|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

07-16-2010, 03:38 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Flagstaff, AZ
Posts: 2,653
|
|
Ok, as promised, I will now talk more about the incident. I just passed my flight re-exam today and the insurance (Global through Falcon, thanks guys) has been great and approved everything.
The incident is as I previously described. I don't think I did anything particularly bad but I should have held the nose wheel off longer. The last gust didn't pick me up very far but that nose gear is not designed to support the entire weight of the aircraft and the impact was enough to roll it right up. I could probably have done a no-flap landing, too, reducing my workload and keeping my speed up as I passed through Flagstaff's notorious tree-top-level wind shear. What it really boils down to is that I was complacent, saved a landing and then blew it on the roll-out. As I said before, I don't blame the nose gear; I've landed plenty of times without problems - just don't expect the design to give you Cessna-like margins.
The engine was torn down by an A&P IA, rather than trusting myself, and had no damage. The prop is being repaired; it will lose about 1/2" each blade. The engine mount was a total loss; all the tubes around the gear mount were bent or cracked. The firewall was ripped and four of the angle pieces needed to be replaced but the perimeter weldments were fine and the center attach points sheared from the floor stiffeners at the rivets, saving the floor, stiffeners, and the attach pieces.
After removing the firewall and bent stiffeners, I took the opportunity to do a little "if I had only known" work. I had placed the ignition boxes side-by-side which made it impossible to work on, either to get a driver on the connectors or on the mounting screws. Turning one box over and dropping it 3 inches solved both problems. I also drained the right tank and plumbed it for the AFP purge return - somehow I had the idea that the purge was supposed to go overboard until Don set me straight. Finally, I installed a Show Planes flap positioning system and wired it to the flap switch.
With all the optional stuff out of the way, I used the old firewall to locate the penetrations on the new one. Being able to cut the holes while the firewall was not part of the airframe made the task immensely easier but stainless is still not my favorite material to work with. However, having all the penetrations done and knowing how the wiring and plumbing must go before the engine mount is on makes a much easier task for hooking everything up again. Me and a friend did the riveting in about four hours (all but the perimeter stuff) with each of us doing a spell under the panel. It wasn't fun but wasn't as hard as I had feared; all the effort to cleanly route stuff made it possible to reach all the rivets on the aft side.
The engine mount was one of the later ones and so the new one was built on the same jig (the builder checked the perimeter attach points on the jig to make sure it matched) and fit back on the firewall with no problem. Drilling the two attach points near the gear mount showed that the fit was exact there, too, and shortly thereafter N156PK was back on three wheels. Next came the engine. I am now reattaching all the systems and I shall then match-drill the firewall perimeter and rivet the cowl attach strips back on.
After that, I have to re-bleed the brakes, do minor fiberglass work (plus a whole new left wheel pant and nose-gear fairing) and reattach the prop. While I am at it, I am checking off the tasks for an annual inspection even though the last was only a few hours ago, tach time. Then I'll do an early one next year to get me cycled into a Spring annual.
In summary, I've learned something about my flying habits. I've also, strangely, had fun doing the rebuild (if you have to do it, you might as well enjoy it). It's nice to have taken care of a few things I've wanted to fix but haven't wanted to stop flying to do. It's also much like the initial build, which I must like because I'm doing another kit. I'd rather not have had the incident but it hasn't been all bad.
As part of the re-build process, I will be adding the intersection fairings (at last!) and trying to get the bird ready to go to paint. It's been said before; paint before you fly or you won't want to stop to get it painted.
Dealing with the FAA was not horrible (other than their frustrating communication habits). I'd get a call, letter, or email from them and respond promptly only to hear nothing for days. At one point I gave them a whole week where I could do the re-exam and at the end of the week had still not heard from them. Other than that, though, they were friendly and easy to deal with (it helps to use a sugar instead of vinegar approach) and the exam was totally uneventful. The examiner's debrief was cordial and helpful - I've still got less than 400 hours under my belt so I am willing to listen to anyone with more experience; my ego will survive as long as I do.
Insurance was even easier; I sent pictures and told them what I intended to do. As I got the firewall off and found the extent of the damage, I gave them a parts list and the quote from Vans as well as from the prop shop and the A&P. The adjuster kept saying he'd like to drop in but never managed to; instead he sent another field agent who he said might be interested, "especially if you can show him the -10". We had a nice visit; by that time the new firewall was on and he said the work looked fine. I just have to submit the final invoices once the prop comes back. I am very happy with Falcon and Global, needless to say.
Well, that's about it. Like I said in the initial post, I don't think this one is fodder for the regular gear-collapse discussion but I'm happy to answer questions or comment on other aspects of the incident. I've only got a couple of weeks worth of work left before I can fly again but I've got a family thing to attend so it will probably be early August before it flies and then I need to see about paint.
Oh, last thing. I discovered extensive cracking in the baffles outboard the oil cooler. No idea if this was accelerated in the incident but I have new parts and a plan for reinforcing and bracing around the cooler. I'll do a separate thread for that when I have some pictures.
__________________
Patrick Kelley - Flagstaff, AZ
RV-6A N156PK - Flying too much to paint
RV-10 14MX(reserved) - Fuselage on gear
http://www.mykitlog.com/flion/
EAA Technical Counselor #5357
|

