Don't sweat it, being in claims, I've seen 10,000+ hour pilots make mistakes like not lowering the landing gear. I've seen guys give too much power on run up in a tailwheel and nose right on over, destroying the prop. Jet jokeys that don't do a walk around and power up, sucking whatever was sitting on the wing right through the engine. $hit happens to the best of them, and yes, insurance will cover the teardown inspection and prop. There will be "betterment" though, since you'll get a 0 time propeller after the mandiatory overhaul. But your claims adjuster will explain all of this to you.

Thanks JetBlu, it's not so much that it happened, but how it happened. The girlfriend asked me how serious the accident was, I don't want to get into the technicalities of a tail dragger CG, prop strike and engine tear downs so using a driving analogy I had to admit the incident was less spinning out at turn 3 at the Daytona 500 and more backing into a shopping cart in Tesco's car park but with the same level of repair needed. Her response of "Oh, I see" after a few seconds silence telegraphed to me she was actually thinking something along the lines of "So basically the same thing you did to my new Golf while out Xmas shopping you prat". Maybe not, but I just got that feeling.

So basically you are saying it was a branefart.
Happens to us all, especially as we get older.

Love the analogy Piperboy. All you forgot to say was that aircraft repairs are 5 times that for cars. Suggest that you keep mum on that one.

Pedalling across a broad spectrum of available movement isn't the same as Pilot Induced Oscillation. A tough and gusting wing from one side may mean that you end up giving full range movement one side, then to centre, then to the same side. It's not the same as LRLRL.

I fly with CPL's regularly who do as you describe, "stir the porridge". Even in dead calm conditions. I can't figure out why they do it, they certainly make life hard for themselves.

I happened to be at KAJO today and saw your plane sitting on the ramp. A friend and I cast a glance over to the bright yellow Maule with a certain measure of sadness, but with hope for a better day. I did the same thing once and know the feeling. In the end it gets fixed and I guess you learn from the experience.

IIRC Wolfgang Langeweische in Stick and Rudder talks about it and calls it 'hefting'. Explains why too.

There but for the grace of god ......

Can you put me in touch with your shop? I'd love to get a deal as good as that...

Looking at my prop replacement options, I could switch the knackered Hartzell CSP with 76" blades with the same model, or I talked to MT props who have an 80" they say will be smoother, less vibration, removes the RPM restriction between 2150 and 2250RPM, better static rpm and better climb, but slower top speed. There is no Faa approval for the prop on my plane but MT say they have a guy who for $1500 can get a field approval.

Any thoughts

Go for it. You'll only chew over it forever if you don't.:= If top speed were that important, you'd be flying something else.

Are you happy with the reduce ground clearance, with the sort of places you go?

You need to answer these questions.

1. Will 2 inches less ground clearance be a problem?
2. How much does the rate of climb increase and do you need it?
3. How much slower in the cruise and can you accept that?

Then if you're still interested you need to talk to as many pilots as possible who have made the swap to MT. Preferably those that have plenty of experience with the MT prop.

You need to find out from them things like;

1. What it's like to get the prop serviced, who can do it, what does it cost etc.
2. What is the prop like in the rain, does the rain cause erosion?
3. How does the prop handle stone damage?
4. Would they do it again or would they have stayed with the original?

The plot thickens !

Had a chin wag with the adjuster today and as Geosynch suggested in his post above its all gonna work out fine, engine tear down for inspection, new prop with a 10% copay by me for betterment etc. Then he asked for my license, aircraft logs , medical and BFR. I thought to myself it's been a while since I'd done a BFR but could not remember just how long till I looked at my logbook and realised it had been 2 years and 2 months. Panic set in till I talked with my CFI friend who explained the Commercial check ride I passed with him in 2014 was a legal substitute for a BFR.

