0
baronn

182 engine failures

Recommended Posts

I'm new to the DZ owner game but, I've been around for a few years and somehow still here. I've missed dying in plane crashes 4 times so far. Suppose to be on the plane and for different odd reasons didn't. 1 king air an otter and 2 182's. I decided when I got in this position, I'd either do it right or not do it.

I did an almost total rebuild on a '59 182. STOL, extensions and a hopped up 520. I hired an A&P, I/A to help me build the motor. These engines are state of the art 1920"s technology. Easily the simplest engine I've ever worked on. Because they are so simple, they are very dependable even if everything isn't perfect. That's why they keep running.

However, as I found out, this creates a sense of complacency on both the owner/pilot and unfortunately mechanics. He wanted to reuse almost every accessory from the old motor. I refused on some, relented on others. Yeah, the fuckin prices were a big influence. Because my guy didn't run the SB's or AD's until just before I was gonna put it back into service, I didn't know about the starter drive issue. The FAA has an AD on this. As these wear out, the starter shaft inside the crankcase starts to wiggle in the cage roller bearing. Eventually this puts enuff of a side load on it to grenade the bearing. The shrapnel falls into the pan and gets picked up into the oiling system. If it doesn't destroy the pump it will destroy the main bearings and the motor will not be running in 30-90 seconds. Scary shit.

He had serviced the outside bearing at the starter and said that took care of it. It didn't. I got the weird electric feeling in my back again and so. in the middle of my season, I put the plane down and decided to change it. 1300 and 2 weeks later, I had it in. Thank God I did. The AD only talks about the starter drive. I changed the bearing also. It's a 10 part. but, a bit tricky to get out. Make sure it gets done. Mine was so worn the shaft wiggled about a 1/16" of an inch. 1 of the rollers were missing. I dropped the pan and couldn't find it. This wuda been a half hr job with the motor on the stand. took 2 days in the plane. I addressed a few other things he missed also. I feel MUCH safer now.

Couple lessons here. #1 choose yer mechanic carefully. He tells ya you can use auto parts and reuse components, keep looking. #2 do your own research and know yer bird. These fuckin airplanes have always scared me more than the jumps and with good reason. The planes are very dependable but, unforgiving if things get missed. Any straight tail is near 60 yrs old. Gear and motors take the most abuse. A lot of times logbooks don't reflect every part of the history. Don't rely on them. learn to poke yer nose under the cowl and do it regularly.

Knowing what I now know, it's amazing these incidents don't happen more often. However, we have seen WAY too many engine failures in the last few years. No doubt the FAA is seeing this also. we need to do better. During my last ramp check with a couple of their reps, They informed me they are more into informing than enforcing and they definitely acted that way. They're actions backed these words. Hopefully this helps prevent any future incidents in the future.

edited for readability

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
USPA’s response to the NTSB report regarding jump ship incidents;

Quote

All fair questions, Derek. Here are the responses:

1. How does this affect non-USPA Group Member drop zones?
USPA can’t compel participation by non-GM DZs, but they may want to use the guidance to ensure they comply with the regs.

2. What happens if the drop zone does not return the Aircraft Status Form?
Renewal of the Group Membership requires completed, returned forms.

3. If the drop zone does return the form, will it be verified for accuracy?
USPA will ensure that the form is accurately completed, e.g. that a Twin Otter operator doesn’t indicate that it is on annual/100-hour inspections, that an operator lists the FSDO its program has been filed with, that all “last” and “next” inspection blocks are completed, and the certifying IA or repair station is listed.

4. If yes, how?
USPA isn’t the FAA; we won’t be conducting surprise inspections or demanding logbooks. Though, as the result of a recent NTSB recommendations, the FAA might.

5. What will be done with the information on the Aircraft Status Form?
We’ll note that the DZ provided the information for the aircraft they list.

6. Will USPA maintain a database that USPA Members can check to see what a drop zone is reporting?
No. But a skydiver has always had the right to ask a DZO about their maintenance.

7. Will a drop zone’s Group Membership not be renewed or revoked for failure to submit or falsifying the Aircraft Status Form?
Completed forms are required for Group Membership. USPA’s by-laws already allow for sanctions on any member who intentionally falsifies a USPA form.

8. If there is a lawsuit resulting from a jump plane incident, will the Aircraft Status Forms be made available to either party involved in the lawsuit?
The form will be discarded after being received and checked for accuracy.

9. If the last addition to the Group Member Pledge, separating landing areas by either distance or time was a dismal failure with many DZ’s failing to separate landing areas, how will this be any different?
We don’t agree that BSR has failed. Many DZs have chosen to separate landings by time, if not distance. Canopy collision fatalities are not only down in number, they are substantially down as a percentage of all fatalities; they were 30% of the total in 2007, 13% of the total in 2008, and so far are 8% of the total in 2009.

