By CHRIS COLLINS
You’ve found a really cheap IA who is going to complete the annual inspection on your Cessna 172 for about $600 cash. You think it’s a great deal!
He will point out a few things you might need and some ADs that are due. Then he will kick the tires, pull on the wings, and in three days you will be flying again.
You have a fresh annual and “Joe Inspector” has new money in his pocket.
This scenario plays out in thousands of small aircraft shops throughout the country every year.
While some aircraft owners frequent this type of service, it is a very dangerous way to maintain your aircraft. That’s right, I said AIRCRAFT!
Your pride and joy, the thing you dreamed about having as a kid! Hell, you begged your wife to take out a 40-year loan for it, and this is how you are going treat it?
First things first, I am in no way condoning people who choose to conduct business this way or the customers who choose to maintain their aircraft in this manner.
The real question here is why? Why would you want to cut corners? Is it just to save a few bucks? I don’t believe this is a good enough answer.
The next time you’re heading to the ramp to go on a weekend trip with your wife or grandkids, look at them and ask yourself, “What if something happened in flight that was a direct cause of slacked maintenance?”
We all know that accidents happen, but wouldn’t you want to be absolutely sure that you did everything you could to prevent it?
Who is responsible for the damages when your aircraft loses control and skids into a building, destroying personal property — or worse, killing someone?
The truth is the real cost of that cheap annual can’t be counted.
Let’s be clear: There are some great IAs out there who do good maintenance at a fair price, but there are some who cut corners.
Do yourself a favor and find a reliable and reasonable repair station. Most repair stations will be higher in price initially, but if they continue to service your aircraft each year, they will get a baseline for what needs to be repaired and what can wait.
Repair stations are very thorough with regards to inspections and you can feel at ease knowing that your aircraft is receiving top level maintenance.
Thank you all for reminding me why general aviation is dying – it’s slowly committing suicide. The bitterness and vitriol from both sides here is utterly disheartening. It’s been five years since I let my IA lapse, and sadly, I have to say it’s been one of the best decisions I’ve ever made. Sigh ……..
Wow! There seems to be a lot of heated discussion here, so I will take this opportunity to turn up the heat so to speak. As an A&P with an Inspection Authorization endorsement, that has owned and operated his own facility since 1992, I must say that I have had plenty of experience with both the cheap owner/operator and the stupid A&P/IA’s that have been maintaining the fleet. When it comes to lowering operational costs of the aircraft, the maintenance is ALWAYS the first to get cut. It makes no difference whether it’s the GA Guy and his J3, or the Big Boys with their 747’s and A340’s. I have worked on so many “unairworthy” aircraft that were still in annual, it’s not even funny. Each time, the story is the same. The owner is cheap, and finds a ” mechanic just like himself. He pays $600 or whatever for the three day annual, and goes off on his merry way, patting himself on the back because he only spent $600. The A&P that did the work doesn’t have much, just a box of mis-matched tools, and a pick-up bed to work out of. But both are happy. Until the mechanic can no longer be found at that airport, so the owner is now forced to find another, hopefully cheap-like minded mechanic or shop. Now here’s the rub. After years of these $600 annuals, I get the airplane and perform the annual inspection and compile a laundry list of discrepancies. For example; the magneto 500 hour inspection has NEVER been performed. The aircraft total time including engine, is 1,135 hrs. The fuel and oil hoses have now turned to a hard plastic be cause they are the original units installed in 1986. The oleo struts have NEVER been rebuilt. The brake discs are below minimums, the alternator that was rep[laced three years ago, is a Chrysler automotive unit for a i971 Valiant, and is not an approved or even an aircraft part. I can go on, but once I’m finished with this list, to get the airplane to a point where I can sign it off and return it to service, the costs is now over $10,000.00. This happens all of the time, and quite frankly, I’m embarrassed by the lack of quality or attention or whatever this phenomenon is. It really doesn’t matter that this particular A&P has been mainlining this particular aircraft for the last fourteen years, I have seen big name shops that you pilot’s consider to be “The Gurus” miss or completely ignore simple tasks. Are they not using the checklist as required by CFR 14, FAR 43? I have opened inspection panels that have not seen the light of day since the aircraft was painted eight years ago. Enough on the lazy mechanics, airplane owners, not all, but most of them are the cheapest bunch of people I have ever come across, (I ran a Porsche/VW shop in my previous life). I have no problem being frugal, but it’s the ones that can’t afford to own it in the first place, certainly cannot afford to maintain it. When it comes to maintaining your airplane, I spend your money like it’s my own. I won’t waste it, but if it needs it, well it’s going to get it. I have to meet published minimum standards and cannot legally settle for anything less. It’s your ass and the asses of your family members strapped in the airplane, why would you want to cheap out on the maintenance? A well maintained aircraft is safe aircraft. You can pay me now, or you can really pay me later.
The average cost for annual maintenance on the example 172, provided that it’s just routine maintenance and you don’t have to comply with a crankshaft AD, should be less than $2,000.00 each year. That is of course, it has been maintain well, and isn’t another POS.
A note on owner assisted annuals. You won’t save any money with me. In fact, you’ll probably pay more because I have to check everything you do. I essentially have become your certified babysitter. I have allowed these types of annuals in the past, and have found sheet metal screws forced into wing inspection panel nutplates that are a machine thread, and vice-versa by these self proclaimed “knowledgeable” owners. As far as supplying your own parts, it’s like taking your own eggs and bacon to your favorite restaurant and asking them to “cook these up for me”. For a shop to provide the level or service required to maintain aircraft, we rely on every revenue stream available, including the small mrk-up on the parts. I say small, because we’re lucky to get 30% mark from “list” prices for airplane parts, opposed to 75% to 250% for auto parts. So when you bring me your own parts, our minimum gross profit margin is now below what we need to keep our doors open, and we will eventually have to close our doors because you cheap owners don’t understand as much about aviation as you think. Sometimes, we have to really trim our services to make up for the lost revenue.You’ve now also increased your operational costs, because now you’ll have to fly of the field to have your maintenance done. Basic business balance prevents you from getting real good quality service at areal cheap price. Our shop rate is in between the industry average, yet our shop rate is less than the motorcycle/snowmobile shop in town. We’re less than the Ford dealer in town. We’re less than the RV dealer in town. We’re $5.00 more than the lawn mower/chainsaw dealer in town. Yet we have higher expenses in overhead, new tool costs, regulatory library costs, administrative costs, and lets not forget insurance costs. If you owners can’t find it in yourselves to support your local shop, then we will eventually disappear from your airport.
