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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
TBO and airworthiness
"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com wrote in message ... "karl gruber" wrote in message ... What is B-10, B50 etc? Karl Always top post B-10, B-50... are the expected hours at which 10%, 50%, etc. are expected to fail. The "B" is from "bearing" - the orignal theorys were developed to predict the life of ball bearings, but the termanology is now used for everything. The Weibull distribution is usually used to "fit" durability data and determine these values. If TBO is B-10, then, in most cases, it would seem silly to overhaul at TBO, if it is B-90, then it would be optimistic to expect to make TBO... Or, TBO could be a number that some engineer pulled out of the air (to put it politely). I don't think TBO is a projected or average expected "point of failure". I believe they'd call that "Expect Life Expectancy". |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
TBO and airworthiness
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message ups.com... On Apr 10, 9:12 pm, Jim Stewart wrote: Does an engine past TBO make an aircraft non-airworthy? I can't seem to find a straight answer on the web. Assuming you can find an IA willing to sign an annual then no. Pardon? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
TBO and airworthiness
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message oups.com... On Apr 11, 10:16 am, Newps wrote: Robert M. Gary wrote: On Apr 10, 9:12 pm, Jim Stewart wrote: Does an engine past TBO make an aircraft non-airworthy? I can't seem to find a straight answer on the web. Assuming you can find an IA willing to sign an annual then no. Have you found that to be a problem? I haven't. My mechanic flies his 180 on pipeline patrol and is 1000 over TBO on his 470. Another friend also flies pipeline in his PA12 and went 3600 hours before he topped it and 7000 hours before he finally majored it, that's a lot of 100 hour inspections. Yes, many IA's I've worked with refuse to sign after 200 over TBO. Its probably a liability issue. Sounds like a competency issue - on what basis did they 'fail" the aircraft? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
TBO and airworthiness
Yes, many IA's I've worked with refuse to sign after 200 over TBO. Its probably a liability issue. Sounds like a competency issue - on what basis did they 'fail" the aircraft? They don't have to fail anything. If it's not returned to service, the owner is at liberty to find another IA who is willing to return it to service. An IA is not obligated to explain why he chooses not to return an aircraft to service. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
TBO and airworthiness
"Dave Butler" wrote in message ... Yes, many IA's I've worked with refuse to sign after 200 over TBO. Its probably a liability issue. Sounds like a competency issue - on what basis did they 'fail" the aircraft? They don't have to fail anything. If it's not returned to service, the owner is at liberty to find another IA who is willing to return it to service. Note the "" around _fail_. An IA is not obligated to explain why he chooses not to return an aircraft to service. I seriously doubt they would stay mute on the subject. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
TBO and airworthiness
Matt Barrow wrote:
"Dave Butler" wrote in message An IA is not obligated to explain why he chooses not to return an aircraft to service. I seriously doubt they would stay mute on the subject. Correct, but if the explanation is not satisfactory to the AC owner, the IA can just say thanks for your business, next time go elsewhere. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
TBO and airworthiness
"Dave Butler" wrote in message ... Matt Barrow wrote: "Dave Butler" wrote in message An IA is not obligated to explain why he chooses not to return an aircraft to service. I seriously doubt they would stay mute on the subject. Correct, but if the explanation is not satisfactory to the AC owner, the IA can just say thanks for your business, next time go elsewhere. If they would not sign off my aircraft merely because it was 200 hours over TBO, regardless of the condition of the engine, bet yer ass I'd go somewhere else. The IA wouldn't have to ask me to go elsewhere. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
TBO and airworthiness
On Apr 12, 8:42 am, "Matt Barrow"
wrote: "Dave Butler" wrote in message ... Yes, many IA's I've worked with refuse to sign after 200 over TBO. Its probably a liability issue. Sounds like a competency issue - on what basis did they 'fail" the aircraft? They don't have to fail anything. If it's not returned to service, the owner is at liberty to find another IA who is willing to return it to service. Note the "" around _fail_. An IA is not obligated to explain why he chooses not to return an aircraft to service. I seriously doubt they would stay mute on the subject. In fact, once the inspection has started, the IA is required by FAR to sign the aircraft off as un-airworthy and give the owner a list of things to fix to make it airworthy. Part 43. But ahead of time, you could quiz him informally about what he would do. If he has an idea about TBO that you don't like, you could learn that before you start. Bill Hale A&PIA |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
TBO and airworthiness
Dave Butler wrote:
Yes, many IA's I've worked with refuse to sign after 200 over TBO. Its probably a liability issue. Sounds like a competency issue - on what basis did they 'fail" the aircraft? They don't have to fail anything. If it's not returned to service, the owner is at liberty to find another IA who is willing to return it to service. An IA is not obligated to explain why he chooses not to return an aircraft to service. He's supposed to make a log entry regarding the results of his inspection isn't he? Even if the FAR didn't specifically require such an entry, common business ethics and practices would demand it should the owner request it. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
TBO and airworthiness
An IA is not obligated to explain why he chooses not to return an aircraft
to service. In fact, once the inspection has started, the IA is required by FAR to sign the aircraft off as un-airworthy and give the owner a list of things to fix to make it airworthy. Part 43. Oh. I'm sure you're right. Thanks for the correction. Dave |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A question on Airworthiness Inspection | Dave S | Home Built | 1 | August 10th 04 05:07 AM |
Restricted Airworthiness | Brad Mallard | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | May 20th 04 05:18 PM |
Airworthiness Cert Still Valid? | Carl Orton | Owning | 12 | February 13th 04 10:21 PM |
Teaching airworthiness | Roger Long | Piloting | 28 | October 2nd 03 09:08 PM |
Airworthiness certification of an experimental | Ace Pilot | Home Built | 0 | July 16th 03 03:26 PM |