The International Cessna^® 170 Association

The following is a departure from the main topic of another thread ( http://www.cessna170.org/forums/viewtop ... 495#p61495 ) and was split off into it's own topic. This illustrates/explains why attention to detail is important when maintaining airplanes...and why ANNUAL inspection by YOUR mechanic/inspector is the ONLY "pre-buy" inspection that is worth anything.

The other topic was related to low oil pressure in flight. The airplane I'd experienced it in, A Cessna 414A, had recently been purchased without benefit of any type of "pre-buy" inspection because the buyer was friends with the sellers and the deal included the sellers continuing useage of the plane. Therefore the buyer thought it not necessary to inspect the airplane, if the seller was also happy to continue using it. Unfortunately the seller was also ignorant of how shoddy the mx was being performed on the airplane. (can you spel pensil-whipped?)

*The bad production/batch was in Aeroshell 15W50 oil mfr'd between certain dates prior to 2003, and an AD note had been issued. (Dates can be faintly read printed on the bottles.) The airplane I was flying had been recently purchased and the previous owner's mx shop, Capitol Wings in Austin, had performed the last oil-change. I suspect they had disregarded and/or missed the fact an AD note was issued against certain lots of that oil and installed it anyway. That shop has always had a "bad reputation" in my opinion, and they "missed" inspecting the wing-attachment fittings for the previous several annuals also, despite the fact they had signed the forms specifically indicating they'd inspected those particular fittings! (The fairings had never been removed since painting several years earlier....I'll never forget your workmanship Alan Dunn!) Here's some pics of the fittings that were about to let the wing fall off inflight.

(The Lord works in mysterious ways. The disregard of the oil AD note may have caused the engine to prematurely disentigrate. The premature engine-change caused me to order an early annual inspection to coincide with the engine-change. The inspecting/engine-change shop (Air Impressions, Waco, TX) performed the inspection as it should have been ...and discovered the severely-corroded wing-attachement fitting....probably saving lives.)

click on pics to ENLARGE them

Another point should be made to take the plane to a shop or bring in a mechanic for the pre-buy annual that you trust and that you know has a thorough knowledge of the particular type of aircraft you are annualling. It will be money well spent.

DON'T EVER use the seller's mechanic for a pre-buy and don't take it to a shop that does not have experience with that type airplane.

Not taking sides but Mike Busch seems to have written a lot lately about using a pre-buy inspection rather than an annual. A little self-interest here on his part, as his company just happens to arrange pre-buy inspections for potential buyers.

By the sheerest of coincidences (hehehe), I've written a number of articles on that very subject. Here's one that appeared in American Bonanza Society magazine awhile back. I've attach it below.

My firm manages hundreds of pre-buys. We NEVER permit an annual inspection in lieu of a pre-buy. The objectives and rules of the road are totally different. The scope and detail should be quite different.

The purpose of an annual is to make a regulatory determination of whether or not the aircraft is in airworthy condition. The purpose of a pre-buy is to determine whether the aircraft has any costly defects that could either cause the prospective buyer not to buy the airplane, or could trigger a renegotiation of the price. In a pre-buy, we're only interested in the $5,000 and $50,000 items, not the $500 or $50 items.

For example, an annual must measure the brake discs and linings to ensure that they meet minimum thickness. In an pre-buy, we could care less about the condition of the brakes, because if they're unairworthy it's no big deal (and no big expense) to repair them. On the other hand, we care a great deal about corrosion (even if it's not an airworthiness issue yet), because corrosion can be very expensive to repair and in some cases could even make the aircraft uneconomical to repair. (One of my clients just discovered some wing spar corrosion in her Cessna 320 that will cost $80,000 to repair.)

Also, an annual must go to completion once it is started. By contrast, a pre-buy should be aborted instantly when a show-stopper discrepancy is discovered. The buyer and seller go off and huddle to discuss the impact of the show stopper, and see if they can renegotiate the deal based on the adverse finding. If they can, then the pre-buy may be resumed. If not, everyone walks away. We perform our pre-buys in phases for exactly that reason. If we get through phase 1 with no bit show-stopers, then we authorize the shop to proceed with phase 2. That's NOT the way an annual inspection is performed, but it is the way a pre-buy should be performed.

Another HUGE difference is this: As a matter of regulation, an annual inspection must be controlled by the aircraft owner. A pre-buy, in contrast, must be controlled by the prospective buyer -- he's paying for it and it is for his sole benefit -- with no influence whatsoever by the seller. As a matter of policy, we insist that the aircraft be flown at least 30 minutes away from home base for the pre-buy to keep the seller from interfering with the process.