As an owner, you are allowed to perform certain tasks on the aircraft. I suggest that you purchase the $300.00 worth of manuals for your aircraft. obtain a copy of the FAR’s especially parts 43, 65, & 91 and get to know your airplane. But, leave the maintenance to the professionals. If you can find any.
Have flown for 44 years.
Have owned 4 aircraft since 1976
First annual inspection was done at a so called professional shop on a simple Piper Cherokee 140.
Result? Plane down for a week, a $3,800.00 bill and my only complaint was to replace a burned battery lead.
The shop replaced items that did not need replacement and were perfectly airworthy and legal.AD affected items that would have passed inspection were replaced with new unnecessarily. They didn’t want to give me the replaced parts because they knew I would have them professionally inspected elsewhere. Well, I demanded the parts and did just that and the parts were deemed to be safe and in compliance.
Guess what? On pickup day and after all that, the burned battery lead was never replaced and it took them over an hour to find the airframe logbook that had been misplaced “somewhere around here”. I screamed like hell reminding them that they tried to sell me new replacement parts that were not needed and threatened to expose them, so they knocked off a substantial amount of their inflated fee. Had I been a sucker, I would have been ripped off.
Guess what else? Since that time I have had IA’s who have taught me a lot in performing my own legal maintenance and owner assisted annuals. The end result is that not one of my four airplanes ever had a problem and were in excellent condition. So I had no problems with no shops and when it came time to sell, pre buy inspections showed no defects or omissions.
Unlike you, the professionals I work with call my involvement educational—NOT babysitting.
They welcome this scenario—and so does the FAA. An educated pilot whether it be in flying scenario or maintenance is a safer more responsible pilot.
Don’t get me wrong,I personally would never use an IA that just wrote paper annuals, but by the same token, for you to suggest that your shop or any other shop is the only way to go because you provide, more safety, thoroughness and compliance is B.S. Are you going to sit there and have us believe that since you opened your doors in 1992 that you have NEVER made a mistake or accidentally omitted something?
Tell that to a friend of mine who used an expensive shop for his Mooney’s annual ($5,200.00) and afterward had to make an emergency landing in the desert because the pressure oil hose that was replaced by this shop was replaced with a hose not designed to withstand oil pressure. The oil hose failed during the first flight after release from the shop and oil loss and starvation created catastrophic engine failure resulting in a windshield covered with oil. Fortunately the owner was lucky and put it down safely. It took 3 weeks to have the plane retrieved out of the desert and trailered back to civilization for repairs.
Proclaim your perfection to another friend who wanted a simple tire change on his T6. Not one mechanic in the well known expensive shop knew had to do this and had to call the owner in for guidance. Seriously? For a tire change? Admittedly, the T6 is not your every day airplane and exotic, but they did not even attempt to seek T6 maintenance manuals for tire replacement info. So the owner provided the guidance and then the shop presented him with an astronomical invoice to boot.
You say, “Leave the maintenance to the professionals”—I agree. But for you to suggest that shops are the ONLY professionals with a flawless track record is wrong and obviously just a scare tactic to keep your doors open. A shop employs human beings and human beings make mistakes—shop or no shop. So don’t try to imply that shops are perfect. They just charge more for equal or less service than an honest and highly professional independent mechanic.
The fact is, there are excellent A &Ps and IAs out there who perform services better than some shops and at least equal to others. These same professional independents willingly train conscientious owners to assist and as a result promote knowledge to the owners—all at a FAIR price.
Discourage owner assistance that you call “babysitting”? Why? Trying to hide something? Like running the hourly money clock on an airplane that has been sitting in the shop with NOTHING being done to it for hours? You may very well run an honest shop, but you must admit that you know of other shops who are not as honest as you. I KNOW. It has happened to me. When a shop didn’t know that I was keeping track and looking, I was. This is why they sheepishly knocked off dollars on the bill after realizing that I was secretly “babysitting” THEM by snooping around unnoticed.
So no thanks. No more overpriced shops for me. My airplanes are safe, FAA legal, and in top condition with complete log book entries an all achieved at a reasonable price. I am a knowledgeable owner in that I know my airplane from spinner to tail cone. I am also conscientious in that I would never compromise safety to save a buck nor attempt to do work that is beyond my capability and knowledge. But I WILL save a buck wherever and whenever I can and not be suckered into believing that paying high price shop rates guarantees safety, completeness and perfection.
You get what you pay for? Not always. I challenge you to walk in to any car showroom and just blindly lay down whatever dollars they are asking for on the price of that new car. After all, you should realize that their overhead expenses are as high or higher than YOUR shop’s, so you should keep that in mind and not try to challenge them on the purchase price—correct? Or do we have a double standard here?
Pay you now or pay you later? Answer–Never.
P.S, I also maintain my own Ford and RV with an independent mechanic.
AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! from an independent A&P/IA
Mr. D’Anna, you obviously missed the many points that I made regarding independent A&P/IA’s and those “Big” shops like the one that over charged you for the annual on your 140. Simply put, it takes more time to “baby sit” you, which is money, (time=money). I lose control over the quality of the maintenance and the efficiency of our process if I have someone that is not tuned into the process as I am. Plus the fact that our insurance won’t allow for you to be in the shop area “participating” in the repair of your aircraft.
I’m not sure how your annual ended up as it did, but with that story you made one of my points for me. Every shop or independent A&P/IA has their own pricing structure. Some of it is spelled out, other times it’s not. We have a flat rate for every aircraft that exists, (almost), and have invested in the proper manuals for each and every make and model that we work on. We have to by federal law, (the FAR’s). If we don’t have the manuals for a particular aircraft, we have to obtain them. Any shop that wishes to stay in business and retain return customers must operate and conduct their business fairly. With that said, for every aircraft that comes through the door, the owner/operator is given the price for the annual inspection, lube and service. This includes all of the points on our own seven page Airframe checklist, four page Engine checklist, and the manufacturers checklist if one exists. Plus, A.D. research and compliance. For your Piper PA-28-140 that will cost you $1,450.00. Once we perform the inspection, we come up with a list of discrepancies listing both airworthy and non-airworthy items and the cost to remedy each item. You unfortunately don’t have much of a choice when it comes to the airworthy items if you wish to fly the aircraft legally. If you wish not to have the airworthy items rectified, then we will make the appropriate logbook entry stating that we had “inspected the aircraft, was found to be in a unairworthy condition, and a list of discrepancies as given to the owner/operator”. You then can take the aircraft to another shop/person that may be willing to compromise the published minimum standards. If the shops that you had dealt with in the past did not proceed in this manner, then you obviously are setting yourself up for a run-away invoice. I see this all of the time.
