Lycoming crankshafts

[Dan Luke]

"Morgans" wrote:

>
> Hasn't Continental pulled some crap like that in the recent past, also?

Yes. Not to mention continuing to sell cylinders made of tempered cottage
cheese and denying there's a problem.

> It sure gives me a lot of faith in certified aircraft engines. Not.
>
> If another company were to step up with a new technology engine, with
> replacement STC's for most all of the popular spam cans, they would clean
> house.

We can only hope. The obstacles are enormous.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Morgans]

I don't know about anyone else, but Lycoming's latest dirty trick with the
crankshafts sure would leave a bad taste in my mouth, if I owned one. I
would not want to consider any purchase with a Lycoming in it.

What good is part tracing, ore to finished part? I thought that was meant
to protect from these kind of problems occurring?

I would think a class action law suite would sure be in order, for all of
the people it must involve.

Hasn't Continental pulled some crap like that in the recent past, also?

It sure gives me a lot of faith in certified aircraft engines. Not.

If another company were to step up with a new technology engine, with
replacement STC's for most all of the popular spam cans, they would clean
house.

Drive yet another nail in the coffin of GA. :-((
--
Jim in NC

[Dave Stadt]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dan Luke" > wrote
>>
>> We can only hope. The obstacles are enormous.
>
> Indeed.
>
> Speaking of that, did you see DeltaHawk is saying 18 months for release
> to
> the public? How long have they been saying that? Years? Decades?
> --
> Jim in NC

As long as they say 18 months to release they are covered forever. :-)

[Montblack]

("Dan Luke" wrote)
>> If another company were to step up with a new technology engine, with
>> replacement STC's for most all of the popular spam cans, they would clean
>> house.

> We can only hope. The obstacles are enormous.


Let's see if we can't squeeze three threads out of today's AvWeb. :-)

http://www.deltahawkengines.com/
Delta Hawk diesel engines

<http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/602-full.html#191852>
The American Diesel, Still Struggling For Air

"DeltaHawk, a small company based in Racine, Wis., has been working for
about a decade to develop a diesel engine for GA aircraft -- the only such
engines being built in the U.S., the company says. The engine first flew
back in May 2003 in a Velocity RG, and since then has been making the rounds
of trade shows as R&D continues. A few of the 200-hp engines have been built
for experimental aircraft, but the company says it is still at least 18
months away from having an FAA-certified engine, and money problems are
slowing down the process. With a little luck, the company hopes to sell more
than 3,600 of the engines in 2010. The company will be exhibiting its
technology at Sun 'n Fun, coming up in Lakeland, Fla., April 4-10."


Montblack
Kurt Manufacturing will be machining the components for DeltaHawk. KM is
down the road from me, maybe five miles.

[Robert M. Gary]

I'm not sure that this should effect your faith in certified engines. I
don't believe Lycoming ever had a crankshaft failure. This seems like a
bunch of CYA to me.

[Morgans]

"Dan Luke" > wrote
>
> We can only hope. The obstacles are enormous.

Indeed.

Speaking of that, did you see DeltaHawk is saying 18 months for release to
the public? How long have they been saying that? Years? Decades?
--
Jim in NC

[Jim Macklin]

Unfortunately, people make parts and people are not perfect.
All the companies buy parts from suppliers. Rarely a
suppliers of parts knowingly uses weak materials or skips
some step to manufacture. Some times a part is not designed
properly and sometimes there is a error such as not using
the proper radius on a machine flanged.
Lycoming and Continental build engines and buy parts.
Everything gets inspected, all the paperwork is checked, but
stuff happens.
Any manufacturer who designs and certifies a new engine will
have the same sort of problems, plus the technology will be
new and untried, so there may be problems that are
unexpected.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
|I don't know about anyone else, but Lycoming's latest dirty
trick with the
| crankshafts sure would leave a bad taste in my mouth, if I
owned one. I
| would not want to consider any purchase with a Lycoming in
it.
|
| What good is part tracing, ore to finished part? I
thought that was meant
| to protect from these kind of problems occurring?
|
| I would think a class action law suite would sure be in
order, for all of
| the people it must involve.
|
| Hasn't Continental pulled some crap like that in the
recent past, also?
|
| It sure gives me a lot of faith in certified aircraft
engines. Not.
|
| If another company were to step up with a new technology
engine, with
| replacement STC's for most all of the popular spam cans,
they would clean
| house.
|
| Drive yet another nail in the coffin of GA. :-((
| --
| Jim in NC
|

[Montblack]

("Jim Macklin" wrote)
> Any manufacturer who designs and certifies a new engine will have the same
> sort of problems, plus the technology will be new and untried, so there
> may be problems that are unexpected.


