Engine overhaul log entries.

Tom-D

Tom-D

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
34,740
Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Can you as an A&P sign off the engine overhaul return to service entry as " IAW the overhaul manual" when you use new cylinders? or an STC'ed shop procedure when completing the work? such as a .020" undersized crank, which is beyond manufacturer's limit?
 
Yes I am, do you as an owner know what is required to be in the overhaul return to service entry? you did buy an aircraft didn't you? is your entry correct?
 
Stirring the pot are we?
 
(3) Powerplant major repairs. Repairs of the following parts of an engine and repairs of the following types, are powerplant major repairs:
(i) Separation or disassembly of a crankcase or crankshaft of a reciprocating engine equipped with an integral supercharger.
(ii) Separation or disassembly of a crankcase or crankshaft of a reciprocating engine equipped with other than spur-type propeller reduction gearing.
(iii) Special repairs to structural engine parts by welding, plating, metalizing, or other methods.

Overhauls are not listed as a major repair. Can be signed off by an A&P.
 
Normally I avoid these discussions. I just wanted to see how quick Tom would be to tell me I'm FOS. :rolleyes:
 
Norman said:
Normally I avoid these discussions. I just wanted to see how quick Tom would be to tell me I'm FOS. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think he meant when employing a procedure that not OEM approved, such as a ground crankshaft beyond OEM limits and using an STC'ed bearing set.

In reality very few overhauls are "IAW with" Lycoming or Continental manual as pretty much every manufacturer bans the use of aftermarket FAA/PMA parts in their products. This holds true for magnetos, carburetors or even the airplane itself.
 
Timbeck2 said:
Oh so this is one of those "I know something you don't know" threads.

Do you know what the wake turbulence separation required for a small aircraft to land behind a Boeing 767?
Click to expand...


I'm going with 6 miles but I don't understand this new Cat A,B,C,D,E,F separation either.:D
 
Did you follow the OH manual and did you perform all the MFR's testing with calibrated equipment?
 
bnt83 said:
I think he meant when employing a procedure that not OEM approved, such as a ground crankshaft beyond OEM limits and using an STC'ed bearing set.

In reality very few overhauls are "IAW with" Lycoming or Continental manual as pretty much every manufacturer bans the use of aftermarket FAA/PMA parts in their products. This holds true for magnetos, carburetors or even the airplane itself.
Click to expand...

I should have read all of his post. I just figured he is on another fishin' trip.
 
bnt83 said:
I think he meant when employing a procedure that not OEM approved, such as a ground crankshaft beyond OEM limits and using an STC'ed bearing set.

In reality very few overhauls are "IAW with" Lycoming or Continental manual as pretty much every manufacturer bans the use of aftermarket FAA/PMA parts in their products. This holds true for magnetos, carburetors or even the airplane itself.
Click to expand...
And yet we see that phrase used time after time.
 
This question came up in a conversation with FSDO. they are so accustom to seeing that phrase they expect it.So a student getting his check ride was denied, ( DPE )they called me to see why I'd use the phrase " this engine meets FAR 43.2 for major overhaul as rebuilt" I asked the inspector How I could use the MM as the reference when I did not comply with it? as the manual says nothing about using new cylinders, or a crank that was re-ground to a STC standard, which was below Manufacturers limits. The phone got quite, and then he said, "I'll get back" phone has not rung.
 
FOS = Reached full capacity of volumetric level of fecal excrement. Or something like that.
 
now....here's an interesting log entry. :D
wood-wood-stove-nbcnewsDOTcom.jpg
 
I'm starting to think we need to track "time since repair", and that repair being a field "overhaul" that lists in detail what happed to the engine....but it may not really quality as an "overhaul" in accordance with manufacturer's data.

