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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The results of not flying...
My A&P is doing a field overhaul on an O-540 (he used to own an engine
shop, and did our overhaul back in '02), and he showed me what happens to a plane that isn't flown often. Two valve lifters (the things that rides on the camshaft) have faces that look like someone took a hatchet to them. The cam lobe that rode on this valve actually isn't too bad (although it didn't pass spec, so they're getting a new camshaft), but only because it wasn't flown enough to completely destroy it before they found a cracked case, which necessitated a tear-down. This plane (a Lance) sat for years, then was flown only very occasionally, and then sat for another nine months while the owner fought to get his medical back. By the time he finally got it back, the engine was toast from inactivity. My A&P's diagnosis: Rust built up on the face of the cam, the lifter, or both, after all the oil had run off over time. Starting the engine then put microscopic scratches in the face of both, and started the process of deterioration. Scary thing is that the engine ran fine (other than the prodigious amounts of oil emanating from the cracked case) -- the owner never knew his engine was beating itself to death internally... Doctor's orders: FLY OFTEN! :-) -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The results of not flying...
"Jay Honeck" wrote: Two valve lifters (the things that rides on the camshaft) have faces that look like someone took a hatchet to them. Inactive Lycomings are particularly susceptible to this, so say the engine gurus. Doctor's orders: FLY OFTEN! Aye-aye, Doc! Bay Minette tonight, Baton Rouge tomorrow. -- Dan T-182T at BFM |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The results of not flying...
On Sep 27, 9:21 am, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"Jay Honeck" wrote: Two valve lifters (the things that rides on the camshaft) have faces that look like someone took a hatchet to them. Inactive Lycomings are particularly susceptible to this, so say the engine gurus. Doctor's orders: FLY OFTEN! Aye-aye, Doc! Bay Minette tonight, Baton Rouge tomorrow. -- Dan T-182T at BFM It's much worse if the owner goes to the airport, starts and runs the engine for awhile, then shuts it down. A cold cylinder leaks considerable combustion gases past the rings, and since those gases contain water vapor and the crankcase is relatively cool, the vapors condense and leave water in the case. That water mixes with the oil over time and, in the presence of metal, creates acids that eat the engine from the inside. So, unless you plan to fly it and get that oil temp up to at least 160 degrees for a half hour or so to boil off the water that forms during warmup, it shouldn't be started at all. I often hear of some airplane for sale whose owner was so conscientious about running it up now and again, but couldn't fly it. Such engines are usually in trouble soon after they start flying again. Dan |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The results of not flying...
Jay Honeck wrote:
Scary thing is that the engine ran fine (other than the prodigious amounts of oil emanating from the cracked case) -- the owner never knew his engine was beating itself to death internally... I've known numerous pilots that have rescued ramp queens that had been sitting for years. Most of the engines "ran fine" soon after the resurrection was complete. It was usually 50-100 hrs. down the road that the corrosion damage to the cam got bad enough to be obvious. Whenever a prospective buyer asks me about a plane that's been sitting for a prolonged period, I tell 'em to (at a minimum) pull some jugs and take a look at the interior of the engine. If you don't bother going that far, the rest is a (fairly high stakes) crapshoot. John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180) John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180) -- Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The results of not flying... Your Logbook, please?