Some companies have a better handle on ALL facets of the manufacturing
process than other companies. Corporate culture?

Some industries adapt to new quality standards better than other industries.

Survival is often a brutal thing to watch.

I watched my corner of the brewing industry go from the 1970's to the
1990's, inside of 5 years. It wasn't fun but we did it. We survived ...for a
few extra years, anyway. Ten.


Montblack

[Matt Barrow]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
et...
>
>>>
>>> We can only hope. The obstacles are enormous.
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>> Speaking of that, did you see DeltaHawk is saying 18 months for release
>> to
>> the public? How long have they been saying that? Years? Decades?
>> --
>> Jim in NC
>
> As long as they say 18 months to release they are covered forever.
> :-)

Rather like GAMI stating on their web site, regarding their PRISM
electronic ignition, "FAA STC certification expected soon". That page hasn't
really changed in four years.
http://www.gami.com/prism.html

[[email protected]]

Robert Gary wrote"
> I'm not sure that this should effect your faith in certified engines. I
>don't believe Lycoming ever had a crankshaft failure. This seems like a
>bunch of CYA to me.

Ya got to be kidding me... There are a couple of dozen flyers dead
already resulting from their " CERTIFIED", overpriced, traceable, FAA
approved cranks.

Ben

[Denny]

Ya got to be kidding me... There are a couple of dozen flyers dead
already resulting from their " CERTIFIED", overpriced, traceable, FAA
approved cranks.
************************************************** *****************************

Do you have AD's for this statement? URL's? NTSB findings?

I see no crank AD's on Lycomings for the past 30 years...

denny - willing to learn

[George]

> Ya got to be kidding me... There are a couple of dozen flyers dead
> already resulting from their " CERTIFIED", overpriced, traceable, FAA
> approved cranks.
>
************************************************** **************************
***
>
> Do you have AD's for this statement? URL's? NTSB findings?

This took all of 3 seconds to find. Don't you people know how to use the
internet ?

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20020808X01353&key=1

[Denny]

I made a factually correct statement about Lycoming crankshafts...
I suggest that you look up the engine make in a Malibu...


denny

[[email protected]]

Reference:
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/0/E7B86DE103CB30E78625684D006644B5?OpenDocument&Highlight=98-02-08

>From the Preamble to AD 98-02-08:

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 18, 1993, the Civil Aviation
Authority (CAA), which is the airworthiness authority of the United
Kingdom (UK), received a report that a Piper PA-28-161 aircraft, with a
Textron Lycoming O-320-D3G reciprocating engine installed, executed a
forced landing due to an engine crankshaft failure which caused the
propeller to separate from the aircraft. The cause of the crankshaft
failure was determined to be due to a high cycle fatigue mechanism that
had initiated from a number of corrosion pits in the crankshaft bore.
After the cracks had progressed through a substantial proportion of the
crankshaft section, the rate of advance had increased until the
remaining unseparated portion had failed as a result of overload. The
cracking occurred in high cycle fatigue and it had progressed over an
extended period of service. At the time of the accident the engine had
operated for 1,950 hours time in service (TIS) since overhaul and had
accumulated 4,429 hours total time since new over a period of 16 years.
In addition, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has confirmed
that four other failures in the United States and 10 in foreign
countries were due to cracks initiating from corrosion pits in the
crankshaft bore on certain Textron Lycoming 320 and 360 reciprocating
engines with ratings of 160 horsepower or greater. Of the 10 failures
in foreign countries, four resulted in the propeller separating from
the aircraft inflight. Three of these four were from 1993 to 1996. The
FAA utilized metallurgical failure analysis reports and other
information to conclude that these failures were due to cracks
originating from corrosion pits. This condition, if not corrected,
could result in crankshaft failure, which can result in engine failure,
propeller separation, forced landing, and possible damage to the
aircraft.

Ref:
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/0/144D97BBB16063168625707E00594561?OpenDocument&Highlight=2005-19-11

>From the Preamble to AD 2005-19-11:
SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Lycoming Engines (formerly Textron Lycoming) AEIO-360, IO-360,
O-360, LIO-360, LO-360, AEIO-540, IO-540, O-540, and TIO-540 series
reciprocating engines rated at 300 horsepower (HP) or lower. This AD
requires replacing certain crankshafts. This AD results from reports of
12 crankshaft failures in Lycoming 360 and 540 series engines rated at
300 HP or lower. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the
crankshaft, which could result in total engine power loss, in-flight
engine failure, and possible loss of the aircraft.

