This Forum is a place for Piper Comanche pilots to communicate and discuss technical issues
If you join or reset a password, please check your Spam Email box for emails from Admin at ComancheTechTalk.com
Please put your questions on the forum as well so everyone can read and respond. Someone else might be having similar questions.
All questions or topics on the Forums automatically get sent to the Tech team as well.
Horn AD
Initial timing and required compliance has sellers and buyers hanging fire.
dap8@comcast.net
- David Pyle
- ICS member
- Posts: 372
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2003 10:33 pm
- Location: Houston
Re: Horn AD
Chief- ICS member
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 11:01 pm
- Location: K9A4
Re: Horn AD
There is later information about the horn situation in the Jan. 2011 Comanche FLYER.
dap8@comcast.net
- David Pyle
- ICS member
- Posts: 372
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2003 10:33 pm
- Location: Houston
Re: Horn AD
I read it. Thanks
Chief- ICS member
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 11:01 pm
- Location: K9A4
Re: Horn AD
- tomburke1
- ICS member
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 2:30 pm
- Location: Fort Lauderdale fl
Re: Horn AD
You may want to re-read the SB, "new horn on new torque tube" is what suffices. Someone other than me would have to tell you if Aussie Horn is recognized by FAA, not sure on that, but the SB clearly states, "new Piper horn on new torque tube".
But, I will say, an Aussie Horn is better than a non-compiance horn and a plane flying is more fun than one sitting!!!!
Chief- ICS member
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 11:01 pm
- Location: K9A4
Re: Horn AD
- tomburke1
- ICS member
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 2:30 pm
- Location: Fort Lauderdale fl
Re: Horn AD
it is very frustrating for the FAA to issues SB without OEM support, that I am sure we can all agree on!
Chief- ICS member
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 11:01 pm
- Location: K9A4
Re: Horn AD
An example was, as I remember, the AD on the Lycoming bolt that secured something in the accessory case. If you had a Superior part or an ECI part in your engine it was not applicable.
- tomburke1
- ICS member
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 2:30 pm
- Location: Fort Lauderdale fl
Re: Horn AD
I sent an email to the FAA to clarify their position on all this. Here is what they said in regards to this statement on their Airworthiness Concern Sheet on the front page of this website (NIAR Survey). Here is what it says......."Piper has issued SB 1189 to replace and /or repetitively inspect the horns on all single (PA-24) and twin (PA-30, PA-39) Comanches. Stabilator torque tubes must be replaced when a new Piper horn is installed."
It clearly states a new horn on a new tube.
Here is what the FAA said in summary today after I contacted them,
The SB says that the balance arm must be replaced. It does not currently state the torque tube must be replaced. However, after a fit check of the SB, Piper is aware that practically the torque tube will also have to be replaced. It would also make economic sense because of the common steps involved in the inspections and replacements for both.
Piper was working on some SB revisions (1189 on the horn and 1160 on the torque tube) and re-kitting of parts. The FAA rep. just wanted to put that info out there even though it's not currently in the SBs.
Hope that clarifies to some degree
By the way, Dave Fitzgerald and Hans are very involved with the FAA on this, so we should all be thankful for their hard work!!!
Let's hope the Aussie Horn is FAA-approved or Piper starts making some Torque Tubes and Horns, quickly!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Chief- ICS member
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 11:01 pm
- Location: K9A4
Re: Horn AD
Everyone is actually working together on this, Piper reluctantly has relented some of its hard line positions on changing the SB (with the proding of the FAA). Don't go jumping off a bridge just yet. This will probably be the most sensible AD in history when it comes out, due to the amount of attention it has drawn from multiple groups. Parts will be available, but doing anything now as far as speculating what will be the final wording, what applies/doesn't apply, compliance and AMOC, would be irresponsible at best. Lets all be thankful that this is an understood phenominon, and not something that is going to get an overly "enthusiastic" shotgun approach to fixing it.
-Zach
Zach Grant L1011jock- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
- Location: Indianapolis KEYE
Re: Horn AD
I'll be optimistics and wait to see how this all works in regards to this latest curve ball. A curve ball that seems to be be brought on by improper maintenance more than true stress and flight fatigue.
