Lycoming Ad received last week

[Oldguy]

11 hours ago, FlyWalt said:

And this is why there is a dwindling number of people supporting general aviation. It is bad enough that we have to pay UNGODLY amounts of money for engines made with 1940's level technology. But on top of that we as aircraft operators also have to pay for the mistakes of those companies who cant put out airworthy parts as well? The only industry with lower standards of customer care and service is the marine industry.

Unless you include the software industry....

[Guest]

If we're comparing cars to airplane engines, how can Mitsubishi build a car for $13000 and warranty it for 10 years and 160,000 kilometres?  

Clarence

 

[cliffy]

Because they sell 6 million instead of 12/yr

 

[Skates97]

On 8/17/2017 at 10:52 AM, Marcopolo said:

I believe the auto industry does, its called a recall.  They send bad crap out and then after threats of a class action suit they recall it and fix it on their dime (most of the time)!

The auto industry does this all the time. I've been on the Parts side of GM Dealerships for 25 years. The number of recalls that have come through that are ridiculous yet are fixed on the Auto Maker's dime are crazy.

[KSMooniac]

the Takata airbag fiasco is a good example...millions of them recalled and the auto manufacturers/dealers get to do the swap (incurring labor cost) because the cars they sold had defective/dangerous parts.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

[Skates97]

1 hour ago, KSMooniac said:

the Takata airbag fiasco is a good example...millions of them recalled and the auto manufacturers/dealers get to do the swap (incurring labor cost) because the cars they sold had defective/dangerous parts.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk
 

Yes, and still waiting on them to be available for some models over a year later... We have a client in Australia that converts trucks to RH drive. They are waiting on air bags for Sierra's and Silverado's but we still can't get them. The last update I have from GM is from July 2016 saying they would be available in the 4th quarter of 2016...

An example of a crazy one was I think the Camaro where they had us change the key. The ignition key had the key fob built into it, but if someone was really tall it was possible for them to hit their knee on the key which could turn the car off. So, you replaced it so the fob was separate from the key which made some people unhappy. It didn't affect very many people, and years ago they probably would have told people that were tall to just be careful and not bang their knee on the key, but in today's litigious society they still issued a recall on it.

[KSMooniac]

I've been waiting for years for a new driver airbag for my 2004 BMW. My pax got replaced almost 2 years ago.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

[jetdriven]

1 hour ago, Skates97 said:

Yes, and still waiting on them to be available for some models over a year later... We have a client in Australia that converts trucks to RH drive. They are waiting on air bags for Sierra's and Silverado's but we still can't get them. The last update I have from GM is from July 2016 saying they would be available in the 4th quarter of 2016...

An example of a crazy one was I think the Camaro where they had us change the key. The ignition key had the key fob built into it, but if someone was really tall it was possible for them to hit their knee on the key which could turn the car off. So, you replaced it so the fob was separate from the key which made some people unhappy. It didn't affect very many people, and years ago they probably would have told people that were tall to just be careful and not bang their knee on the key, but in today's litigious society they still issued a recall on it.

it was because a few people had the steering lock on them while driving, and they crashed and were killed. Even worse was GM knew about it for years, and covered it up and ignored it.  I think it was acutally the lock cylinder had too much play, but till. You shouldn't "get yousself kilt" because your knee hits the key, In many cars I do.

Edited August 18, 2017 by jetdriven

[timpercarpio]

We had our engine overhauled at Columbia last year and were affected by the AD. 3 out of 4 of our bushings failed with 2 falling out of the connecting rods without using the tool. The third one failed after 2 turns, they replaced all 4. We shared the cost with Columbia and hope to get something back from Lycoming since it was their parts that failed. Columbia did nothing wrong and neither did we. Customer service is the hallmark of all good businesses and I think Lycoming is coming up short in that regard. 

[jclemens]

On 8/17/2017 at 11:03 AM, kortopates said:

Indeed, and I've heard it cost $3700 for the tool. Which should keep most all but the engine shops from performing these inspections which isn't such a bad thing when connecting rods need to be replaced given the specialized nature of torquing the rod bolts to a precise measurable stretch.