Dan

[John Gaquin]

"George" > wrote in message news:UJbWf.17503
>
> This took all of 3 seconds to find. Don't you people know how to use the
> internet ?
>
> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20020808X01353&key=1


These three people died because the pilot failed to follow procedures and
[apparently] stalled the airplane. The crankshaft was a factor, but an
eminently survivable one.


"The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s)
of this accident as follows:

The pilot's failure to maintain airspeed above stall speed...... A factor to
the accident was ......the fatigue failure of the crankshaft.'

[Denny]

I stand corrected, I should have done the search before replying... A
couple-three years back when the Continental crankshaft failures were
the topic of discussion I had done an AD search on Lycoming crankshafts
(since a have a pair of them) and the FAA web site did not show any for
Lycoming since the early 70's... I hadn't repeated the search
recently... My bad...

But, the topic of metallurgy failures is not limited to Lycoming and
Continental... Both Superior and ECI has massive recalls on cylinders
for early wear and cracking, including failures in flight...
Continental big bores are famous for the rocker arm bushings wearing
out every 900 hours (I've been through a couple of early top overhauls
over this)...
Lycoming parallel valve cylinders are famous for lack of cooling oil to
the valve stems leading to morning sickness (been there, done that,
got the tee shirt, now I use AVBLEND)...

The problem is more than just Lyconsaurus being dinosauers... Airplane
engines are highly stressed machinery... If they were engines pumping
water from the mines, or turning dynomotors for municipal electric
plants, or pushing 900 foot container ships, we would just make the
parts so heavy and thick they could never fail, but that is not an
option with airplanes.. It seems that every major player in the
aircraft engine market has been bitten by the metallurgy bug... Is it
the stress on the engine parts, or the FAA regs, or bad metallurgy? I
don't know the answers but there do not appear to be simple
solutions... Every company producing engines/parts has bright people
working for them, so if there were solutions they would have been
implemented and we would not be having this discussion...

denny

[Jose]

> I don't know about anyone else, but Lycoming's latest dirty trick with the
> crankshafts...

What "dirty trick"?

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[nrp]

I remember reading about this some years ago. There was a picture of
the failed UK crank front journal bearing ID taken thru the front plug
hole. It was solid crud where the crud ID appeared to be about 1/4
inch diameter. That engine must have been filthy inside & operated in
some very abusive and corrosive conditions. It is interesting that it
had been overhauled once & was near TBO again. Who did the magnaflux
at the first overhaul?

[Big John]

Isn't this the one that run's on JP and therefore won't need a lot of
new infrastructure to support?

Read someplace that both L & C were looking at developing a new
generation engine. Could the DeltaHawk have them worried?

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` ````````````````````````````````

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 23:45:10 -0600, "Montblack"
> wrote:

>("Dan Luke" wrote)
>>> If another company were to step up with a new technology engine, with
>>> replacement STC's for most all of the popular spam cans, they would clean
>>> house.
>
>> We can only hope. The obstacles are enormous.
>
>
>Let's see if we can't squeeze three threads out of today's AvWeb. :-)
>
>http://www.deltahawkengines.com/
>Delta Hawk diesel engines
>
><http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/602-full.html#191852>
>The American Diesel, Still Struggling For Air
>
>"DeltaHawk, a small company based in Racine, Wis., has been working for
>about a decade to develop a diesel engine for GA aircraft -- the only such
>engines being built in the U.S., the company says. The engine first flew
>back in May 2003 in a Velocity RG, and since then has been making the rounds
>of trade shows as R&D continues. A few of the 200-hp engines have been built
>for experimental aircraft, but the company says it is still at least 18
>months away from having an FAA-certified engine, and money problems are
>slowing down the process. With a little luck, the company hopes to sell more
>than 3,600 of the engines in 2010. The company will be exhibiting its
>technology at Sun 'n Fun, coming up in Lakeland, Fla., April 4-10."
>
>
>Montblack
>Kurt Manufacturing will be machining the components for DeltaHawk. KM is
>down the road from me, maybe five miles.

[Dave Stadt]

"Big John" > wrote in message
...
> Isn't this the one that run's on JP and therefore won't need a lot of
> new infrastructure to support?
>
> Read someplace that both L & C were looking at developing a new
> generation engine. Could the DeltaHawk have them worried?

At this point in time DeltaHawk poses a threat to no one. They have been in
development since before there was dirt and don't seem to ever get close to
having a viable product.

