O2lady...what's the news??

[Ztex]

Karen,
I was by the airport today and saw your poor airplane out by the prop shop...looking lonely

Just wondering what the news is?

Z

[LadyO2Pilot]

Thanks for asking, Zane. News is not all that good. I have not heard from the prop shop as to their quest for a blade and how much that is going to cost. But we have determined that we probably need to change the engine also and the current one probably should not be overhauled due to the costs involved with complying with the AD on crank and its replacement with no core charge. So factory reman will have to be the direction that we have to go. So the cost goes up significantly especially combined with whatever the prop blade and hub rehab costs. This was not expected and unfortunately, the baby will be grounded and hopefully housed at VFM until money can be raised. To supplement what I have (do we ever have enough...LOL) I'm looking into setting up a 501c3 or a trust which owns the plane and investigating the possibility (and availability) of warbird restoration grants anywhere. I have also had informal offers of possible fundraising projects and or sponsorships. Nothing formal has materialized and until the legal stuff is completed and I know the price for the prop repair, the black bird will remain in your neck of the woods.

Other than that, I'm really getting antsy to fly and have nothing but a silly ole 4 wheel car But will really be down in the dumps when the fall shows start

[LadyO2Pilot]

As an amendment before BDK gets me (a la the Spitfire thread which I just read)....the reason for setting up a trust or 501c3 is......because of an organization which I have helped in the past with their projects may be willing to help me and have suggested others would too. I am not outright asking for donations but would like to find grants and/or loans to be repaid.

but I'm up for your flaming if you wish

[Cvairwerks]

What about finding a mid-timed takeoff from one of the salvage places? Might be able to find one that will keep you in the air for at least the rest of the year and buy you some time to find a better solution.

[mustanglover]

Thanks for asking, Zane. News is not all that good. I have not heard from the prop shop as to their quest for a blade and how much that is going to cost. But we have determined that we probably need to change the engine also and the current one probably should not be overhauled due to the costs involved with complying with the AD on crank and its replacement with no core charge. So factory reman will have to be the direction that we have to go. So the cost goes up significantly especially combined with whatever the prop blade and hub rehab costs. This was not expected and unfortunately, the baby will be grounded and hopefully housed at VFM until money can be raised. To supplement what I have (do we ever have enough...LOL) I'm looking into setting up a 501c3 or a trust which owns the plane and investigating the possibility (and availability) of warbird restoration grants anywhere. I have also had informal offers of possible fundraising projects and or sponsorships. Nothing formal has materialized and until the legal stuff is completed and I know the price for the prop repair, the black bird will remain in your neck of the woods.

Other than that, I'm really getting antsy to fly and have nothing but a silly ole 4 wheel car But will really be down in the dumps when the fall shows start

You can't find someone to work with you to help YOU tear down that engine and replace the crank? That is the way to go and would be MUCH cheaper than a factory reman.

[LadyO2Pilot]

You can't find someone to work with you to help YOU tear down that engine and replace the crank? That is the way to go and would be MUCH cheaper than a factory reman.

Oh sure I can....but it's more complicated than that. The AD is such that the crank needs to be replaced by another one made by different company and manufactured by a different process. (Thanks Continental and FAA . The bad thing is there is nothing wrong with the old ones; they just wanted everyone to have the same kind...duh ) You have to pay full bore for the crank and get no core charge for the old one. The overhaul with this new crank turns out to be almost as costly as the new engine and you still have accessories that need to be overhauled or replaced. With the factory reman you get everything a one neat package.

As far as finding a good mid time engine somewhere. I, and a couple of friends, did some searching for that with no luck. This particular IO-360-D is not in good supply as the O-2 doesn't have vacuum pump so you must replace the engine with the exact one.....anyone have a D23 hanging around in their barn??? Many other a/c that have IO-360s also run vacuum pumps....so no go. Have a friend who did put one of these on his O-2 and now can't find anyone who is willing to do an overhaul on the "wrong engine.".....at least that was the story I heard.

[Obergrafeter]

So is there going to be a slot in my hangar to rent out for a while if something else doesn't happen first?

