William, did you establish the engine status when you offered to buy it? Your post #4 suggests that (perhaps jokingly) it wasn’t shock load inspected
I only got as far as the owner asking Swiftair, and they confirmed that the crankshaft AD was done. Everything seemed to be in order with regard to past repairs, the owner seemed unusually fastidious about it all. I’d expect it’s one of those aeroplanes where you just have to pay the market price for it and get a good one. There is a lot to be said for that if you are busy outside of aviation. The book value of this aeroplane is $120k plus. Passengers seem to like flying the TB aircraft, they have a car like appeal and the TB20 in particular is a very attractive design. The owner just wanted retail price, I can only pay wholesale if I have resell it. I’m sure it will sell for him once they tidy up the adverts.
The crank AD would have been done best part of 10 years ago…
The crank AD would have been done best part of 10 years ago…
I know a guy who bought a R182 in 2015 and it needed the crank AD. Don’t ask…. 
I am totally not surprised. I came across several TBs where this was “not noticed” for a few years.
Peter wrote:
A shock load job includes an OH of the mag(s) and the governor.
NOT according to Lycoming’s SB on the subject, no “overhaul” required:
“Complete a magnetic particle inspection on the following internal parts made of steel:
- Accessory drive gears
- Magneto drive gears
… "
So, a dismantling and NDT is required, not an overhaul. However that isn’t far short in man-hour terms.
It’s the [un-necessary] new parts that make an overhaul pricey, otherwise stripping a mag down to bits and building it back up is less than 2 hours for a shop that does this all day long.
Dear Peter (Bill, Mooney_Driver, AnthonyQ and anyone else who has read this forum)
I am the owner of the TB20 (G-BZPI) you write about and I am both surprised and disappointed to read the kind of dialogue that has been posted on this forum about my aeroplane. I absolutely agree that we all have to look after and support each other as a community and this forum should be exactly the place for doing just that. However, I would suggest that people really need to get their facts correct before speculating with spurious and potentially damaging information based on nothing factual whatsoever. I have owned this aircraft for 5 years and it is perfect; to suggest that anything has been done incorrectly or inappropriately is questioning my integrity and the integrity of the maintenance operation that has looked after the aircraft for the past 18 years. I would in no way attempt to hide a gear up landing and the shock load test and subsequent overhaul is fully documented, together with the new prop and mag etc. in the log books and maintenance record. Who would buy an aeroplane without looking at that? It is sadly a somewhat jaundiced view to suggest we are all crooks and scammers – I for one certainly am not! It is disappointing that you did not take the time to do adequate research to establish the facts before posting the comments that you did. If you need me to, when I get the time, I will post a link to the relevant details on here to put the record straight. Thank you.
I have said this in multiple threads of the same “what about this aeroplane” theme, that talking about a specific aeroplane is not going to help the cause of selling it. I’d said it, I think, in the thread that was started about another TB20 that was for sale. The person looking in/starting the thread has no investment and the seller has all the downside. In a rare case someone might pop their head up and praise the aeroplane
It’s just another frustration on the road to selling an aeroplane.
The original owner ought to have commented on the specific issues raised. The original advert – the basis of this discussion – appears in post 1.
If an advert is badly drafted, the seller has only himself to blame for any discussion about the description!