[Jose]

> ...I call that a dirty trick.
>
> What do you call it?

It doesn't matter. I was unaware of the root news item.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Morgans]

"Jose" > wrote in message
m...
> > I don't know about anyone else, but Lycoming's latest dirty trick with
the
> > crankshafts...
>
> What "dirty trick"?

If a company admits that they have manufactured a faulty part, then they
should be replacing it, free of charge, including any labor to replace it.
If they do not stand behind their product, and expect the customer to pick
up the tab, I call that a dirty trick.

What do you call it?
--
Jim in NC

[[email protected]]

>I remember reading about this some years ago. There was a picture of
>the failed UK crank front journal bearing ID taken thru the front plug
>hole. It was solid crud where the crud ID appeared to be about 1/4
>inch diameter. That engine must have been filthy inside & operated in
>some very abusive and corrosive conditions. It is interesting that it
>had been overhauled once & was near TBO again. Who did the magnaflux
>at the first overhaul?

That crud is usually a product of condensation mixing with
the oil. The condensation comes from blowby gases, water being one of
combustion's byproducts. Sludge results from the mixing, along with
acidic compounds formed from hydrogen present in both water and oil,
and sulfur, chlorine and nitrogen from the oil. The presence of
aluminum doesn't help any, either.
Since the front of the crank runs fairly cold due to the cooling effect
of the prop, condensation is a bigger problem inside the crank nose.
The acids pit the inside of the crank, creating stress risers, and it
eventually fails. Magnafluxing at the previous overhaul doesn't prevent
it.
Short flights don't let the oil get hot enough to boil off
the condensates formed when the engine is cold. Running up the engine
without flying it does more damage than leaving it alone.

Dan

[Montblack]

("George" wrote)
>> Do you have AD's for this statement? URL's? NTSB findings?

> This took all of 3 seconds to find. Don't you people know how to use the
> internet ?
>
> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20020808X01353&key=1


Yes, wait for someone to provide a link, them click on it. <g>


Montblack
'The Internet is the greatest library the world has ever known .
Unfortunately, all of the books are in a pile in the middle of the floor.'
:-)

[Montblack]

("Big John" wrote)
> Isn't this the one that run's on JP and therefore won't need a lot of new
> infrastructure to support?
>
> Read someplace that both L & C were looking at developing a new generation
> engine. Could the DeltaHawk have them worried?


DeltaHawk Q & A website:
http://www.deltahawkengines.com/questi00.shtml

Q: So, what fuels are acceptable for use in your engine?
A: Acceptable fuels are Jet A, Jet A1, JP5, JP8, D1 and D2, which are all
kerosene based. The high naphtha fuels (JP 4 and Jet B) are not suitable.

Q: Can jet fuel and diesel be mixed in the fuel tank (for example, when
changing fuel used as temperature changes), or should one fuel be chosen and
used forever.
A: Yes, the fuels can be mixed.

Q: Could you use heating fuel in your engine? I know this is not legal, but
in a pinch could this be done?
A: It would not be recommended but if done, certainly use a lubricity
additive.

Q:You have mentioned a using a lubricity additive when using Jet A. What is
this additive and how much is used?
A: Although it may not be necessary, we think it is good insurance to use
it. The product is usually added at the rate of one pint per 120 gallons
(~1,000 to 1), and costs about $4.75/pint (~ 4 cents per gallon). With the
new pumps, ½ the normal rate is probably adequate for "insurance" purposes.
This protects the injector moving parts and the pump piston. When we supply
engines, the specification and source will also be supplied. Any diesel
shop carries it.

Q: How can you make do with only a single engine control lever? Don't you
need to adjust mixture at some high altitude?
A: At a high altitude (above 18,000 ft) the fuel should be trimmed back.
This can be done either by the pilot, based on indicated altitude and a
chart provided by DeltaHawk, or automatically by an aneroid device (pressure
altitude sensor). Either way, it is the single lever, the fuel lever (or
"throttle"), which is being adjusted.


Montblack

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:tH4Wf.1271$t22.320@dukeread08...
> Unfortunately, people make parts and people are not perfect.
> All the companies buy parts from suppliers. Rarely a
> suppliers of parts knowingly uses weak materials or skips
> some step to manufacture. Some times a part is not designed
> properly and sometimes there is a error such as not using
> the proper radius on a machine flanged.
> Lycoming and Continental build engines and buy parts.
> Everything gets inspected, all the paperwork is checked, but
> stuff happens.
> Any manufacturer who designs and certifies a new engine will
> have the same sort of problems, plus the technology will be
> new and untried, so there may be problems that are
> unexpected.
>

Same problem in the auto industry. The bigges difference is that broken
cranks or cams or... show up in the warrenty data - not in NTSB accident
reports.