The program may not be perfect, but it will clarify what the regulations require and it will urge the operators to make sure they comply. And it will accomplish this without heavy-handed government action.

Ed Scott



Derek V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, I shared my experience to let others know about the mistakes I had made on my build. I'm not a writer and I wasn't looking for a lesson. Well aware of the USPA's guidelines. IMO they aren't enuff. If you have something positive to add to the thread, please do. If yer only comment is to criticize my (lack) of writing expertise, save the electrons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please take this as a compliment. You are providing pertinent information that should be read by as many people as possible. Personally, when I see a 'wall of text', I don't bother reading it.
If your post were not informative, nobody would have complained about the format - they would have just ignored it and expected everyone else to do the same.
For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
baronn

OK, I shared my experience to let others know about the mistakes I had made on my build. I'm not a writer and I wasn't looking for a lesson. Well aware of the USPA's guidelines. IMO they aren't enuff. If you have something positive to add to the thread, please do. If yer only comment is to criticize my (lack) of writing expertise, save the electrons



POSITIVITY! Thank you for posting something WORTHY! And to the others, Biting one's tongue is a tough choice. Choose to be better. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
timski

***OK, I shared my experience to let others know about the mistakes I had made on my build. I'm not a writer and I wasn't looking for a lesson. Well aware of the USPA's guidelines. IMO they aren't enuff. If you have something positive to add to the thread, please do. If yer only comment is to criticize my (lack) of writing expertise, save the electrons



POSITIVITY! Thank you for posting something WORTHY! And to the others, Biting one's tongue is a tough choice. Choose to be better. ;)

While I agree with your comments, Divermike has it right. If someone is reading these posts on a small screen device or phone. Long paragraphs are a nightmare to comprehend.

Back to the thread. Yes direct drive AC engines be it Continental or Lycoming. Are very reliable. Not as much as a turbine. But thats another discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every NTSB skydiving related accident back to 1995.

https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/Results.aspx?queryId=92898a77-0845-4454-8de3-d92819573b8b

Lots of 182s, lots of self induced accidents.
Replying to: Re: Stall On Jump Run Emergency Procedure? by billvon

If the plane is unrecoverable then exiting is a very very good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DBCOOPER

Every NTSB skydiving related accident back to 1995.

https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/Results.aspx?queryId=92898a77-0845-4454-8de3-d92819573b8b

Lots of 182s, lots of self induced accidents.



"The latest AOPA Air Safety Foundation Safety Highlights, now available, analyzes the safety record of the Cessna 182 Skylane in relation to a comparison group of six similar aircraft. The 20-page report finds the aircraft type both safe and popular...

The accident record of Cessna's medium-size single in instrument weather conditions was better than the comparison aircraft group, with only 6.3 Skylane accidents per 100,000 hours flown in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) while the comparison group suffered a rate of 7.7 accidents per 100,000 similar hours...

The Skylane was selected for the safety analysis because of its popularity. Some 13,000 Skylanes are registered with the FAA, more than any other model of four-place single-engine aircraft except the Cessna 172 Skyhawk"
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2008/october/03/asf-safety-review-finds-cessna-skylane-safe-popular

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
baronn

They informed me they are more into informing than enforcing and they definitely acted that way. They're actions backed these words. Hopefully this helps prevent any future incidents in the future.

\

You're kidding right? "inform not enforce" translates to "I can do whatever I want because I wont get in trouble for it anyway". Imagine if the police only 'informed' citizens about the laws they broke and not actually enforced any of them. The FAA needs to step in the other direction and start handing out larger fines, revoking pilot licenses, and grounding aircraft permanently. What do you think would motivate a DZO more to do maintenance, threat that the FAA will come over to them and 'inform' them about the FARs they broke, or threat that the FAA will fine them six figures and ground their entire fleet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westerly

***They informed me they are more into informing than enforcing and they definitely acted that way. They're actions backed these words. Hopefully this helps prevent any future incidents in the future.

\

You're kidding right? "inform not enforce" translates to "I can do whatever I want because I wont get in trouble for it anyway". Imagine if the police only 'informed' citizens about the laws they broke and not actually enforced any of them. The FAA needs to step in the other direction and start handing out larger fines, revoking pilot licenses, and grounding aircraft permanently. What do you think would motivate a DZO more to do maintenance, threat that the FAA will come over to them and 'inform' them about the FARs they broke, or threat that the FAA will fine them six figures and ground their entire fleet?