Feeling a tad relieved I gave all he docs to the adjuster, who then said the strangest thing

" don't get greedy and ask for a King Air"

I asked him what he meant and he said the last prop strike he handled was a guy in a Cessna 185 who demanded that he be allowed on the insurance companies dime to rent his mates Texan T6 as an equivalent replacement as it was somewhat a like for like aircraft while his 185 was getting fixed. The insurance company were furious but allowed the T6 rental as they did not want the hassle of fighting the guy who was adamant that is what he wanted.

I asked the adjuster why this was relevant to my situation and he informed me that (completely unknown to me ) my policy allowed for a replacement rental aircraft not to exceed $1000 a day up to $10,000 not including fuel, engine reserve and oil costs !

With the above in mind I would like to start a competition with 1st prize going to the person who can think of a model of aircraft available for rental that meets the following criteria:

* Flies, looks or could argueably be deemed similar to a Maule (no matter how remotely)
* Turbo'd and injected up the ying yang and with a whole bunch of ponies up front.
* Fast as f&@k and climbs like a lovesick mountain goat.
* Flash appearance and enough ramp appeal to afford an old, fat and balding pilot a realistic chance of pulling a tidy young bird.

Usual competition terms and conditions apply with the winning entrant receiving a selfie of me with the young bird, sitting left seat in the fancy plane giving a thumbs up sign. :ok:

Obviously some people are going to take the piddle whn dealing with the insurance company but IMHO a replacement hire only needs to be able to handle the task at hand on a specific day so if you were expecting to visit a hard strip of decent lenth there is nothing wrong with a 182 which you should be able to hire easily just about anywhere.
Finding a hire for a trip where you really need the abilities of the Maule is, of course, a more difficult question and there are no easy answers.

I got very close a couple of times with my MX7, they can be tricky!

Cessna Ttx? :-)

How about the Aviat Husky from Aerodynamic Aviation, San Jose.

The Turbo Arrow could fill yur boots too if you can handle a hot bird ;-)

I suggest a Cirrus. I know it is nothing like a Maule, but then a T-6 is nothing like a 185!

This one comes with its own "hot bird", but I think you might need to talk to Brad Pitt ;)

https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=...%3Fw%3D500&f=1

What prop did you decide to go with?

Working on getting some help picking the right one with one of the guys on here (PD). In the meantime I've been round the block a few times taking with the folks at Hartzell and MT. The. Issues are as follows:

The only FAA approved prop for the plane is the one that's on it now the bog standard Hartzell CSP 76"

I have look at the new Hartzell Trailblazer 80" composite 2 blade.
Pros: Its getting rave reviews from Husky and Scout pilots
It's a lot lighter than the current 76" metal prop
Cons : it's certified for every friggin bush plane except the Maule and the guy at Hatzell said he's not sure if and when they plan on doing the Maule thrust, noise and other tests to get it certified.

MT 2 Blade Composite 80"
Pros: 20 Lbs lighter
Replaceable nickel plated leading edge
Field repairable for small nicks and chips
Straight swap out with no need to change existing governor or hub, just spinner
Supposedly better static thrust, shorter take off , better climb and slight increase in cruise.
Factory offer money back guarantee
Rave reviews from both certified and non certified aircraft owners.
Removes the RPM restriction between 2100 and 2250
Never been an AD on an MT prop
Open ended service life and no TBO
Comparable to Hatzell composite 2 blade above.
Cons: Only approved for Maules in Europe not US, but MT claim they can get FAA field approval in 6 weeks and for a cost of $1500.00!

MT 3 Blade composite 203cm

Pros : All of the above as per MT 2 blade except slower cruise
Ramp appeal, looks cool, one sexy looking MF.
Supposedly gives turbine like smoothness

Cons : As per 2 blade plus more money.

I talked to Maule and asked why they have one of there airplanes on there website, brochure and sales material with an 3 blade MT prop if it's not certified for that plane and they said they just stuck it on to test with and it looked cool, made a video of the flight and took it back off again.

Jury still out !

Funny then that the US MT people did an AD search for mine while quoting my overhaul, by model and serial number, while I held on the phone. ;) There was no AD on mine but there was a 'mandatory' change to the hub to incorporate different seals. Apparently the new seals don't throw grease as badly as the traditonal MT seals, and my experience has confirmed that - very little grease thrown compared to the original seals.