With an annual, there is an assumption that discrepancies (at least airworthiness discrepancies) will be repaired. In a pre-buy, no repairs are ever performed, because the person paying for the pre-buy (the buyer) does not own the airplane and does not have the right to authorize repairs. Only after the deal is done and title transfers can repairs be performed.

The advice that "the best pre-buy is an annual inspection" is about as wrong as it can possibly be in my opinion. I hear it a lot. I disagree vociferously. --Mike

It is common, however, for us to convert a pre-buy into an annual once the buyer has taken title to the aircraft.

Here's an interesting "caveat emptor" story about a C-170 "pre-buy" which reinforces what Richard says above. More interesting perhaps is a comment the author made in 2009, prior to the C-170 purchase, after a trouble-filled pre-buy inspection of a Helio Courier he bought:

Having gone through this experience, I know if we're ever involved with another plane purchase we’ll be a lot more thorough with the pre-purchase inspection and be more willing to hold out for exactly the right deal.

A post-buy nightmare.

We operated two Cessna Ram 414As. During one of the 100 hour inspections I noticed a small blister on the wing attach fitting at the wing root the same area as George’s pictures. After probing the area with a scribe it was found to have severe exfoliation corrosion. After contacting Ram aircraft in Waco Texas I was referred to (Air Impressions, Waco, TX). We got a ferry permit and flew the airplane from Seattle to Waco to have the aircraft repaired by Air Impressions. The second aircraft was also ultimately repaired by Air Impressions for the same reason. It was found later to have additional corrosion at the spar splice just aft of the left engine nacelle on the rear spar shortly after being repaired by Air Impressions. Air Impressions had supposedly inspected the whole spar and given it a clean bill of health. I think Air Impressions did an excellent job under estimated cost for the repairs on both aircraft. However I think they did a poor job inspecting the spar on the second 414. I think the inspection is inhibited by dirt and residue in the area suspected. I was always trying to get the line guy’s to do a better job of cleaning these areas during aircraft wash. The boss was always more interested in how the airplane appeared rather than any benefit to enhance maintainability. The line guy’s answered to the boss. As it required a lot of clean up at each 100 hour annual inspection we caught these problems early on. But my issue here is not lambasting any maintenance facility that you have no experience with. Don’t even get me started on a shop in Divine Texas though. I have worked on a lot of 300 and 400 Cessna's, the spar fittings are a well-known issue and should be monitored closely.
I have been in the uncomfortable position of where a buyer and a seller both wanted me to work as there agent. I have always recommended that an annual inspection was the only way to perform a pre-purchase inspection. Often we have only done a cursory record search before rejecting a potential aircraft. Often the purchase has been in a coordinated annual inspection where the owner or buyer agreed to pay for or split the cost of the annual and have the seller pay for any airworthiness squawks.
Generally I like to have a buyer participate in the early part if not the whole part of a “pre-purchase” evaluation. I do not call them inspections. That way the buyer can see first-hand what issues the aircraft may have. This has sometimes evolved into an annual inspection if that is not what the buyer wanted. Every case has been different. Sometimes the purchase would fall through due to the seller not wanting to be cooperative with the buyer’s desires. I have also seen a few airplanes purchased without a pre-purchase evaluation of any type. It has never worked out to the buyer’s advantage unless they were intentionally buying a derelict aircraft to begin with. I have also seen a 172 flow by an anxious buyer before the pre-purchase evaluation was performed. Afterwards discovering there were no nuts or washers on any of the elevator hinge bolts discovered on the mechanics walk around(After all the airplane had flown in). I have also done a pre-purchase evaluation and then had the seller owner refuse to fly the airplane due to the issues discovered during the evaluation. thus turning it into an annual for the seller who did not sell the aircraft.
Just my thoughts,
Jim

It seems to me that whether you go for a pre-purchase evaluation, inspection, or annual, what really matters are the checklist used, and the diligence of the mechanic doing the looking. Be in control of those things, and you'll know what you're buying.

I'm with you John...don't really care what you call it.... go by the numbers and check it off.


W.

Aryana wrote:Gary, the rebuild in that link made me exhausted just reading it. What a ton of work correcting all those problems on that plane.

I was interested in a 206H that those guys were selling and what a PIA they were to deal with, it made me think of a used car salesman with alligator shoes, I had already seen the plane and knew what it was but the lies and misrepresenting was bad, I remember this 170 when it was for sale, on the surface it looked good and I think someone on here reported on it, I feel so bad for the buyer, I hope he got the feds and a lawyer involved, those type of dealers are plain bad news.

I think that Mike Busch is probably dealing more with airplanes that I never would have been likely to be thinking of buying. He claims to be interested in the "$5000 items" and doesnt worry about the "$500 or $50 dollar items". If I was buying the kind of airplane that I have been capable of buying, a couple of $500 items might be a big deal. I don't think he deals a lot with the older Cessna airplanes at the bottom of the price field like the C-170s and the C-172s.