Side note, how did overhaul become a term that the engine manufacturer was able to define or change at will anyway? When you get 8130-3 for parts that say "overhauled", did the manufacturer of them do the same? What I'm getting at is there are thousands of parts out there called "overhauled" but there is no published overhaul procedure.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
Did you follow the OH manual and did you perform all the MFR's testing with calibrated equipment?
Click to expand...
No ! I used other means acceptable to the administrator. just like FAR 43 requires.
 
bnt83 said:
I'm starting to think we need to track "time since repair", and that repair being a field "overhaul" that lists in detail what happed to the engine....but it may not really quality as an "overhaul" in accordance with manufacturer's data.

Side note, how did overhaul become a term that the engine manufacturer was able to define or change at will anyway? When you get 8130-3 for parts that say "overhauled", did the manufacturer of them do the same? What I'm getting at is there are thousands of parts out there called "overhauled" but there is no published overhaul procedure.
Click to expand...
You can "REPAIR" every part in an "OVERHAULED" Engine, and still log it as a repair.

But the question remains, why should the airworthiness inspectors expect to see "Overhauled IAW the Manufacturer's overhaul manual".

IMHO they shouldn't. They should expect to see a description of the work as FAR 43 requires. and a statement saying it was overhauled at a certain TT of the engine.
Plus you should also have an entry showing the removal from the aircraft in the AC records, at a certain time of the AC TT.

Just remember engine overhauls entries go in the engine record, removal and replacement of the engine go in the aircraft records.
 
Truth be known, I was just pulling your chain Tom. In my opinion, you bring valuable information to this forum...its just the way you go about it sometimes....;)
 
Tom-D said:
This question came up in a conversation with FSDO. they are so accustom to seeing that phrase they expect it.So a student getting his check ride was denied, ( DPE )they called me to see why I'd use the phrase " this engine meets FAR 43.2 for major overhaul as rebuilt" I asked the inspector How I could use the MM as the reference when I did not comply with it? as the manual says nothing about using new cylinders, or a crank that was re-ground to a STC standard, which was below Manufacturers limits. The phone got quite, and then he said, "I'll get back" phone has not rung.
Click to expand...

This is a good point.

Now that said, I'm surprised they looked that closely at the logs before the checkride.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
This is a good point.

Now that said, I'm surprised they looked that closely at the logs before the checkride.
Click to expand...

For a DPE ride I would agree, it's odd they looked that close.

For a FSDO ride I would not agree, when I've gone in for a FSDO ride they have a maintance inspector look through your logs and your plane while you're starting in on the oral.
 
James331 said:
For a DPE ride I would agree, it's odd they looked that close.

For a FSDO ride I would not agree, when I've gone in for a FSDO ride they have a maintance inspector look through your logs and your plane while you're starting in on the oral.
Click to expand...


I went for an early morning FSDO ride, they had four inspectors from maintenance look at the logbook and the airplane! (this airplane was previously owned by one of the Ops Inspectors lol).
 
James331 said:
For a DPE ride I would agree, it's odd they looked that close.

For a FSDO ride I would not agree, when I've gone in for a FSDO ride they have a maintance inspector look through your logs and your plane while you're starting in on the oral.
Click to expand...

The way Tom's post was worded, it's not entirely clear whether the DPE denied the ride and called the FSDO, or whether it was a FSDO ride. Note in the quoted post Tom said the conversation was with the FSDO, but for the check ride he said "(DPE)".

I would agree with you that on a FSDO ride I'd expect a more thorough examination of the logs.
 
Had a similar experience where a DPE shut a student down because I had entered " inspected IAW an annual inspection" To appease him and the owner I made a new log entry stating that all references to "annual inspection" we're to be interpreted as regarding part 43 appendix d because that is the only reference in the FAR's defining "annual inspection" There are no alternate definitions to be found.
 
Silvaire said:
Had a similar experience where a DPE shut a student down because I had entered " inspected IAW an annual inspection" To appease him and the owner I made a new log entry stating that all references to "annual inspection" we're to be interpreted as regarding part 43 appendix d because that is the only reference in the FAR's defining "annual inspection" There are no alternate definitions to be found.
Click to expand...

Talk about nit picking for the sake of nit picking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top