--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is illegal, only illegals will immigrate.

[Montblack]

("Dave Stadt" wrote)
> At this point in time DeltaHawk poses a threat to no one. They have been
> in development since before there was dirt and don't seem to ever get
> close to having a viable product.


[They do have a real engine flying in a real airplane.]

http://www.deltahawkengines.com/orders00.shtml
Placing Orders For Engines

"The FAA Certification planning process is underway."
[This surprised me - "planning"?]

"Although work remains on many tasks, we are confident that it will be
accomplished through the continued and by now perhaps legendary persistence
of Team DeltaHawk."
["Legendary persistence" ...a.k.a. 'Around longer than dirt' by Dave]

"Deposits are being used to plan for the initial production volume and model
mix."
[More "planning".]

"Ordering Terms and Conditions are included on the Order Form."
[Hey, The Eclipse was (only) $750K back in '97 or '98, IIRC. That's 9 years
ago, now.]


Montblack

[Doug]

>What do you call it?

Aircraft maintenance....

[nrp]

My 172 M crank ID was inspected (and painted) about 5 years ago, when
it was at 1500 hrs and 25 years since new. A lot of the flights have
been short, and it has always been hard to get the oil warmed up on it
in our MN winters. There was no corrosion, and no buildup of sludge,
although the engine has seen very little hi-lead fuel. Oil changes
(Aeroshell 15W50) have been only ~2/year.

I wonder why the UK one was so fouled up inside - and why ours was not?
Could it be the lead?.

[Morgans]

"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com> wrote

> Same problem in the auto industry. The bigges difference is that broken
> cranks or cams or... show up in the warrenty data - not in NTSB accident
> reports.

Can you point to a major auto maker's crankshaft recall?
--
Jim in NC

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com> wrote
>
>> Same problem in the auto industry. The bigges difference is that broken
>> cranks or cams or... show up in the warrenty data - not in NTSB accident
>> reports.
>
> Can you point to a major auto maker's crankshaft recall?
> --
> Jim in NC

Manufacturer Number Product Reason Country Year

General Motors 150000 Chevrolet, Chevette, PontiacT-1000 Defective
crankshaft U.S.A 0/1986

Mazda 25400 Familia, Laser Danger of crankshaft fracture and engine
damage due to defective bolts WORLD WIDE 7/1990


Suzuki Motor Corporation has determined that the Eiger automatic ATVs were
produced with an internal manufacturing flaw. This flaw could cause the
crankshaft to break during operation. A broken crankshaft will interrupt
power transfer from the engine to the transmission and the drive wheels,
leaving the driver stranded away from his or her base of operation.


My dad had a mid 70's Plymouth that broke 2 cranks in about as many years -
last time he ever bought a Chrysler product. Don't know if there was ever a
recall, or it was just covered under the warrenty.

Plus, if you break, say 0.01% of the crankshafts (1 out of 10,000), would
that trigger a recall for a car? How about for an aircraft? I think the
"threshold" is a lot different.
As suggested by the following:

........ begin quote......
A 'walking' crankshaft is a crankshaft that moves too much inside the
engine. This is also known as excessive thrust bearing play. The movement is
usually due to the crankshaft not fitting inside its bearings correctly.
While not bad for the crankshaft, the movement can place excessive or uneven
loads on the bearings, causing premature failures.

Many 2G owners have suffered from walking crankshafts. It appears that
Mitsubishi built many 2G engines using defective crankshafts, which were
machined out of specification and are thus capable of moving around too much
inside the block. All 2G model years appear to be affected to some degree.

<snip>

It can be difficult to tell if a particular car is experiencing crankwalk.
Symptoms are usually indirect and difficult to diagnose until major damage
occurs.

<snip>

Although 2G DSM owners have been anxiously awaiting a recall or TSB on the
crankwalk problem, there is none as yet. According to Paul's second post on
the subject, there may never be a TSB, although some members of DSM Canada
are pushing for one in this thread on their discussion board. As a result,
it is doubly important that affected 2G owners get their bearings (or
blocks, if necessary) replaced before their warranty expires. This might be
difficult for owners of aftermarket clutches, as dealerships often claim the
aftermarket pressure plates are the cause of the problem.

......... end quote ......
--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
Spell checking is left as an excercise for the reader.

