April 2012
Getting what you pay for isn’t always a good bargain
You can find it at almost every General Aviation airport. A little sign on the bulletin board, or a business card taped to the self-serve gas pump, advertising annual inspections for some ridiculous price like $200.
We all know that it is not possible to perform an annual inspection on even the simplest of General Aviation aircraft for the sum of $200, yet there it is, in black and white. What’s disturbing is the fact that these guys stay in business, which would indicate someone is utilizing those services.
Owning an aircraft can mean unanticipated expenses, and you don’t want to spend more on maintenance than you absolutely have to, but at some point you have to ask yourself, “Can I afford cheap maintenance?”
What I mean by this goes well beyond the obvious. I’m sure it is perfectly plain to you as aircraft owners that if there were an incident or accident which involved the federal agencies or the insurance companies, that you—not the mechanic—would be held responsible if it were found that inadequate maintenance was the root cause of the problem. FAR 91.403 spells this out.
No, the point here is that eventually you are going to have to pay the piper (no pun intended) either in the form of a discounted price at the time of sale, or in the form of a huge annual inspection bill after years of “cheap” maintenance.
Last week I picked up a light twin for an annual from a client I have known for years. For over a decade, the owner had it maintained by a Certified Repair Station (CRS) at his home base. The CRS closed, leaving him without a mechanic to work on his plane, and he asked me for help. I had not done any of his maintenance before, but I knew him and his aircraft, so I agreed to do the annual this year.
Like most of us, this owner is particular about keeping his airplane in good shape. He is knowledgeable about maintenance issues specific to his aircraft, and also knows the airplane’s maintenance history, at least for the 10-plus years he has owned it.
I quoted him a base inspection price, which was in line with what he expected, plus whatever my company’s technicians found that needed fixing. The base inspection was for 30-man hours ($2,250). He then indicated that he wanted us to pull the magnetos so he could have them inspected, and reinstall them with new ignition harnesses, which he would supply. So far, so good.
But upon taking the aircraft apart, we found a lot of corrosion issues, some of which were significant. Now, corrosion doesn’t happen overnight. This aircraft is hangared, but we live in coastal Florida and the plane spends a lot of time outside in the Bahamas, so finding corrosion wasn’t a real surprise. The amount of corrosion, and where we found it, was.
Pointing it out to the owner, he had no problem with fixing it. He was a little shocked at the cost of some of the parts that needed to be replaced, like rod ends, bushing and brackets, as well as the number of things that needed replacing, but on balance he took it well.
Discussing this with the owner further, he told me that last year the CRS that did the annual inspection completed it in just one day. While that is physically possible (four technicians for eight hours), it is unlikely they did a thorough job. Furthermore, the CRS did not mention any of the corrosion issues to the owner. Nor did it mention the leaking fuel sender gaskets (which had been over-torqued), the frayed ignition harnesses, or the aging flammable fluid hoses, which were all over 10 years old. They did not change the vacuum filters because they are placarded 200 hours (but in the fine print, it says “or annually”). These filters, which are truly cheap, can cost you a very expensive vacuum pump if they fail and allow something the size of pinhead to run through your dry vacuum pump.
We estimated 60 to 90 hours of labor, plus the parts, to address the immediate corrosion issues. The rudder attach bushing and torque tube were severely corroded. It isn’t like you couldn’t see it without disassembling the aircraft. The same can be said for the rear wing-attach fittings and the flap attach hardware and actuator rod ends.
Just because an item is marked as a visual inspection item, it doesn’t mean it should never be replaced. While “on condition” is subjective, there should be, and in fact are, reasonable limits.
On the same aircraft, I suggested that we replace the turbocharger V clamps. These clamps hold the two halves of the turbocharger together, and only require a visual inspection. It is my opinion that they should be replaced every 300 to 400 hours. (I have the same clamps on my airplane.) Should the plain steel bolt that holds it all together fail, the turbo would split and likely cause an engine fire. When we went to change them (at 600 hours total time), they simply snapped.
The owner recognized that the last few annuals were less than thorough, and accepted that he was going to have to pay to avoid a situation that might render the aircraft unairworthy.
On another light twin that was just purchased by a different client, the logbooks indicated that the aircraft was in annual and legal to the letter of the law. However, all of the fuel bags were leaking (some of them were the original 1967 vintage), all the fuel lines were more than 20 years old, and though the engines and props only had 300 hours total time since major overhaul, that happened 20 years ago as well. In this case, the new owner knew about these issues prior to the sale and the previous owner paid for it in the form of a reduced sale price.
The point is that it is virtually impossible to avoid the financial repercussions of “cheap” maintenance. You are either going to pay for it now, or pay for it later.
The advantage to paying for it now is twofold. First, you know you have a safe airplane. Should you ever have to defend yourself to an insurance company or an alphabet agency, you can do so with a reasonable expectation of success.
Secondly, instead of getting a single large bill for a lot of work all at one time, you spread the cost out over a longer period of time, thus avoiding the sticker shock that comes with a $10,000 annual.
With both of the aircraft I described above, we developed a plan whereby we first completed the airworthiness/safety-of-flight issues and returned the aircraft to service. Then we planned a schedule to address the rest of the issues over a period of time, before the next inspection was due.
This allowed the aircraft to be flown, and when it was convenient for the owner we would fix the outstanding problems with a minimum loss of availability for use. This is a practical, realistic approach to aircraft maintenance.
Want to save a few bucks? Get out there and help your mechanic. Removing and reinstalling the cowls, fairings and inspection covers takes time. You are perfectly capable of doing it yourself. If you’re not doing it already, maybe you should consider it.
In the cases I just described, the owners were willing to run down parts, which is a huge time savings. Some shops make a fair markup on parts, and don’t want you to provide your own because they don’t make anything on owner-supplied parts. I personally don’t care. It takes time to source parts, and then I have to pay for them right away, bill the customer and wait to get paid. I would be just as happy to let the owner do it.
If your aircraft maintenance manual has a factory recommended inspection checklist, insist that your A&P use it. If he (or she) has a problem with that, maybe you should find another mechanic.
Ask your aircraft maintenance tech (AMT) to separate the airworthiness items (must do) from the preventive/preemptive issues (should do). Don’t defer these preventive issues for long.
You need to keep airplane ownership costs in perspective. You will pay the average light aircraft maintenance shop about $85 per hour to work on a piston airplane. That is less than you pay your local Chevy dealer to work on your car.
If that figure is still outside your budget, consider partnerships, flying clubs and flight school leasebacks. These options reduce the cost of ownership to what you can afford. What you cannot afford, is cheap maintenance.
Michael Leighton is a 7,000-plus hour, two time and current Master CFII MEI-ATP, as well as an A&P. He operates an aircraft management, maintenance and insurance-accepted flight training services company as well as a Part 135 aircraft charter company in South Florida. You can find him on the web at https://web.mac.com/mkleighton. Send questions or comments to editor@www.piperflyer.com.