Its way too soon to tell, but surely some percentage of the rods replaced under this AD will eventually suffer failure from the fix due to improperly torqued rod bolts; likely performed by tech's that lack experience with the procedure.

The tool is not $3700.  We have two of them, I want to say they were like $120 each.  The large majority or rod bolts are not stretch bolts.  Properly torquing the ones that are is not a black art, most head bolts in the automotive industry are of the same type.  Have some faith in the A&P community, most of us are not incompetent.  We have performed this SB/AD on 8 engines in the last two weeks, there were bushings that failed.  The ones that did are scary, they need to be removed from service.  This AD is a good thing, it will increase safety.  The cost is, well, part of being in aviation, I won't argue about who should be responsible for it.  Just know that there is a problem that is being dealt with, and in the end the fleet will be safer.

Edited August 21, 2017 by jclemens

[PTK]

For clarification purposes, are these OEM Lycoming or PMA parts?

[kortopates]

7 hours ago, jclemens said:

The tool is not $3700.  We have two of them, I want to say they were like $120 each.  The large majority or rod bolts are not stretch bolts.  Properly torquing the ones that are is not a black art, most head bolts in the automotive industry are of the same type.  Have some faith in the A&P community, most of us are not incompetent.  We have performed this SB/AD on 8 engines in the last two weeks, there were bushings that failed.  The ones that did are scary, they need to be removed from service.  This AD is a good thing, it will increase safety.  The cost is, well, part of being in aviation, I won't argue about who should be responsible for it.  Just know that there is a problem that is being dealt with, and in the end the fleet will be safer.

Good hear the real street price is very affordable. I hope your right though, but even without replacing crank rods I still worry somewhat after seeing many engines with the cylinders removed and the crankcase bolts not tightened back up under tension to keep a load on the crank bearings.  Despite how Mike B has written and publicized accidents from the many improperly torqued cylinders it seems many still don't adopt the practice of torquing a cylinder base or washers on the through bolts to keep the bearing under some tension. Doing a top is exactly when the engine is at most risk from not doing so.  

[KSMooniac]

For clarification purposes, are these OEM Lycoming or PMA parts?

OEM Lycoming. Not from a Swiss watch maker...

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

[jclemens]

The bushings that failed the test were OEM Lycoming, they were in factory engines affected by serial number. The others may or may not be, the SB was performed on them because there was no way to tell what bushings were used.  All that could be determined is that they were replaced during the affected timeframe.  I suspect they were mostly Superior PMA bushings, but again, no way to tell.  

[RobertGary1]

On 8/18/2017 at 6:23 PM, timpercarpio said:

We had our engine overhauled at Columbia last year and were affected by the AD. 3 out of 4 of our bushings failed with 2 falling out of the connecting rods without using the tool. The third one failed after 2 turns, they replaced all 4. We shared the cost with Columbia and hope to get something back from Lycoming since it was their parts that failed. Columbia did nothing wrong and neither did we. Customer service is the hallmark of all good businesses and I think Lycoming is coming up short in that regard. 

They accepted the risk as part of business knowing they were offering a warranty in excess of what their supplier (Lycoming) offered. Its built into their cost structure.

 

-Robert

[RobertGary1]

On 8/21/2017 at 4:28 AM, jclemens said:

The tool is not $3700.  We have two of them, I want to say they were like $120 each.  The large majority or rod bolts are not stretch bolts.  Properly torquing the ones that are is not a black art, most head bolts in the automotive industry are of the same type.  Have some faith in the A&P community, most of us are not incompetent.  We have performed this SB/AD on 8 engines in the last two weeks, there were bushings that failed.  The ones that did are scary, they need to be removed from service.  This AD is a good thing, it will increase safety.  The cost is, well, part of being in aviation, I won't argue about who should be responsible for it.  Just know that there is a problem that is being dealt with, and in the end the fleet will be safer.

Lose rod bolt is what caused my engine failure. That was a Lycoming *NEW* (not reman) engine too. There must be some black art in torquing them.

I agree that car headbolts are usually not torqued by head pressure but by degree. (i.e. 180 degree turn after initial torque). But I think Lycoming specifies it in length of stretch?? 

