Quote:
Originally Posted by RPJ  I am going to be renting a Seneca II turbo to build some multi-time. About six months ago the aircraft landed hard and the nose gear collapsed. The left engine's prop struck the ground and dug in about six inches. The left engine was inspected using a specialized device (x-ray I believe?) to look for fatigue cracks or damage. The inspection identified no abnormalities so a complete engine overhaul was not required by law. An I.A. signed off on it and the plane was returned to service about a month ago.
Is this plane generally still safe to fly even though a rebuild was not technically required or performed? Is the left engine much more susceptible to failure after that prop strike even though there was no fatigue found? I just want some info from JC'ers on what I am getting myself into. |
I will have to double check, but IIRC any time a prop strike stops the engine (as this one did) a engine tear down inspection is REQUIRED before it can be flown again.
As an expert in Non Destructive Testing, I know that you can't take a simple X-ray of the engine and determine if there are cracks or weak points. Usually after the engine is in peices, all critical parts are either diped in luquied penatrant, The crank and the camshaft are inspected by magnaflux.
This is basicly the exact same process that rebuilt engines go through. If they all passed, I would have no problem flying it.