07-16-2010, 10:57 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Manstad, Norway
Posts: 866
|
|
Good job
Thanks for the update.
I'm glad you're getting it together again and that the experiences with FAA and insurance was ok.
Looking forward to your "second first flight" report soon! 
__________________
Regards Alf Olav Frog / Norway
First RV-7 completed, (bought partly finished from a US-builder) 305 hrs per July 2014, SOLD
Second -7 had first flight Feb 25th 2014. 220 hrs pr July 2019. Life is good!
|

07-17-2010, 07:38 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 1,849
|
|
Glad to see your got your wings back and soon your bird.
__________________
Todd
N110TD
RV-10 Vesta V8 LS2/BMA EFIS/One formerly flying at 3J1 Hobbs stopped at 150 hours
Savannah, GA and Ridgeland, SC
|

07-17-2010, 07:42 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,275
|
|
What is a "flight re-exam?"
|

07-17-2010, 08:11 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Flagstaff, AZ
Posts: 2,653
|
|
Ron, the FSDO issues a '709' (I believe the form is actually 44709) letter to inform you that you must take a flight exam to retain your pilot privileges. You haven't lost your license and can keep flying as long as you contact the FSDO promptly to make arrangements for the test. The letter will spell out anything special for the test and, on the day of the test you have to have an 8710 form (application for certification) ready with 'reexamination' checked at the top. In my case, it was a private pilot rating exam with emphasis on landings. In the event, we simply stayed in the pattern and did three landings, the last one power off, less than 20 minutes from engine start to stop. It sounds (and, admittedly, feels) a little scary but if you've passed your private exam in the first place and are current then it shouldn't be a problem.
I asked the FAA rep why I got the exam and he admitted that Scotsdale FSDO tends to issue a lot of 709s. In my case, since there was no apparent mechanical cause, their investigation indicated that I should be re-tested. I was Ok with that except their 'investigation' had not included getting my hours or narrative - it wasn't the conclusion that bothered me but the fact that their work seemed a little sketchy. Still, it wasn't a big deal except for the length of time and the amount of back and forth it took to get the flight arranged. The examiner came up to Flagstaff and I had to provide the aircraft (which the 709 also specified as an RV-6A or similar); most of my preparation involved getting used to the panel in the borrowed RV (thanks to AZTAILWIND and his partner; Brad also did a great job familiarizing me with his bird).
__________________
Patrick Kelley - Flagstaff, AZ
RV-6A N156PK - Flying too much to paint
RV-10 14MX(reserved) - Fuselage on gear
http://www.mykitlog.com/flion/
EAA Technical Counselor #5357
|

