N601RX Posted January 18, 2013 Report Posted January 18, 2013 Approved, but not mandatorty. If you don't believe me google it or read the link above. The FAA has issued guidance stating that several times. Here is the link FAA interpetation. Read the last paragraph of the 1st page and continued onto the 2nd page. http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2006/060828sb-letter.pdf Quote
PTK Posted January 18, 2013 Report Posted January 18, 2013 Wow Byron! Where did you order this engine?! If I may ask?! That is a great price! Quote
PTK Posted January 18, 2013 Report Posted January 18, 2013 That's awesome! I tried sending you pm but unable. Quote
PTK Posted January 18, 2013 Report Posted January 18, 2013 Approved, but not mandatorty. If you don't believe me google it or read the link above. The FAA has issued guidance stating that several times. Here is the link FAA interpetation. Read the last paragraph of the 1st page and continued onto the 2nd page.http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2006/060828sb-letter.pdf I read it and I hear you. I don't have an opinion however, because I simply don't know. It is an interesting question though because it's stamped in red "MANDATORY." Besides we all know what happens when one expresses their opinion! Quote
Alan Fox Posted January 18, 2013 Report Posted January 18, 2013 RX should listen to smiles , He says he doesnt know........All ADs and service bulletins are required per Lycoming to specify an Overhaul, This has no bearing on airworthiness ,TBO is just a reccomendation , but the manufacturer mandates what is or is not an overhaul.....  RX not only are you wrong , you you cant even admit you are wrong....The worst part is that you are advising people that think you know what you are talking about , and you dont.... You can dissassemble an engine and inspect everything and reassemble without replacing anything , and it is legal to fly , it is not considered an overhaul , it is an IRAN inspection....IRAN is not an overhaul , it is an inspection....Prop strike inspections are IRAN inspections not overhauls...IRAN = Inspect And Repair As Necasary........ Quote
jetdriven Posted January 18, 2013 Report Posted January 18, 2013 Perhaps N601RX should sign it off as an overhaul, or find a mechanic willing to do so. If he can't, then he has his answer. Quote
N601RX Posted January 18, 2013 Report Posted January 18, 2013 RX should listen to smiles , He says he doesnt know........All ADs and service bulletins are required per Lycoming to specify an Overhaul, This has no bearing on airworthiness ,TBO is just a reccomendation , but the manufacturer mandates what is or is not an overhaul.....  RX not only are you wrong , you you cant even admit you are wrong....The worst part is that you are advising people that think you know what you are talking about , and you dont.... You can dissassemble an engine and inspect everything and reassemble without replacing anything , and it is legal to fly , it is not considered an overhaul , it is an IRAN inspection....IRAN is not an overhaul , it is an inspection....Prop strike inspections are IRAN inspections not overhauls...IRAN = Inspect And Repair As Necasary........ What your saying would apply equally to you also. Below is what the FAA says about overhauls and the associated log entry. Read item 1. Also section 3-48 of the current version of the direct drive overhaul manual clearly says that SB240 is recommended. To me recommended does not mean required. If you can show me anything crediitable that says different I'll be happy to admit that I'm wrong. Code of Federal Regulations Sec. 43.2 Part 43 MAINTENANCE, PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE, REBUILDING, AND ALTERATION Sec. 43.2 Records of overhaul and rebuilding. (a) No person may describe in any required maintenance entry or form an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part as being overhauled unless-- (1) Using methods, techniques, and practices acceptable to the Administrator, it has been disassembled, cleaned, inspected, repaired as necessary, and reassembled; and (2) It has been tested in accordance with approved standards and technical data, or in accordance with current standards and technical data acceptable to the Administrator, which have been developed and documented by the holder of the type certificate, supplemental type certificate, or a material, part, process, or appliance approval under [part 21 of this chapter.] ( No person may describe in any required maintenance entry or form an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part as being rebuilt unless it has been disassembled, cleaned, inspected, repaired as necessary, reassembled, and tested to the same tolerances and limits as a new item, using either new parts or used parts that either conform to new part tolerances and limits or to approved oversized or undersized dimensions. Amdt. 43-43A, Eff. 4/16/11 Comments Document History Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Actions: Not Applicable. Final Rule Actions: Final rule. Docket No. FAA-2006-25877; Issued on 10/6/2009 Final rule; correction. Docket No. FAA-2006-25877; Issued on 2/24/2010 Quote
tony Posted January 18, 2013 Report Posted January 18, 2013 All engine oil hose All oil seals All gaskets All circlips, lockplates and retaining rings Piston rings All exhaust valves (except Inconel alloy valves) All exhaust valve retaining keys Crankshaft sludge tubes (where applicable) Cylinder fin stabilizers All bearing inserts (main and connecting rods) Magneto drive cushions Stressed bolts and fastenings Camshaft gear attaching bolts Connecting rod bolts and nuts Crankshaft flange bolts Damaged ignition cable All laminated shims Crankshaft counterweight bushings Piston pin plugs A.C. diaphragm fuel pump........................... Here is the list of parts that I copied from Tonys link that have to be replaced reguardless of condition..... Try reading your own post GENIOUS.........section 3 of LYCOMING overhaul manual...  I’m sorry if I bruised your tender ego, and I must have made you angry; however, your derogatory comment doesn’t change the fact that you’re still wrong. Quote
PTK Posted January 18, 2013 Report Posted January 18, 2013 May I call another timeout please !! back to your corners! How do you very knowledgeable folks interpret paragraph labeled (2) in 601RX's above post, considering FAA approval of SB 204W ? Does 204W qualify as "...tested in accordance with approved standards and technical data, or in accordance with current standards and technical data acceptable to the Administrator, which have been developed and documented by the holder of the type certificate, supplemental type certificate..." ? In other words, does it necessarily mean that the FAA issued approval of 204W by relying on Lycoming's expertise and technical data, or not? Because IF so, then 204W cannot be anything less than mandatory to the FAA. You may resume!! Quote
Alan Fox Posted January 18, 2013 Report Posted January 18, 2013 I am illiterate.....Iliterate ......... A Dumbass....... 1 Quote
aaronk25 Posted January 18, 2013 Author Report Posted January 18, 2013 Engine is running great and I have a call into Darrell Buldoc that he will return Monday. I'm gonna ask him what it would cost to have it count as a smoh. He basically IRANd the motor from what I could tell. Thanks for all the info guys. Quote
PTK Posted January 19, 2013 Report Posted January 19, 2013 You are wrong! No YOU are wrong! ...and the winner is........!!! where did everybody go?! Quote
Alan Fox Posted January 19, 2013 Report Posted January 19, 2013 I went flying today!!!!!   Got tired of arguing..... Quote
tony Posted January 20, 2013 Report Posted January 20, 2013 i did too, wasn't it a gorgeous day to fly? Quote
PTK Posted January 20, 2013 Report Posted January 20, 2013 I did too. Was windy up here in south Jersey today. Nice day otherwise. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.