

BTW, after ten years I switched to that same agency because I found that less-experienced friend's retractable, constant-speed, fuel injected race-horse based upon a grass field was paying several hundred dollars less for his insurance than I was based/hangared on pavement and never having suffered any in-motion claims.

[Waterboy]

Thanks for all the input. I use Falcon Insurance as my broker. Their service has been great and their prices reasonable. My policy is underwritten by US Specialties Insurance. They are a mass insurance company and would likely have no idea what a Cessna 170 is. So they passed my claim off to Aviation Light Services out of Phenix AZ. That is who I am having to deal with as an adjuster. My adjuster has been professional and polite.

I have gone several rounds with the adjuster trying to include the cylinder AD with the claim so the engine can be put back together. No luck, we are at an impasse. Either I hire a layer or I pay for the AD. The adjuster will not budge. I am starting to see how it would not be in my best interest to challenge them. The insurance company will pay for the inspection required by, SB96-11B , and any damage related to the prop strike. Because the inspection calls to inspect the accessories they will pay for new slick mags.

http://www.tcmlink.com/pdf2/SB96-11B.pdf

I am using a local reputable engine shop out of Troutdale, OR. The owner has been very helpful through the process. My engine has been removed from the aircraft and should be arriving a the shop soon. The plan is to inspect the engine and based on the findings decide weather to overhaul the engine or just repair it. The last overhaul was in 1977 and there are 1100 hours TSOH. Best part of this whole thing is all my leaky seals will be replaced. The PMA number etched on the cylinder base I think is from when they were reworked by Crome Plate back in 77.

What would your recommendations be for, Overhaul or not to overhaul? I hope to keep the plane for a least another 4 years. It has some hail damage and a few dents, it will never be worth much more than $35,000 or so even with a 0 TSOH.

[bagarre]

Your engine overhaul is almost as old as I am.
I wish they could overhaul me to serviceable limits

Even if you had yo pay some out of pocket, I'd go with the overhaul.

[170C]

Even if you have to pay for the AD and some additional expenses, you will never get a full overhaul at a lower cost than when the insurance company is picking up the major portion of the costs. Then you will know what you have with your engine and it will increase the value of your plane. After its all over you could challenge the insurance carrier on the AD situation.

[T. C. Downey]

Who will do the crank inspection?

[Waterboy]

I am using Premier Aircraft Engines in Troutdale OR.

http://www.premieraircraft.net/index.html

Is there anything in particular I need to know about having the crank inspected?

[T. C. Downey]

Some facilities use the ultra sound method, which will condemn good cranks due to flaws that pass the Magnaflux method given in the Overhaul manual.

Flaws that have been there from day one.

[Waterboy]

My estimate says the engine will receive the following work:

*case inspected
*Crankshaft is polished, magnetic particle, ultrasound and dimensionally inspected.
*Rod are inspected. Alignment and dimensions are checked.
*Steel parts are magnetic particle inspected. Aluminum parts are liquid penetrant inspected.
*engine is assembled according to the Continental Manual and test run.



Looks like there is an Ultra Sound inspection on the crank.

[Jason]

My crankshaft failed inspection at a local shop a few months ago but I decided to get a second opinion after agonizing about it for a while. Aircraft Specialties was recommended to me and it passed. I talked to the shop manager, Harold, after they inspected it and he said pretty much what Tom said in his last post. I am satisfied with their work.