Bravo mandatory overhaul at 2,000 hours

[jetdriven]

Don maxwell told us that some fed at the SAT FSDO forced Mooney to put a 2,000 overhaul mandatory limit in the M20m airworthiness limitations section of the maintenance manual therefore making it mandatory. WTF?

EDIT: according to Maxwell it comes from higher up than the FSDO and does not contain the words "shall" or "must", thereby giving principled owners an "out"

[Piloto]

My understanding is that only the ACO (Aircraft Certification Office) that originally certified the plane is the only one that can do changes to the original certification. FSDO offices are responsible for the compliance of FAA regulations and certification, with no authority to certify or change products.

José

[N9453V]

I believe it's the Fort Worth ACO that oversees Mooney's type certificates and DERs and they have a bit of a reputation...

The previous owner of my plane was working on an STC with the Fort Worth ACO and it took him almost a year and a ridiculous amount of effort to get approval just to install on one plane. Also, I heard from folks at Eclipse that they changed ACO's because they were having a lot of issues with Fort Worth.

-Andrew

[Dmax]

I was refering to Chapter 4 of the revised Mooney M20M Service manual. It is titled Airworthiness Limitations. It is required of all aircraft service manuals as they are revised. There has been much debate about this and items addressed are mandatory. The loophole in this at this time is that Mooney did not include the magic words of "must" or "shall" in the wording. They have received a letter to include those words in the next update which they would like immediately.Since the staff at SAT has doubled in the last 4 years, Mooney now has their own personal "prodder" to keep the pot stirred. With a one man engineering dept I hope that the update is delayed as long as possible.

Don

[Greg_D]

Is that forthcoming change only for the M20M, or will it apply to other models?

[N601RX]

This nonsense needs to be stopped at a level higher than the district level. Next thing they will be extending this to calander times. Then they will extend it to props and other accessories. This is something that AOPA should be getting involved in.

Is there any requirement for a owner with a private mechanic to go out and buy and use the latest edition of the service manual?

[John Pleisse]

On what basis? How was that sniffed out by the SAT FSDO? Which begs the question, if you have Trinidad TC with virtually the same power plant, who is going to tell them to change their SM? And is the SM the final say in TBO? Stupid. $63k engine.

[jetdriven]

I was refering to Chapter 4 of the revised Mooney M20M Service manual. It is titled Airworthiness Limitations. It is required of all aircraft service manuals as they are revised. There has been much debate about this and items addressed are mandatory. The loophole in this at this time is that Mooney did not include the magic words of "must" or "shall" in the wording. They have received a letter to include those words in the next update which they would like immediately.Since the staff at SAT has doubled in the last 4 years, Mooney now has their own personal "prodder" to keep the pot stirred. With a one man engineering dept I hope that the update is delayed as long as possible.

Don

Thanks for the clarification, Don. I find it really crazy that one man might cause all the Bravo owners to overhaul their engine at a certain time, regardless of the fact they are part 91 operators.

[Dmax]

The chapter 4 airworthiness limitations is for all planes. It is being added to all SM's as they are being revised or updated. Another item is instructations for continued airworthiness. These are mandatory and many shops are going by it. The wording is not correct in the Mooney manuals so we kinda have an open right now. The chapter 4 exists for m20TN, M20R, M20S, M20M right now, The J & K models will be next but it may be a while as it takes about 18 months for a revision to be approved. We have been having this discussion at our IA renewals for the last few years.The alphabets know about it . I only mention this in case you get somewhere and they want you to comply with the chapter 4. Just remember, you dont need a medical, a bfr, a sm or an annual til you have a problem.

[OR75]

What triggers this in the first place ? An engine stop at 2000.1 hours ?

Is this Mooney specific or will it apply to all reciprocating engines ?

[KSMooniac]

What triggers this in the first place ? An engine stop at 2000.1 hours ?

Is this Mooney specific or will it apply to all reciprocating engines ?

For now it is Mooney-specific, and only due to a rogue ACO (Aircraft Cert Office) or FSDO that "oversees" Mooney in Kerrville. Since there aren't any other manufacturers in the San Antonio/Kerrville region, this rogue opinion has not yet spread to others. Hopefully this gets nipped in the bud before it spreads, because it is utterly stupid and a case of a solution looking for a problem that doesn't exist. I doubt the Wichita ACO would publish something like this and cripple Cessna and Beech.

[N601RX]

The next thing will be the emergency AD that comes out due to all the tach cables that unscrew themselves after each annual.

[Cruiser]

If this is a "local" requirement can't Mooney get some outside assistance (Lycoming/TCM) and move this demand by the local FSDO up the chain to get it stopped now?

Why would an engine have Mooney specific overhaul limitations anyway.

[jetdriven]

The next thing will be the emergency AD that comes out due to all the tach cables that unscrew themselves after each annual.

No kidding although I am not sure the bravo has a recording tachometer. I certainly would wire the hobbs through the landing gear switch though.

My friend with a T-6 did that. His engine has 1800 hours on it (it's past TBO) and it was last overhauled in 1952!

[Becca]

I'd like to hear from AOPA on this topic. It sets a bad precendent. I'm going to contact them and see what they say, you should too. One member they might ignore, multiple members, maybe not. If this only effects Mooneys it will definitely devalue our planes in the eyes of some purchasers. Maybe post something on the red board too?