We recently performed an annual inspection and extensive repairs on an Piper Aerostar that the previous year the owner spent over $24,000,00 on “repairs” at the Aerostar “gurus”. They did do some fairly extensive repairs to the aircraft, but also ruined the lower spar cap by not consulting the maintenance manual, or the current type certificate holder on how to perform the needed repairs correctly. They may have performed an annul inspection, but I can attest that it was NOT very thorough, as there were several inspection panels that had not been removed since the aircraft was painted back in 2006. Nor did they perform any servicing. Both propellers were basically dry of grease, and there was clear evidence of no lubrication ever being applied per the maintenance manual in certain areas. Probably because these areas are difficult to access. I won’t mention that that all of the fluid carrying hoses were dated 3Q79 or 1Q80. It’s DOM is 1981. Again, the maintenance manual states when these hoses are to be replaced. This is the published standard thing that I’m referring to. There are many other “standards” that are published that cover almost everything on your airplane.
The shop that you referenced, you said that they didn’t want to give you the old parts for the reason that they were possibly still good, takes us back to those published standards. Now granted, some items are to be evaluated and determined it’s condition by the opinion of the person(s) responsible for the repair. But, there are published standards to be conferred with. Not knowing what those “parts” were, it’s hard to render something faulty without some sort of documentation to substantiate your reason for removal. We always give the removed components back to the owner. Most times, he’ll just throw them away in our trash cans.
As I tried to point out in my original post, just because those big shops have a panted floor, (we do), and a huge parts department, (we have that too), doesn’t mean that they know what they are doing, and are conscientious in their work. All it means is that they, the CRS or individual A&P or A&P/IA, passed a test. Which, for airman is 70% or better.
The other point that you seemed to have missed is that no matter where you take your airplane, whether it be a small shop, a big shop, a huge FBO, or “Bennie” working out of back of his pick-up, you run the risk of getting screwed or finding that “jewel” maintenance provider. This scenario exists in everything. That part you bought for you boat, the oil change you had done on your car, everything.
You can bad mouth me and my business all you want, but I’ve been doing this maintenance thing professionally a long time, and have been flying since I was nine years old, so your 44 years of flying is not that impressive to me. Sorry.
You shouldn’t judge “all” shops or A&P/IA’s based on your past experiences.
Wow, how many hours did it take you to solo when you were nine.(Pulling you leg)
Chuck,
I didn’t “bad mouth” you and your business. I referenced SOME not ALL shops and even said that YOU and YOUR SHOP may be very honest but not all shops are.
So there should be no reason for you to be so defensive and as a result, misquote people.
We Do share something in common however—you’re not impressed with me and I’m not impressed with you.
Mr. D’Anna, I apologize if I hurt your feelings.
But, I didn’t whine when you said “but by the same token, for you to suggest that your shop or any other shop is the only way to go because you provide, more safety, thoroughness and compliance is B.S. Are you going to sit there and have us believe that since you opened your doors in 1992 that you have NEVER made a mistake or accidentally omitted something?”.
Just so we’re clear and I didn’t mis-quote you, these are your words. If you feel that my defensiveness over statements like this one is unwarranted, then again I’m sorry for hurting your feelings.
Which by the way, I have never made a mistake. There is no room for error in this business. I have broken or destroyed parts of some one else’s property, (airplane parts), but have repaired or replaced it before it left the shop, on my dime I might add. I don’t let time constraints, money, (or lack thereof), or owner badgering, influence or interfere with my process or safety. If you haven’t already surmised, I am from German descent, and anything less than perfection is unacceptable. My own morals and values won’t allow mediocrity. There have been many times an aircraft has left here that I’m not satisfied with, but again it meets minimum standards. It sounds like you’re O.K. with minimum standard levels. That’s just fine. There is nothing wrong with that. I just can’t do it.
Finally, the apparent arrogance in you’re last line speaks volumes as to your overall perspective regarding aviation maintenance. It truly has solidified the old saying “it’s us against them”.
Again, I apologize for hurting your feelings.
I find it entertaining when you come to the conclusion that you “hurt my feelings”. Please don’t flatter yourself. You couldn’t hurt my feelings if you tried and stating that you did so is very presumptuous and a bit arrogant in and of itself.
You say “It’s sounds like you’re ok with minimum standard levels”
I never said that and as a matter of fact I said that my plane meets or exceeds all levels of service and is in perfect condition. I settle for nothing less.
All I was attempting to say in this whole thing is that there are independent mechanics who are just as professional, efficient and demanding as some of the best shops. Period. Never once did I state that YOUR shop is sub standard and I congratulate you for settling for nothing less than excellence. I simply stated that some of my bad experiences and friends’ bad experiences were a result of employing SOME bad shops. It was never inferred that ALL shops are bad.
In a nutshell:
1) There are excellent shops and there are mediocre shops
2) There are excellent independent mechanics and there are mediocre independent mechanics.
It is up to the owner to seek and employ the best in these categories and to make the choice without sacrificing excellent standards.
Additionally, owner assisted maintenance under the watchful eye of a GOOD mechanic or shop is not only legal per the FAA, but encouraged by AOPA, EAA, The Aviation Consumer publication and other professional aviation organizations. While this posture may impose competition with shops, it should not automatically be interpreted as a threat to shops nor owner acceptance of low standards. It is simply an avenue to achieve excellent results and knowledge while saving dollars.
For you to have concluded that my employment and preference for good independent mechanics along with owner participation to be an “it’s us against them” (your words) situation is simply an unfortunate misinterpretation on your part.
I wish you and your shop well.
I used to manage maintenance on five C-182s for CAP and my own single engine Cessna. I had shops dictate what we had to do for them to ‘sign off the annual/100 hr’ and held planes hostage unless we permitted what they said. Then I met Mike Busch, and shops became a lot more careful how they made their demands.
Mike Busch is a writer, lecturer, pilot and AP. He teaches free online courses on defensive maintenance through EAA, Avweb, Cessna pilot association and savvy aviator http://www.savvyaviator.com/. He also manages maintenance and counsels those trapped by shops that hold planes hostage. He has some really interesting stories and solutions. If you haven’t heard of him or been through his courses I strongly urge owners google his name and read his articles. It would benefit renters too.
Some random thoughts:
You are the owner in command. Read FAR43 and act like it. It’s very straight forward.
An annual/100 hr is just an inspection. FAR43 does say to inspect the oil filter/screen, so either I let them change oil and filter or I give them the last cut and inspected filter. Compression checks are generally a tradition that tell us little more than pulling the prop thru by hand. I also dislike mechanics messing with spark plugs because pre-ignition events frequently follow spark plug cleaning.
Ask to see the shop’s borescope. If they don’t have one they can’t comply with the Continental motors cylinder inspection if a valve is leaking. Many wing it, but just so ya know. Tiny inspection cameras that display and record on a smart phone or ipad are cheap. I have my own.