[Jim Macklin]

Back in the days prior to WWII, a student pilot might expect
to have several genuine engine failures before the license
was issued. Today the engine is pretty good as long as you
put fuel in the tank and oil in the engine [cap secured].
Sometimes you read about a prop strike and they check the
run-out to see if the crank is OK. That doesn't mean the
crank isn't damaged, just that it wasn't left crooked. It
could have been bent 10 thousands left and then back to the
right 12 thou, and be within tolerance. It will break some
time. But some people won't pull the engine down and
MagnuFlux and X-ray the crank and rods because the insurance
company won't pay for it unless they find it's broken.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com>
wrote in message
news:WrqdnUxuq4FjS7TZnZ2dnUVZ_tKdnZ2d@wideopenwest .com...
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:tH4Wf.1271$t22.320@dukeread08...
| > Unfortunately, people make parts and people are not
perfect.
| > All the companies buy parts from suppliers. Rarely a
| > suppliers of parts knowingly uses weak materials or
skips
| > some step to manufacture. Some times a part is not
designed
| > properly and sometimes there is a error such as not
using
| > the proper radius on a machine flanged.
| > Lycoming and Continental build engines and buy parts.
| > Everything gets inspected, all the paperwork is checked,
but
| > stuff happens.
| > Any manufacturer who designs and certifies a new engine
will
| > have the same sort of problems, plus the technology will
be
| > new and untried, so there may be problems that are
| > unexpected.
| >
|
| Same problem in the auto industry. The bigges difference
is that broken
| cranks or cams or... show up in the warrenty data - not in
NTSB accident
| reports.
|
|
| --
| Geoff
| The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
| remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply
by mail
| When immigration is illegal, only illegals will immigrate.
|
|

[Dave Stadt]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Dave Stadt" wrote)
>> At this point in time DeltaHawk poses a threat to no one. They have been
>> in development since before there was dirt and don't seem to ever get
>> close to having a viable product.
>
> [They do have a real engine flying in a real airplane.

It would be interesting to know how many hours that engine has been in the
air.

> http://www.deltahawkengines.com/orders00.shtml
> Placing Orders For Engines
>
> "The FAA Certification planning process is underway."
> [This surprised me - "planning"?]

Why don't they get some engines out to the experimental folks that have been
waiting eons, develop some cash flow then worry about going through the
arduous and expensive FAA certification process?

> "Although work remains on many tasks, we are confident that it will be
> accomplished through the continued and by now perhaps legendary
> persistence of Team DeltaHawk."
> ["Legendary persistence" ...a.k.a. 'Around longer than dirt' by Dave]
>
> "Deposits are being used to plan for the initial production volume and
> model mix."
> [More "planning".]

In other words we have run out of money and are using peoples deposits to
stay afloat. Shades of Jim Bede?

[Morgans]

"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com> wrote

> General Motors 150000 Chevrolet, Chevette, PontiacT-1000 Defective
> crankshaft U.S.A 0/1986

Chevette-nuff said! GM's attempt to get into the economy car market, and to
be cheap enough, everything was under-built.

> Mazda 25400 Familia, Laser Danger of crankshaft fracture and engine
> damage due to defective bolts WORLD WIDE 7/1990

Goes along with my feelings about Japanese cars.

> Suzuki Motor Corporation has determined that the Eiger automatic ATVs

ATV's? You have to be kidding. Are we going to count Briggs and Stratton,
also?

> My dad had a mid 70's Plymouth that broke 2 cranks in about as many
years -
> last time he ever bought a Chrysler product. Don't know if there was ever
a
> recall, or it was just covered under the warrenty.

Plymouth had some major issues, during that time. Feel safe to say that
they would not be in the running for aircraft engines, AFAIAC. Was that by
chance a K car engine? Fiasco, from the word go.
--
Jim in NC

[Dan Luke]

"Morgans" wrote:

>> Mazda 25400 Familia, Laser Danger of crankshaft fracture and engine
>> damage due to defective bolts WORLD WIDE 7/1990
>
> Goes along with my feelings about Japanese cars.

??

Japanese cars led the revolution in automobile quality; Honda and Toyota are
still the quality standard of the world.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Ross Richardson]

My '91 Honda Prelude had 123,000 miles on it when I sold it. The owner
called and reported that it had crossed 125,000 miles and still going
strong. Only major work was a transmission overhaul, and the usual
maintenance items required, alternator, tires, etc. My current '97
Toyota Camry has 187,000 miles. No major maintenance issues. My American
cars never got that good of service..

