Another look at the failed C-140 wing skin

[beaky]

I have one more photo of the damage and thought all you amateur investigators might like to see it... shows more of the forward edge of the area in question.



I see here that not only was the piece not lapped over the leading edge all the way to the bottom, it  was laid on top of the piece covering the cap in such a way that the airflow could easily "pick" at it if the tape or glue started to let go! This can't be right, although I guess if one redid the cap section so that it came back over the top and overlapped the big panel, that would be better.

I think at the moment that the bottom line here is that the gluing was just not done correctly for cold-weather ops. This plane lives in an unheated hangar, BTW.

[a1]

So do you know what exactly caused this while you were flying? If you answered this question already then sorry as I didn't read the last post(too long for my likeing). Will your insurence rates go up or soemthing?

[beaky]

So do you know what exactly caused this while you were flying?

No, but we strongly suspect this little guy:

If you answered this question already then sorry as I didn't read the last post(too long for my likeing). Will your insurence rates go up or soemthing? :o

It better not; I haven't thought of that yet, but it shouldn't. I have a non-owner's policy which covers me for damage to anything except the plane (including people), and I signed on liability for damage to the plane due to any error of mine.
So in effect, the airplane is not insured itself, much like any basic auto policy that protects other people and property, but not the vehicle itself.
It's done this way because it's just so expensive to insure an old kite like this to cover repairs or replacement - many owners  don't bother with hull insurance, and schools have the right to drop that in the renter's lap; I find that reasonable.

I did not discuss this with the owners after this (not yet); I doubt they will come after me to pay for the plane because I was not at the controls when the damage apparently occurred... their instructor was.

Also, it looks like it was a faulty repair, so if they come after either of us they are in for a fight.  >:(

I've had little things happen with rentals that were my fault, and there was never any beef with the owners, so I'm not too worried about something that definitely was NOT my fault.

[Hagar]

I have one more photo of the damage and thought all you amateur investigators might like to see it... shows more of the forward edge of the area in question.

I think that just about confirms my suspicions.

[Brett_Henderson]

I'll chime in on the insurance stuff. I've researched this stuff to a silly degree (and made a valuable friend/ally in th form of a renowned, aviation attorney).

Hull insurance on older planes is tricky, and prohibitively expensive. Since most hull coverage for "newer" planes in rental service have deductibles in the $2500 - $5000 range; doubling that in aircraft-damage coverage, is a good idea for a non-owner. $10,000 worth of aircraft damage insurance is less than $200/year (cheap peace of mind). I put a 172 wingtip into a hangar (pretty minor damage) and the repair was almost $2500 !

[beaky]

Some good news: I just spoke with Bob, and he's assured me that the owners, although they didn't waive my rental fee, are not looking to dig in my pockets to repair this... in fact, there are some facts I did not know until I spoke again with him:

The wings were redone in '98, but the tops were redone again for some reason in '01.
Stitching is supposed to be used, and the owner had assumed that was done, and no clips.
They are mortified that it was not done, and very PO'd at whoever did this repair.

It's common for schools and FBOs to not be able to scrutinize all work done on their fleet, I guess... certain assumptions are made when a qualified IA signs a repaired or restored plane for flight.
It's easy to say "I would never, etc.", but they're busy and also not responsible for signing off on the work.

But I'll wager they will be more cautious in future- in fact, I've heard they've grounded their Cub until they get to the bottom of this. Word around the airport is that this husband&wife team are a formidable pair... I almost feel sorry for whoever botched this repair.
But not much.

I've been assured they won't take advantage of me (and my gut feeling is that they won't), and I've been told they will let me know all facts as they come in, but I am going to see about getting a  copy of the signed  rental agreement just in case, because although I read it, I only remember the gist of it.
Money does strange things to people, especially in the very rough business of running a flight school and FBO.

As for lessons learned on my part:

1) fly the SOB to the ground, no matter what. Stop thinking and just fly with whatever you have left, and be conservative.

2)never ever ever fly an old ragwing you don't know unless you very carefully look at all seams, etc., even when you are going up with someone who knows it well and is not apparently worried about anything.

3) always find a way to take the time to peruse the service logs to at least get an idea of what's been done recently.


4) always get a copy of anything you sign at a flight school or FBO.

[C]

Any idea in what manner it came off? Did it peel backwards or did it effectively lift straight up?

[Hagar]

Some good news: I just spoke with Bob, and he's assured me that the owners, although they didn't waive my rental fee, are not looking to dig in my pockets to repair this... in fact, there are some facts I did not know until I spoke again with him:

I don't see how anyone could hold you responsible for what happened. In fact you probably have good grounds for suing them. I'm no lawyer but there is no reason you would need to know the past history of the aircraft before flying it. If an aircraft is offered for hire you have every right to expect it to be in a safe & airworthy condition. The responsibility in this case rests with the flight school & the repair organisation that carried out the defective work. This incident should be reported to the FAA (if it has not already been) & all aircraft having similar work done by the organisation should be grounded until a thorough inspection has been carried out by a licenced engineer. I hope the flight school owners learn something from this.