If you are passive about maintenance you will pay a premium: Tossing the keys to the FBO desk and telling them to call when it is done is a recipe for disaster.
As a minimum, tell them to do the inspection and fix nothing. A signed agreement is a lifesaver here. Then you and the shop foreman should go over the list of discrepancies and either decline, defer or authorize repairs. The worse that can happen is they sign off an annual with discrepancies with a list of discrepancies given to owner. That’s it! If they refuse to do it that way find another shop.
Do maintenance when it arises. Deferring it to annual/100 hr makes sense in some cases, but usually not.
Avionics: Let APs do what they are willing to do. For example: Any AP can install IFR certified WAAS GPS if there is a pre-existing STC and the install manual includes a flight check procedure. Most of the cost is labor to run antenna coax. Why pay avionics shops to remove and replace interiors @ $120/hour. For that matter, owners can do it. Owners with basic electrical and mechanical skills can also do it all under AP supervision.
MIF: Maintenance induces failures. MIFs are an excellent reason to do the minimum necessary to comply with FAR43 for annual/100 hr inspections. The more you fix the more you’ll break. I’ve had shops that do static/transponder/altimeter correlation and verification checks screw up radio and autopilot wiring that persisted for months and cost thousands to diagnose and fix.
TBO is an obsolete concept. Airlines and military went to ‘on condition’ maintenance 50 years ago. GA should learn from them. As long as an item can be inspected without disassembly, that is sufficient. Except for the Bendix two-in-one ‘D’ mags. They are non-redundant black boxes that cost as much to inspect as to repair. Vacuum pumps are another, where infant mortality is more prevalent than old age. Redundance it the solution.
Never ever ask for an overhaul. Of anything. Ever. IRAN – ‘Inspect and repair as necessary’ should be your operative word. It allows negotiable flexibility. ‘Overhaul’ is very specific to return something to new condition and many serviceable parts go in the trash. No negotiation.
It seems many confuse maintenance with inspection. They are not the same thing. Let’s be clear: The annual/100 hr is just to ensure the plane meets it’s type design. It’s marginally connected to safety and has to do with compliance that is largely opinion based.
The seat rails in our C-182s were cash cows and shops were turning out planes with new rails and seats that still jammed or released on takeoff. The problem never was the rails, it was the seat rollers that were flat spotted or jammed and would slide and latch with nobody in the seat, but not roll on the rails with someone in the seat. They seemed locked for takeoff, but weren’t. This was an absurd situation. Every one of our shops were unaware of the roller inspection requirement.
Nor was the FSDO. That was because the inspection procedure was separate from the FAA boiler plate. Issued in the late 70s via mail or fax, everyone got the boiler plate, nobody had the diagrams, pass/fail criteria and procedure. I got a complete set from CPA and distributed them to the shops. I had a lot to do with the seat inspection AD rewrite to ensure the importants stuff was included.
I was also involved with the Lycoming oil pump AD that appeared to require replacement of oil pumps on all Lycomings. But there were many exceptions. Nobody knew them. I and a few others got the word out, saving owners thousands.
If I hadn’t been involved, I wouldn’t have had a clue.
The annual inspection is to confirm that the aircraft meets its type certificate or PROPERLY ALTERED CONDITION AND IS IN A CONDITION FOR SAFE OPERATION. That’s all it is.
One word, Experimental. know your plane from spinner to tail. Seek help when you have questions. Listen to those with knowledge/experience, then get your hands dirty and do your own work. Too bad the U.S. Does not have a program similar to Canada where an owner can do his own work, assuming he/she is competent. No reason an owner should not be able to sign off their own annual for a non complex aircraft that’s certified.
I completely agree. Most owners of the single engine airplanes covered by Canada’s regulation know more about them than the present day FAA Inspectors and most mechanics also. Of course, the FAA won’t allow them to operate in the U.S., otherwise, don’t dare cross the border with that ‘unsafe’ airplane.
What you are espousing is a double edge sword.
I am a mechanic with over 40 years building high performance marine outboards and I/O’s.
You would not believe the stuff that comes through my shop. Some downright dangerous. In addition I have inspected raceboats where the owner, mechanic and even other inspectors didn’t catch safety flaws that could have cost the driver his life.
I have no problem with owner assisted annuals or an owner doing all of his own repairs, as long as he gets a proper inspection and sign off from an IA. After all they have seen and are looking for some things we never would think of. They have the proper tools for inspection as well.
In my case I do 100% of my own work. However I work under my A&P IA. We discuss what I want to do. We go over how I will accomplish it and what materials I will use. He then supervises my work as I am doing it and then a final inspection and sign off. Basically the same as if I was working as an employee. He is there every step of the way.
Yes it does cost a few dollars, but it is an economical alternative to just turning it over to a shop. In addition I learn more each time and I know my skills and limits. I also know my aircraft, which is very important to me.
I would never just hop into an aircraft I wasn’t sure of the quality of the maintenance. There are some experimental aircraft I would ride in any day, some I would politely decline if offered a ride, depends on the owner, repair person.
I have seen shops who charge ridiculously high rates but at the same time miss critical items during an annual inspection. Things like spark plug leads not being threaded on to the spark plugs, oil dipsticks missing, magnetos that were timed better BEFORE the inspection, propellers not dressed, dirty air filters not replaced, pressure line hoses replaced with hoses that are not specked for pressure and airworthiness directives that are not addressed and or recorded. So, sorry Collins, for you to say, “Repair stations are very thorough with regards to inspections and you can feel at ease knowing that your aircraft is receiving top level maintenance” is a sense of false security on your part. I have experienced and have been made aware of some horror stories of so called high priced shops with great reputations that have signed off airplanes with defects and errors. Some airplanes have even been involved in accidents due to failure on the shop’s part So big money doesn’t guarantee safety and efficiency nor does a fancy shop environment. Result? Find a good IA or shop that will let you the owner participate in the annual inspection and everyday maintenance. Once you build a good trusting relationship, the IA or shop will feel comfortable in permitting you to assist in performing the maintenance both at annual time and as needed throughout the year. My annuals ARE reasonable because I took the time and effort to learn my airplane, and got training from my IA who as a result trusts my effort, inspects and signs off my work. He knows that I know my limitations and will not do anything I am not comfortable with. As a result, my airplane is always in top shape, my annual rates are cheap, and I know everything about my airplane from spinner to tail cone. The reality is, high priced shops are run by human beings who can make mistakes—sometimes deadly ones. So no thanks. No shops for me. Buy some tools, get some good training from a good IA, get your hands dirty, and your plane will be safe and legal at a very reasonable price and give you TRUE piece of mind.