I'm not a great fan of my MT prop. It works OK but it's just a wood prop with a bit of fiberglass on top. That glass is very thin so it doesn't fly off under centrifugal loads, and it tends to crack near the hub letting water get to the wood. The blades are held into the hub with lag screws into the end grain, which is a very old fashioned technique. Mine has the crudely formed stainless steel leading edge protection and I remove corrosion with Scotchbrite after every flight. It's true that the the blades can be reworked many times, but they tend to need that attention in my experience. It's a bit of a delicate device.

Certainly some compelling reasons to look closely at the MT option.

The only words of caution I would give are;

• Ensure you're comparing apple with apples.
• How many of the enthusiastic reviews are very recent owners without the benefit of a few years operations.
• Very often it's not what's said in the marketing info but rather what's left unsaid that really matters.

It sounds very like to me the mandatory hub replacement Silvaire mentions is an AD by another name.

You say no TBO, but in reality what life are owners getting from the blades?

I know there will be regional variations but I've heard murmurings about lack of suitably factory qualified people to to work on the MT props. This may be just my part of the world.

Only just seen this thread so late contribution, but, knowing UA rather well, that description couldn't be further from the truth !!!!

Buy the cheapest option. The Maule is already a pretty good performer. Why pay more to get a few percentage increase in performance that you are highly unlikely ever to use ?

I agree, you get a lot of plane for your money with a Maule.

I did 500 hours in mine, in 5 years - often two adults and two kids, plus luggage...

Cheers, Sam.

Went down to the engine shop that's doing the tear down and inspection. The engine was just being put on a stand after being removed from the plane just as I arrived. The boss of the engine shop suggested that if I had a spare hour or so I could watch them take it apart. I couldn't believe they had it completley disassembled in about 90 minutes.

I asked him what are the top reasons engines come to him prior to reaching TBO. He gave 2 reasons:

1. Lack of use, and lack of use where the owner thinks starting and running it on the ground is doing good when in fact the opposite is true, it accelerates water corrosion damage to the engine.
2. Cooking the engine, an example he gave is not returning the engine to idle after run up and instead leaving it running at 14 or 1500rpm while you faff around copying your IFR clearance then taxi up to the hold short as number 3 and have to wait, all the while at higher rpm than idle and on a hot day.

He showed me a Lycoming 360 that came in for overhaul that had 4000 hours put on it in the last 5 years. The engine was in excellent condition and within factory tolerances, he also pointed out another engine that he had just taken out of service it had a stamp on the side that said "46" which to my amazement he pointed out meant it was made in 1946 !!

He also said he's had quite a few owners bring their planes to him with low compression on one cylinder and enquire about prices to replace the cylinder or even a complete overhaul before TBO , he suggested that prior to taking it apart they put a cap of some type of engine cleaning product, I can't remember the brand, in each cylinder, a quart in with the oil and a 2% mixture in with the fuel and take it for a 5 hour flight and this normally cleans out the cylinders and rings and returns the cylinder to an acceptable compression. Pretty cheap solution to what appeared to be a major problem.

Quite interesting stuff,

Have you made a decision on your prop yet?

piperboy84:

I was always taught to keep the engine at 1200rpm. Are you saying even that is too high?

I guess it depends on what your particular engine idle speed is, for most 4 banger Lycomings it's around 1000 RPM

1200 for me too. The local engineers used to reckon the plugs fouled up at 1000 or less.

Shouldn't foul up if leaned while on the ground

Agreed. Just need to get everyone else to do it as well!

My shiny new MTV-9-B/200-52 78.8" three blade composite prop, Kevlar spinner, nickel leading edges is on the truck from Wisconsin to California to be put on the inspected and port polished engine.

Insurance is paying for about 90% of the prop. And the AI reckons he'll have the field approval paperwork done in 2 weeks.

Every cloud has a silver lining!

Santa Monica Tower said I was making them dizzy

Brilliant - great effect!

