![]() |
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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If a plane (C172S) has 1600 TT but is at 250 hrs SMOH on an original engine
that's spec'd for 2000hrs TBO, does this mean that the engine went in for overhaul prematurely? For what possible reason and how would I find out? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 8/1/2005 15:32, H.P. wrote:
If a plane (C172S) has 1600 TT but is at 250 hrs SMOH on an original engine that's spec'd for 2000hrs TBO, does this mean that the engine went in for overhaul prematurely? For what possible reason and how would I find out? Remember that TBO is based on hours run as well as calendar time. How long was the engine in the airplane, and what does it's manufacture recommend for calendar time to overhaul? -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Student Sacramento, CA |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The 172S model is a 1999-2001 model year if I'm not mistaken. 6 years (less
how long it has been since SMOH) is way below any reasonable manufacturer's recommendations. Jim "Mark Hansen" wrote in message ... On 8/1/2005 15:32, H.P. wrote: If a plane (C172S) has 1600 TT but is at 250 hrs SMOH on an original engine that's spec'd for 2000hrs TBO, does this mean that the engine went in for overhaul prematurely? For what possible reason and how would I find out? Remember that TBO is based on hours run as well as calendar time. How long was the engine in the airplane, and what does it's manufacture recommend for calendar time to overhaul? -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Student Sacramento, CA |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If a plane (C172S) has 1600 TT but is at 250 hrs SMOH on an
original engine that's spec'd for 2000hrs TBO, does this mean that the engine went in for overhaul prematurely? In this case, yes. For what possible reason and how would I find out? For many possible reasons. It could have had a prop strike and the owner opted to major since the insurance was paying for the teardown and rebuild anyway. The engine could have grenaded itself (bearings or whatever). The jugs might have worn out and the owner decided to major rather than top because it wasn't that much more money or downtime (which isn't true, but...) The factory might have done a ****ty job of building the engine, and it just didn't last. Look in the logs around the time of the overhaul and prior. Was there airframe repair at the same time? Then it was a prop strike, or maybe an engine failure resulting in an off-airport landing. Did the engine have a history of replacing jugs? Maybe the owner just got fed up with it. Really, unless there are issues with unrepaired or improperly repaired airframe damage, I would worry a lot more about HOW the engine was overhauled rather than WHY. Michael |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
yes...
look in the engine log book.. sometimes a reason for overhaul is not specifically mentioned.. but information like declining compression readings etc may yield and answer or something like "engine overhauled at xxxhours due to propeller strike, crank passed inspection" BT "H.P." wrote in message . .. If a plane (C172S) has 1600 TT but is at 250 hrs SMOH on an original engine that's spec'd for 2000hrs TBO, does this mean that the engine went in for overhaul prematurely? For what possible reason and how would I find out? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
H.P. wrote:
If a plane (C172S) has 1600 TT but is at 250 hrs SMOH on an original engine that's spec'd for 2000hrs TBO, does this mean that the engine went in for overhaul prematurely? For what possible reason and how would I find out? 1. Yes 2. Too many possible reasons to enumerate. 3. Ask the owner? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Engines commonly do not reach TBO unless flown regularly (i.e. daily or
hourly) and properly operated. I wouldn't be concerned about an overhaul at 1350 hrs as long as the overhaul was properly done. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Newbie Question, really: That first flight | Cecil Chapman | Home Built | 25 | September 20th 04 05:52 AM |
A question only a newbie would ask | Peter Duniho | Piloting | 68 | August 18th 04 11:54 PM |
Newbie question on Rate of Climb | Wright1902Glider | Home Built | 0 | August 17th 04 03:48 PM |
Newbie Question - Vacuum vs Electric | Bill Denton | Aerobatics | 1 | April 15th 04 11:30 PM |
Newbie question | Bill Gribble | Soaring | 6 | November 6th 03 07:57 PM |