What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Not Vlad's tire!

bhester

Well Known Member
Patron
No, this is not Vlad's tire!
I had someone ask me about a leak he had on one of his brakes, he thought it was leaking from the o-ring. I suggested that he take it to a buddy of mine who was closer to him and retired, he'd have more time than I did right now. I actually replaced a cracked leaking brake line for him back in Nov. last year, while I was at it I flipped his tires, greased his bearings, and checked his brake pads also. At that time he was wanting a condition inspection and had a list of things that needed attention. He received the list when he bought the plane, from someone that had a pre-buy insp. done and decided to not buy it. I told him that I did not have the time to do that kind work and suggested that he find a shop that could spend the time on it that it needed. He told me a couple months later that he got the condition insp. done by someone else. It was down for a few weeks. Now today is 9 months from when I worked on the tires and brakes and maybe 7 months since a condition insp. was done by someone else. He showed up at my buddies hangar today to get the leak fixed. When he took the wheel pant off he could not believe it. He told him right away that he had bigger problems than a leak. He showed him the tire and the guy said he did not know it was like that. The other side was almost as bad. The brake pads were worn so bad that the o-ring on the puck was coming so far out that it was leaking but not because the o-ring was bad, because the pads were nearly gone. He said he wondered why they were making so much noise. Yes, that is the inter tube poking out of the 1" hole. So I guess this answers the question, when should I change my tires. Well da, when the tube pokes out. You would actually have to look at them to see this though.
My buddy told him to go buy a lottery ticket, because he was a very lucky guy!

OIy16-RbTFEZ3O6wMZUM1tC9-Whp4J2x7LgOWGaUV3pLgEowzx1Bk1W42ocRl2YBNqizDnib1PBDwupYctNyXd5NQc9lSj5Mu9IOXL8aji6vImCGN0os7-AgEGawYsF5ZgZN4UNKEzHmk4H0YIQkKHcIon9cNA-2FkBstuDUM4MefTAtkr2fxwJWIaDAgdAq9QpQlUAj3uGuoB6CIiqZNPL4XI2U57qnMq9BKtdPjDfTwOA5iTJBUYiFjfh1lcT3S50uVXGiTVlXdXxpCMloOIW3qZb3koXgghmklgdTrVVXKCDQHlXWvqJwl7Ujyy9vKn-jYGgknWxgNlbTo9qjyESJS96G6T7-ohvxNWGhVLC5aa7KqGcmlqgWLzfLWr9BylhPPi7yxiS0LC9eZBSpUE7j5d-zbnZKMHOekO5D2zkL7j9GMHyybCeYJIbHTITETXkkrbI_dQa10UXyw-H67N1QUepsvl_i6bBr7Rs436WLNOAQPBDQLpoMiApIfyhFvDlai4ssZteEjytJxyN9OaMBgYOd933tnW8scVAgVAE7gjgn_YFS6JikrWswcsGY5k3se2DQUd1Pyp24Ke7a4uNH6y9OpVYhUucricRgHRayG6qGinsasczX3LheH0OLR5TpjjnFCeCDttSXRfPSFir6kCiXJsySp0ctA3c1_9zRnYg=w460-h613-no
 
Last edited:
I can see it now. Holy smokes - wow. What a picture. That is a big problem just waiting to happen.
 
If I am reading this correctly, he went from a treaded tire to worn-though in 7 months. But not only worn though in one spot, he also managed to take all the tread off the entire face of the tire. That seems nearly impossible to do??
 
If I am reading this correctly, he went from a treaded tire to worn-though in 7 months. But not only worn though in one spot, he also managed to take all the tread off the entire face of the tire. That seems nearly impossible to do??

Re read the original post....9 months prior the tires had been flipped. But still a lot of wear in 9 months flying.
still........amazing! One lucky guy!
 
If I am reading this correctly, he went from a treaded tire to worn-though in 7 months. But not only worn though in one spot, he also managed to take all the tread off the entire face of the tire. That seems nearly impossible to do??

Agreed. You can't go from some tread to completely warn through tread in 9 months through normal flying unless something else is going on.
 