I don't think you really understand the meaning of "inform" rather than "enforce", as it pertains to how the FAA operates.

There are plenty of sanctions for those who wilfully ignore the rules who then have incidents and accidents.

Its advising operators how to comply, especially when new operational procedures are introduced, rather than waving a big stick at a pile of rubble AFTER an accident has occurred.
My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westerly

***They informed me they are more into informing than enforcing and they definitely acted that way. They're actions backed these words. Hopefully this helps prevent any future incidents in the future.

\

You're kidding right? "inform not enforce" translates to "I can do whatever I want because I wont get in trouble for it anyway". Imagine if the police only 'informed' citizens about the laws they broke and not actually enforced any of them. The FAA needs to step in the other direction and start handing out larger fines, revoking pilot licenses, and grounding aircraft permanently. What do you think would motivate a DZO more to do maintenance, threat that the FAA will come over to them and 'inform' them about the FARs they broke, or threat that the FAA will fine them six figures and ground their entire fleet?

Are you really having this much trouble, or maybe I should say lack of trust, at your DZ? Was it an incident or something else that made you feel like you aren't safe when you skydive where you do? Have you talked to anyone else at your DZ to see if there isn't a way to address it locally?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westerly

***They informed me they are more into informing than enforcing and they definitely acted that way. They're actions backed these words. Hopefully this helps prevent any future incidents in the future.

\

You're kidding right? "inform not enforce" translates to "I can do whatever I want because I wont get in trouble for it anyway". Imagine if the police only 'informed' citizens about the laws they broke and not actually enforced any of them. The FAA needs to step in the other direction and start handing out larger fines, revoking pilot licenses, and grounding aircraft permanently. What do you think would motivate a DZO more to do maintenance, threat that the FAA will come over to them and 'inform' them about the FARs they broke, or threat that the FAA will fine them six figures and ground their entire fleet?

Hey, Mr I know everything about everything, when was the last time you were ramp checked? Do you have any idea what is involved? Of course you do because you know everything about everything. ( Don't delete me yet Bill). Besides the paperwork they usually check seat belt labels and a do walk around. So if you have your ticket, medical,air worthiness, registration weight and balance and owners manual its as far as they can go. So if the owners manual(operating manual in newer planes) is missing they won't make an enforcement action they will tell you you need it and not shut you down. The new kinder FAA

Now if you an asshole, or the fed is a dick, or there are obvious deficiencies in the plane they can call you in with a request for log books. At that point they are no longer the new kinder FAA. So get yourself an airplane,start flying jumpers and join the fun.
Replying to: Re: Stall On Jump Run Emergency Procedure? by billvon

If the plane is unrecoverable then exiting is a very very good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

What do you think would motivate a DZO more to do maintenance, threat that the FAA will come over to them and 'inform' them about the FARs they broke, or threat that the FAA will fine them six figures and ground their entire fleet?



What do you think would motivate a DZO to do more maintenance?

1) The FAA coming over and informing them of the FAR's they broke, and that they would come back if it's not fixed, fine them six figures and ground their fleet, or

2) The FAA coming over, noting they broke some FAR's, fining them six figures and grounding their fleet?

If you were a DZO, which one would ensure you were out there the next day getting your fleet up to spec?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Imagine if the police only 'informed' citizens about the laws they broke and not actually enforced any of them.



Have you ever been pulled over and given just a warning? Probably not if you give them the kind of attitude you're giving here. An FAA inspector could find something wrong with any given aircraft. There are no exceptions. Remember that next time you board any aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob_Church

******They informed me they are more into informing than enforcing and they definitely acted that way. They're actions backed these words. Hopefully this helps prevent any future incidents in the future.

\

You're kidding right? "inform not enforce" translates to "I can do whatever I want because I wont get in trouble for it anyway". Imagine if the police only 'informed' citizens about the laws they broke and not actually enforced any of them. The FAA needs to step in the other direction and start handing out larger fines, revoking pilot licenses, and grounding aircraft permanently. What do you think would motivate a DZO more to do maintenance, threat that the FAA will come over to them and 'inform' them about the FARs they broke, or threat that the FAA will fine them six figures and ground their entire fleet?

Are you really having this much trouble, or maybe I should say lack of trust, at your DZ? Was it an incident or something else that made you feel like you aren't safe when you skydive where you do? Have you talked to anyone else at your DZ to see if there isn't a way to address it locally?