I'll tell you this, I am extremely proud of ICS, its solidarity, leadership and depth of pilots, such as yourself that fight to keep our Comanches' flying.
A big thank you!!!! Keep it up!!
Chief- ICS member
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 11:01 pm
- Location: K9A4
Re: Horn AD
Hint: It has to do with the word, Piper.
Enough suspense,,,
It says IF a new PIPER horn is installed the STABILATOR TUBE MUST BE REPLACED. Well, if you have an approved substitute part such as the "Aussie Horn", (which is supposed to be approved fairly soon), then the SB and the future AD does not apply to your aircraft. The Aussie Horn replacement instructions do not have the replacemet of the stabilor tube in it's instructions.
In response to yor statements aout part availability, as a 26 year and over 3000 hours of flight time Comanche owner I find it hard to agree with you. I have not really had many problems acquiring the parts I have needed to keep my plane flying. Many of the parts you quote as being hard to find are around. You just have to put some work into finding them. Throwing your hands up and crying that there are no new gear transmisions around, doesn't help. networking with other owners, calling around to parts yards, looking on Barnstormers.com, etc, are things that get you the parts you need. In the past year I have seen at least 2 advertisements for Hoof Valves on Barnstormer.com. I have seen at least 6 gear transmissions there as well. I purchased a Hoof Valve there for $200.00, and a Dura Transmission that has a yellow tag from a renowned Comanche shop with it for $800.00. Even EBAY has some parts for Comanche. A year or so ago, a Hoof valve sold there for $186.00 as removed.
And, yes I agree with your statement that alot of the problems come from lack of or improper maintenance. If you are saying that the Stabilator Horn problem is caused by this, there I have to disagree. Improper assembly at the factory is the likely problem there.
And , I agree totally and emphaticaly with your statements regarding the Comanche Society. I have yet had a request for help that someone didn't answer me with a solution, or at worst a direction to travel to find a solution.
- tomburke1
- ICS member
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 2:30 pm
- Location: Fort Lauderdale fl
Re: Horn AD
Mind you, this whole story took almost 3 days to actually play out! Maybe it is just me being extra tuned into the Comanche series, but I have NEVER worked so hard to get any Comanche back into the air! I think we actually have benefitted by not being totally reliant on Piper for replacement parts. We as owners and members of the ICS have found multiple new supply chains whenever needed, and we will continue to do so as the need arrises. We may not like the price, or the lead time, but as Tom said, once something is sourced, networking with ICS and other owners will get the word out, good or bad.
Zach
Zach Grant L1011jock- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
- Location: Indianapolis KEYE
Re: Horn AD
As to speculating what the AD is going to say, you are doing just that, speculating. As far as talking about the current SB wording, yes, that is how it is worded, and simply, it makes sense as the holes were match drilled, and when replacing the horn, need to be match drilled again. I really don't know how you do that without replacing both if you expect to keep the slop out as intended. Using close tolerance bolts only works when you have close tolerance holes! Call me a pessimist, but, as I applaud the gents from down under for coming up with a solution, I am not convinced it will be without problems, especially in the area of installation with regard to the imperfect and often out of stated tolerance existing Piper parts. In the big airplanes, there is a whole group of engineers in what is called the "interchangeability" department, whose entire lot in life is to figure out what parts will fit what aircraft based on known and sometimes unknown manufacturing or modification differences. Being that so far we have found many different differences between the same airplanes, as they were rolled out of the factory, I am afraid that just replacing the horn, especially with one of a different design no matter how good it is, could lead to further yet unknown issues. The devil you know, is certainly preferable to the devil you don't...
Zach
Zach Grant L1011jock- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
- Location: Indianapolis KEYE
Re: Horn AD
I have talked to Dave Fitzgerald a few times regarding this matter and he seems to be of the opinion that the approval of the Aussie horn by the FAA is imminent. From what I have beeen told , by international agreement , any approval by the Australian authority will be approved by the American FAA.