I have disagreed with Mike Busch on many minor points and a few major ones and I believe one reason is that he fails to remain objective when he writes about matters from which he personally profits.
His writings (quoted above) are self-contradictory, in that he recommends a "pre-buy" because it does not look for "airworthiness". What the heck are you doing when buying an airplane if you don't care about it's relative airworthiness? (This comment of mine does not apply to the buyer who's considering a derelict/project, because if you are looking at that kind of project you likely already have sufficient knowledge/experience to determine for yourself the merits of the plane.)
The non-professional who looks to buy an airplane most likely intends to strap it on and fly it! In such cases the subject airplane is almost always marketed as "airworthy"...(Isn't that what is implied by "flies great"/"runs perfect"/ etc). Why would such a buyer not be primarily interested in the airworthiness of the object he's about to put himself and family in?
The current airworthiness status of the airplane, and the time/money required to PUT it airworthy is exactly what I'm interested in when I look at a prospective purchase. I don't need someone else to tell me if the paint is pretty or not and how much a paint job costs, those are tasks that even a cave-man can determine without hiring anyone.

Busch also fails to understand the nature of the "annual inspection" used as a "pre-buy" activity when he states that an annual must be carried all the way through to completion. An annual inspection may be stopped at any time. I know. I've done it!* The appropriate logbook entry will state that the inspection was begun and not completed, the areas completed to be recorded, that uninspected areas be listed, and that unairworthy items be listed and that list provided to the owner (and of course, the buyer whom the inspector is working for.) This prevents the seller from removing the plane from the transaction and attempting to market it elsewhere without repairing it or obtaining a ferry-permit (which becomes part of the mx record.)

* In 1998 when I was considering a pretty B model I ran across in McAllen, TX, I hired the FBO (McCreery Aviation) to perform an annual inspection. They began the inspection and I arrived about 3 hours into the inspection. I looked into the opened-wings and fairings and saw rusted hardware, silver-painted wing interiors (indicating painted-over filiform corrosion), and old, rusted control cables....
They had not yet looked at the engine, landing gear, etc., and were looking thru the logs. That particular airplane had once been used as a floatplane and the floats had been used for fuel tanks to establish an endurance record. Improper log entries abounded.
About four mechanics were working on the airframe while the IA was researching the logs when I STOPPED their progress and instructed them to call the seller and tell him they were putting his inspection covers/fairings back on and telling him he could come pick it back up. They calculated that I owed them $200 for their time so-far. It was a good investment, and there was no problem in stopping that inspection. (Their flat-rate annual insp., fee only, was quoted at $750.) They logged an "uncompleted annual inspection, aircraft returned to service with discrepancies noted."
The previous annual inspector was contacted and he opined it to be a great airplane. I told him it was junk and he admitted that he had been using students at the local vocational high school to inspect his sign off on his "friend's" airplane for years.

Also, any time an annual is started and not completed (presumably for mutually-agreed reasons.... then the activity is recorded as an "incomplete" annual and the airplane is either not approved for return to service or the record reflects that portion of the work accomplished and, if the current inspection status of the aircraft is still within the calendar, then the owner can still fly it home if the items discovered are not airworthiness issues. (Example: At the same place MetalMaster mentioned, Air Impressions-Waco, TX, I observed those folks performing a "pre-buy" using annual inspection forms. They wrote up the airconditioner as "INOP" which P-O'd the seller because it would require $5K to fix.
When Air Impressions was angrily confronted by the seller because the seller did not consider air conditioning to be an airworthiness-issue.... then the Inspector merely asked to see the seller/operators MEL! (Approved Minimum Equipt List... If an MEL allows operation with INOP equipment then the airplane is not grounded....but.... now the buyer knew that the airplane had a $5K repair item and was better informed about what he was buying.) Air Impressions did a fine job for both the buyer and the seller, both of whom rec'd an education about that airplane.
A "pre-buy" inspection does not require the inspector to check to see if air conditioning actually WORKS. But if an annual inspection is used ...then any installed equipment must be operational or must be deferred under an MEL and the mx record must reflect that!

Mr. Busch says that his "pre-buy" only looks for the big-ticket items. Using Mr. Busch's services then, it is possible that a completely UN-airworthy airplane might receive his glorious blessings.
I can tell you from personal experience that a lot of small items ARE big ticket items when they are added up, and there is nothing more frustrating than to get your new purchase home and find that UN-discovered/over-looked items will really spoil your day and can wreck both your budget and the pleasure of your purchase.

