Jump to content

Any thoughts on


jshill

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Quote: flight2000

I have the web space available and can compile the data.  I would love to emulate what he did with the CSOB site.  I have manuals and other data for the E model, but can just as easily incorporate any other models.  Let me know if you want to start putting the data out there.

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not all LOP or ROP.  Frequency of flight also matters.  We put 2500+ tach hours on the engine of my C172 (3200 hobbs) and no cylinder was below 76 on the compressions (new cylinders at overhaul time).  That was 4 years worth of flying in a training environment - all rich of peak.  If that time was spread out over 25 years, the results may not have been the same.


A couple months before selling it, I had sold my flight instruction service and just flew the airplane personally.  It developed a leak coming out of the breather.  We took all the cylinders off and inspected them.  We just put new rings on the pistons and kept going.  Nasty leak eliminated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote: N601RX

An undocumented password protected FTP site might stand a better chance of surviving.  I have all the manauls to my plane and accessories and have shared them with many people on here. Unfortunately most of the manuals are to big to e-mail. 

Up until about a year ago the web site below had pretty much every Mooney, Lycoming, Continental, Garmin and King Manual available on it. Now all it has is the threating letter from Piper.

http://www.flycorona.com/manuals/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To get back to the OP, I'm not a Savvy client, but I have taken the seminar (which I thought was well worth the time and cost), and I've watched most of the (free) webinars.  It's certainly true that flying safely costs money, but spending more money doesn't equate to flying more safely.  The traditional view of maintenance is that mx is good, so more mx is better.  The airlines and military, some time ago, shifted to the view that mx is a necessary evil to be tolerated, but minimized.  In doing so, they reduced costs, and increased safety and dispatch reliability.  GA, for the most part, hasn't made that shift.


Mike strongly favors condition-directed mx over time-directed mx.  IOW, repair/replace/overhaul parts based on their condition, not based on the passing of some period of calendar or operating time.  In some cases, condition monitoring isn't practical (as with magnetos, for example), so inspection or repair needs to be done on a time-directed basis; in other cases, time-directed mx is mandated by regulation (like an AD requiring a recurring inspection).  In most other cases, repair or replace on condition.  Before you commit maintenance (i.e., attack an airplane with tools), you should have a good idea of what exactly you're doing and why you're doing it.


BTW, Mike is now saying his engines are at 200% of TBO, and TBO is 1400 hours on his T310R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote: Becca

So, I meant to ask this on the other post, what do people mean by the additional work of running your plane LOP?  What's this idea that its harder or more difficult for the pilot than ROP?  To me, the process seems the same for either method.  Can someone explain to me the difference?  Lean your mixture until you find your peak EGT on the engine monitor.  Then you either add 100 degrees to that number and richen the mixture to be on the rich side, or you subtract 50 degrees from the number and lean the mixture to be on the lean side. ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote: N4352H

There isn't a correlation that (over)spending without question at your favorite maintenance shop makes your plane any more airworthy or safe compared to a prudent owner maintaining his/her plane like Busch advocates.  I'm sure your shop loves it when you toss them the keys and write a check later!  I bet you even get Christmas cards from them.  ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote: Becca

There isn't a correlation that (over)spending without question at your favorite maintenance shop makes your plane any more airworthy or safe compared to a prudent owner maintaining his/her plane like Busch advocates.  I'm sure your shop loves it when you toss them the keys and write a check later!  I bet you even get Christmas cards from them.  ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hank, having just r&r'd our prop I can say a c/s prop is no big deal.  Just use a new o-ring on install. Otherwise it's like changing a wheel on a Chevy.  The biggest hassle was safety wiring the prop bolts.  Find a cool a& p and get with it .  It helps with confidence in your machine.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote: jetdriven

Hank, having just r&r'd our prop I can say a c/s prop is no big deal.  Just use a new o-ring on install. Otherwise it's like changing a wheel on a Chevy.  The biggest hassle was safety wiring the prop bolts.  Find a cool a& p and get with it .  It helps with confidence in your machine.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.