.stuff snipped I've known numerous pilots that have rescued ramp queens that had been sitting for years. Most of the engines "ran fine" soon after the resurrection was complete. It was usually 50-100 hrs. down the road that the corrosion damage to the cam got bad enough to be obvious. .stuff snipped I am wondering if it would be considered in bad taste to ask a prospective seller to produce his/her personal logbook (or the books of those flying the beast) in order to establish the plane's flying history? You can check the plane's books to get a history of hours between annuals. A concern we had when buying was that the plane (74 Cherokee 140 - 150hp 0-320) had a history of being purchased, being flown for 30-40 hours (usually over a year's time), and then sold again. The thing had also had a field overhaul 400 hours into its life for a prop strike. What saved us from having too big a risk was that the previous owner to us trained in it for 150 hours of fairly regular flying. He spent a fortune replacing things, including one cylinder. If it was going to go South, it would have likely done so with him. We got it at 1200 hours since new (and 20 years) but it was really an 800SMOH/17 years engine. Normally, those numbers can be disastrous. But, we got the plane to 1800 hours before it finally was burning a quart an hour and compressions sagged. Looking back, I am amazed the thing got that far towards TBO. With moderate abuse (not flying), it ran for 1400 hours before compressions went down and oil usage was at the limit. It appears that it never sat quite long enough to do the Lycoming cam scrub self destruct thing. Ironically, the owner moved up to another low time Piper, this time with an 0-360 in a Cherokee 180. Within weeks, it started to idle a bit rough and it turned out that one cam lobe was nearly gone. So, he dodged the bullet with the plane he sold us and got it on the next one. Weird luck. Of course, as newbies to airplane ownership 13 years ago, we knew nothing of the risks we were taking back then. I remember only thinking that the plane had not flown a lot of hours in all those years based on a book I read about buying airplanes. And, it turned out O.K. Maybe that is why we get into such disagreements on this group when someone gives out advice that seems to counter another's experience. It really IS a crap shoot with these engines. Good Luck, Mike |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
The results of not flying... Your Logbook, please?
"Mike Spera" wrote in message
... ... I am wondering if it would be considered in bad taste to ask a prospective seller to produce his/her personal logbook (or the books of those flying the beast) in order to establish the plane's flying history? You can check the plane's books to get a history of hours between annuals. ... Mike Personally, I might provide a description but I would not be interested in letting you pour over my log books. On the other hand, why would you need to? The plane's logbooks tell the real story. You have tach hours at annuals, oil changes, and other maintenance. I think that provides a better and more accurate view into the flying history of the plane. ------------------------------- Travis Lake N3094P PWK |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
The results of not flying... Your Logbook, please?
On the other hand, why would you need to? The plane's logbooks tell the real
story. You have tach hours at annuals, oil changes, and other maintenance. I think that provides a better and more accurate view into the flying history of the plane. Well, yes and no. Some logs are better than others. For example, I am a perfectionist about my logs. Everything gets logged, no mattter how seemingly insignificant. Atlas' previous owner, however, didn't bother to log oil changes. He logged major work, but just didn't bother to fill in the oil changes. Why? Lazy, I suppose -- but I *know* he did them. Personally, I'd have no trouble at all showing a prospective buyer my personal logs, if requested. What harm can come of it? -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The results of not flying... Your Logbook, please?
Jay Honeck wrote: For example, I am a perfectionist about my logs. Everything gets logged, no mattter how seemingly insignificant. Gas? Air in the tires? A quart of oil? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The results of not flying... Your Logbook, please?
Jay Honeck wrote in
oups.com: Personally, I'd have no trouble at all showing a prospective buyer my personal logs, if requested. What harm can come of it? True but it may not tell the whole story. A friend of mine had a C-152 that he wanted to sell but couldn't fly it because of his medical issues. He asked me to put time on the plane to hold down deterioration and keep the engine in shape. -- |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
The results of not flying... Your Logbook, please?
On the other hand, why would you need to? The plane's logbooks tell the real story. You have tach hours at annuals, oil changes, and other maintenance. I think that provides a better and more accurate view into the flying history of the plane. If the airplane has a journey log, fine. But if all you have is hours between annual, that's not very useful. A plane that's flown an hour twice a month is a better bet than one that's flown 6 hours every 4 months. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ionia Results | Ed Byars | Soaring | 12 | July 22nd 07 04:25 PM |
pribina results | bagmaker | Soaring | 0 | April 14th 07 01:13 AM |
SSA: PR and results | Robert de León | Soaring | 0 | July 29th 04 01:50 PM |
Region 11 Results??? | BPattonsoa | Soaring | 4 | June 18th 04 12:37 AM |
Alodyne results | Ed Wischmeyer | Home Built | 0 | February 1st 04 01:56 AM |