• The Biplane Forum is a large global active community of biplane builders, owners and pilots. From Pitts to Skybolts, to older barnstormers, all types are welcome. In addition to our active community, our content boasts exhaustive technical information which is often sought after for projects and maintenance. This information has accumulated over the 12+ years the forum has been in existence.

    The Biplane Forum is a private community. Subscriptions are only $29.95/year to gain access to this great community and unmatched source of information not found anywhere else on the web. We are also a great resource for non biplane users, since many GA aircraft are built the same way (fabric and tube construction).

HC C2YK 4CF Non Suffix Hub and Spinner

cactusav8r

Cactusav8r
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
1,246
Reaction score
297
I'm thinking of selling my Aerobatic Prop. Recent (within 60 hours) Eddy Current Inspection, NO Modes, AD compliant, No chips.. I should have my head examined for not keeping it.. I'm Jonesing for a fancy 3 bladed prop that probably doesn't perform as well!

I believe this is the exact same prop on the Pitts S-2B.

Asking $6000 plus actual shipping costs from 35614
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Bond007

Registered Users
Joined
May 1, 2017
Messages
380
Reaction score
228
U should have your head examined for flying aerobatics with that prop.
Get rid of it before it kills u.
I've seen that style hub brake and it takes the engine off the mount instantaneously.
Danny 007
 
Last edited:

cactusav8r

Cactusav8r
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
1,246
Reaction score
297
My prop has some 300 hours on a 2000 Limited Life as well as a flawless recent Eddy Current, it is in complete compliance with all ADs.

If you are (u r) not interested in it, then simply don't contact me about it, no one will come to your (ur) door...

This isn't some hard sell...
 

cactusav8r

Cactusav8r
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
1,246
Reaction score
297
Soo, I spoke with a few Prop Shops, and two Builders (one Pitts/Builder owner who says he knows folks with the same prop on their S2)..
Prop isn't worth the $6000, I was hoping to get, so who ever is interested make me an offer..

As far as the Hub Failures, all on high time Props, hence the 2000 hour limit Mine has 420 hours total time and a recent Eddy Current.

Again if you (U) aren't interested then don't bother responding or worrying about me trying to sell it to you (U)...

Cheers....
 

cactusav8r

Cactusav8r
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
1,246
Reaction score
297
Lowered the Prop on Barnstormers $4000 obo, Probably be a good 2nd Prop for someone or maybe for someone doing light aerobatics. A prop shop offered me $15oo for the blades (They are in A1 shape).. I'd like to get it sold all together if I could...
 

cactusav8r

Cactusav8r
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
1,246
Reaction score
297
This Prop is off and ready for a new home. $4000 for it all Spinner/BackPlate/Prop ready to put on. I am open to any and all offers. Would make a nice prop for gentleman Aerobatics. No Nicks/Leaks/Chips and recent ECI.
 

Ralsmark

New Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Messages
287
Reaction score
186
A question: According to AD 2001-23-08 for Y-shank hub serial numbers with suffix E, suffix A or no suffix:

"(2) Propeller hubs on aircraft certified in the acrobatic category are to be removed from service and replaced with serviceable parts at next overhaul but not to exceed 1,000 hours TIS or 72 months, whichever comes first, after the effective date of this AD."

It seems that for certified aerobatic airplane purposes, this prop turned into a pumpkin in 2007, 72 months after the AD issued. Am I reading the AD wrong? Can you explain what service action you believe makes the prop AD compliant?

If the prop is to continue service with the existing hub, it may be more prudent to install on a non-aerobatic airplane.

Mark
 

cactusav8r

Cactusav8r
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
1,246
Reaction score
297
Nope
My particular prop, hub, use requires an ECI every 150 hours, and has a useful life of 2000 hours. It has 43o hours total time since new and had an ECI 40 hours ago. This is same compliance as the the IO540 Powered Pitts S2 planes. My airplane has only ever done gentleman aerobatics, nothing more.
 
Last edited:

cactusav8r

Cactusav8r
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
1,246
Reaction score
297
You know it would make a better prop for an RV or perhaps a Biplane for light aerobatics, Rolls, loops. I am headed in a little more than that direction.
 

Morphewb

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jun 6, 2009
Messages
1,936
Reaction score
885
Someone was on here three days ago looking for '' a constant speed'' prop. Didn't seem to be too picky as to when, what, where, etc. Might want to track down that post.
 

PittsDriver68

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
5,226
Reaction score
1,684
Location
NH16
"A question: According to AD 2001-23-08..."

Reading AD's where they don't indent can be confusing. The section on "Hub Replacement" starts with paragraph (b) and then (c). The section that post #7 misunderstandingly refers to is (c) subparagraphs (1) and (2). You have to read that (c) says "Propellers with the suffix "A" at the end..." before you get to its subparagraph "(2) Propeller hubs on aircraft certified in the acrobatic category...". So none of this applies to the propeller that is looking for a new home. That propeller is covered by paragraph (a) higher up.

Reading FAA stuff often requires grammatical analysis that we all tried to avoid studying in grade school. Don;t feel bad if you have to read the text three times to make sense of it.

I owned a no-suffix Hartzell that I ran for many years doing the 150 hour eddy-current inspection. Between that and doing 25 hour visual inspections of the crank flange (lightening holes) I got really good as Hartzell removal and replacement.

