Mandatory SB565 Lycoming fuel pump

I received a notice in the mail. It says,

"If your Lycoming engine has a diaphragm-type fuel pump with Lycoming
P/N LW-15473 installed, and has a date code of 3201, the pump must be
replaced PRIOR TO NEXT FLIGHT."

The defective pumps were shipped from Lycoming between 10/1/01 and
2/2/04.

It affects a wide range of engines from 320 to 540, IO, O, AIO, TO

Paul kgyy wrote:
I received a notice in the mail. It says,

"If your Lycoming engine has a diaphragm-type fuel pump with Lycoming
P/N LW-15473 installed, and has a date code of 3201, the pump must be
replaced PRIOR TO NEXT FLIGHT."

The defective pumps were shipped from Lycoming between 10/1/01 and
2/2/04.

It affects a wide range of engines from 320 to 540, IO, O, AIO, TO

Here's the link to the full text :

http://www.lycoming.textron.com/supp...tins/SB565.pdf



It seems to have affected mostly injected engines (except a TO-320,
TO-360 and 1 model of O-540).

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

Paul kgyy wrote:
I received a notice in the mail. It says,

"If your Lycoming engine has a diaphragm-type fuel pump with Lycoming
P/N LW-15473 installed, and has a date code of 3201, the pump must be
replaced PRIOR TO NEXT FLIGHT."

The defective pumps were shipped from Lycoming between 10/1/01 and
2/2/04.

It affects a wide range of engines from 320 to 540, IO, O, AIO, TO

Was the notice an AD? If so, it would have a number like 2005-10-11 or
something similar. I have not heard of one but you can search AD's
he

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory...e?OpenFrameSet

One of the nice features is a listing of all the new AD's in the last
60 days. I checked the last 60 days against Lycoming (just cut the
text from the browser and paste it into WordPad) and got nothing. So I
doubt this is an AD.

Now, if no AD has issued and you are a Part-91 operator (if you don't
know whether you are or not - you are; if you were subject to Part 135,
137, 125, 121, etc you would have a certificate and manual, and boy
would you know it...) then regardless of what Lycoming says, regardless
of how the letter is worded, and regardless of all the FUD (Fear,
Uncertainty, Doubt) that gets spread around - you are not grounded and
you are not required to replace anything.

Having said that, Lycoming is pretty famous for ****ty quality control
(they just lost a major lawsuit where they tried to blame it all on a
subcontractor) and I don't doubt that they've managed to make (more
likely had a contractor make to their spec) a bunch of crappy fuel
pumps. Most Lycoming engines have options other than Lycoming for a
fuel pump. I suggest you look into replacing your Lycoming fuel pump
with a non-Lycoming product.

Michael

Not an AD but an SB from Lycoming. Text:

"New, rebuilt and overhauled engines shipped from Lycoming between
Oct 1, 2001 and Feb 2, 2004 with fuel pump P/N LW-15473..."

You can read the rest at the link provided earlier and decide if
you wish to comply at this time.

And decide at what point this may become an AD.

"Blanche" wrote in message
...
Not an AD but an SB from Lycoming. Text:

"New, rebuilt and overhauled engines shipped from Lycoming between
Oct 1, 2001 and Feb 2, 2004 with fuel pump P/N LW-15473..."

You can read the rest at the link provided earlier and decide if
you wish to comply at this time.

And decide at what point this may become an AD.

Yep. A mandatory service bulletin is designed to do two things...

1) Get the word out that there is or may be a problem.

2) Reduce Lycoming's liability.

KB

On 2005-03-16, Michael wrote:
you are not grounded and
you are not required to replace anything.

And if you need an engine driven pump then you probably already have a
backup electrical pump. Would there really be any need to replace the
mechanical one before it wears out?

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

Ben Jackson wrote:
On 2005-03-16, Michael wrote:
you are not grounded and
you are not required to replace anything.

And if you need an engine driven pump then you probably already have
a
backup electrical pump. Would there really be any need to replace
the
mechanical one before it wears out?

Seeing as Lycoming is paying for the new pump and 1.5 hrs. of labor
for the swap, it would be less than smart to take advantage of the deal
and get rid of a potentially bad pump. "Why wouldn't you replace it?"
would be a better question.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

And if you need an engine driven pump then you probably already have a
backup electrical pump. Would there really be any need to replace the
mechanical one before it wears out?


Are people actually flying with this logic?

Key words here are "need" engine driven pump and "backup" electrical.

Is it a matter of the pump failure that could cause other problems besides
fuel pressure, like lack of fuel flow.. do you know why the SB was
suggested?

Like another poster said, it's free.. why NOT do it.

BT

The SB only says potential restricted or lost fuel flow. "Restricted"
sounds to me as if the backup pump might encounter a problem. The SB
does not describe what's bad.

wrote:
Seeing as Lycoming is paying for the new pump and 1.5 hrs. of labor
for the swap, it would be less than smart to take advantage of the
deal
and get rid of a potentially bad pump. "Why wouldn't you replace it?"
would be a better question.

No doubt it makes sense to replace it - once the shop has the part in
stock and is prepared to accomodate your aircraft, all at Lycoming's
expense of course.

What doesn't make sense is grounding your aircraft until this happens.

BTW - I don't know about you, but I sure as hell counldn't replace a
fuel pump on my Lycoming engines in 90 minutes. Not when you include
decowling, taking loose the fuel lines, finding the special wrench you
need to get to that one bolt (there is ALWAYS a special wrench, usually
one you made using torch and grinding wheel), mounting the new pump,
connecting the lines, checking for leaks using the electric boost pump,
and recowling.

On my PA-30, it's probably a half day job. Now I suppose someone who
has done it many times would be a lot quicker, but (a) what are the
odds that the shop you go to has a mechanic who has done this job many
times on your particular installation, and (b) do you really believe
the shop will be willing to eat the extra time that Lycoming won't pay
for?

Then there's the fact that airplanes vary. On an early model Mooney, I
would not be surprised to find out that you need to detach the engine
mounts to replace the fuel pump - that was exactly what we had to do to
replace the prop governor gasket.

In other words - Lycoming's offer is not particularly generous
(certainly not up to what you would expect for a recall in the
automotive world) and this will probably still cost you.

Michael