07-17-2010, 09:25 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,275
|
|
Thanks Patrick. I do not recall ever reading of such a test. Good thing it was somewhat perfunctory. I don't think that I would like to take a real private pilots check ride again.
|

07-17-2010, 09:48 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Mojave
Posts: 4,652
|
|
The "709 checkride" is issued anytime your airmanship skills are called into question. It usually covers only the limited areas of performance (such as landings) that you have performed in such a way as to call attention to them, but it can include a full PPL checkride.
I have suffered a 709 ride (also at the "request" of Scottsdale) as a result of running over a runway light as I was turning onto the taxiway. My ride took 10 minutes and was simply two trips around the pattern. It was easy (pleasant, even) - but I don't ever want to go through it again.
__________________
WARNING! Incorrect design and/or fabrication of aircraft and/or components may result in injury or death. Information presented in this post is based on my own experience - Reader has sole responsibility for determining accuracy or suitability for use.
Michael Robinson
______________
Harmon Rocket II -SDS EFI
RV-8 - SDS CPI
1940 Taylorcraft BL-65
1984 L39C
|

07-17-2010, 10:14 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Flagstaff, AZ
Posts: 2,653
|
|
While the ride emphasizes a certain task, you can be busted for any operation required by the flight. So my three landings also included pre-flight, taxiing, communications, etc. However, there was no quiz nor any additional work, such as navigation or anything relating to my multi-engine rating, for example. By the way, my examiner, Jacob Hansen, may work for the FAA but he was great to fly with and I'd happily meet him on a social basis. They're not all bad guys. But I agree with Michael; I'd rather not get another 709.
__________________
Patrick Kelley - Flagstaff, AZ
RV-6A N156PK - Flying too much to paint
RV-10 14MX(reserved) - Fuselage on gear
http://www.mykitlog.com/flion/
EAA Technical Counselor #5357
|

07-17-2010, 10:32 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Mojave
Posts: 4,652
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by flion
...By the way, my examiner, Jacob Hansen, may work for the FAA but he was great to fly with and I'd happily meet him on a social basis. They're not all bad guys...
|
My experience as well. They had a hard time finding a guy with the right qualifications to evaluate me in the Hiperbipe, but eventually dug up a guy with a lot of 450 Stearman experience. Even though he told me he was only there to "evaluate" (rather than instruct), he did give me some good pointers that I still carry with me today. He helped make me a better pilot. Overall it was a very good "bad" experience.
__________________
WARNING! Incorrect design and/or fabrication of aircraft and/or components may result in injury or death. Information presented in this post is based on my own experience - Reader has sole responsibility for determining accuracy or suitability for use.
Michael Robinson
______________
Harmon Rocket II -SDS EFI
RV-8 - SDS CPI
1940 Taylorcraft BL-65
1984 L39C
|

08-18-2010, 06:14 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Flagstaff, AZ
Posts: 2,653
|
|
First Flight Redux
Today I put my RV-6A back into the air. About halfway into the 20 minute flight, my Engine Pod quit talking to the EFIS; landed without problem and found, sure enough, that it was the cable between the EFIS and POD. The DB-9 connector shell in the engine compartment had failed, possibly due to heat. I replaced the plastic shell with a metal one and all is good again. I still have to do the wheel pants and nose gear fairing (as well as the intersection fairings at last!) before I can call it good and finally get her to a paint shop. Other than the Pod problem the flight was uneventful except I had forgotten how good Northern AZ looks as the monsoon winds down. Green and water everywhere.
(note to editor: that's 'winds' as in what you do to a rubber band, not 'winds' as in the invisible guy that steals my VAF cap.  )
__________________
Patrick Kelley - Flagstaff, AZ
RV-6A N156PK - Flying too much to paint
RV-10 14MX(reserved) - Fuselage on gear
http://www.mykitlog.com/flion/
EAA Technical Counselor #5357
Last edited by flion : 08-19-2010 at 09:24 AM.
Reason: word clarification
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:37 AM.
|