Best of luck,

Wes
 

Ralsmark

New Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Messages
287
Reaction score
186
OK, Wes, thanks for that clarification. From what you say, I understand the mandatory hub replacement affects only the listed A suffix serial number hubs. No-suffix and E suffix hubs not affected.

I have the same model E suffix serial number hub that I am planning to pull this month to be overhauled and upgraded with a used B suffix hub.

Regards,

Mark
 

PittsDriver68

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
5,226
Reaction score
1,684
Location
NH16
That's exactly what I did. I do not miss pulling and replacing my propeller 3 times a year.

Best of luck,

Wes
 

cactusav8r

Cactusav8r
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
1,246
Reaction score
297
Hmm, Removal isn't required for the ECI. they did it on the plane.

Regards
 

PittsDriver68

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
5,226
Reaction score
1,684
Location
NH16
Generally speaking, you do not have to remove the prop. But its less expensive if you bring the propeller to their shop when the shop doing the ECI is not located on an airport. My closest inspection shop charges the shop rate for traveling from their shop to your place. Since I needed to pull the propeller to inspect the crank flange, I coordinated that with the trip to the ECI shop. If I recall correctly, I think that the ECI only cost $125 done in their shop vs at least twice that if I brought the airplane to the airport nearest them. That shop does pipeline weld X-ray and other non-aviation work, so they weren't located that close to an airport. Worked for me.

Best of luck,

Wes
 

cactusav8r

Cactusav8r
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
1,246
Reaction score
297
Gotcha, My PropShop is at an Airport. So I flew over there and they simply took my Spinner off.

Regards
 

Ed T

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Aug 5, 2008
Messages
271
Reaction score
83
Aircraft Propeller Systems in Lake Zurich, IL came to our last EAA meeting to talk about props. They alerted me to AD2001-23-08 which applies to a "no-suffix" HC-CY2K-4F I bought new many years ago for use in my Skybolt project. Subsequent discussions with Jason Klein, APS GA Sales Manager, have spelled out some options and related costs to deal with the AD and required repetitive inspections. A new "B" suffix hub for my prop will cost $4100, and installation as part of an overhaul is an additional $3230. They will also consider doing the install as part of a less expensive process they call a re-seal with the proviso that if they find corrosion they will upgrade to the more expensive overhaul process. They were also willing to look for an overhauled (not new) "B" hub and estimated cost from $2500 to $3000 "depending on where one could be found". They will provide free pick-up and delivery of the prop in the local area. They also said they would modify the existing spinner bulkhead at no cost.

There is an alternative procedure that satisfies AD2001-23-08 without the need for repetitive 100 hour ECI by replacing the normal grease in my current non-suffix hub with oil. Conversion to an oil-filled hub is much less expensive: conversion and reseal, $2100; conversion and overhaul $3430. Can anyone comment on desirability of this mod? Seems to me the current hub with oil fill does not eliminate possibility of cracks in the hub but rather will make them easier to detect, presumably much sooner than the next 100 hour eddy current inspection.

This thread and others have made reference to stresses on the prop and crank depending on the type and aggressiveness of aerobatic maneuvers performed. I'm 73, so I plan to fly mostly "gentleman" aerobatics, but I do not want to limit the airplane for other pilots or later owners. It seems to me the greatest stresses would come from combinations of speed, and motions that produce abrupt changes in pitch and yaw (gyroscopic). Another thread mentioned a Skybolt might be competitive for Sportsman and maybe Intermediate, but noted snaps could place additional stresses on the prop at Intermediate level. If the oil-filled non-suffix hub is still subject to cracking and possible blade loss, can some of you "Top Guns" suggest maneuvers that should be avoided if I go this route to lower cost? Also, have others elected the oil-filled hub as terminating action for the AD? What has been your experience?

Beej, if this is too far off topic, I have no objection to you moving it and sorry for upsetting Cactusav8r's thread. Maybe call it "Hartzell Props and AD2001-23-08". Thanks all.
 

PittsDriver68

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
5,226
Reaction score
1,684
Location
NH16
McCauley mandated red colored oil in their prop hubs many years ago. See a red streak on their hub during pre-flight and you know that it has a crack, grounding you right there. Seems to have worked for them. Should work for a Hartzell. Rereading the AD I see no mention of putting oil in the hub as an alternate method of compliance. Where is that published?

I would not worry about the hub cracking with Skybolt aerobatics. We never heard about airplanes falling out of the sky with cracked/broken Hartzell propeller hubs from acro. Yes, its a problem, but the FAA's threshold for issuing AD's is pretty aggressive.

Best of luck,

Wes
 

Ed T

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Aug 5, 2008
Messages
271
Reaction score
83
Thanks Wes. The alternate method of compliance is spelled out in the service bulletin referenced by AD2001-23-08, that is Hartzell SB-61-227, Propeller - Hub Inspection, now in revision 6. In your opinion are there any acro maneuvers that are especially hard on the prop (hammerhead, abrupt pull-up to vertical, snaps, tumbling, etc.)? I do have a new, solid, thick flange ECI crankshaft for my engine re-build.
 

PittsDriver68

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Messages
5,226
Reaction score
1,684
Location
NH16
Thanks for the info. I will suggest that snaps are relatively hard on the prop and tumbles are really hard on the prop and the crank. Common wisdom is don't tumble a Hartzell.

Best of luck,

Wes
 

Latest posts

Top