[Matt Gunsch]

VIII - Model M337B (USAF O2A), 4-6 PCLM (Normal Category), Approved March 22, 1967
(Refer to Sec. II for information pertaining to the Model 337B)
Engines (Both) Continental IO-360-D or -DB
*Fuel 100/130 minimum grade aviation gasoline

According to the type certificate, you can run either a IO-360 D or DB engine

and the TCM type certificate
NOTE 4. The following accessory drive or mounting provisions are available:

*** Vacuum pump Optional CC 1.545:1 100 800 50
***AND 20000 pad modified for speed, -A, -AB, -B, -D, -DB, -E, H, -HB, -J, -JB, -K, -KB, -ES only.
NOTE 5. The Model IO-360-D is similar to IO-360-A except for rating and oil cooled pistons.

The Model IO-360-DB is similar to the IO-360-D except for modified crankshaft.

So, there are 2 models of engines that can be used on the O-2A.

and if anyone wants to know why the crank is required to be replaced, TCM asked for a AD to require replacment of all crankshafts with a new crankshaft of a VAR manufacture, What is so stupid about this AD, there was no supporting data that shows that the new VAR cranks are any better than the older style of cranks that they replace. Both the VAR and non VAR both have to have the same utlra sonic inspection at overhaul.

It is just another case of a manufacturer getting the FAA to require replacment of a part, with no data to back it up. But TCM is now able to sell ALOT of new crankshafts that they would not have been able to sell before

Here is the AD, if you ever have trouble falling asleep, you can print it out for some bedtime reading, once you start reading it, you will be out like a light.

97-26-17 Teledyne Continental Motors and Rolls-Royce, plc: Amendment 39-10260. Docket 93-ANE-08. Supersedes AD 87-23-08, Amendment 39-5735.

Applicability: Teledyne Continental Motors (TCM) IO-360, LTSIO-360, TSIO-360, IO-520, LIO-520, LTSIO-520 and TSIO-520 series reciprocating engines built on or prior to December 31, 1980; rebuilt TCM IO-360, LTSIO-360, TSIO-360, IO-520, LIO-520, LTSIO-520 and TSIO-520 series reciprocating engines with serial numbers lower than those listed in TCM Critical Service Bulletin (SB) No. CSB96-8, dated June 25, 1996; TCM factory overhauled IO-360, LTSIO-360, TSIO-360, IO-520, LIO-520, LTSIO-520 and TSIO-520 series reciprocating engines with serial number of 901203H and lower; and Rolls-Royce, plc IO-360 and TSIO-360 series reciprocating engines with any serial number. These engines are installed on but not limited to the following aircraft: Raytheon (formerly Beech) models 95-C55, 95-C55A, D55, D55A, E55, E55A, 58, 58A, 58P, 58PA, 58TC, 58TCA, S35, V35, V35A, V35B, E33A, E33C, 35-C33A, 36, A36, F33A, F33C and A36TC; Bellanca model 17-30A; Cessna models 172XP, A185, A188, T188C, 206, T206, 207, T207, 210, T210, P210, 310R, T310P, T310Q, T310R, 320D, 320E, 320F, 336, 337, T337, P337, 340, 401, 402, 414 and T41B/C; Colemill conversion of Commander 500A; Goodyear Airship Blimp 22; Maule Model M-4-210, M-4-210C, M-4-210S, M-4-210T, and M-5-210C; Mooney model M20-K; Navion model H; Pierre Robin HR 100; The New Piper Aircraft, Inc. (formerly Piper Aircraft Company) models PA28-201T, PA28R-201T, PA28RT-201T, PA34-200T and PA34-220T; Prinair DeHavilland Heron; Reims models FR172, F337 and FT337; and Swift Museum Foundation, Inc. models GC-1A and GC-1B equipped with the IO-360 engine.

Note 1: This airworthiness directive (AD) applies to each engine identified in the preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the requirements of this AD. For engines that have been modified, altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished previously.

