Search results

I would go as far as saying that's it pretty standard that an O-200 will need top end work between 800 to 1200 hours. Why is this? Is the design poor? I’ve heard some hanger talk that is you work them hard then they last longer? I cruise at 2350rpm. Would increasing that help? Other people...

What about priming? Is it still needed with the surefly especially with the retarded timing for starting?

I hear everyone in the good old USA are pulling them out. When in England there are still quite a few approaches that make use of them. In fact at some airfields its the only approach that is available. My King 44B antenna has just given up the ghost and I wondered if anyone has one going spare?

My 80HP Rotax has just gone over 5000 hours on nothing but routine maintenance. The first 4000 hours were done largely on mogas the last 1000 hours totally on Avgas. Now its running on Avgas we change the oil every 50 hours rather than 100 hours. We also change the plugs a little more...

I probably shoot more instrument approaches than most and occasionally down to minima's. The aircrafts equipped with an ADF/DME and an iPad. Pretty well every airfield with an instrucment approach in my part of europe has an NDb. Ground is pretty flat mind.

Cessna150 door panels? Door pillers? And the instrument panel covers?

Huge numbers of NDB approaches remain in the UK and only a handful of GPS approaches. One advantage being you don't have to pay for a database for an ADF unit

Does that new breather tube mod come with all new or factory rebuilt o-200's from continental?

Thank you. I was referring to the O-200A To quote continental "Continental Motors introduced its Gold Standard Factory Rebuilt and New Engines. These engines incorporate improvements in technology and manufacturing processes that have allowed us to increase the TBO" I was therefore wondering...

Later serial numbers of this venerable engine have a TBO of 2000 hours compared to 1800 of the earlier serial numbers. Does anyone know what modifications have been carried out on these later serial numbered engines that allow the higher TBO?

My 80hp uncertified roatax 912 has done 4800 on nothing more than routine maintenance. As for my experience with the O-200 it isn't that good. My last 4 haven't met TBO.

I wonder when you factor in the cost of maintaining the wobbly prop if this aircraft has lower running costs than the o200 powered variant. If you fit a wobbly prop on a rotax then there is no space for a vacuum pump. Hence the Venturi. I think they should drop this and fit a G5.

European perspective here. Small flying school with 3 Cessna 150's, A PA28 and an EV-97 Eurostar. The PA28's engine made started making metal at 2380 hours. It was stripped and found beyond economical repair. A factory rebuilt engine was fitted (£26400) and this engine started making metal at...