Nate, I absolutely agree with everything in your post. You are an owner who participates, anticipates, and would have parts lined up in advance. This is the right approach.
However, just a heads up on dressing props. Hartzell and McCauley show, in their data sheets on their websites, that they require that props be painted with Polane, from Sherwin Williams, a two step paint that is difficult to spray and requires an airless sprayer (not the HVLP sprayers that shops have). The Krylon sprays from Lowes and Home Depot are not approved. If an IA dresses your prop (as he is supposed to) then he must use the prescribed paint that is laid out in the data sheet.
I raised this at an FAA seminar and I was told:
a) IAs work for the FAA. The customer pays our bill, but that we work for the FAA (IAs are designees).
b) prop shops should do the paint. They have the equipment and that’s what they are there for.
That’s the FAA speaking, so please don’t shoot the messenger.
PB,
That’s what I love about forums such as this one.
Here I have been flying 44 years, have owned 4 aircraft and never knew about the information you provided about prop dressing and painting.
Thanks for that. It just shows that when a pilot/owner thinks he is aware of most things regarding aviation and maintenance, a fellow pilot comes up with something totally new, valid and important.
It’s all about helping each other!!
Thanks again.
The manufacturers publish the data sheet for your make and model of propeller on their websites, and the data sheet will specify what paint is required.
On topic, Hartzell allows only three of its props to be polished – all others must be painted with the prescribed protective finish. There is a Twin Comanche at my airport which has polished props and I won’t work on it – the mechanic that does is actually an FAA Inspector, and he was telling me that he got into a heated argument with another inspector who accused him of annualling a plane that had polished props that were not approved as such. I just smiled since I had read the data sheets and I knew.
All the information is available – all owners need to do is look for it.
Actually McCauley in their owners handbook says;
McCauley strongly recommends that all blades be painted. Paint and primer protect blades from corrosion. McCauley recommends Sherwin-Williams products, but any industry equivalent is acceptable. The following procedure is recommended, but any procedure achieving similar results is acceptable.
There is nowhere published that polished props are unairworthy. Nor is there any requirement to paint a prop, only a “chemical conversion film coat” to protect from corrosion.
A manufacturers recommendation is not required.
I’m not going to debate it. But I suggest that you look at the Hartzell and McCauley data sheets.
If you don’t want to debate something then don’t post it as absolute fact.
I have trusted two A&P mechanics who have “tag teamed ” my airplane for years. I have taken digital pictures all over the plane a week before the annual as the camera doesn’t lie and do a”digital ” inspection first. By blowing up images you see things that you normally overlook and send these to my guy’s. They give their opinion, I order the parts beforehand, and they know what they have to replace, and schedule the time. This let’s me have an idea of time costs and gets the airplane in and out faster, they have a digital record of what they did, and a way to monitor trouble spots for more problems later. This makes ongoing “maintenance ” cheaper and keeps unneeded, overpriced, or shoddy “repairs ” limited to human errors. We don’t do anything without evidence or data and because of this I trust them and they trust me.
Bob
I have flown many aircraft from a B24 down to a vw powered single place. Have owned at least 10 aircraft or had a interest in them with other owners. I have always done and said annual your aircraft every time you fly it to the extent possible without disassembly. More damage is done in poor disassembly than any other act. Look, listen to your plane before you fly. I have never had a annual in which I did not give the mechanic a list of things which were marginal or had failed. Some AD’s or new regulations being the exception. The most dangerous time to fly a aircraft is right after a annual. I’ve seen quite a few in both military , civil and home built.
Some of these comments refer to excessive charging by IAs – but if the owner is derelict in his ‘engagement’ in the maintenance of his aircraft, does he expect the IA to wipe his ass and repair the deficient items?
I’d love to be able to do an inspection for a few hundred dollars – but I see many planes which are pencil whipped, where owners don’t ‘engage’ in the maintenance of their enterprise (aka plane ownership) and when the IA comes along and finds major ADs that haven’t been done (signed off, but not done) then what is he supposed to do?
I can refuse to sign the AD, or I can sign it ‘subject to’, or sign it with recommendations if I can cure the deficiencies and make the plane airworthy. The posters here are going to be unhappy since they just don’t seem to understand the seriousness of their enterprise. Besides that, the liability against the IA is huge – if an IA signs an annual and the aircraft crashes, even with pilot error, the IA gets sued.
The best advice that I can offer is that owners get deeply involved in the operation and maintenance of their aircraft and then hire an IA to inspect, not have to overcome the consequence of a year of use and lack of maintenance.
Lastly, the comment by an avionics shop owner at KSNA rings in my ears when he said “We feel no obligation to subsidize peoples’ hobby”. Most owners do fly as a hobby, and while some progress to higher skill levels, most don’t. Many are excellent pilots yet they don’t even change their oil, preferring to hire people to do that, yet ignoring the bigger items.
“Lastly, the comment by an avionics shop owner at KSNA rings in my ears when he said “We feel no obligation to subsidize peoples’ hobby”. Most owners do fly as a hobby, and while some progress to higher skill levels, most don’t. Many are excellent pilots yet they don’t even change their oil, preferring to hire people to do that, yet ignoring the bigger items.”
Not sure what you are saying here.
I have no problem with one not wanting to change their own oil. That’s what A&P’s are there for and charge for.
I wouldn’t ask an A&P to subsidize my hobby, but then again why or how I fly is my business and I should be treated the same as anyone else. Where the problem lies is many times the shop, particularly avionics shops, since you brought them up, that charge many, many times more than their hourly labor charge to do the job. They charge 2, 3 4 or more times the going rate, because they can. They have a mini- monopoly on the installation and hold the sign off over the aircraft owners head.
Hey I see it in the auto and marine industries too. Heck lawyers are the worst!
Many states got rid of vehicle inspections for many of the same abuses we see in the aviation sector.
“…I am in no way condoning people who choose to conduct business this way or the customers who choose to maintain their aircraft in this manner.”
Condoning?? Perhaps you meant condemning?
This person clearly has no idea what he is saying.
If you keep your aircraft maintained “in accordance with its type design”, it doesn’t matter who does it. The annual inspection checklist is the same regardless who inspects the plane, the airworthiness limitations are the same, regardless who inspects the plane.
If anyone tries to tell you that one is better than the other, they clearly don’t know what they are talking about. The quality of the inspection lies with the integrity of both the owner and the mechanic, period. I have seen excellent work from both, and poor work from both.
It is only a perception that the quality of work from one entity is better than the other, not a fact. I am an A&P and owned and operated a repair station. The repair station certificate did not let us convey any additional value or safety to the owner over an IA . It did raise the cost of our shop labor, as it took one person almost full time just to keep up with regulatory requirements (i.e. paperwork) for the repair station.
