Parker Service "letter"

Just got a "service Letter in the mail from Parker. Dated Feb 15,
2008 It states that "All Parker/Airborne engine driven air pumps are
beyond their mandatory replacement time and must be removed from
services"

Bascally they are saying that if you have a Parker/Airborne Vac Pump
that its toast, remove it before the next flight. Now I dont, mine is
a Garwin wet unit, but this seems like this is either a blanket get
out of jail liability card or one hell of a way to make some money.
The letter goes on to say that they realize that owners have a choice
of using a new or overhauled unit but "owners/pilots must be aware of
the increased risk of pneumatic system failure when using overhauled
or reconditioned pumps. An overhauled/reconditioned Parker/Airborne
pump MUST NOT be used"

If this service letter represents a real SB then people would be nuts
to support these yahoos by buying another Parker pump product.

In rec.aviation.owning wrote:
Just got a "service Letter in the mail from Parker. Dated Feb 15,
2008 It states that "All Parker/Airborne engine driven air pumps are
beyond their mandatory replacement time and must be removed from
services"

Bascally they are saying that if you have a Parker/Airborne Vac Pump
that its toast, remove it before the next flight. Now I dont, mine is
a Garwin wet unit, but this seems like this is either a blanket get
out of jail liability card or one hell of a way to make some money.
The letter goes on to say that they realize that owners have a choice
of using a new or overhauled unit but "owners/pilots must be aware of
the increased risk of pneumatic system failure when using overhauled
or reconditioned pumps. An overhauled/reconditioned Parker/Airborne
pump MUST NOT be used"

If this service letter represents a real SB then people would be nuts
to support these yahoos by buying another Parker pump product.

That would be difficult.

Did you read the line:

"Parker/Airborne ceased the manufacture of Engine-Driven Air Pumps in
February 20002."

In other words, they are saying the last pump made is now beyond it's
service life.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote:
In rec.aviation.owning wrote:
Just got a "service Letter in the mail from Parker. Dated Feb 15,
2008 It states that "All Parker/Airborne engine driven air pumps are
beyond their mandatory replacement time and must be removed from
services"

Bascally they are saying that if you have a Parker/Airborne Vac Pump
that its toast, remove it before the next flight. Now I dont, mine is
a Garwin wet unit, but this seems like this is either a blanket get
out of jail liability card or one hell of a way to make some money.
The letter goes on to say that they realize that owners have a choice
of using a new or overhauled unit but "owners/pilots must be aware of
the increased risk of pneumatic system failure when using overhauled
or reconditioned pumps. An overhauled/reconditioned Parker/Airborne
pump MUST NOT be used"

If this service letter represents a real SB then people would be nuts
to support these yahoos by buying another Parker pump product.

That would be difficult.

Did you read the line:

"Parker/Airborne ceased the manufacture of Engine-Driven Air Pumps in
February 20002."

In other words, they are saying the last pump made is now beyond it's
service life.



Isn't Parker the one that got run out of business due to a liability suit?

In rec.aviation.owning Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
wrote:
In rec.aviation.owning wrote:
Just got a "service Letter in the mail from Parker. Dated Feb 15,
2008 It states that "All Parker/Airborne engine driven air pumps are
beyond their mandatory replacement time and must be removed from
services"

Bascally they are saying that if you have a Parker/Airborne Vac Pump
that its toast, remove it before the next flight. Now I dont, mine is
a Garwin wet unit, but this seems like this is either a blanket get
out of jail liability card or one hell of a way to make some money.
The letter goes on to say that they realize that owners have a choice
of using a new or overhauled unit but "owners/pilots must be aware of
the increased risk of pneumatic system failure when using overhauled
or reconditioned pumps. An overhauled/reconditioned Parker/Airborne
pump MUST NOT be used"

If this service letter represents a real SB then people would be nuts
to support these yahoos by buying another Parker pump product.

That would be difficult.

Did you read the line:

"Parker/Airborne ceased the manufacture of Engine-Driven Air Pumps in
February 20002."

In other words, they are saying the last pump made is now beyond it's
service life.



Isn't Parker the one that got run out of business due to a liability suit?

Sort of.

Parker lost despite the NTSB report that said the pump was functional
when the aircraft crashed.

Parker then basically said screw the GA market as not being worth the
grief and got out of the GA market. They are still very much in business.

Lawsuit:

http://www.robbrobb.com/media_articl...ticle=4_01.htm

Parker:

http://www.parker.com/portal/site/PARKER


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote in message ...
In rec.aviation.owning Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
wrote:
In rec.aviation.owning wrote:
Just got a "service Letter in the mail from Parker. Dated Feb 15,
2008 It states that "All Parker/Airborne engine driven air pumps are
beyond their mandatory replacement time and must be removed from
services"

Bascally they are saying that if you have a Parker/Airborne Vac Pump
that its toast, remove it before the next flight. Now I dont, mine is
a Garwin wet unit, but this seems like this is either a blanket get
out of jail liability card or one hell of a way to make some money.
The letter goes on to say that they realize that owners have a choice
of using a new or overhauled unit but "owners/pilots must be aware of
the increased risk of pneumatic system failure when using overhauled
or reconditioned pumps. An overhauled/reconditioned Parker/Airborne
pump MUST NOT be used"

If this service letter represents a real SB then people would be nuts
to support these yahoos by buying another Parker pump product.

