Second Hand Parts on New Machines
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: All The Places I Shouldnt Be
Posts: 1,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Second Hand Parts on New Machines
Question for all members here that has me deep in thought (no smart ass comments) about the consequences.
I got a PM from a subscriber on one of the forums I belong to regarding some issues he is having on behalf of an owner of a helo he bought on his behalf, a brand new machine. Here is the para that causes me concern, and its cut and pasted from his message to me.
Now I am not going to say who, where or what at this stage but would like some input from members here about the consequences of such actions. if I bought a new helo and found out some parts on it were second hand I would be rightly pi$$ed off.
Ned
I got a PM from a subscriber on one of the forums I belong to regarding some issues he is having on behalf of an owner of a helo he bought on his behalf, a brand new machine. Here is the para that causes me concern, and its cut and pasted from his message to me.
This combined with some oil cooler bearings and belt that were second hand( been on 7 different airframes) on delivery has insensed him.
Ned
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Schlossgasse 12, Buedingen
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
second hand parts
Anyone buying a new helicopter should read the contract carefully. At least one OEM has a clause that allows repaired items to be fitted to new aircraft if deemed airworthy. It can always be negotiated out or a price adjustment made.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: On the Rump of Pendle Hill GB
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the UK that would be covered by the "Sale of Goods Act", under those circumstances , Log Books, Manual and keys should be handed back to the seller in return for full monies or another NEW machine in exchange.
If it happened to me thats what I would have done as soon as the problem was discovered!! at the same time telling all and sundry about the Low down scumbag who was trying to con me!!
Peter R-B
Vfr
If it happened to me thats what I would have done as soon as the problem was discovered!! at the same time telling all and sundry about the Low down scumbag who was trying to con me!!
Peter R-B
Vfr
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: ****
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok but what if the 2nd hand part has been fully overhauled and has the same amount of hours available as the "new" part ? (before anyone shoots me down obviously if were talking Service life limited parts then I can see where the problem lies).
NST
NST
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: the hills of halton
Age: 71
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At one OEM I worked at we were allowed to deliver new aircraft with a used part that had no more than 10 hours on it. Parts that has been through multiple repair cycles were for sure not allowed.
When I was working in europe a new L2 was delivered with engines approx 400 hrs old (we were confused when told to do 500 hrly eng insp when the a/c was only a couple of weeks old and airframe under 100hrs old) and the pilots seats looked new but when checked serial numbers were from old L models , seats sold by HS back to EC who fitted them to new machines (seats even had HS mods on them, thats why we looked at them).
Have also seen refurbed 365 parts in factory packing from EC as new parts...... and people wonder why i don't like eurotrash!
Have also seen refurbed 365 parts in factory packing from EC as new parts...... and people wonder why i don't like eurotrash!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"IF" the manufacturer has an "appoved slave program" they can use the same slave part on several aircraft in production. The part is not to leave the production facility and is to be removed prior to any flights after the certification is issued. Someone down the line will get that "new" 50 hour part on their new aircraft, but they should be informed and offered the option of taking it (with some benifit) or opting for a new part.
After certification, and into the kitting phase all those rules go away and you are to the scruples of the manufacturer or finisher. You could get an old seat or old engines installed legally, but you have to accept it. They seem to get you over a barrel when you pay such large amounts of money in advance of ever seeing a logbook or anything but a purchase order. It is hard to walk away from a new ship that you have already paid a million or more dollars into before you see it, knowing the next one available could be months or a year away. That is why we have courts.
After certification, and into the kitting phase all those rules go away and you are to the scruples of the manufacturer or finisher. You could get an old seat or old engines installed legally, but you have to accept it. They seem to get you over a barrel when you pay such large amounts of money in advance of ever seeing a logbook or anything but a purchase order. It is hard to walk away from a new ship that you have already paid a million or more dollars into before you see it, knowing the next one available could be months or a year away. That is why we have courts.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Here and there...
Age: 58
Posts: 854
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not a legally minded person, but from a purely technical point of view I don't see what the problem is with a manufacturer fitting an overhauled part to a production machine.
After all, the overhaul procedure is in place to "renew" a part and as long as there are no life limiting items involved that would affect the available hours to the owner before the part was due for the next overhaul.
Parts that are already used, however and have less than the full time remaining less test flying etc would be extremely dodgy and would incur a legal action if it were my aircraft.
After all, the overhaul procedure is in place to "renew" a part and as long as there are no life limiting items involved that would affect the available hours to the owner before the part was due for the next overhaul.
Parts that are already used, however and have less than the full time remaining less test flying etc would be extremely dodgy and would incur a legal action if it were my aircraft.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: At home
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eurocopter does indeed deliver apparently "new" aircraft with some used parts or components fitted. The component history section of the log book will show exactly what and where. They are purchased as re-manufactured aircraft and priced accordingly.
These aircraft generally have a S/N range that differs from the main production range. An example is the re-manufactured AS 350 series aircraft that are delivered with S/N's in the 9000 range whereas the production 350's start at S/N 1000 with new deliveries currently up around S/N 4000+.
Not all parts delivered are "new" either. A quick look at Block 12 on the Form 1 will show the condition. If the part is obviously not in the condition stated in Block 12, you possibly have a bogus part on your hands.
The notion of "Have also seen refurbed 365 parts in factory packing from EC as new parts......" needs some clarification. Was it that the parts were in new packaging or did they differ from the Form 1 statement? Did the Form 1 state "New"? Was any action taken?