As for lessons learned on my part:

1) fly the SOB to the ground, no matter what. Stop thinking and just fly with whatever you have left, and be conservative.

2)never ever ever fly an old ragwing you don't know unless you very carefully look at all seams, etc., even when you are going up with someone who knows it well and is not apparently worried about anything.

3) always find a way to take the time to peruse the service logs to at least get an idea of what's been done recently.

Very difficult to know what you would do in a given situation until it happens. Knowing the sort of person you are I have no doubt that you would have landed that kite safely by instinct & without thinking about it. It might have been different if it had been a low-wing type where you could see the actual damage from the cockpit.

Please don't let this put you off "ragwings". I suspect this is an isolated incident & unlkely to happen again to anyone. I've seen a lot of things over the years that would make you cringe but I would have no hesitation in flying in one tomorrow. If you thought about everything that is likely to happen you would never fly again. It's perfectly understandable if your confidence has been shaken but my best advice would be to go up again at the earliest opportunity.

If that wing repair had been bodged it would be very difficult for an experienced engineer to spot, let alone a pilot from a cursory pre-flight inspection. There must be some trust between you & the owner of the aircraft. You cannot expect to take an aircraft apart every time you wish to fly it.

[beaky]

Re: Hagar's last post here...

I've sent the school an email assuring them I have no intention of going after them, following my gut feeling and what I've heard about them.
But I did ask for a copy of the rental agreement, just in case.
Their response will tell the tale, I guess.
If they wanted to be total pricks, they might argue that regardless of who did what, I signed that waiver, so I'm "it".

I hope we all stay friends- I've found that although there are plenty of scumbags in the flying business, most people in the business will do the right thing, even when great sums of money are concerned.
And a friend in that world, someone who knows you trust and respect them, is so valuable I can't even begin to explain it to a non-pilot.

I've also noticed that airport-bum scuttlebutt is usually accurate, and these folks have a good reputation there and are highly respected from what I've heard so far.

The shop that did this work, however, owes me an apology, along with everyone else who's climbed into the plane since they last worked on it.
I'm not a vindictive guy, but as you say, action must be taken to prevent it from happening again- the next pilots and/or  pax may not be so lucky.
I'm starting to worry about other planes that have come out of that shop... not a pleasant thought.   :-/

One more thing:
I'm not put off ragwings at all by this, and it's not just because I'm basically a flying fool.

Improper maintenance is improper maintenance- an airliner or combat-hardened aircraft can be brought down by a component you can hold in your hand if it was the wrong part or installed wrong.

Fate is the hunter, and all that.

Not leery of flying in general, either... although I was a little spooked getting aboard an A320 the next day... man, those flaps wiggle like crazy when they're deployed!!

The second leg was in a good ol' tanklike DC-9... helped ease me out of my discomfort.

But I must get back in the saddle ASAP- Bob has invited me to fly in his 120 if I get out there next month, and either way I'm planning to get back up in that J3 at Andover very soon.

[Hagar]

But I must get back in the saddle ASAP- Bob has invited me to fly in his 120 if I get out there next month, and either way I'm planning to get back up in that J3 at Andover very soon.

Glad to hear it. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

[pepper_airborne]

You could always get a AFF license and always keep one of those pilot shutes with you when flying

[beaky]

You could always get a AFF license and always keep one of those pilot shutes with you when flying

Not much use in that situation... even on the ground it's a job extricating oneself from a 140... with a structural problem at 2000 AGL it'd never work. We'd be dead before we got both legs out.
Nothing to do but try to keep it flying.

I'm just glad we were close to the field, and didn't have to make the hard decision to put it down off-airport (although northern Illinois is wonderfully flat and open for the most part).

[DaveSims]

Here is the link to the NTSB report on your incident rotty.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_i ... 0291&key=1

[beaky]

Here is the link to the NTSB report on your incident rotty.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_i ... 0291&key=1

Wow, that was quick... thanks for the link.

Here's another detective job for you: look for local news headlines about some farmer finding mysterious silvery fabric that fell from the sky...

[Willit Run]

Here is the link to the NTSB report on your incident rotty.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_i ... 0291&key=1

Wow, that was quick... thanks for the link.

Here's another detective job for you: look for local news headlines about some farmer finding mysterious silvery fabric that fell from the sky...

Farmer's quote: " It was Aliens!!!  I shot at them and part of their flying saucer came off.  I was abducted fours years ago and I ain't let'em get me this time!! "  :D