The repair station does serve a purpose. It allows non certified persons to perform aircraft or component maintenance based on their demonstrated experience. Of course, once they have a CRS certificate, they are now “certified”, but only certified for which they are rated, which can be very limited, or quite broad, depending on the rating.
Some repair stations only hire A&P mechanics, some train individuals to perform certain tasks it just depends on what they are doing.
Conversely, just because a person has an A&P license, doesn’t equate to any level skill or competency, it simply means they met the requirements of the rating and passed the tests, nothing more. I have been an A&P for many years, and met many, many talented and knowledgeable aviation people, that aren’t rated mechanics.
I am amazed that an article like this actually got published, GA News should be more careful in their staff selection or at a minimum, screen articles like this.
Mike, your post deserves a BIG AMEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mike – what Richard says. It’s hardly an article – more of a highly biased opinion piece. I’m generally a fan of the writers at GAN, but this guy missed the mark badly. I could see this as a post on Facebook, but here it’s out of place.
Maybe a move to the “Opinion” page/tab is warranted? Open question to the GAN editors and staff.
First let me say that all of your points are very valid. The purpose of the article was to invoke this kind of good discussion. I am trying to understand why customers take their aircraft to people who don’t provide good maintenance? The points I tried to make come from the experience of seeing aircraft that were maintained in a very unsafe manner. If you have a great IA /A&P who does top level maintenance at a fair price, great, likewise if you use a repair station. I’m referencing customers who bring aircraft in and during the inspection we find airworthiness items that should have been captured by their IA but were somehow missed. Someone mentioned owner assisted annuals, which are good, but everyone isn’t mechanically inclined and can’t work on their own aircraft. I never said paying more guaranteed anything; we know that nothing is guaranteed. Customers have the power to choose where to take their aircraft, but in my opinion, a trustworthy repair station is the best option. I talk with customers every day, some who I do business with and others who get maintenance done somewhere else. All of them say that having a safe aircraft is the most important thing, regardless of the price they are paying. The price paid for the services isn’t the real problem; the problem is what the customer is getting in return.
A trustworthy repair station? The problem that I have with that is that the man who owns the business, and is a truly expert mechanic, is not the man working on your plane, and have seen numerous examples where inept workers have damaged a plane while the owner is in his office doing quotes or buying parts.
While a repair station that specializes in a make and type (Citation, Challenger etc) is qualified on that make and type, I couldn’t endorse a typical (and average) repair station on other makes and types of which they see little.
I say again: a) owners should be involved in their “aviation enterprise” and engage in general maintenance, buy parts, and so on, and b) choose an IA who is knowledgeable on their make and type. A Beech Baron is way different than a Cessna 172, so don’t expect that Cessna knowledgeable mechanic to be able to maintain the Beechcraft.
I agree completely, owners and operators of small aircraft should become more familiar with their aircraft. Also, they should participate in as much of the maintenance as they feel comfortable in doing.
For this and many other reasons, I work for those that understand the value of what I bring to the equation. These are people that can afford and appreciate what an experienced A&P brings to the table. I don’t want my friends hurt, and I don’t want them ripped off either. I doubt that a repair station can increase the value or safety over an A&P with subject matter expertise for a given aircraft. The organizational chart, corporate election, or 145, has nothing to do with the end result.
Chris,
You will find unscrupulous service providers in every industry, aviation is no different. There are also cheapskate owner/operators in every industry, aviation is no different in this respect either. The budget annual you are describing is what occurs when these two entities meet, but maybe not, more later.
Two schools of thought to consider for you. Cheap customers don’t make good customers and dead customers don’t make good customers either. Good repair shops won’t fool with the customer that wants a pencil whipped annual doesn’t matter how they operate, as an individual or repair station.
Sadly, there is no place in aviation for either of these two entities, but they are still here, and probably will be for a long time. The individual that seeks unscrupulous and cheap service providers are just as guilty as the service provider.
To the contrary, perhaps your $600 annual describes another scenario? The owner of the 172 is a professional A&P mechanic, he maintains his airplane perfectly, and he pays a friend of his, (another A&P/IA) to sign off his annual, after he does all of the work. Perhaps they reciprocate? Good mechanics praise a second set of eyes to help them spot things that they may have missed. In the case of the $600 number that has been discussed, this maybe a completely legit deal, that has no bearing on the quality or integrity of the work performed.
All this said, I still disagree that a repair station, in general, can provide any higher level of quality than a good mechanic can on his own (if properly equipped, and qualified to do so). So rather than state that a trustworthy repair station is best (however, your opinion) that a trustworthy entity, would be best, whatever that may be for your situation.
You cite overlooked items, yet at the end of the day, its people that miss items, people that tender invoices, repair station or not, its unfortunate, but these things happen. Also, you brought up a cost, which is not related to value. The value of the latter description I gave you (two mechanics that help each other out) is priceless, what kind of dollar value can you put on that? The cost of the first scenario is zero, except maybe short term, the aircraft owner convinces himself he did good by saving money, and the mechanic thinks he did good to make a quick $600.
The problem goes both ways with customer and provider. The scenario you are describing I believe would be the exception to what happens on a daily basis. I believe that the situation I described presents a more accurate picture of our industry today. While I don’t put a dollar value on the quality of the workmanship, I question some in the industry who provide these services at a very low price and who don’t conduct thorough inspections. On the flip side, customers who seek out these types of services are equally responsible. Repair stations must obtain certification and must continually keep up with those requirements to stay in business. One man shops just aren’t scrutinized in this manner.
Under the regulations, the agency doing the repairs (which means A&P.IA or repair station) must use every available means to make sure they are completing the task in accordance with manufacturers instructions. Believe it or not, as A&P’s we have currency requirements, just like pilots.
65.83 Recent experience requirements.
A certificated mechanic may not exercise the privileges of his certificate and rating unless, within the preceding 24 months—
(a) The Administrator has found that he is able to do that work; or
(b) He has, for at least 6 months—
(1) Served as a mechanic under his certificate and rating;
(2) Technically supervised other mechanics;
(3) Supervised, in an executive capacity, the maintenance or alteration of aircraft; or
(4) Been engaged in any combination of paragraph (b) (1), (2), or (3) of this section.
Though I am “certified” to work on a Lear, I am not current, and don’t posses a maintenance library and may not have the tools to do the job, therefore, I am not qualified. Just like a pilot may posses a single engine land rating, he is “certified” to fly any single engine land plane. However, he may not be qualified to fly a PC-XII, if he has only flown a Bonanza.