-Robert

[RobertGary1]

On 8/21/2017 at 5:39 AM, PTK said:

For clarification purposes, are these OEM Lycoming or PMA parts?

Basically the same thing but when Lycoming resells them they are called OEM. Lycoming does not manufacture them.

-Robert

[PTK]

5 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said:

Basically the same thing but when Lycoming resells them they are called OEM. Lycoming does not manufacture them.

-Robert

Who manufactures the Lycoming OEM ones?

[jclemens]

6 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said:

Lose rod bolt is what caused my engine failure. That was a Lycoming *NEW* (not reman) engine too. There must be some black art in torquing them.

I agree that car headbolts are usually not torqued by head pressure but by degree. (i.e. 180 degree turn after initial torque). But I think Lycoming specifies it in length of stretch?? 

-Robert

Torqueing stretch bolts is simple.  You torque them to an initial value (38 ft/lbs for the part number I picked as an example), then measure the length of the bolt (standard micrometer) , if it falls within the accepted length range (2.255 -2.256) your done.  If it's too short continue torqueing until it falls in that range (max torque 55 ft/lbs).  If it's too long already, replace bolt and try again.  If it's still too short after hitting max torque, replace bolt and try again.  But again, most bolts are not torqued by stretch, just to a value.  See SI458G, attached.  Every rod Lycoming produces has a service bolt that is a torque bolt, as well as a stretch bolt.  Most people opt for the one you don't have to measure...

SI1458G Connecting Rod Bolts (1).pdf

[RobertGary1]

1 hour ago, jclemens said:

Torqueing stretch bolts is simple.  You torque them to an initial value (38 ft/lbs for the part number I picked as an example), then measure the length of the bolt (standard micrometer) , if it falls within the accepted length range (2.255 -2.256) your done.  If it's too short continue torqueing until it falls in that range (max torque 55 ft/lbs).  If it's too long already, replace bolt and try again.  If it's still too short after hitting max torque, replace bolt and try again.  But again, most bolts are not torqued by stretch, just to a value.  See SI458G, attached.  Every rod Lycoming produces has a service bolt that is a torque bolt, as well as a stretch bolt.  Most people opt for the one you don't have to measure...

SI1458G Connecting Rod Bolts (1).pdf

That's good information. Just curious have you heard of many working lose? Am I the only one?  I would have thought the guy in the Lycoming factory would have been an expert of ensuring mine were correct. Maybe it was a metallurgy thing? But just backed out, all good threads until the last, then all hell broke lose. FAA agreed with the finding but didn't think it was worth pursuing.

-Robert

[jclemens]

No, not a common failure.  I have seen it happen once in 20+ years, and that was on an engine that had a rod that was not torqued (probably not at all, just hand tight) and it failed immediately after the engine was started for the first time.  That was a 520 in a bonanza I had just finished installing, scared the hell out of me when it happened.

[flyboy0681]

On 8/18/2017 at 5:13 PM, KSMooniac said:

I've been waiting for years for a new driver airbag for my 2004 BMW. My pax got replaced almost 2 years ago.

 

I guess that's what happens when you essentially have a monopoly. Yes there are other airbag manufacturers, but Takata pretty much has the global market to itself.

[jetdriven]

 I think The fleet would have been safer, had Lycoming taken seriously ,all of the returns of small end rod bushings that they been getting for the previous few years. I spoke with an engine shop that's  Been returning those bushings for years and telling lycoming  repeatedly that these bushings are too small of an OD. they pressed in too easily, and lycoming demanded they prove it was outside of the pressure spec to install it in the small end of the rod while refusing to disclose the actual specification required of the pressfit. They're really good at this they deny any possibility rhat anything bad could've ever left the factory until they are caught up with the indefensible and even then, deny it.  Maybe after the engine self-destructs they might offer you a new 38$ bushing or perhaps a pro-rat and replacement engine if lucky. Labor is on you regardless. Perhaps spend a few  less $ on their army of lawyers and use that money for QC. But they choose. 

Edited August 22, 2017 by jetdriven