diamondaviators.net

Airplane is in for its annual at Safari express.

The shop claimed the nose gear leg needed to be replaced due to washer wear marks on the fork bolt. I checked accident reports, called diamond and I can find no example of the bolt breaking because of washer wear on the both that attaches the fork. Diamond, also confirmed that they had never heard of the bolt breaking because of washer wear or oxidation.

I was told the airplane would not be signed off by the IA. The shop went out of their way to email photos of the bolt and recommend to the IA that he not sign off my airplane. Essentially forcing me into replacing the nose gear leg.

I asked the shop to save the old leg.

To “save time” they cut the nose gear leg! Notice where they cut made little to no sense, as the leg has a cross piece it pivots on.

I suspect the did this so the old leg could not be used or resold.

What if anything should I ask of the shop? Partial credit for destroying the old leg?

As I recall from our DA20 nose gear removal quite a few years ago - it's not as easy as it looks. I'm guessing the pivots may have been corroded and that necessitated the shop to cut the strut out. Or maybe you are correct - they didn't want you reusing that strut. If that's the case, shame on them.

The only two places the gear leg attaches are the pivot and damper. It appears it would be very easy to just cut the bolt for the damper to free the front attachment point. To free the pivot you would just cut next to the nlg pivot.

Can anyone see any reason why they would have cut the strut where they did?

Even more concerning, if they really believed it was necessary to cut the strut to remove it, what else did they screw up? They did so much work I’m now wondering if I should take the plane to another a&p to have them re check the work.

What’s reasonable to ask them to reimburse me for ruining this gear leg?

Not sure about the FAA, but in a lot of places around the world it is a requirement to destroy any aviation component considered scrap so that it cannot be reused.

Karl wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 6:02 am Not sure about the FAA, but in a lot of places around the world it is a requirement to destroy any aviation component considered scrap so that it cannot be reused.

This is true. Just a few days ago my shop told me of an incident where they could not sign off a customer's old wood-wing Mooney due to termite damage. This is not a repairable condition. The owner sold the plane for salvage. As many other things in the plane were reusable it wasn't totally worthless. When the salvage company came to pick up the plane they sawed the wings off with a chainsaw.

The original a&p working on the airplane said it was safe to fly with the corrosion on the pivot surface and the scoring on the bolt.

The shop owner went out of his way to convince the IA not to sign off the plane until I had replaced the leg. He even emailed him photos. The plan was to do the gear leg during the winter as the parts were on back order.

So if the part was useable according to atleast one a&p, and another a&p supposedly had to cut it to remove it, why would they destroy it?

What would you do if this was your plane?

I believe the shop owes me a used gear leg or a partial credit for destroying a serviceable part.

I don't think that the gear had to be cut to remove it. Airworthiness would be determined by the IA. As to whether he was pressured to state that your part wasn't airworthy, and went along to keep his business relationship smooth with the shop, who knows.

I would be afraid to fly my airplane with the degree of wear and corrosion on your threaded portion. Wear like that is a good initiating point for stress fractures, and a crack there would lose your nose wheel. Then, you are talking a probable prop strike, engine tear down (at the least).

If I were you, I would still want the old part - I would weld it up into a floor lamp. A few years ago, when I had to tear down my engine for the prop governor idler shaft set screw repair:

viewtopic.php?p=74801&hilit=prop+govern ... rew#p74801

I took the old bearings and exhaust gaskets and used them to practice my welding skills to make a small rocket sculpture:
I know, off topic...

There is precedent for that threaded stud to fail.
FWIW, unlike the DA40, the 20 AMM specifies regular lubrication of the pivot and the stud extension.

Cool picture. How did that landing go?

Charles wrote: ↑Thu Oct 06, 2022 6:37 pm Cool picture. How did that landing go?

IIRC it was basically uneventful. The best case would have been on to a concrete runway, worst would be a grass field.

I don't know about the DA20 but I know I can hold my nose off the ground down to very slow speeds. Of course it would help to know your nosewheel had left the aircraft . I believe that was the case here but it wouldn't always be so.