Procedures and Regulations to put an engine "on condition"?

[wrenchturnin]

Hey guys. I have a customer wanting to put his 0-320 on condition. He also wants a top overhaul done. I imagine there are regulations related, 25hr compression checks etc.. or is all of this covered in the engine manual?

[culver10]

There is no such thing as on condition for a privately registered aircraft. Read the CARS.

[groncher]

Culver is correct, see CAR625 appendix C.
For commercial aircraft refer to airworthiness notice B041 for guidance.

[Strega]

Hey guys. I have a customer wanting to put his 0-320 on condition. He also wants a top overhaul done. I imagine there are regulations related, 25hr compression checks etc.. or is all of this covered in the engine manual?

nuff said..

[wrenchturnin]

Wow a bunch of wolves on this forum! What are you talking about nuff said? It was an honest question and maybe not ALL of us know all the awnsers! There are plenty of private aircraft flying around with "on condition" engines with an approved maintenance schedules. I was just simply asking how to get the process started and some pointers.

[Strega]

I have a question, how much do you charge your customer for your services?

[photofly]

There are plenty of private aircraft flying around with "on condition" engines with an approved maintenance schedules. I was just simply asking how to get the process started and some pointers.

I doubt there are any, because only a muppet would actively seek a maintenance schedule more restrictive than 625 appendix B and C.

There is no process, and it would be reasonable to expect an AME working on small private aircraft to know this.

[GyvAir]

If you weren’t squeezed out of the womb knowing that you already know all there is to know about aviation, you’re not welcome on AvCanada. Didn’t you know that?

Sarcasm aside though, I’m sure you’ll find you get better answers in any forum if your initial questions reflect a bit more research on your own part, prior to asking for help.

[wrenchturnin]

I havn't worked on the small stuff in 5 years and I recently changed career industrys and I'm trying to get back up to speed again and opening my side business. I have a M1/M2 But when I did work on the M1's I remember numerous aircraft with on condition engines with extra time interval checks required. Im beginning at 65$/hr because of my current inexperience but that will go up with time. I havn't yet worked on a customer plane. Im just starting out here guys.

I want to do everything legal and already have all my calibrated tooling. I was a very good mechanic when I was in aviation . I don't want to be the guy in the back of his pickup truck pencil whipping entry's and without legal manuals. All I want to do is provide a honest legal service. And if it becomes a problem with customers etc.. to do things legally and properly then I will just close up shop.

[photofly]

If you weren’t squeezed out of the womb knowing that you already know all there is to know about aviation, you’re not welcome on AvCanada. Didn’t you know that?

Sarcasm aside though, I’m sure you’ll find you get better answers in any forum if your initial questions reflect a bit more research on your own part, prior to asking for help.

Apparently it's ok to pop out of the womb and charge customers for top overhauls of their O320 engines though.

[wrenchturnin]

Yes true a top overhaul is a long shot at my experience level. He's got new cylinders though which makes is a bit easier but still.

[ahramin]

Well, to answer your original post, there is no requirement to overhaul an engine on a private aircraft when it reaches tbo hours, so no on condition program. There is no such thing as a top overhaul. The word overhaul has a specific meaning which no longer means anything specific when adding the word top. Cylinders are accessories, and it doesn't make sense to replace $5000 worth of accessories just for the hell of it. Lastly compression checks are now widely recognized to be somewhat useless. Continental requires a boroscope inspection any time a compression check is called for, and Lycoming recommends it. A prudent AME would never consider the results of a compression check - good or bad - without confirming it with a boroscope inspection.

What others are getting at here is that just by the questions you are asking, it's obvious you should not be in charge of making (or giving advice on) maintenance spending decisions on aircraft. I disagree that this makes you unfit to do aircraft maintenance. Maintenance decisions are the OWNER's responsibility. If the person responsible - the owner - doesn't know enough to make these decisions then they shouldn't blame someone not responsible - the mechanic - if they end up spending money to no purpose, like a top overhaul. It's your job to tell the owner if the cylinders are airworthy, and the owner's job to decide if he or she wants to replace them, and what to replace them with.

The only thing I would do in your case is when the owner asks for advice on these sorts of decisions, admit that you aren't up to speed on it and don't know. If you aren't claiming to offer expert advice, no one can blame you for not being expert.