I dont have any major concerns at my DZ. However, I have jumped at places which are sketch city and even more mainstream DZs still usually do at least one thing unsafe. I am not going to name names because it simply doesent matter at this point. But I once stood by a girl at a very prominent DZ, one which I am very confident you've heard of, and overheard her instructor give her a WS course. It was her first time flying a WS, she only had 200 jumps and had never jumped a WS. Her instructor gave her maybe 10 minutes of ground instruction, 5 of which was spent getting her into the suit, and then she was on the same load as me. So basically five minutes of instruction and that was her entire first flight course for her first jump... And she had the absolute bare minimal jumps required for a WS jump.

You can decide whether you think that is unsafe or not, but I would say it's a pattern of negligence and I see stuff like that at many DZs all over the place. If it's not shitty instruction at one DZ, it's lack of checking rigs when a new jumper comes to visit at another, or maybe a complete disregard to exit order at some other DZ, or maybe failure to ground students when the winds are honking at 20 - 25 knots... Those are all examples I've seen, and I have plenty more. So when I see stuff like that, stuff in which I KNOW that any experienced jumper knows is wrong, I dont have much of a mentality for 'educate, not punish'. Education is for people that made an understandable mistake. Punishments are for those who do know better and chose to break the rules anyway because they dont give a shit.

I am not saying all DZs break the rules. Some are fantastic, but not all are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westerly



*********They informed me they are more into informing than enforcing and they definitely acted that way. They're actions backed these words. Hopefully this helps prevent any future incidents in the future.

\

You're kidding right? "inform not enforce" translates to "I can do whatever I want because I wont get in trouble for it anyway". Imagine if the police only 'informed' citizens about the laws they broke and not actually enforced any of them. The FAA needs to step in the other direction and start handing out larger fines, revoking pilot licenses, and grounding aircraft permanently. What do you think would motivate a DZO more to do maintenance, threat that the FAA will come over to them and 'inform' them about the FARs they broke, or threat that the FAA will fine them six figures and ground their entire fleet?

Are you really having this much trouble, or maybe I should say lack of trust, at your DZ? Was it an incident or something else that made you feel like you aren't safe when you skydive where you do? Have you talked to anyone else at your DZ to see if there isn't a way to address it locally?

I dont have any major concerns at my DZ. However, I have jumped at places which are sketch city and even more mainstream DZs still usually do at least one thing unsafe. I am not going to name names because it simply doesent matter at this point. But I once stood by a girl at a very prominent DZ, one which I am very confident you've heard of, and overheard her instructor give her a WS course. It was her first time flying a WS, she only had 200 jumps and had never jumped a WS. Her instructor gave her maybe 10 minutes of ground instruction, 5 of which was spent getting her into the suit, and then she was on the same load as me. So basically five minutes of instruction and that was her entire first flight course for her first jump... And she had the absolute bare minimal jumps required for a WS jump.

You can decide whether you think that is unsafe or not, but I would say it's a pattern of negligence and I see stuff like that at many DZs all over the place. If it's not shitty instruction at one DZ, it's lack of checking rigs when a new jumper comes to visit at another, or maybe a complete disregard to exit order at some other DZ, or maybe failure to ground students when the winds are honking at 20 - 25 knots... Those are all examples I've seen, and I have plenty more. So when I see stuff like that, stuff in which I KNOW that any experienced jumper knows is wrong, I dont have much of a mentality for 'educate, not punish'. Education is for people that made an understandable mistake. Punishments are for those who do know better and chose to break the rules anyway because they dont give a shit.

I am not saying all DZs break the rules. Some are fantastic, but not all are.

I thought this was about FAA and airplane maintenance. You've sidestepped the discussion nicely.
My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally IMHO we need less regulation not more. I applaud the original poster for going through the aircraft with an eye toward safety. 182's in aviation are aging, 182's in skydiving are old AND bruised.
Having said that inviting more regulation? For a sport already on a tight shoestring I would worry about asking for more regulation. Besides most accidents by a long shot are pilot error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
headcase

Personally IMHO we need less regulation not more. I applaud the original poster for going through the aircraft with an eye toward safety. 182's in aviation are aging, 182's in skydiving are old AND bruised.
Having said that inviting more regulation? For a sport already on a tight shoestring I would worry about asking for more regulation. Besides most accidents by a long shot are pilot error.



I've always seen USPA as a central body that represents skydivers. They mostly defend us against those people who see skydivers as an unnecessary problem. There are occasions where they need to act on something but the idea of actually wanting to set up a group that oversees us, I think, says more about the person wanting it than USPA or skydiving.
Some people can't imagine a body of people without someone being in charge and enforcing rules. It's like when we were kids and we'd start a club and the first thing we'd do is set up rules and the punishments for breaking them. Most of us grow out of that. But not all.
Personally, I'd rather be skydiving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's free!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0