- tomburke1
- ICS member
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 2:30 pm
- Location: Fort Lauderdale fl
Re: Horn AD
You are making an assumption that the AD will be based on the SB. At this point that has yet to be determined. ADs may or may not mirror a SB. Just because Piper says to do something in a SB, that may or may not be adopted by an FAA AD in whole or in part. An AD may be more restrictive, less restrictive, or may not be issues at all for a given manufacturers SB. You are correct that the Aussie horn approval is apparently immanent, but that still does not address my concerns that it's use may supply it's own set of future problems, as people will be trying to install it on old torque tubes, and attaching old balance arms. That is simply the issues of installation, long term effects from imperfect installation, or imperfect interchangeability with existing parts may cause other issues. As for the Piper parts, they have a 54 year track record, and a singular known mode of failure. All sides of the possible ramifications of any mod must be examined and weighed. Making any decision without all of the available information is not the smartest move in my opinion. What the FAA is going to mandate is certainly a wildcard, and not one that I am willing to make a decision without knowing.
Zach
Zach Grant L1011jock- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
- Location: Indianapolis KEYE
Re: Horn AD
I think your last statement is a bit premature, but I hope you are correct. I believe a new assembly from Piper will be just as permanent a fix, but that is also speculation, and I like the idea that there is less disassembly/assembly required with the Piper kits as to allow for less field induced errors and variables. Remember, the Aussie horn will be nothing but a horn, you supply all the other parts, serviceable or not...and if the AD reads that the assembly must be changed, then all the parts of the assembly must be changed, not just the horn (which you are correct will not be a Piper part number, but I think you see where it could go). I am not betting for or against anyone, but like I said, I will reserve my decision as to the compliance with an AD until I see the AD. The alternative is assuming something not in evidence, and you know what assumptions do...
Zach
Zach Grant L1011jock- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
- Location: Indianapolis KEYE
Re: Horn AD
I could definitely learn from your experience. 26 years and 3000 hours is quite an accomplishment in any one plane. It sounds like you have figured out how to keep our Comanches flying. If you don't mind, you'll be the first person I email when I need a part.
On a side note, If you read my email, my frustration is with Piper and the FAA, not ICS, or you, or Webco, or Comanche Gear or any other great supporter of our planes. And although you don't know me, let me assure you, I'll never "throw up my hands and cry", about an airplane or its parts, especially when you have such great support from ICS and many others. I would simply love to see the FAA and Piper do more to require support of our fleet. No more, no less. Strong support from Piper insures the future, keeps value high and keeps our planes safe and predictable for sellers and buyers.
I think Zach is right, it is premature and unwise to speculate, but I'll throw in my unsolicited opinion. If all this turns into an AD, I bet the FAA will take care of two SBs (1160/1189) with one AD. The parts are so dependent on each other and they work together in keeping the plane flying. Not addressing both would be kind of like getting new tires without an alignment. You can do it, but is it the best use of time and money.
I appreciate you and all the others. Thanks
By the way, do you know where I can find a new Torque Tube? I need one.
Chief- ICS member
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 11:01 pm
- Location: K9A4
Re: Horn AD
Kristin Winter- ICS member
- Posts: 1299
- Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:21 pm
- Location: Northern California
Re: Horn AD
No disrespect intended WRT the Aussie Horn Program. My concerns are with what the final AD rule will require. As for your horn being a solution to the absolutely abhorrent requirements of the the Piper SB, it is the best solution, however, when the FAA publishes the final AD rule, that will become the governing document, and at this point it is possible that it will not look anything like the Piper SB. That is why I am expressing a tone of caution. There are many pitfalls possible in the language of an AD, either intended or unintended. Once such would be if the rule read that ASSEMBLY XYZ had to be changed for new. Certainly your horn would not be covered, but the assembly contains all of the other parts that would be, thus causing a possibly extended period of grounding while fighting for an AMOC. There are many other situations that could cause unwanted rework, or expensive down time, but until we know what the final rule says, it is all speculation. I have no doubt as to the quality of your kit, but I do wish to reserve my recommondation of a course of action until all the facts are known, and compliance with the AD is assured by whatever process it stipulates. I hope for all of our sakes that the final rule does not cause any additional financial or material impact for those that have taken action or plan to before the final rule is published, but immagine the consternation if there was a recommondation that ended up making people do something twice...I hope you understand.