Re read the original post....9 months prior the tires had been flipped. But still a lot of wear in 9 months flying.
still........amazing! One lucky guy!

Yes but they weren't flipped because they were bald on one side already. I deduce this from the fact that 2 people looked at the tires in the last nine months and didn't recommend grounding them. If you look at the profile in the pic, LOTS of wear from side loading (I presume). They look like track tires when they come off my motorcycle, except I am not allowed to take them down to the cords and still pass inspection.

I'm also presuming that this is a TW plane, though it was not specified. I'm not sure that even matters because you could just as easily side load a tire in either gear configuration. Scary for a lot of reasons.
 
unacceptable

This outrageous neglect is bad for all of us in GA. There is NO excuse for a licensed pilot to operate an aircraft to anywhere near this level of unsafe operation.

A recent thread on VAF discussed the proper level of tire wear before replacing. Some said to flip them and wear out the tread on the inboard side of the tires. I took the side of replacing tires when any part of the tread reaches near bare. I also argued that spending $40 dollars on new pads at each conditional inspection was a reasonable expense to assure plenty of pad wear before the next conditional.

Tire and brake maintenance on an aircraft is even more critical than on cars. A car doesn't have to start moving, but it is always important that it can stop! Our RV's need good tires and brakes to start taxiing. Loss of control on this aircraft could have happened at any moment it was in motion.

Please..... Don't scrimp on tires and brakes. Tires can be replaced for less than $200 bucks. Pads are $10 dollars each. That's just $40 bucks to replace each year. How much does your insurance cost you each year?
 
Wow

Wow!

How in the world can you miss that on even the most basic of preflight inspections?
 
Yes but they weren't flipped because they were bald on one side already. I deduce this from the fact that 2 people looked at the tires in the last nine months and didn't recommend grounding them.

I'm also presuming that this is a TW plane, though it was not specified. I'm not sure that even matters because you could just as easily side load a tire in either gear configuration. Scary for a lot of reasons.

No they were not bald when flipped and no this was not on a TW acft. it has a nose wheel.

The pilot sent me a picture of it today and his comment with the picture was Crazy! I told him that he really has to start pre-flighting his plane, he told me that it was not on his checklist. WHAT!!! I told him he needed a new checklist.
 
I also argued that spending $40 dollars on new pads at each conditional inspection was a reasonable expense to assure plenty......?

I agree with everything you said and I respect your maintenance philosophy. However, I won't fix what isn't broke or isn't likely too break.
My first set of brake pads - 5 years 446.4 hours replaced well ahead of manufacturers limits.
I just inspected today at 10 1/2 years, 720 hours. They will easily make another 150 hours or more and still be well above limits.
This includes over 60 hours of formation flying and taxiing accordingly.
I cleaned, inspected rotors, mic'd thicknes of pads, and checked for any defects.
All good.
Brake effectiveness is good. Don't see any reason to change a perfectly good part that is within manufactures limits, broken in, and will be so well past the next inspection.

As far as letting tires go that far, shame, shame.... I want tread. ( also on my second set. The first went 550 hours. Current tires are half tread or better. )

95% paved runways.
 
No they were not bald when flipped and no this was not on a TW acft. it has a nose wheel.

The pilot sent me a picture of it today and his comment with the picture was Crazy! I told him that he really has to start pre-flighting his plane, he told me that it was not on his checklist. WHAT!!! I told him he needed a new checklist.

Thanks for the confirmation. Still a head-scratcher.:confused:
 
This is just poor airmanship. And by that I don't *only* mean that someone apparently has some pretty poor landing/braking/taxiing skills.

Good airmanship starts when you open the hangar door, and involves more than just blindly following a checklist. Unless it's the most extensive preflight checklist on earth, it can't possibly contain everything you need to look at and evaluate during a preflight. That's where good observations and critical thinking come into play. Even if "tires = inflation and condition" is *not* on the checklist (seriously?), it's pretty poor airmanship to not know enough or care enough to look at them.

Shocking, but not surprising...
 
This is just poor airmanship. And by that I don't *only* mean that someone apparently has some pretty poor landing/braking/taxiing skills..

That wear pattern is normal for the tapered gear airplanes. Extreme wear, but a normal pattern -the outside of the tires is worn.