He implies that corrosion which can be value-destroying may be overlooked "even if it's not an airworthiness issue yet" item in an annual inspection. Not correct. ALL corrosion is an airworthiness consideration UNLESS there is no legal definition of the inspection such as "pre-buy" where it can be totally unmentioned. The FARs specify that the inspection activity requires cleaning for the inspection process. By definition corrosion will not likely exist in structural areas that have been cleaned for inspection.
However, a "pre-buy" has no legal definition! It requires no certification. It requires no liability/responsibility on the part of the inspector. It is merely up to the "pre-buy inspector" to decide what to look for and what to report. In fact, technically speaking, since a "pre-buy inspector" is not required to be certificated or even qualified to determine airworthiness.... he may not even have the legal authority to return the aircraft to service after the inspection! He is not even required to possess mechanical ability or experience of any type, and the inspection report may not have any standing in the record.
Failure to require an "annual" inspection removes most liability from the "inspector" (who is not req'd to rely upon his certificates) and transfers any/all right back to the buyer.

The point of using an annual inspection is to set the performance-standards to be used that have legal standing and definition both in court, and in intent. it also requires the seller to, ...up front.... agree that the airplane is being sought for use in an intended purpose that the seller represents the aircraft to meet.

Mike Busch is a businessman/author for-profits. In this case, He promotes what he can sell with minimum liability/responsibility to the customer. In my opinion, that removes him from the "disinterested third party" category with regard to this topic.

I think that a pre-buy should be the annual inspection for legal reasons but also an SME condition report that you wouldn't expect from an annual inspection.

There are examples about even on a simple plane like the 170.
The parking brake 'should' be removed however this isn't an inspection discrepancy.
Cloth wires may be fine and serviceable but it's nice to know that it's a value add if the wires are upgraded.
Which Tailwheel bracket?

This is the kind of information I'd like to gather on TOP of the fact that the pane passed inspection and this stuff looks more like a pre-buy appraisal.

Think of all the things about an airplane that will pass inspection but might be a turn off to you personally.

bagarre wrote:........The parking brake 'should' be removed however this isn't an inspection discrepancy.
Cloth wires may be fine and serviceable but it's nice to know that it's a value add if the wires are upgraded.
Which Tailwheel bracket?.........

Examples of why its a good idea to use an IA who is a specialist or at least knowledgeable about the plane you are looking at. Any IA can annual any airplane but may not actually know what to look for on a 170.

n2582d wrote:Here's an interesting "caveat emptor" story about a C-170 "pre-buy" which reinforces what Richard says above. More interesting perhaps is a comment the author made in 2009, prior to the C-170 purchase, after a trouble-filled pre-buy inspection of a Helio Courier he bought:

Having gone through this experience, I know if we're ever involved with another plane purchase we’ll be a lot more thorough with the pre-purchase inspection and be more willing to hold out for exactly the right deal.

A post-buy nightmare.

I'm not sure this proves anything about "annual as prebuy", but it sure is an indictment of one man's method of buying an airplane! He bought an airplane sight unseen and without ever having met the seller, and then was horrified to find he'd been cheated. Uh huh.

strangebird wrote:

Aryana wrote:Gary, the rebuild in that link made me exhausted just reading it. What a ton of work correcting all those problems on that plane.

I was interested in a 206H that those guys were selling and what a PIA they were to deal with, it made me think of a used car salesman with alligator shoes, I had already seen the plane and knew what it was but the lies and misrepresenting was bad, I remember this 170 when it was for sale, on the surface it looked good and I think someone on here reported on it, I feel so bad for the buyer, I hope he got the feds and a lawyer involved, those type of dealers are plain bad news.

A couple of buddies of mine have had some dealings with South Delta Aviation. One friend sold his Cardinal through them (first Cardinal sold to the public), and another friend and fellow 170 driver recently purchased an A36 through them. The Cardinal sale took FOREVER. They weren't really advertising the airplane very hard, and at one point the people that eventually purchased the airplane walked away because South Delta didn't have their paperwork in order for export in a timely manner. Not sure how they got them back.

My buddy with the A36 had to deal with some greaseball tactics to get the airplane. They agreed on a price and arranged for the airplane to be flown to a third-party mechanic to do a pre-buy, and all of a sudden my buddy gets a call that there is another person interested in the airplane and was willing to pay full price for the airplane, sight unseen. After David told him that he was an xxxxxxx for trying to cost him $20K in order to get a $200 payday increase, the guy backed off and somehow that other party was no longer interested in the airplane.

Pretty sure neither one of my friends will be using South Delta again.

I recall seeing the 170 in question for sale a while back. Sad that it cost so much to purchase, and then cost so much more on top of that to get it airworthy. The issue with the windscreen is particularly disconcerting.