Regards,
Zach
Zach Grant L1011jock- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
- Location: Indianapolis KEYE
Re: Horn AD
Confusion reigns.
dap8@comcast.net
- David Pyle
- ICS member
- Posts: 372
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2003 10:33 pm
- Location: Houston
Re: Horn AD
I understand the relevance of a SB. However everyone believes that SB 1189 will be an AD.
So in your opinion, and as a Comanche seller, how much would you discount the price of an airplane w/o SB compliance anticipating the AD?
dap8@comcast.net
- David Pyle
- ICS member
- Posts: 372
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2003 10:33 pm
- Location: Houston
Re: Horn AD
I understand the relevance of a SB. However everyone believes that SB 1189 will be an AD.
So in your opinion, and as a Comanche seller, how much would you discount the price of an airplane w/o SB compliance anticipating the issuance of an AD?
First let me say, that In a sale anything and everything is negotiable.
From what I am seeing the price to comply with the SB is still kind of undecided. I have chosen to buy the Aussie Horn and go that route. I think that the cost of the installation will be about $2000.00 in round figures.
The other way is to use Piper parts and I am told that they are not available right now. So, it would be difficult to put a price on that means of compliance at this time.
To answer your question, as best I can, I feel that if the seller feels that he has priced his aircraft with the non compliance of the SB taken into consideration already, I would think he would be reluctant to discount it further. If his price is not adjusted for the non compliance I would think the $2000.00 estimate to alleviate the SB by using the Aussie Horn would be a good point to start. The decision as to the acceptance of that method would be one that the buyer would have to make.
- tomburke1
- ICS member
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 2:30 pm
- Location: Fort Lauderdale fl
Re: Horn AD
Zach
Zach Grant L1011jock- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
- Location: Indianapolis KEYE
Re: Horn AD
I will tell you SB 1189 will never become an AD, the FAA has stated that unequivocally. There will probably be an AD related to the horn cracking, but it will certainly not reflect what the Piper SB says in it's present form. I really don't know how to say that any clearer!!! Everybody does NOT think SB 1189 will be an AD, including those folks in the FAA that write the ADs.
Zach
Zach Grant L1011jock- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
- Location: Indianapolis KEYE
Re: Horn AD
AD's do impact the sale of a plane as do engine overhauls, condition of paint, interior, avionics, etc. Try and buy a Cessna 401 with out of time engines and a wing spar AD that has not been done. You can buy a $250,000 plane for $80,000. But that is just simple business. The seller suffers, the buyer benefits. The engines you may replace, they paint you can do or not do, same with avionics and interior, but the wing spar AD, you have to replace. No question!
All that said, and here is the bottom line, if you bought our Comanches new today, based on their performance and operating envelope, they would cost $400,000+. And remember, a new plane owner has to absorb not only the cost of a new plane but all AD's that follow. The best plane to own and fly is one that has been in operation for years. The AD's have been discovered and absorbed. There are no squawk free planes. AD's are a part of keeping planes safe. The key to all this, in my opinion is OEM support. And OEM does not mean just Piper, it could be any "Original Equipment Manufacturer" of any part on a Comanche. Webco makes a great teflon-coated landing gear conduit. They are the current OEM of that product. We need Webco to stay healthy. We need Lycoming to stay healthy. We need Piper to stay healthy. AD's should reflect and roll up under that philosophy in how they are addressed from the FAA and the product supplier. Approved parts for required fixes!
That is my take. Enforcement of all this an annual inspection and a sign-off on a logbook, all of which is required. The FAA enforces, we comply. Liability hangs in the balance. As long as you spend less than $400,000, consider yourself fortunate to have such a great plane for such a bargain.
Chief- ICS member
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 11:01 pm
- Location: K9A4
Re: Horn AD
I would say that a new Comanche today would sell for more then that. I think $550,000 or there abouts would be more accurate.
- tomburke1
- ICS member
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 2:30 pm
- Location: Fort Lauderdale fl
- tomburke1
- ICS member
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 2:30 pm
- Location: Fort Lauderdale fl