[wrenchturnin]

Dam I guess I've been out of it for a while I've never did in the past or heard of a borescope requirement with compression tests. I realize my questions are a bit unresearched but with my 9 years in aviation 4 of which was on these small aircraft plus all the information any mechanic could need in the aircraft manuals I think i should have enough information to make decent desicions and give decent advice. I've already poured 10k into starting this thing, hard to go back now but doable.

[ahramin]

Well that is where you are wrong. What advice does the maintenance manual give on when a "top overhaul" should be done? Where is the infant mortality rate of new cylinders listed and what is the primary cause? Where is the failure rate of engines past tbo listed?

All the information a mechanic could need? Sure, if you include all the relevant service letters and such sent out by the manufacturers in the last ten years. All the information an owner needs to decide which parts to replace when? Not even close.

"I don't know" is a perfectly acceptable answer, even though it's very hard to say.

[culver10]

According to the CAR's, there is no hard time, hours/years, on a privately registered aircraft. As long as the AME inspecting the engine is convinced the engine is still good, he/she can sign it out. Lycomings have a big issue with corrosion on the camshaft and lifters (search past topics). Also high time Lycomings can also have badly corroded exhaust valves. And if one breaks, can ruin the day. So pulling a jug to inspect the cam and exhaust valve might be good idea?

[PilotDAR]

wrenchturnin wrote:
There are plenty of private aircraft flying around with "on condition" engines with an approved maintenance schedules. I was just simply asking how to get the process started and some pointers.

I doubt there are any, because only a muppet would actively seek a maintenance schedule more restrictive than 625 appendix B and C.

Muppet here, (waving hands in the back of the crowd)

I have developed a maintenance schedule and inspection checklist for each of my aircraft. Not so as to be more restrictive than TC requires, but rather to assure that all "manufacturer's items, and additional non standard (STC'd) items, are captured - doing so is required in Appendix C. It's not required that my maintenance schedules be approved (for my private planes), but they exist, and are used at the specified calendar intervals, which satisfies the requirement. But then, you knew that I would do that, didn't you?

In my engine log (O-200), there is an entry in 1992, which contains the wording: "Engine established on condition", and signed by the AMO ACA. I chose to buy that plane years earlier, with a very high time engine, knowing that the "On condition" rule was going to come into force, and there might not be a requirement for me to overhaul the engine based on total time only. I ran that engine 1500 hours beyond the Continental 2000 TBO, before electing to completely overhaul it. Even then, it was in fine condition...

[wrenchturnin]

I agree man. Nice reply. I know that manufacturers inspection items are on top and take precident of the CAR625 for example annual items, then there's AD'S and out of phase on top of that etc... So when you say "on condition rule" the requirements are set by your own schedule?

[PilotDAR]

I refer to this "rule":

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/s ... 41-549.htm

Now I had worked to the pink paper edition of the day, which was Edition 1, of December 18, 1997, so I see it has been since revised. But it seems to still spell out the requirements for entry to the process. Perhaps its been replaced by another rule, I'm not familiar - my engine has been in since the start.

[photofly]

Muppet here, (waving hands in the back of the crowd)

But you didn't go and kneel before the great TC and it to require you to submit to compression tests every 25 hours, did you?

DIdn't think so.

[crazyaviator]

because only a muppet would actively seek a maintenance schedule more restrictive than 625 appendix B and C.
There is no process, and it would be reasonable to expect an AME working on small private aircraft to know this.

ANOTHER muppet here ! There is NOTHING wrong with an Owner/AME establishing a modified, non-mandatory "on-Condition" program for a high time engine in a private A/C! Do you strega, think TC are idiots? MANY engines go 2500-3000 hrs safely but it is the fool who just waits for a massive failure before doing that overhaul,,,,that is WHY we monitor AND make NOTES, like in an organized fashion,,, not on the back of our hand or in our memory. I would rather trust my A/C to the OP than to an arrogant know-it-all,,,,,,,,,,,,

Like DAR says, specific A/C have items to inspect that are NOT noted in 625 APP B and so a wise owner/AME would responsibly go BEYOND the CARS minimum. Strega, you aught to do less writing and more reading of DAR s replies