Would this plane have flown?

I would not have felt qualified to determine whether it was flyable or
not, so I probably would not have flown it without getting an opinion
and a ferry permit from an A&P (and I am not above making the A&P fly
with me). My main concerns would be weakened attach points and possibly
some sort of flutter induced by disrupted airflow over the aileron.

That is exactly how I felt (although I was less concerned with the
permit itself). I was getting lots of advice but it felt good to have
an A&P come out and give me his opinion. It would have been nice to get
the opinion of an aerospace engineer but I wasn't going to hold my
breath for that. I did have the A&P come with me on the test flight
after the repair before I put the family in the plane. My main concern
had also been flutter resulting from the uneven surface.
My broker seems to believe that it would be very unlikely that this
will effect my rates in the future. I"m hoping that they are able to
collect from the truck's Mexican liability policy too. BTW: I wonder
how often people drop their plane off for annual and the mechanic
borrows parts off it to retrieve another plane without the owner ever
knowing.

-Robert

"Dave Butler" wrote in message
news:1143128184.860637@sj-nntpcache-3...
Dave Butler wrote:
Dave Stadt wrote:

"Dave Butler" wrote in message
news:1143124006.95524@sj-nntpcache-5...

Dylan Smith wrote:

On 2006-03-23, Morgans wrote:


Flutter scares the crap out of me.



I would strongly doubt (based on what I know) that there was even the
remotest chance of flutter. From what I understand, flutter would
require the flexing of the wing structure in such a way to cause the
whole thing to oscillate. This happens with experimental airframes (or
used to happen) because the whole surface or wing would warp under
aerodynamic loads in such a way that you'd get the oscillation. A dent
in a Mooney aileron isn't going to cause that.


FWIW, Mooney ailerons are required to be rebalanced after they are
*painted*.



As are almost all flight control surfaces on most all aircraft.


OK, I thought this requirement came from manufacturers service letters
and the like. I know about Bonanza and Mooney. Is there some other more
general requirement?

Here's a quote from http://www.avweb.com/news/maint/182829-1.html "Getting
Good Paint" by Paul Bertorelli:

"Guenther and better shops insist—rightly—that controls be removed,
stripped, inspected and, most important, rebalanced after painting. On
some controls—Bonanza ruddervators and Mooney ailerons—this is a critical
task and shouldn’t be skipped. But it should still be standard on all
aircraft. Guenther goes so far as to record the balance data in the
aircraft logbook, along with the signoff for the paint itself."

which makes me think this is not a general requirement or practice.

It is. Most all manufacturers provide control surface balance requirements.
Even the Cessna 150 requires it. I also believe it is in the FARs.

Flutter is caused by imbalanced movable surfaces. When the
plane moves the moment arm of the surface causes deflection
of the surface.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"nrp" wrote in message
oups.com...
| Flutter is determined by the torsional stiffness (and
mass) of the wing
| section. In this case, that did not seem to be
compromised - i. e.
| there were no diagonal wrinkles across the wing panel. If
there were
| diagonal wrinkles, flutter would be a real possibility.
But dropping
| the airspeed greatly helps the flutter margin, just as
increasing the
| max speed quickly reduces the flutter margin. I
understand that during
| each new aircraft's flight at the factory, the test pilot
must dive it
| to 110% of the indicated red line speed. The survivors
are certfied.
|
| There were diagonal wrinkles across the aileron panel, but
I don't
| think the aileron in itself can flutter. The question in
this case
| would be the aileron control integrity. Someone earlier
suggested
| blocking or locking one aileron. That could have all
sorts of
| interesting changes and very definitely I would not
recommend.
|

Family values?

We all get there together, where the plane goes. "Daddy,
why are we dead?"



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
| I would not have felt qualified to determine whether it
was flyable or
| not, so I probably would not have flown it without
getting an opinion
| and a ferry permit from an A&P (and I am not above
making the A&P fly
| with me). My main concerns would be weakened attach
points and possibly
| some sort of flutter induced by disrupted airflow over
the aileron.
|
| That is exactly how I felt (although I was less concerned
with the
| permit itself). I was getting lots of advice but it felt
good to have
| an A&P come out and give me his opinion. It would have
been nice to get
| the opinion of an aerospace engineer but I wasn't going to
hold my
| breath for that. I did have the A&P come with me on the
test flight
| after the repair before I put the family in the plane. My
main concern
| had also been flutter resulting from the uneven surface.
| My broker seems to believe that it would be very unlikely
that this
| will effect my rates in the future. I"m hoping that they
are able to
| collect from the truck's Mexican liability policy too.
BTW: I wonder
| how often people drop their plane off for annual and the
mechanic
| borrows parts off it to retrieve another plane without the
owner ever
| knowing.
|
| -Robert
|

Family values?