The FAA will soon get rid of the Inspection Authorization rating (soon, 10 years? I dunno) as it is a dead rating. There is no difference in a 100 hour or an annual. But because they are finding evidence of IA’s that are not doing their jobs, they have to find another way. Also, they will soon eliminate the “trophy” certificates. These are people that aren’t “actively engaged” in the profession, but do it anyway. I wouldn’t get my heart valve replaced by a part time surgeon that is a full time car mechanic, why would i have my annual done by a full time surgeon with an IA certificate? The regs on this are clear too.
65.91 Inspection authorization.
(a) An application for an inspection authorization is made on a form and in a manner prescribed by the Administrator.
(b) An applicant who meets the requirements of this section is entitled to an inspection authorization.
(c) To be eligible for an inspection authorization, an applicant must—
(1) Hold a currently effective mechanic certificate with both an airframe rating and a powerplant rating, each of which is currently effective and has been in effect for a total of at least 3 years;
(2) Have been actively engaged, for at least the 2-year period before the date he applies, in maintaining aircraft certificated and maintained in accordance with this chapter;
(3) Have a fixed base of operations at which he may be located in person or by telephone during a normal working week but it need not be the place where he will exercise his inspection authority;
(4) Have available to him the equipment, facilities, and inspection data necessary to properly inspect airframes, powerplants, propellers, or any related part or appliance; and
Notice it says “Have available to him…..”
A repair station is bound by the same rules, the requirement to be current, actively engaged, and the proper equipment and facilities, data, etc. is the same, repair station or A&P, no difference.
I think major repairs will soon be inspected by an outside party, such as a DAR. As far as insurance goes, this section really sucks. Insurance underwriters estimate their exposure by revenues and exposure. Professional service providers, attorneys, accountants and professional engineers, have a different kind of exposure (in the eyes of the insurance company) as do us blue collar types. However, we all really bear the same amount of potential liability. We can all be the first domino that starts the chain reaction. They rate it differently, and for individuals, its very expensive, and almost dictates that we change careers, which sucks.
In response to this entire deal, you can take your airplane to the best and still get yourself and your mechanic in a pickle. Pilot hits a buzzard, crashes, FAA investigates the mechanic, widow sues everyone, and everyone hears this story. On the flipside, I see the a**holes that roll the dice, skip annuals, dont buy insurance, and get away with it. Its just the way things are. However, I subscribe to the idea of do the best you can, don’t take big chances, and try to enjoy aviation as best you can afford.
I mentioned owner assisted annuals, and it doesn’t take mechanical to take the screws out of an inspection plate or remove the ones like a fabric covered airplane has, or remove the carpet, etc., etc. My God, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to do these simple tasks. Anyone can LEARN to do those things. If he doesn’t want to do them then take the plane to a shop and pay someone to do it. Legally, the owner can do some of these things even without a mechanic overseeing them. Read the regulation. I inspected a Cessna 180 that had been rebuilt by a CERTIFIED repair station in a different part of the country the year before. This is what I found: Cracked rear spar carry through spar(old crack) behind the headliner, spark plugs not approved on that model engine, Cylinders for an IO-470 engine on a non-fuel injected engine, elevator control bolt with the nut not saftied. When I called the shop to try to get the owner some help with the cost of replacing the cylinders, I was told to “go to hell” and they hung up.. Finally, I was able to get the FAA to approve these cylinders & spark plugs with a field approval after they checked with several engine shops with excellent reputations. There are good ones and there are bad ones, and this repair station is worse than the latter. i hope the FAA shut them down. No matter who does your inspections or repairs, the FAA says the OWNER/OPERATOR is responsible for the aircraft’s airworthiness, but I’m sure you already knew that too.
My comment was a reply to Mike.
I’m sorry, the rerply was for CHRIS.
Richard,
I see stuff like that more often than the public would normally be aware. You are correct, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist, but maintenance should be performed by someone that is competent.
I agree 100% with owner assist on smaller aircraft, but that has backfired too, when the owner decides he can do it all without the assistance of a qualified mechanic (note I said qualified, not certified)
As an example, another IA friend of mine did an owner assist annual on his friends C-210. The day after the owner gets the plane back in his hangar, he decides to take off the fuel selector handle and remove the plastic pedestal cover to paint it. The regs say that the owner can “refurbish” some things on his own as owner maintenance. Unfortunately, he does not notice that the fuel selector handle is indexed, and re-installs the handled at the wrong clock angle. The next day, he is giving rides to some friends, switches tanks and the engine quits. Luckily, he glides to the airport, and figures out on his own what happened and informed his IA friend what had happened.
What would have been the outcome if he didn’t make it, or got hurt or killed? I can tell you with certainty. The FAA, upon investigating the crash, would have found an improperly installed selector handle (knob), they would have noticed by the records that the aircraft just came out of annual a few days before, and would have blamed the IA that did the annual.
Guys, go to the experts pro-actively, otherwise, you will be paying some very expensive experts (surgeons, attorneys, etc) retro-actively.
If you are a pilot and own a single engine airplane, you are already part of the group that is responsible for the most accidents (I am part of that group too). Join the advocacy groups, the models specific groups, participate in all of the training you can, and pay for a model specific professional and who cares if that is a repair station or an individual.
If you cant make the time and effort to do it safely, then find another hobby.
A person with an A&P or CRS is no more an expert than anyone else. I mentioned before, it simply means they met the requirements for that rating.
Find either a good mechanic that you like, or a person that is willing to make themselves familiar with your plane out of passion vs necessity. With aging aircraft, its nearly impossible for any one mechanic to know all of the nuances with many models. The Gods are in the details, and you’d better find someone familiar with the details, or be willing to get familiar.
If it’s not a Cub or a Champ type, they can get someone else to do the annual. I don’t do it for a living, I don’t do them unless I know the guy. Too much liability. As I.A.’s, are actually doing the FAA’s work, and I think we should be covered liability wise like DER’s and DAR’s are.
Uh …… help me out here. How are DERs and DARS afforded liability protection?
I’m an IA and I worry a lot about doing work without liability coverage. But I’m unaware of any privelige that is granted to DERs and DARs.
PB, It is supposed to happen under the new FAA bill. I read it on Aero News Net several weeks ago that they would be included like FAA inspectors are. I guess I should have said “covered like DER’s & DAR’s are going to be under the new FAA bill.”
I’ve been told by a FSDO Inspector that they have to catch a plane in a mechanic’s hangar before it leaves, otherwise the mechanic says that someone else must have interfered with the aircraft, as was the case where your customer played with the fuel selector handle.
