Real stats on engine failures?

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Well there is no maitenance on connecting rods and crankshafts.


....other than preventive.


"Tom S." wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
link.net...
I don't have any personally but I have a friend that has had three in
3500hrs. One connecting rod failure in a 210. A crankshaft failure
in
an
Azetec and I forget the details of the third failure. It has been
estimated
that 10% of Malibus have had inflight engine failures of some kind.


It'd be interesting to know the maintenance history of those birds that
did
have failures (skimped maintenance, etc).

It's also be interesting to know the total operating hours of the Malibu
fleet, Lycoming vs. Continental...

What preventive maitenance is done on either crankshafts of connecting rods?

Mike
MU-2


"Tom S." wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Well there is no maitenance on connecting rods and crankshafts.


...other than .preventive


"Tom S." wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
link.net...
I don't have any personally but I have a friend that has had three
in
3500hrs. One connecting rod failure in a 210. A crankshaft failure
in
an
Azetec and I forget the details of the third failure. It has been
estimated
that 10% of Malibus have had inflight engine failures of some kind.


It'd be interesting to know the maintenance history of those birds
that
did
have failures (skimped maintenance, etc).

It's also be interesting to know the total operating hours of the
Malibu
fleet, Lycoming vs. Continental...

"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

"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.

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

"Captain Wubba" wrote in message

Anybody have
any facts or hard data,

No hard data, just a fact. Flying since '72, including 18 years of airline
flying, and I've never had a catastrophic failure of any kind, ever. Just
lucky, I guess.

JG

No hard data, just a fact. Flying since '72, including 18 years of airline
flying, and I've never had a catastrophic failure of any kind, ever. Just
lucky, I guess.

I have just over 5000 hours and have had
4 complete failures, one partial power failure, and 2 precautionary shutdowns.
I've also had a dual prop governor failure in a Twin Otter which lead to
shutting down one of the engines.

It makes me really happy that I did my initial training in gliders!!



-John
*You are nothing until you have flown a Douglas, Lockheed, Grumman or North
American*

Well, I've had a couple of precautionary shutdowns in a commuter t-prop,
both ultimately traced to faulty sensor or indicator; and a couple of
failed generators or hydraulic systems, etc, but these last occurred in
Boeing transports with multiple redundancy. I've never encountered a
failure that was a show-stopper. Knock wood.

JG


"Ditch" wrote in message

I have just over 5000 hours and have had
4 complete failures, one partial power failure, and 2 precautionary
shutdowns.
I've also had a dual prop governor failure in a Twin Otter which lead to
shutting down one of the engines.

On 24 Nov 2003 11:31:57 -0800
(Captain Wubba) wrote:

Howdy. I was discussing with a friend of mine my concerns about flying
single-engine planes at night or in hard IFR, due to the possibility
of engine failure. My buddy is a CFI/CFII/ATP as well as an A&P, about
3500 hours, and been around airplanes for a long time, so I tend to
give credence to his experiences. He asked me how often I thought a
piston engine had an in-flight engine failure. I guestimated once
every 10,000 hours or so. He said that was *dramatically*
over-estimating the failure rate. He said that in his experience it is
at least 40,000 to 50,000 hours per in-flight engine failure. The
place where he works sometimes as a mechanic has plenty of planes come
in for overhauls and annuals, and he estimates that for every plane
that has had an engine failure before TBO, at least 20-30 make it to
TBO without any failure (which would extrapolate to a similar figure).
The flight school he teaches at has 7 Cessnas used for primary
training and rental that have flown at least 40,000 hours total in the
six years he has been there, and they have not experienced a single
engine failure.

I emailed Lycoming, and (unsurprisingly) they told me they did not
keep records about engine failure rates.

So I'd like to find out if anyone has done any objective analysis of
certificated, piston-engine failure rates in light airplanes. I have
seen all kinds of 'guesses', but little in the way of objective facts.
After analyzing NTSB accident data and comparing to annual GA
flight-hours, I'm starting to think my friend is on the right track,
but that is a relatively small sample, and has some methodologial
flaws. It's funny. I know 20,000 hour CFIs who have never had an
engine failure, and I also know 300 hour PP-ASELs who have had engine
failures.

Just for giggles, I asked 8 pilot friends/relatives if they had ever
had an engine failure. The only 'yes' was a relative who lost an
engine after takeoff on his first solo cross-country in 1958. And I
know one other pilot who had an engine failure, who I wasn't able to
talk to.

So what is it? If the engine-failure rate is one failure for every
50,000 flight hours, I'll feel much less reticent about night/IFR
single-engine flying than if it is one in 10,000 hours. Anybody have
any facts or hard data, or have any idea where I might be able to
track some down?

Thanks,

Cap


I think it's a reasonable question to ask bnut to me it's more important to
know how many engine failures resulted in fatalities since if the engine
failed and they walked away from it then who the hell cares what failed
as long as you live to fly again. Am I making any sense? The stat I'm
tinking of would be engine failures where a fatality resulted and that
number will be many more hours than just a engine failure and that's
the number that I'll live close to if I have to live close to some fear
factor. Even if I'm carried away on a stretcher it beats paying the
down mortgage. The engine will just be the last thing I'd think of.

Do you know what that does to your numbers when you include fatals?


R. Hubbell

"R. Hubbell" wrote Cap


I think it's a reasonable question to ask bnut to me it's more important
to
know how many engine failures resulted in fatalities since if the engine
failed and they walked away from it then who the hell cares what failed
as long as you live to fly again. Am I making any sense? The stat I'm
tinking of would be engine failures where a fatality resulted and that
number will be many more hours than just a engine failure and that's
the number that I'll live close to if I have to live close to some fear
factor. Even if I'm carried away on a stretcher it beats paying the
down mortgage. The engine will just be the last thing I'd think of.

Do you know what that does to your numbers when you include fatals?


R. Hubbell


That is ridiculous! What happens after the engine failure is a combination
of timing, luck, location, with a mix of judgment and skill. That is what
prevents fatalities.

Saying what you said, is like saying a fart is only a fart, if it results in
a ****.

Get a grip!
--
Jim in NC