AirTalk.org Aviation discussions newsgroups   Archives   FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  Engine "on condition"??          AirTalk.org Forum Index -> Owning Airplanes View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Frode Berg Guest Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:58 pm    Post subject: Engine "on condition"?? Hi! Just spoke to my mechanic, and he told me that there will be a new regulation here in Norway for private aircraft that takes away the mandatory engine replacement after approx 2000 hours. Instead, an engine is allowed to run indefinately as long as the regular maintenance is carried out at a sertified shop. He said this is the way it works in the US. Can someone verify this, and tell me, does anyone ever replace their engine if this is the regulations apart from when having a total failure (fire and such..) Also, what are the safety issues? Does a new engine actually perform better? He told me about a C177 that came to his shop from the US for overhaul (change of a couple of sylinders +) and it had over 9000 hours on it's engine... I thought it was mandatory everywere to replace an engine after 2000 hours (or whatever time on individual engines). If this gets approved, it certainly is good news for us private operators. Maybe a GNS430 is not so far reach anyway....(our engine is just over 2000 hours now...) Thanks, Frode Berg Back to top Dave Butler Guest Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 7:17 pm    Post subject: Re: Engine "on condition"?? In the US for Part 91 flying (which you can approximately read as "non-commercial flying") engine overhaul or replacement is *not* required at the interval specified by the manufacturer's "recommended time between overhauls". Most engines have recommended TBOs in the 2000 hour range. Most engines get overhauled at something near their recommended TBOs. Some people like to replace rather than overhaul. Some people like to see how long they can go without overhauling. Dave Remove SHIRT to reply directly. Frode Berg wrote: Quote: Hi! Just spoke to my mechanic, and he told me that there will be a new regulation here in Norway for private aircraft that takes away the mandatory engine replacement after approx 2000 hours. Instead, an engine is allowed to run indefinately as long as the regular maintenance is carried out at a sertified shop. He said this is the way it works in the US. Can someone verify this, and tell me, does anyone ever replace their engine if this is the regulations apart from when having a total failure (fire and such..) Also, what are the safety issues? Does a new engine actually perform better? He told me about a C177 that came to his shop from the US for overhaul (change of a couple of sylinders +) and it had over 9000 hours on it's engine... I thought it was mandatory everywere to replace an engine after 2000 hours (or whatever time on individual engines). If this gets approved, it certainly is good news for us private operators. Maybe a GNS430 is not so far reach anyway....(our engine is just over 2000 hours now...) Thanks, Frode Berg -- Dave Butler, software engineer 919-392-4367 Back to top Paul Tomblin Guest Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 8:50 pm    Post subject: Re: Engine "on condition"?? In a previous article, "Frode Berg" <frode (AT) frodeberg (DOT) com> said: Quote: Just spoke to my mechanic, and he told me that there will be a new regulation here in Norway for private aircraft that takes away the mandatory engine replacement after approx 2000 hours. Our club aircraft have the idea life for an engine - they get flown frequently, and mostly for travel instead of training. That means they don't build up rust from sitting around, and they don't get horsed up to full throttle and down to idle all the time. And because of that, we almost always get way over TBO. Between borescoping at annual and doing a oil analysis at every oil change, we're pretty good at spotting an engine that is due to go, and we've gotten over 3,000 hours on a few engines. -- Paul Tomblin <ptomblin (AT) xcski (DOT) com> http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/ Don't use a big word where a diminutive one will suffice. Back to top MikeM Guest Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 8:51 pm    Post subject: Re: Engine "on condition"?? I've owned my Skylane since 1986. I operate under part 91. Continental O-470R engine First run on the engine; it went to 2475hrs (975 beyond tbo), and a cylinder lost compression. That was what ended the "on condition" operation and the engine was overhauled in 1988. When operating "on condition", it is usually the first thing requiring a fix that causes the overhaul. Second run; In early 2000, the engine was 500 beyond tbo and running strong. Since I was planning several long trips, I elected to overhaul it on my schedule. At the time Continental was having trouble with new crankshafts and cylinders, so I choose an overhaul instead of a factory remanufactered engine. I kept my crankcase halves & crankshaft; got new cylinders, pistons, valves, lifters, camshaft, etc. Cylinders were from Superior Millenium (third party). Now about 600 hours into the third run; everything running good. MikeM Skylane Frode Berg wrote: Quote: Hi! Just spoke to my mechanic, and he told me that there will be a new regulation here in Norway for private aircraft that takes away the mandatory engine replacement after approx 2000 hours. Instead, an engine is allowed to run indefinately as long as the regular maintenance is carried out at a sertified shop. He said this is the way it works in the US. Can someone verify this, and tell me, does anyone ever replace their engine if this is the regulations apart from when having a total failure (fire and such..) Also, what are the safety issues? Does a new engine actually perform better? He told me about a C177 that came to his shop from the US for overhaul (change of a couple of sylinders +) and it had over 9000 hours on it's engine... I thought it was mandatory everywere to replace an engine after 2000 hours (or whatever time on individual engines). If this gets approved, it certainly is good news for us private operators. Maybe a GNS430 is not so far reach anyway....(our engine is just over 2000 hours now...) Thanks, Frode Berg Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         AirTalk.org Forum Index -> Owning Airplanes All times are GMT Page 1 of 1   Jump to: Select a forum Aviation----------------alt.aviationAviation safety EnhancementPlanes, gliders and flying in AustraliaAviation et pilotage (Français)rec.aviationAviation (Aerobatics)Hot air, gas balloons and airshipsHang-gliding, paragliding, foot-launched flightAircraft Design & BuildingInstrument Flight RulesAviation (Classifieds)Military AircraftNaval AviationAviation (Miscellaneous Topics)Owning AirplanesAviators (General Discussions)Aviation related productsAircraft RestorationHelicopters and rotary wing aircraftsFlight SimulationSailplanesAviation (Students)Light aircraftFlying related activities in the UK Airports----------------alt.airportsEdinburgh Airport Glasgow Airport Humberside Airport Luton Airport Aberdeen Airport Glasgow Prestwick Airport  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2006 phpBB Group SEO toolkit © 2004-2006 webmedic.