The only thing I see here is someone who never checked tire condition on preflight.
 
Thanks Bobby

Thanks for sharing this Bobby! I'm just jealous that I can't fly as much as that dude. I'm ok with flipping the tire. I don't cause I'm too lazy to change the tire "twice". I'm with Danny in regards to the "Low" cost of maintenance relative to the cost of repairing the airframe, prop/engine... or god forbid our own personal body.

Hopefully your buddy got "scared" enough to start taking a quick look at the tires... and hopefully the rest of the plane too. :)
 
That wear pattern is normal for the tapered gear airplanes. Extreme wear, but a normal pattern -the outside of the tires is worn.

The only thing I see here is someone who never checked tire condition on preflight.

Agreed. Nor did they pull wheel pants in 9 months. I don't care if you have airstops or a hole in your pants to air tires up without pant removal. Although this should have been obvious even with pants on, pull those wheel pants regularly. This is part of good maintenance practices and as Danny pointed out, a little labor vs what can happen with a tire, brake, or wheel failure.....
Good post Bobby and great reminder that these machines take regular inspection and maintenance between CI's.
 
That wear pattern is normal for the tapered gear airplanes. Extreme wear, but a normal pattern -the outside of the tires is worn.

The only thing I see here is someone who never checked tire condition on preflight.

The *pattern* is normal, true, but the *amount* of wear for just 9 months is extreme. You'd have to really work to get that amount of wear, IMO. OR, you could just hit the brakes good and hard and skid the tire on many of your landings...
 
A Mooney landed at 3J1 a couple weeks ago who had take a friend's wife up for a ride. The pilot came walking up asking for help with a flat tire - stranded on the runway. Both tires were bald and it appeared he landed with the brakes locked with both tires showing a large worn spot and one flatted due to the tube being liberated as well.

The entire airplane looked like a death trap. Engine sagging 2 inches below the cowl, paint job that had been rattle canned over, oil leaks all over the engine (the top case seam was covered with proseal), etc.

While getting 2 new tires, he borrowed tools to replace a couple spark plugs that were bad.

They walk among us :eek:
 
A Mooney landed at 3J1 a couple weeks ago who had take a friend's wife up for a ride. The pilot came walking up asking for help with a flat tire - stranded on the runway. Both tires were bald and it appeared he landed with the brakes locked with both tires showing a large worn spot and one flatted due to the tube being liberated as well.

The entire airplane looked like a death trap. Engine sagging 2 inches below the cowl, paint job that had been rattle canned over, oil leaks all over the engine (the top case seam was covered with proseal), etc.

While getting 2 new tires, he borrowed tools to replace a couple spark plugs that were bad.

They walk among us :eek:

Whoever the IA is that is signing off such a piece of work needs to have a little visit from the FAA. I'm not all about telling dad when something isn't going right, but when it's blatantly obvious that the guy just doesn't get it and he's going to kill someone, that needs to be pointed out. There is simply no reason to tolerate pencil whipping for MX.
 
I agree with everything you said and I respect your maintenance philosophy. However, I won't fix what isn't broke or isn't likely too break.
My first set of brake pads - 5 years 446.4 hours replaced well ahead of manufacturers limits.
I just inspected today at 10 1/2 years, 720 hours. They will easily make another 150 hours or more and still be well above limits.
This includes over 60 hours of formation flying and taxiing accordingly.
I cleaned, inspected rotors, mic'd thicknes of pads, and checked for any defects.
All good.
Brake effectiveness is good. Don't see any reason to change a perfectly good part that is within manufactures limits, broken in, and will be so well past the next inspection.

As far as letting tires go that far, shame, shame.... I want tread. ( also on my second set. The first went 550 hours. Current tires are half tread or better. )

95% paved runways.

I agree with you.

There is also risk introduced when doing any kind of maintenance, and I prefer not to touch a system that is operating within limits or is under its useful life span.

This is a philosophy termed "The Waddington Effect" with a decent write up about it by Mike Busch found here:

https://www.savvyaviation.com/wp-content/uploads/articles_eaa/EAA_2011-03_the-waddington-effect.pdf
 
Back
Top