To prevent crankshaft failure and subsequent engine failure, accomplish the following:

(a) At the next engine overhaul, or whenever the crankshaft is next removed from the engine, after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, determine if the crankshaft was manufactured using the airmelt or vacuum arc remelt (VAR) process in accordance with the identification procedure described in TCM Critical SB No. CSB96-8, dated June 25, 1996. If the crankshaft was manufactured using the airmelt process or if the manufacturing process is unknown, remove the crankshaft from service and replace with a serviceable crankshaft manufactured using the VAR process.

(b) For all TCM IO-360, LTSIO-360, TSIO-360, IO-520, LIO-520, LTSIO-520 and TSIO-520 and Rolls-Royce, plc IO-360 and TSIO-360 engine models that have VAR crankshafts installed, regardless of serial number; at the next and every subsequent crankshaft removal from the engine case or installation of a replacement crankshaft, prior to crankshaft installation in the engine, conduct an ultrasonic inspection of the crankshaft in accordance with the procedures specified in TCM Mandatory SB No. MSB96-10, dated August 15, 1996, and, if necessary, replace with a serviceable part.

Note 2: Accomplishment of the ultrasonic inspection required by this AD does not fulfill any requirements for
magnetic particle inspection or any other inspections specified in TCM or Rolls-Royce, plc overhaul manuals.

(c) The ultrasonic inspection of the crankshaft must be performed by a non-destructive test (NDT) ultrasonic (UT) Level II inspector who is qualified under the guidelines established by the American Society of Nondestructive Testing or MIL-STD-410 or FAA-approved equivalent, or must be trained by TCM personnel or their designated representative on how to accomplish and conduct this inspection procedure. The person approving the engine for return to service is required to verify that the UT inspection was accomplished in accordance with the requirements of this paragraph.

(d) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used if approved by the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office. Operators shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office.

Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved alternative methods of compliance with this airworthiness directive, if any, may be obtained from the Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office.

(e) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the aircraft to a location where the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.

(f) The actions required by this AD shall be done in accordance with the following TCM service documents:

Document No. Pages Date
CSB96-8 1-6 June 25, 1996
Total pages: 6.
MSB96-10 1-3 August 15, 1996
Total pages: 3.

This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from Teledyne Continental Motors, P.O. Box 90, Mobile, AL 36601; telephone (888) 826-5874. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, New England Region, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

(g) This amendment becomes effective on January 23, 1998.

[LadyO2Pilot]

So is there going to be a slot in my hangar to rent out for a while if something else doesn't happen first?

I haven't from you on the "something" but heard from others it was imminent. I didn't want to bother you during Leah's time, Grumps

I'll call ya.

[LadyO2Pilot]

Wow thanks Matt.....I've read all that several times over the years but didn't think to post. Also with the explanation of the reasoning for the AD....seen that before too and that just really chaps but I'm sure it happens more than we know.

[skymstr02]

You know that you are not required to tear down the engine after a prop strike. This is TCM service bulletin, and as a FAR part 91 operator, you are not bound to comply with service bulletins if you do not wish to. Continental engines wants you to, but its up to you whether or not you want to.

Check the prop shaft runout with a dial indicator, and if it is within limits, make a log entry, and go on your merry way. All 100% legal, and you are not sacrificing any safety in doing so.

[LadyO2Pilot]

You know that you are not required to tear down the engine after a prop strike. This is TCM service bulletin, and as a FAR part 91 operator, you are not bound to comply with service bulletins if you do not wish to. Continental engines wants you to, but its up to you whether or not you want to.

Check the prop shaft runout with a dial indicator, and if it is within limits, make a log entry, and go on your merry way. All 100% legal, and you are not sacrificing any safety in doing so.

Yes, DZ...I know....remember we did that the last time in 2001...with the 40 hours of testing for metal in oil. And am checking the runout now too.....just not sure I want to gamble again especially as this is the engine with the higher time albeit seems to test stronger than the one with the lower times....go figure. No decision has been made though...just tending toward replacement as a wise choice.

Now you don't want your fav girl pilot to have a crank shear and an escaping prop assembly cut the boom as our mutually fav IA says...do you....LOL