Getting to the end of my tether with the engine issue on the Los Angeles based Maule. Here is a recap. 2007 aircraft ( Lycoming 360 )with 275 hours since new. Had a prop strike earlier this year where the prop hit the dirt while taxiing at idle. Insurance covered a complete tear down and inspection which showed the engine was fine, during the rebuild I changed the 2 blade Hartzell out for a 3 blade MT. Picked the plane up from the shop, upon getting it back to the home field I taxi for about 2 minutes then do a mag check. The number one cylinder on the right mag (bottom plug) temperature on the EGT gauge drops off the bottom of the scale, I lose 3 to 4 hundred rpm and the engine farts and pops. While 2,3 & 4 rise as normal, I power up to 2300 rpm and aggressively lean then return back to 2000rpm for a mag check and it clears.

After each and every short taxi whether before or after a flight the #1 cylinder/plug fouls up and takes aggressive leaning to clear ( I always lean for taxi) . I take it to an on-field repair shop who remove, rotate, test and gap the plugs but the problem stays with the cylinder and mag (#1 on the bottom). I taxi out and it’s the same **** all over again, while flying at cruise rpm I notice the #1 cylinder is consistently hotter than the others by about 120 degrees while this is not excessive it is consistently the #1 that runs hotter, I would have thought it being on the front it would have perhaps been the same or even cooler than 3 or 4 on the back. A mag check while cruising shows everything is running within tolerance and smoothly. Over the next 25 hours I use twice the normal oil consumption compared to pre prop strike.

I go back to the engine shop and they say it just needs a bit more running in, I request a compression check and get 70,70,74,76 which again is within tolerance but prior to the teardown I was getting between 74 to 76 across the board. I chalk the 70’s up to the rings settling in and hope for better numbers. They bore scope the #1 and can see the cross hatch from the honing clearly and no glazing. They suggest we adjust the mixture and test and adjust the mags, upon flying and landing I get the same old ****. I return it to the shop and tell them that after 25 hours of flight the cylinder and rings should have settled in so they agree to remove it and do a light re-hone and new rings on number 1. They advised I takeoff and hold at full power for an hour flight, after landing at the home field and taxiing I get the exact same problem again.

I’m tired of going back to the engine shop and having the local field mechanic change or rotate the fouled plug and have to decide what to do next. My choices:

1. Live with it and spend 2 or 3 minutes aggressively leaning each run-up with the plane farting and popping and shaking and excessive oil consumption.

2. Write to the insurer and tell them after 3 months, 30 hours of flight time and 4 visits back to mechanics and a cylinder re-honing of #1 ( in addition to the re-honing of all 4 at the initial teardown) I want a complete new engine as this could be a dangerous situation and is unacceptable.

3. Jump of Santa Monica Pier or take up lawn bowling as a hobby.

Any thoughts?

Personally I'd take it to the shop and tell them that I'm not leaving until this issue is FULLY fixed. Tell them that the next time they say the plane is fixed, you'll force the head mechanic to come with you on the flight and if **** hits the fan its not just your life in the balance!

This issue sounds to me like something is just waiting to go seriously wrong.

But then again - the prospect of lawn bowling is somewhat appealing after the stresses involved in getting this fixed! :hmm:

I don't see any reference to checking the timing on the right mag. I mention this, not as any kind of expert, but because a friend of mine had a similar problem on his Cardinal. In his case it was both mags and the engine would only run smoothly with the mixture leaned. His original engineers could not find anything wrong so he went to a second shop where they found that the timing was out on both mags.

pb84,

Sorry to hear you are still having problems with your "little yellow airplane". When the engine was rebuilt, were any parts replaced?

I've forwarded your "cri de coeur" to the tow pilots in my gliding club, who collectively have thousands of hours behind O-360s. I'll let you know if I get any useful replies.

Concerning your third choice, I can't see you fitting in at a lawn bowling club. I think the pier option is better, but given its historic location, you should do it James Dean style, in a Porsche! ;)

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c3...pse39q8pze.jpg