Morgans wrote:
> "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com> wrote
>
>
>snip
>
>
>> Mazda 25400 Familia, Laser Danger of crankshaft fracture and engine
>>damage due to defective bolts WORLD WIDE 7/1990
>
>
> Goes along with my feelings about Japanese cars.
>
>
>> snip

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
"Dan Luke" > wrote:

> Japanese cars led the revolution in automobile quality; Honda and Toyota are
> still the quality standard of the world.

given the design standard of the Element and Scion, I guess Honda and Toyota
must be putting their efforts into quality. :-/

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Dave Stadt]

"Ross Richardson" > wrote in message
...
> My '91 Honda Prelude had 123,000 miles on it when I sold it. The owner
> called and reported that it had crossed 125,000 miles and still going
> strong. Only major work was a transmission overhaul, and the usual
> maintenance items required, alternator, tires, etc. My current '97 Toyota
> Camry has 187,000 miles. No major maintenance issues. My American cars
> never got that good of service..

My Tennessee built Saturn is at 233K miles with no major and almost no minor
work. Too bad GM screwed up something that worked.

[Matt Barrow]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
om...
>
> My Tennessee built Saturn is at 233K miles with no major and almost no
> minor work. Too bad GM screwed up something that worked.

Wasn't the Saturn designed by Toyota, or am I thinking of something else?

[Jim Macklin]

We bought a used 1993 Plymouth van with a 3.3 engine from a
friend a few years ago, it now has over 200,000 miles. We
gave our son a 1989 Acura a car we had been using, it now is
running strong at 195,000 miles. He is planning to buy a
new car in the next year or two.

Proper maintenance is the key, whether airplane or car.
Those 18 wheelers often go 500,000 miles.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.




"Ross Richardson" > wrote in
message ...
| My '91 Honda Prelude had 123,000 miles on it when I sold
it. The owner
| called and reported that it had crossed 125,000 miles and
still going
| strong. Only major work was a transmission overhaul, and
the usual
| maintenance items required, alternator, tires, etc. My
current '97
| Toyota Camry has 187,000 miles. No major maintenance
issues. My American
| cars never got that good of service..
|
| Morgans wrote:
| > "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t
com> wrote
| >
| >
| >snip
| >
| >
| >> Mazda 25400 Familia, Laser Danger of crankshaft
fracture and engine
| >>damage due to defective bolts WORLD WIDE 7/1990
| >
| >
| > Goes along with my feelings about Japanese cars.
| >
| >
| >> snip

[Dave Stadt]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
> om...
>>
>> My Tennessee built Saturn is at 233K miles with no major and almost no
>> minor work. Too bad GM screwed up something that worked.
>
> Wasn't the Saturn designed by Toyota, or am I thinking of something else?

You are thinking of something else.

[Montblack]

("Bob Noel" wrote)
> given the design standard of the Element and Scion, I guess Honda and
> Toyota must be putting their efforts into quality. :-/


Two brothers own Elements. Sister owns a Scion.

I want to get Mom out of her '91 Toyota Camry and into something higher - so
Dad can get in and out easier. RAV-4? Element? So far she's not budging, she
LOVES her Camry - 145K.

My gal has the 2000 Accord ...Special Edition - 62K. So far so good.

She calls my minivan "The Truck" ...make me feel more masculine. <g>
"Should we take the Honda to the movie or your Truck?"


Montblack
'94 Dodge Grand Caravan - 132K
The Airplane of Minivans

[Ross Richardson]

I drove a Scion for loaner vehicle when I had some schedule maintenance
done. What a mess. I cannot remember the models but one looked like a
station wagon and the other like a sport's car. I hope I do not offend
anyone, but I would not buy one of them. And to place the instrument
panel in the middle instead of in front of the driver?????

Bob Noel wrote:

> In article >,
> "Dan Luke" > wrote:
>
>
>>Japanese cars led the revolution in automobile quality; Honda and Toyota are
>>still the quality standard of the world.
>
>
> given the design standard of the Element and Scion, I guess Honda and Toyota
> must be putting their efforts into quality. :-/
>

[Dan Luke]

"Bob Noel" wrote:

> "Dan Luke" > wrote:
>
>> Japanese cars led the revolution in automobile quality; Honda and Toyota
>> are
>> still the quality standard of the world.
>
> given the design standard of the Element and Scion, I guess Honda and
> Toyota
> must be putting their efforts into quality. :-/

Hard to see what they were aiming for besides ugly.

[Morgans]

"Dan Luke" > wrote
>
> Japanese cars led the revolution in automobile quality; Honda and Toyota
are
> still the quality standard of the world.

