A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Real stats on engine failures?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 1st 03, 02:09 PM
Kyler Laird
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mike Rapoport" writes:

Well there is no maitenance on connecting rods and crankshafts.


But do you agree that components that require maintenance (propeller,
cylinders, engine mounts, ...) can cause/accelerate crankshaft
failures?

--kyler
  #2  
Old December 1st 03, 02:56 PM
Tom S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kyler Laird" wrote in message
...
"Mike Rapoport" writes:

Well there is no maitenance on connecting rods and crankshafts.


But do you agree that components that require maintenance (propeller,
cylinders, engine mounts, ...) can cause/accelerate crankshaft
failures?

Nah...Mike says you can completely neglect them.


  #3  
Old December 1st 03, 06:12 PM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I suppose that I agree to a limited extent, but virtually all
crankshaft/connecting rod failures are caused by a flaw/fault in
design/manufacture or installation. Once the crank or connecting rod is
installed, nothing is done to it and it is unseen until overhaul time. A
failure of either of these components is not going to put much, if any,
metal into the oil until the bitter end either..

Mike
MU-2

"Kyler Laird" wrote in message
...
"Mike Rapoport" writes:

Well there is no maitenance on connecting rods and crankshafts.


But do you agree that components that require maintenance (propeller,
cylinders, engine mounts, ...) can cause/accelerate crankshaft
failures?

--kyler



  #4  
Old December 1st 03, 08:09 PM
Kyler Laird
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mike Rapoport" writes:

But do you agree that components that require maintenance (propeller,
cylinders, engine mounts, ...) can cause/accelerate crankshaft
failures?


I suppose that I agree to a limited extent, but virtually all
crankshaft/connecting rod failures are caused by a flaw/fault in
design/manufacture or installation. Once the crank or connecting rod is
installed, nothing is done to it and it is unseen until overhaul time. A
failure of either of these components is not going to put much, if any,
metal into the oil until the bitter end either..


I was thinking less of metal in the oil than the forces exerted on the
crankshaft. An out-of-balance prop or even a faulty spark plug can
cause out-of-spec. impluses to be exerted on the crankshaft.

I sure don't know how significant that is likely to be though. ('course
you can consider the stories of pilots taking off after prop. strikes as
an extreme.)

--kyler
  #5  
Old December 3rd 03, 02:42 PM
Big John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kyler

Another true (War) story.

T-28A

7 cyl 900 HP engine. (128+ HP per cyl)
2 blade Aero-Products prop (big wide paddle blades to absorb HP)
Prop shaft cut with a square corner where it transitioned to throw.
At original cruise rpm viborations/stresses caused prop shaft to break
off and prop depart plane.
Result - dead stick with prop missing.

Fixes tried.

1. Tried 3 blade prop which reduced stress on crank - worked but cost
too much to throw away the relatively new 2 blade props and get
new 3 blade props.

2. Dissambled engine and under cut (rounded) square corner betweem
shaft and throw. More failures.

3. Set up a restricted rpm range that could be transitioned but not
fly steady state in.

4. Raised cruise rpm 150 rpm changing stress on crank. These two
worked but reduced range and duraation a lot. Had to refuel after
every training mission vs flying two missions on one load of fuel.

Looks like this true life story supports both sides of the argument?

Big John


On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 20:09:35 GMT, Kyler Laird
wrote:

"Mike Rapoport" writes:

But do you agree that components that require maintenance (propeller,
cylinders, engine mounts, ...) can cause/accelerate crankshaft
failures?


I suppose that I agree to a limited extent, but virtually all
crankshaft/connecting rod failures are caused by a flaw/fault in
design/manufacture or installation. Once the crank or connecting rod is
installed, nothing is done to it and it is unseen until overhaul time. A
failure of either of these components is not going to put much, if any,
metal into the oil until the bitter end either..


I was thinking less of metal in the oil than the forces exerted on the
crankshaft. An out-of-balance prop or even a faulty spark plug can
cause out-of-spec. impluses to be exerted on the crankshaft.

I sure don't know how significant that is likely to be though. ('course
you can consider the stories of pilots taking off after prop. strikes as
an extreme.)

--kyler


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
V-8 powered Seabee Corky Scott Home Built 212 October 2nd 04 11:45 PM
Dennis Fetters Mini 500 EmailMe Home Built 70 June 21st 04 09:36 PM
My Engine Fire!! [email protected] Owning 1 March 31st 04 01:41 PM
Engine... Overhaul? / Replace? advice please text news Owning 11 February 17th 04 04:44 PM
Gasflow of VW engine Veeduber Home Built 4 July 14th 03 08:06 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.