That would be difficult.

Did you read the line:

"Parker/Airborne ceased the manufacture of Engine-Driven Air Pumps in
February 20002."

In other words, they are saying the last pump made is now beyond it's
service life.



Isn't Parker the one that got run out of business due to a liability suit?

Sort of.

Parker lost despite the NTSB report that said the pump was functional
when the aircraft crashed.

Parker then basically said screw the GA market as not being worth the
grief and got out of the GA market. They are still very much in business.



Ever hear of Cleveland wheels and brakes?




Lawsuit:

http://www.robbrobb.com/media_articl...ticle=4_01.htm

Parker:

http://www.parker.com/portal/site/PARKER


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Mar 26, 9:15 am, wrote:
In rec.aviation.owning wrote:
Just got a "service Letter in the mail from Parker. Dated Feb 15,
2008 It states that "All Parker/Airborne engine driven air pumps are
beyond their mandatory replacement time and must be removed from
services"
Bascally they are saying that if you have a Parker/Airborne Vac Pump
that its toast, remove it before the next flight. Now I dont, mine is
a Garwin wet unit, but this seems like this is either a blanket get
out of jail liability card or one hell of a way to make some money.
The letter goes on to say that they realize that owners have a choice
of using a new or overhauled unit but "owners/pilots must be aware of
the increased risk of pneumatic system failure when using overhauled
or reconditioned pumps. An overhauled/reconditioned Parker/Airborne
pump MUST NOT be used"
If this service letter represents a real SB then people would be nuts
to support these yahoos by buying another Parker pump product.

That would be difficult.

Did you read the line:

"Parker/Airborne ceased the manufacture of Engine-Driven Air Pumps in
February 20002."

In other words, they are saying the last pump made is now beyond it's
service life.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

IIRC, those pumps have a six-year life, mostly due to the
plastic drive coupling that goes brittle with age and heat. The carbon
rotor and vanes should be fine, but they're no good if the coupling
doesn't drive them. The coupling was made of plastic so it would shear
rather than lunch the engine if the pump jammed.
We use the Rapco pumps as well as the Tempest. Tempest rebuilds
pumps and puts a visual vane inspection port in the back. Rapco puts
the port in the side of the pump and uses a calibrated plastic gauge
to measure vane wear. Cessna wants pumps replaced at 500 hours/six
years unless they have the port; then they can run beyond the 500
until the vanes are at their limits. In flight school service we never
get a pump near the six-year limit.
I wonder if the drive coupling is available separately?

Dan

Dan

In rec.aviation.owning wrote:
On Mar 26, 9:15 am, wrote:
In rec.aviation.owning wrote:
Just got a "service Letter in the mail from Parker. Dated Feb 15,
2008 It states that "All Parker/Airborne engine driven air pumps are
beyond their mandatory replacement time and must be removed from
services"
Bascally they are saying that if you have a Parker/Airborne Vac Pump
that its toast, remove it before the next flight. Now I dont, mine is
a Garwin wet unit, but this seems like this is either a blanket get
out of jail liability card or one hell of a way to make some money.
The letter goes on to say that they realize that owners have a choice
of using a new or overhauled unit but "owners/pilots must be aware of
the increased risk of pneumatic system failure when using overhauled
or reconditioned pumps. An overhauled/reconditioned Parker/Airborne
pump MUST NOT be used"
If this service letter represents a real SB then people would be nuts
to support these yahoos by buying another Parker pump product.

That would be difficult.

Did you read the line:

"Parker/Airborne ceased the manufacture of Engine-Driven Air Pumps in
February 20002."

In other words, they are saying the last pump made is now beyond it's
service life.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

IIRC, those pumps have a six-year life, mostly due to the
plastic drive coupling that goes brittle with age and heat. The carbon
rotor and vanes should be fine, but they're no good if the coupling
doesn't drive them. The coupling was made of plastic so it would shear
rather than lunch the engine if the pump jammed.
We use the Rapco pumps as well as the Tempest. Tempest rebuilds
pumps and puts a visual vane inspection port in the back. Rapco puts
the port in the side of the pump and uses a calibrated plastic gauge
to measure vane wear. Cessna wants pumps replaced at 500 hours/six
years unless they have the port; then they can run beyond the 500
until the vanes are at their limits. In flight school service we never
get a pump near the six-year limit.
I wonder if the drive coupling is available separately?

Since they stopped making the stuff over 6 years ago, I would think
the chance of finding a new one less than the life limit is rather slim.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Mar 26, 7:20*am, wrote:
Just got a "service Letter in the mail from Parker. *Dated Feb 15,
2008 It states that "All Parker/Airborne engine driven air pumps are
beyond their mandatory replacement time and must be removed from
services"

Part 91 pilots can continue to run the pumps just fine. Many pilots
have complained that the letter is written as if its an AD with the
force of the FAA behind it. It is not.

-Robert