These aircraft generally have a S/N range that differs from the main production range. An example is the re-manufactured AS 350 series aircraft that are delivered with S/N's in the 9000 range whereas the production 350's start at S/N 1000 with new deliveries currently up around S/N 4000+.
Not all parts delivered are "new" either. A quick look at Block 12 on the Form 1 will show the condition. If the part is obviously not in the condition stated in Block 12, you possibly have a bogus part on your hands.
The notion of "Have also seen refurbed 365 parts in factory packing from EC as new parts......" needs some clarification. Was it that the parts were in new packaging or did they differ from the Form 1 statement? Did the Form 1 state "New"? Was any action taken?
In North America there are strick rules about using refurbished parts on new aircraft. To a certain point it relates to a law suit a few years back where a computer manufacturer was prosecuted for using previously installed power supplies in new computers.
If a manufacturer elects to install used parts (obviously not time or cycle limited parts) he has to advise the customer and get his approval.
If a manufacturer elects to install used parts (obviously not time or cycle limited parts) he has to advise the customer and get his approval.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SW Asia
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FAA is very strict about the newness of the aircraft, and won't allow old parts anywhere near a new machine. When new aircraft are very lightly equipped, it is sometimes a problem to get the "slave" items on and off because the certificate for a new aircraft can be poisoned by old items.
Why? Because the aircraft comes from an approved production system, which describes how the materials are bought, handled, machined, installed and tested. A used component does not come from that system, and so it makes the entire aircraft non-compliant with the approved production method.
Nice to know these rules exist.
Why? Because the aircraft comes from an approved production system, which describes how the materials are bought, handled, machined, installed and tested. A used component does not come from that system, and so it makes the entire aircraft non-compliant with the approved production method.
Nice to know these rules exist.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Just west of here
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We bought a remanufactured 350B2 from Eurocopter some time back. If I recall correctly it had used 0 TSO servos, a used T/R drive shaft, a used battery and some used 0 TSO instruments. Otherwise everything else was new and looked it. The big honcho was real happy as the price was way less than a new ship.
It was sold to us as as a remanufactured ship, not new, so we expected some used parts. The poster above had it right - the log book listed exactly what was used. Looked new, flew like a new bird too.
It was sold to us as as a remanufactured ship, not new, so we expected some used parts. The poster above had it right - the log book listed exactly what was used. Looked new, flew like a new bird too.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New parts
I am not a legally minded person, but from a purely technical point of view I don't see what the problem is with a manufacturer fitting an overhauled part to a production machine.
The commercial aspect is with regards to the customer's warranty period which may either be calendar based or more normally a combination of calendar and flight hours (whichever occurs first). Certain airframe manufacturers also re-issue EASA Form 1 tags with "inspected" in place of exisiting airworthiness certification documents for other reasons (either for their own internal quality procedures or to camouflage the real repair station who performed the actual work). The thing that really counts with new parts, is their low hours (for life-limited components) or their warranty periods, as far as safety is concerned, new or overhauled clearly shouldn't be an issue if they are certificated and documented correctly!
A number of K-Max purchasers saved themselves a significant amount of money, when the purchased their new helicopters with a used engine. The cost of a new T53-17 compared to what you can buy one for on the open market is pretty significant.
The FAA provision for this is defined here:
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...E/AC21-19A.pdf
The FAA provision for this is defined here:
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...E/AC21-19A.pdf
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The 'Bat Cave' @ HLP in the Big Durian Indo
Age: 61
Posts: 781
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We bought a remanufactured 350B2 from Eurocopter some time back. If I recall correctly it had used 0 TSO servos, a used T/R drive shaft, a used battery and some used 0 TSO instruments
Disagree that they put a used battery in it though, that's a bit much
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: At Work
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is an FAA issue here but I will leave that to the experts. With respect to contract law, assuming this was an MD product one would look at the venue section of the contract. If the venue is Arizona Law, then...
If the used parts were fully disclosed, and the buyer accepted it, there would be no issue. If they were not disclosed, the buyer may have an issue if they could show 1) that these used parts were clearly used and 2) that there were any damages associated with putting on these parts.
Take a blower bearing unit and belt. Look a the life and pro-rate. The damages end up being a few thousand dollars. Who wants to spend 100k litigating over those damages.
The moral of the story is two fold:
1) Do not take delivery of any item prior to an appropriate inspection. In cases such as mentioned on the thread, they would be disclosed on the component cards and so you would have notice. Work it out before you pay the balance owed.
2) The most important part. Deposits on aircraft sent to the manufacturer are unsecured debts. You send MD or Sikorsky or anyone a deposit and the manufacturer runs out of money or gets into trouble, your deposit is at serious risk. If the manufacturer is having problems, escrow your deposit so that it is not the property of the manufacturer but is held in a neutral account.
If the used parts were fully disclosed, and the buyer accepted it, there would be no issue. If they were not disclosed, the buyer may have an issue if they could show 1) that these used parts were clearly used and 2) that there were any damages associated with putting on these parts.
Take a blower bearing unit and belt. Look a the life and pro-rate. The damages end up being a few thousand dollars. Who wants to spend 100k litigating over those damages.
The moral of the story is two fold:
1) Do not take delivery of any item prior to an appropriate inspection. In cases such as mentioned on the thread, they would be disclosed on the component cards and so you would have notice. Work it out before you pay the balance owed.
2) The most important part. Deposits on aircraft sent to the manufacturer are unsecured debts. You send MD or Sikorsky or anyone a deposit and the manufacturer runs out of money or gets into trouble, your deposit is at serious risk. If the manufacturer is having problems, escrow your deposit so that it is not the property of the manufacturer but is held in a neutral account.