To each, his own. That is your opinion, which I do not share.
Before you throw out a bunch of statistics, I'll just say figures lie, and
liars figure. You can show statistics to support any position, if you want.
--
Jim in NC

[Dave]

OK...

I had a 30 KM drive 3 yrs ago in a Lincoln Town Car, 1998, was being
retired from limo service at 1.234.000 kms.....

Orig. interior, (leather), engine rebuilt at 600,000kms, to many
tires, shocks, belts and brake pads to mention...

Professionally maintained, (Company had several hundred of them),
getting 180 of them the week after I left...

The driver claimed there is nothing on the road that could match the
Town cars for this service.. he claimed they had tried them all...

Dave


On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 07:51:33 -0600, Ross Richardson
> wrote:

>My '91 Honda Prelude had 123,000 miles on it when I sold it. The owner
>called and reported that it had crossed 125,000 miles and still going
>strong. Only major work was a transmission overhaul, and the usual
>maintenance items required, alternator, tires, etc. My current '97
>Toyota Camry has 187,000 miles. No major maintenance issues. My American
>cars never got that good of service..
>
>Morgans wrote:
>> "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com> wrote
>>
>>
>>snip
>>
>>
>>> Mazda 25400 Familia, Laser Danger of crankshaft fracture and engine
>>>damage due to defective bolts WORLD WIDE 7/1990
>>
>>
>> Goes along with my feelings about Japanese cars.
>>
>>
>>> snip

[john smith]

Note that there is no discrimination between crank failures used for
aerobatic and nonaerobatic flight/aircraft.

> >From the Preamble to AD 2005-19-11:
> SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
> certain Lycoming Engines (formerly Textron Lycoming) AEIO-360, IO-360,
> O-360, LIO-360, LO-360, AEIO-540, IO-540, O-540, and TIO-540 series
> reciprocating engines rated at 300 horsepower (HP) or lower. This AD
> requires replacing certain crankshafts. This AD results from reports of
> 12 crankshaft failures in Lycoming 360 and 540 series engines rated at
> 300 HP or lower. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the
> crankshaft, which could result in total engine power loss, in-flight
> engine failure, and possible loss of the aircraft.

[john smith]

In article >,
Ross Richardson > wrote:

> My '91 Honda Prelude had 123,000 miles on it when I sold it. The owner
> called and reported that it had crossed 125,000 miles and still going
> strong. Only major work was a transmission overhaul, and the usual
> maintenance items required, alternator, tires, etc. My current '97
> Toyota Camry has 187,000 miles. No major maintenance issues. My American
> cars never got that good of service..

American cars will hold up if you service them regularly.
Vehicles I have owned:
1966 Dodge Dart... sold with 135,000 miles (loved that 170cc slant six!)
1968 Mercury Montego... stolen with 144,000 miles (purchased used)
1969 Chevrolet Nova 302... sold with 196,000 miles (purchased used)
1985 Dodge Charger... sold with 179,000 miles (purchased new)
1994 Plymouth Voyager... 158,000 miles (purchased new, still going)

[Montblack]

("john smith" wrote)
> 1994 Plymouth Voyager... 158,000 miles (purchased new, still going)


Plymouth ...ha!

Full reclining 2nd row captain chairs
Full Privacy tinting
Temp/Compass/MPG/Trip computer
Special Light Console Package

3.3 Engine
Towing package + hitch

Super-duper stereo upgrade/tape player
(Which now needs a pencil inserted into it, to make the radio work)

Special (again) body molding
Rear latch switch on dash
Rear wiper/washer ...hasn't worked in 5 years.
Rear electric side (vent) windows

Power everything
ABS

AC - with front seat and 2nd row passenger controls
(See: Rear wiper/washer)

Um, ...armrests all around

....new trani at 88K :-(

I'm not saying it doesn't have heat in the winter, I'm simply suggesting you
keep your coat on. And your hat. Mittens too. If you roll down the front two
windows a crack - and pop the rear vent windows, it doesn't fog up on you.
That's a little trick I picked up driving VW bugs in the 70's.

4x8 sheet of plywood in back these days. Things slide in and out eisier on
plywood.


Montblack
(Dad's new car in '93)
1994 Dodge Grand Caravan
The Airplane of Minivans 132K

[john smith]

> Rear wiper/washer ...hasn't worked in 5 years.

Chrysler will replace that for free.
There is a recall on the rear wiper that affects the air bag.
There is a recall for the rear hatch strut bolts which will also be
replaced.
There is a recall on the rear hatch release mechanism.

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/recalls/recallsearch.cfm