[N601RX]

If their allowed to do this with one manufacturer, it is only a matter of time before it spreads to other manufactures. It will also spread to props and other accessories.

[OR75]

The J manual refers to the Lycoming SI 1009 AJ

The L manual says "2000 Hours"

The M manual says "2000 hours (Reference Lycoming SI 1009 AJ)"

The R and S manual says "2000 hours"

for all the title is "Recommended O/H or Replace Time Limits)

[aerobat95]

We need to findout who this guy is and have a conversation with him in a unlit parking lot. People and policies like this are whats killing GA in the US.....Its only a matter of time before GA dies completely here....damn sad.

[jetdriven]

The J manual refers to the Lycoming SI 1009 AJ

The L manual says "2000 Hours"

The M manual says "2000 hours (Reference Lycoming SI 1009 AJ)"

The R and S manual says "2000 hours"

for all the title is "Recommended O/H or Replace Time Limits)

Nothing in that manual is compulsory unless it is contained in the "Airworthiness Limitations" section of the maintenance manual. FAR part 23 certificated aircraft have a long list of items there. CAR 3 aircraft, such as the M20 series, traditionally have not.

[Dmax]

Please reread my post, it'll probably be my last. This is not a one man thing. It has been in the long body service manuals for several years. It comes from the top not the sat fsdo. They are the contact point. Was trying to give you an out if confronted

[bd32322]

Can someone post a link to the AOPA forum where i can let them know about this? I kmow they already know about this, but regardless... Its ridiculous to think that pilots wont look after their own safety and do overhauls on condition instead of a magical number!

I am also confused about what this thread is saying. Looks like the FSDO can revise manuals and add the mandatory TBO, so how is it not related to a rogue FSDO? And shouldnt the revision come from Mooney instead of the FSDO forcing the language?

[Becca]

Please reread my post, it'll probably be my last. This is not a one man thing. It has been in the long body service manuals for several years. It comes from the top not the sat fsdo. They are the contact point. Was trying to give you an out if confronted

Don - if you aren't up for posting on this, can you PM me with who you mean from "the top" and if you have a copy of the paper work where the "top" or the SAT FSDO has insisted on changing the language to "must" or whatever it is that makes an overhaul mandatory? I'd like to talk to someoen at AOPA about this and/or MAPA - I understand you said they already know, but as a long time member of these organizations, I'd like to know what they are doing to advocate against this - from your posts, I feel like this has been heading this way for a couple years now, yet this is the first I have heard about it, and I think I try to do a good job keeping track of aviation news. But I just don't feel like I have all the information to even understand what's happening.

[fantom]

Damn....aren't we missing the BIG news?

Welcome to posting on MooneySpace, Don. We need your experience, knowledge and wit around here.

[Dmax]

MOONEY AIRPLANE COMPANY, INC.

M20M SERVICE & MAINTENANCE MANUAL

4-00-00 - AIRWORTHINESS LIMITATIONS - MODEL M20M (Normal Category)

The Airworthiness Umitations Section is FAA approved and specifies maintenance required under

14 CFR §§ 43.16 and 91.403 unless an alternative program has been FAA approved.

NOTE

All time limits and requirements listed in this section are also covered in Chapter 5 - Time Umits/Maintenance

Checks.

4-10-00 - TIME LIMIT COMPONENTS

It is recommended that replacement of components

should be accomplished not later than the specified pe-

4-10-01 - REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE

riod of operation for that component or in accordance

with manufactures service data or airworthiness directives.

ITEM REPLACE TIME LIMITS

Landing Gear

Actuator No-Back Spring 1000 Hours

Powerplant

Engine - Lycoming 2000 Hours (refer to mfg's. repair data)

Propeller - McCauley 2000 Hours (refer to mfg's. repair data)

Magnetos - Slick 4 Years or engine O/H (refer to mfg's. repair/inspection

data)

V-Band Clamps After 2 disassemblies

Flight Controls

TKS Airframe/Propeller Pump Motor 2000 Hours

Miscellaneous Systems

Vacuum Pump, Primary On Condition or 500 Hrs. (or manufacturer's recommendation)

or 6 years from date of mfg. and at Engine

O/H

Stand-by Vacuum Pump/Electric * 100 Hours (Inspect Drive Coupling)

Check Valve Manifolds, Check Valves and Regulator 10 Years from date of manufacture (date of rnanutac-

Check Valve Manifolds Parker 2H3-39 and 2H3-47 ture encoded in serial number - refer to Parker service

literature)

* Replacement vacuum pump no longer available. Aircraft should be retrofitted with Tailcone Mounted Vacuum System,

Mooney drawing number 940155.

NOTE

Components should be inspected and serviced at regular intervals per the serviCing, lubrication and

inspection chart of this manual located In Chapter 5 - Time Llmits/Malntenance Checks.

4-00-00

Rev Date ~

Page~5_

Date 2006

[Dmax]

It is recommended that replacement of components

If the wording is changed from recommended to "must" or "shall" then it becomes mandatory. There are shops that are already reading this as mandatory due to the fact that it is in Chapter 4 of the service manual and those items are mandatory if worded properly. This has been in the manual since 06. Many of these planes are coming up on the 2000hr mark since this addition to the SM. It was not there the first go around.