We all get there together, where the plane goes. "Daddy,
why are we dead?"

Jim,

I'm not sure what type of stupid statement you are trying to make. The
plane was fixed (minus mismatched paint). How many years do you
normally require a plane sit idle after the A&P repairs the plane
before you fly it??

-Robert

Was it repaired and completely inspected or were more
repairs done on return to the USA? The indications that I
had from the thread was that more repairs/inspections were
done on the airplane after it returned to the US. Yet you
carried your family after major repairs caused by damage.

Glad you got away with it, but what would you have done had
the bell crank on the aileron been damaged and stuck the
aileron full up or down? What would have done if something
else was hidden in the controls that was not repaired? You
obviously had a question, why else did you start this
thread?

FAR requires a test flight after repairs and that you, the
pilot doing the test make a logbook entry, right after the
A&P release to service, before any passengers are carried.
Without a ferry permit [special airworthiness certificate]
the A&P can only return the aircraft to service if it is in
the same condition as a "new airplane" or all repairs are
completed. If you are stopped by the FAA on a ramp check,
hope all your paperwork is perfect.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P


"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ups.com...
| Family values?
|
| We all get there together, where the plane goes.
"Daddy,
| why are we dead?"
|
| Jim,
|
| I'm not sure what type of stupid statement you are trying
to make. The
| plane was fixed (minus mismatched paint). How many years
do you
| normally require a plane sit idle after the A&P repairs
the plane
| before you fly it??
|
| -Robert
|

Was it repaired and completely inspected or were more
repairs done on return to the USA? The indications that I
had from the thread was that more repairs/inspections were
done on the airplane after it returned to the US. Yet you
carried your family after major repairs caused by damage.

Quoting from the original post "I was able to call an A&P to come down
to Mexico and swap it for me." Sadly, the other Mooney owners wants his
back (go figure) so yes, more repairs were also done back home (like
ordering a factory new aileron for me, paint etc). Yes it was
inspected in Mexico by the A&P doing the work and all wing panels
relevant to aileron control were removed before the A&P got in the
plane with me and we performed the test flight. I honestly don't know
what else to do with regard to inspection other than having had the A&P
look at it. I could ask Mooney if they want to send an engineer down
but I don't think that is going to happen.

Jim, I'm still highly offended by your comment about my family.

-Robert

But I understand flutter also relies on the original torsional
stiffness of the wing being preserved. That if it is not (i. e. a
wrinkled wing skin) the flutter margin is reduced. Might even a
properly balanced control surface still flutter if the primary wing
stiffness is compromised? or is the control surface CG the only
determining item? THX

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ups.com...

Quoting from the original post "I was able to call an A&P to come down
to Mexico and swap it for me." Sadly, the other Mooney owners wants his
back (go figure) so yes, more repairs were also done back home (like
ordering a factory new aileron for me, paint etc). Yes it was
inspected in Mexico by the A&P doing the work and all wing panels
relevant to aileron control were removed before the A&P got in the
plane with me and we performed the test flight. I honestly don't know
what else to do with regard to inspection other than having had the A&P
look at it. I could ask Mooney if they want to send an engineer down
but I don't think that is going to happen.

Jim, I'm still highly offended by your comment about my family.

-Robert

IMHO you did everything that could have reasonably been expected.

Then you answered the question, IF you really had a complete
repair and the A&P did make a "return to service" entry. If
he did all that and you did a test flight [you really should
not have carried a passenger, which the A&P would be] and
made the pilot's return to service after test flight, then
what was your question, should you have just flown it away
without any work/inspection or repair?

As for your family, my comment was about your judgment, if
you want to substitute three strangers from the beach,
that's fine with me.


BTW, since some FAA types read these groups, they have your
N number.



"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ups.com...
| Was it repaired and completely inspected or were more
| repairs done on return to the USA? The indications that
I
| had from the thread was that more repairs/inspections
were
| done on the airplane after it returned to the US. Yet
you
| carried your family after major repairs caused by
damage.
|
| Quoting from the original post "I was able to call an A&P
to come down
| to Mexico and swap it for me." Sadly, the other Mooney
owners wants his
| back (go figure) so yes, more repairs were also done back
home (like
| ordering a factory new aileron for me, paint etc). Yes it
was
| inspected in Mexico by the A&P doing the work and all wing
panels
| relevant to aileron control were removed before the A&P
got in the
| plane with me and we performed the test flight. I honestly
don't know
| what else to do with regard to inspection other than
having had the A&P
| look at it. I could ask Mooney if they want to send an
engineer down
| but I don't think that is going to happen.
|
| Jim, I'm still highly offended by your comment about my
family.
|
| -Robert
|