My brain will never ever remember that new GFA phone number - that 3797411 is there for life- John and others in GFA office will get a lot less calls from me so they will get less interruptions ....................... old McPhee
2008/6/24 STO Airworthiness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hello Nige, > > This was a good call with a successful outcome which may well have saved > a catastrophic failure & it just goes to show that, in our game you > must stick to your principles even though the decision may be unpopular. > As Mike Valentine used to say " In Aviation, It's a damn sight better to > be down here wishing you were up there, than to be up there wishing you > were down here!!" > > Dog members please note that the GFA office will be moving this Thursday > 26th June. > > New address is:- > Level 1 / 34 Somerton Road > Somerton > Vic 3062 > Phone:- (03)9303 7805 > Fax:- (03)9303 7960 > Web: www.gfa.org.au > > > Regards, > JGV. > Please note my new e-mail address as of 23 Feb 2007: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ------------------------------------------------------ > The Gliding Federation of Australia Inc. > invites you to visit the web site www.gfa.org.au > newcomers to gliding and soaring are invited to visit www.soaring.com.au > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------------------------------- > This email transmission may contain confidential or privileged > information > that is intended only for the individual or entity named in the email > address. > If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any > disclosure, > copying, distribution or reliance upon the contents of this email is > strictly > prohibited > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nigel Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, 20 June 2008 5:47 PM > To: DOGS > Cc: Tom Gilbert; Russell White; Redmond Quinn; Michael Shirley; Mark > Morgan; Keith Gateley; Hudson, John; graham marsh; Wrigley, Gavin; Colin > Turner; Catherine Conway; Baylee Roberts; ANDREW WRIGHT; Ivor Paech; > Harry Bache > Subject: [DOG mailing list] Crankshaft Damage from prop strike. > > > > > G'day DOGers > I have cc'd this mail to other operators who may be interested in this > result. > > Attached photo's of damage to the blade of a HOV 62 160 prop fitted to > an L2000 in a > G109 . > This is assumed to be from a stone. > The owners asked for an opionion from me. I have not seen the Blade > damage in person only seen the Photo's. > The damge to the leading edge is I thought severe for a stone chip. It > seems strange to have such a large bit of damage so far up from the > tip. I have trouble understanding how something that big would be > picked up by prop wash that high. > The damage to the leading edge is quite deep. > I have not seen the blade as I said, and Air Props have deemed the > damage too bad for them to touch so it went back to Hoffmann. Thus all > I have is the photo's and while my immediate reaction is that a strike > like this on one blade only does not constitute full stress reversal at > the crankshaft journal and likely low stress values anyway therefore > unlikley to have done any engine damage, I was reluctant to express > more than a general opinion not being directly involved. > I was asked to put the question to Limbach. > I sent the images to Limbach thinking I was likely to get a negative > defensive response and that is exactly what I got. > They are of course hiding behind their service bulletin 11.4 which I > have also attached. > Their reaction to the images was "please comply with SB 11.4". > > I felt that there was little choice but to bulk strip. JohnViney agreed > so that was our isntruction to the owners. > > The insurance assessor asked the owners to check with the manufacturer > re Bulk Strip and that is exactly what we have done. > The engine in this aircraft only had 48 hour since overhaul. We did an > NDT check on the Crankshaft and Con Rods at that stage and all was well. > > The engine was removed after I quoted the Spares and someone else quoted > also including labour and the insurer gave the go ahead. > > Well I have to eat my words. I really didn't imagine we were doing > anything than arse covering due to the SB. How wrong was I. I knew there > was an oustide chance but thought pretty slim of any damage but there is > always the unkown and in this case it was just what had caused the prop > damage. > The answere came back today on the NDT of the crankshaft. > There is a crack in the centre main journal. > Take this as wake up call guys. Just cause the damage doesn't look too > bad and there is no evidence of flange runout don't assume it wil be ok. > I have had some people state there is no need to bulf strip when a > timber prop is used. Well that's bollicks. There is plenty of evidence > to the contrary around but this instance takes me a bit by surprise. > I certainly will take a more conservative veiw the next time this comes > up. > Cheers. > Nige. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > You are subscribed to the Dimona Owners Group mailing list. > To unsubscribe, send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