My position – I encourage owner assisted maintenance, but this man is a danger to himself and everyone around him and I guess he is doing this work because he can save money by doing so. I’d cut him off and send him somewhere else. The small amount of money that you can earn by helping this owner will disappear in a heartbeat if a lawyer comes after you because of the crash. Estates have a habit of hiring lawyers, and when the pilot isn’t around to be cross examioned the risk and liability falls to you.
PB,
Per the FAR’s you are absolutely right, as a mechanic we sign off the logs and attest that it was airworthy when it left our hands. I bet you I can go to a junk yard, find a plane that was piled in somewhere, and it will still be in annual, at least according to the records.
However, blood thirsty plaintiffs attorneys don’t see it that way, and don’t understand and don’t care. All they see are $$ signs and they have a great witness, a widow, and according to this widow, her husband was the most safety conscious, careful pilot in the world. The facts are that her spouse is dead, and the plane has not been out of maintenance for X flight hours or X days.
What the FAA says and what the courts do, are separate issues. You cant go to the plaintiff’s attorney and say “well the FAA told me…..”, he will just tell you “too bad”. A dirt bad misinformed attorney can sue a ham sandwich if he wants to. And there are no limits on stupidity.
There is a big difference in the aircraft we fly. The more complex, them more intensive an annual will be. An aircraft used hundreds or thousands of hours will need more work.
But to make a blanket statement like the author shows he really has little understanding of aircraft maintenance, or maintenance of any kind. I’d bet he would rather take his car to the dealer who charges $150 for an oil change and “inspection” than the local mom and pop shop that does the same thing for $39.95.
Particularly when it comes to aircraft that are maintained throughout the year, and flown usually less than 100 hours per year, they should not need extensive annuals. Too often I see multi thousand dollar annuals due to the shop “finding” or requiring something to be fixed that has nothing to do with airworthiness.
Had a shop refuse to release a 172 due to a bad overhead speaker. wanted almost $1,000 to replace it. Blatant rip off.
That’s not to say the high dollar shops are all bad or price gouging.
My recommendation is to find a mechanic that is familiar with the aircraft you fly, work with him, check references. The items needing inspection are plainly spelled out for each aircraft in the FAR?AIM and the service manual. It shouldn’t take 3 weeks to inspect a 172.
Yeah, you’ve touched a nerve . . .
Interesting choice of photos in this article. Picture 1 is a turbine cabin twin. This isn’t the GAN market, it is Business and Commercial Aviation. These aircraft are owned by large businesses, not us guys (and gals) in the bugsmasher brigade. Picture #2 is a big turbine single with what appears to be an FLIR pod hanging off the bottom. I don’t know of too many “civilian” aircraft with this type of equipment. This aircraft is owned by some law enforcement agency, state, federal, you pick the initials, again, not by you or me. It is maintained with (our) tax dollars, so cost is no object.
I’m sticking with my guy who does ramp annuals for a couple of hundred bucks. He’s cranky, sunburnt, cusses a lot, and doesn’t charge much, but he KNOWS light aircraft and isn’t looking to have me make his yacht payment.
So if the mechanic goes through the bureaucracy and becomes a repair station, he will do a better fabric repair on my Champ than my mechanic with 40 experience at his un-approved shop.
I encourage my students as well as profession associates that manage corporate flight operations to put there faith good maintenance processes and trust their experienced mechanics that carry out these processes. This is more of at attitude combined with knowledge. This requires effort and discipline but effects safer and cost effective results.
does Chris Collins have an A&P? What is his back ground. He seems to think that repair stations are better because they charge more. more likely then not these repair stations are hiring kids fresh out of school with the ink still wet on their ticket. They do this because they can pay them a little more then McDonalds does. My suggestion, Find a shop with an experienced mechanic with a good reputation. weather it is a one man show or a large shop has little to do with quality. Better yet, get your hands dirty and do an owner assisted annual.
Paying more – often LOTS more – doesn’t guarantee anything other than you’ve paid more. I’ve seen, not just heard about, a big bucks FBO which “fixed” a wobbling Cessna spinner by wrapping the front bulkhead with duct tape. The FAA had a few harsh words for them, evidently not enough, because they are still in business. I’ve had an Official Cessna Dealer ruin every Southco fastener on the cowling of MY OWN airplane because the “mechanic” used an air wrench on the quarter turn fasteners. Then they claimed that “they were like that”.
I’d much rather find a good independent IA who will come out to my airplane, let me help with the annual, and who will have to answer to ME, PERSONALLY for what he does, not hide behind some big, fancy company. There’s a reason FBOs don’t like ramp annuals – that is because in my limited 40 years of aviation experience, you can often get a much better job for much less money, especially on simple, older airplanes which the FBO doesn’t even want to touch because they know they can’t make much money on them. If you like paying Gulfstream prices for an annual on a 152 or a Warrior, by all means, find the biggest, shiniest and most expensive FBO you can and write some huge checks.
If you’d like to get an annual without taking out a mortgage, ask pilots of airplanes similar to yours, ask around at the local grass strips, drop in to the local EAA chapter (a great resource!), learn about your airplane and be willing to get your hands dirty for a day or so.
“learn about your airplane and be willing to get your hands dirty for a day or so”
I agree totally with this post. If owners get involved they are safer pilots since they know the condition of their plane. Any participation (other than flying) is a good thing and active participation by an owner with lubrication and wear items lessens the inspection and repair costs.
I agree with Bradley. I only do owner assisted annuals where the owner does the “grunt work” removing all of the inspection covers, seats, carpet, etc. and I do the inspection holds the prop when I do the compression check, etc. He learns a lot about his airplane and it probably makes him a safer pilot in the process. The annual inspection is just what it says…..an INSPECTION. No maintenance except simple items are done by me during the inspection. I only do aircraft like Cubs, Champs and the small single engine Cessna types. Too old for anything else and I do them at the airport where the plane is kept instead of at my private strip so the owner doesn’t feel trapped. $600 is highway robbery to do just an inspection on a Cub or Champ in my opinion.
I find this article disingenuous. I have had excessively expensive annuals where the airplane quit in the runup area and I have had economical annuals that have found problems that had been missed by the “repair station” expensive annual. The facts are, the cost of an annual is NOT and indicator of how through it is. Find a good A&P IA that you trust, better yet find one that welcomes questions. Our Cherokee has 8000 hours and we have had good luck with owner assisted annuals. I find this choice the most valuable as the owner gains a working knowledge of their aircraft under the supervision of a experienced A&P.
It’s the guys that are doing $8000 annuals on Skyhawks that are driving many pilots out of aviation.
So, if I start charging people double, their aircraft becomes twice as safe? But if I charge less, I’m cutting corners?
I just wanted to make sure I understand how this works. They didn’t teach this part in school.