FFS. I need a new hobby.

[mondtster]

I have got to get my A&P. I’d take twice the time and have to buy a few expensive things, but I’m sure I can - with some paid help when get stuck - rebuild in less than 2 years.

Time often isn’t the issue. Try finding some of the parts that are unobtanium and see how long it takes to overhaul an engine.

I’m finishing up one right now that I started during the Covid fiasco because parts were an issue.

 

[cowman]

I've talked to a couple of A&Ps at different shops and they've all told me that small shops could do overhauls but almost none of them are going to anymore for liability reasons. Lawyers ruin everything I guess.

On the dual-mag issue I've looked at it too. I think just about everyone looks at the design and says WTF were they thinking. OTOH do the actual stats support the idea that there's a notably higher failure rate with these mags? I haven't seen any good evidence to support that- obviously at one time Lycoming thought it would be just fine. Is this a case of it just not looking good but not actually being a problem in practice?

Personally if it was a minimal cost/time difference I'd probably want to get rid of the dual-mag too but when we're talking a 2-year turnaround time and (I presume) a hefty price difference... IDK what I'd do there. Depends on the cost/wait alternative and stats I suppose.

 

[WDD]

none of them are going to anymore for liability reasons. Lawyers ruin everything I guess

Which is why doing it myself would get around that. And hey - I’m retired - it would keep me out of the house.

Parts shortages - hopefully it’s better now than Covid; can’t really do anything about it.

 

[moparrob66]

Could you buy a used engine, have a different shop IRAN and fly that until you get the other one overhauled?

 

[idahoflier]

Just saw this, sorry, that really sucks! I hope you're able to find a solution that doesn't involve waiting two years for Lycoming!

 

[Bell206]

I've talked to a couple of A&Ps at different shops and they've all told me that small shops could do overhauls but almost none of them are going to anymore for liability reasons.

FYI: in a number of cases mx insurance providers split out "major" engine work as a separate insurable. Years ago I stopped performing heavy engine work due to my premium would be another 20% higher and I didn't perform enough engine work to justify the extra cost.

 

[Steamflyer]

On the dual-mag issue I've looked at it too. I think just about everyone looks at the design and says WTF were they thinking. OTOH do the actual stats support the idea that there's a notably higher failure rate with these mags? I haven't seen any good evidence to support that- obviously at one time Lycoming thought it would be just fine. Is this a case of it just not looking good but not actually being a problem in practice?

The issue with single drive, dual mag is that it is an orphan with very restricted parts supply and few places that will or can overhaul them. Not a reliability issue.

 

[Jim K]

The issue with single drive, dual mag is that it is an orphan with very restricted parts supply and few places that will or can overhaul them. Not a reliability issue.

Ironically, the parts & overhaul situation is 10000% better than the engine to which it is attached. As part of this exercise, I've been exploring wide-flange angle valve cylinders....they don't exist. At least not within a reasonable timeframe.

Also ironically, we sent out my dual mag for a 500 hour inspection on Wednesday of last week, the day before we discovered the idler problem. I paid extra for the quick turnaround service, hoping to have the plane back in service by the end of this week. We called friday to tell them to put it on hold, in case we decided to get a different engine. They already had it done. It arrived back at the shop yesterday. Sigh.

 

[Chrisgoesflying]

Why are you looking to overhaul at Lycoming? Could you not go to an engine shop or even get a field overhaul done? That might be faster I assume. Also, are there any used, mid-time engines for sale right now? If so, maybe a better option to put another engine up front. Sell this one as a core to offset some of the expenses of buying an airworthy mid-time engine.

 

[Steamflyer]

Ironically, the parts & overhaul situation is 10000% better than the engine to which it is attached. As part of this exercise, I've been exploring wide-flange angle valve cylinders....they don't exist. At least not within a reasonable timeframe.

There are several shops out there that can probably rebuild your engine in 12-20 weeks. I would think that the shop you first used might be interested and coming to an accommodation, but not clear that you and they are still on good enough terms for that to occur given some of the posts. That depends on the condition of your innards, the case, and whether or not you want new or overhauled cylinders. To me, new is preferable, but new Lycoming assemblies seem more scarce than the Continental ones. And don't think Superior makes them for that engine.

If you plan to continue flying the plane as extensively as before, you might be well served by fixing the current engine. Maybe try and figure out, if possible, why, two times, the idler shaft did not idle and rather spun at least some of the time. It seems like a set screw into the depression should keep it put. But sufficient friction developed between the gear and the shaft to make that not so.

 

[WDD]

I’m loosing track.

Engine is broken again because of a part associated with controlling the prop. To fix it you have to split the case again, and maybe it chewed some metal.

How does the single vs dual mag issue come in?

 

[Salty]

I’m loosing track.

Engine is broken again because of a part associated with controlling the prop. To fix it you have to split the case again, and maybe it chewed some metal.

How does the single vs dual mag issue come in?

It’s the next most likely thing to kill Jim. I actually typed him but my phone changed it and it worked so I left it.

 

[Racerx]

I’m loosing track.

Engine is broken again because of a part associated with controlling the prop. To fix it you have to split the case again, and maybe it chewed some metal.

How does the single vs dual mag issue come in?

The dude flys a ton and he's gonna need an overhaul sooner rather than later. If he has to split the case (again) and has to over haul a bastard mag at the same time... Now seems like the perfect time to start fresh.

 

[WDD]

Did it chew metal and needs to have an IRAN, or does the case just need to be split and that part reattached?

 

[cowman]

I’m loosing track.

Engine is broken again because of a part associated with controlling the prop. To fix it you have to split the case again, and maybe it chewed some metal.

How does the single vs dual mag issue come in?

The thingy retaining the part controlling the prop is retained by the case, there's a chance his case may need work/is no good so it might end up being that it makes sense to just rebuild/replace the whole engine.

If he does get a new engine there's an STC for a different variant of the IO-540 that has a traditional mag setup instead of the dual-mag. A lot of guys with dual-mags opt for that when getting a new engine.

 

[Salty]

The dual mag, in my humble opinion, takes the redundancy of having two mags and tosses it in the dumpster. If an impulse coupler breaks, it's not good. I cannot conceive why the FAA ever approved its use.

The Bendix D2000/D3000 dual magneto is used on many Lycoming engines. If your Lycoming engine model number ends in a “D” suffix—e.g., O-360-A1F6D or TIO-540-F2BD—it has one of these puppies installed. In essence, this is two independent magnetos packaged into one box, with a single drive shaft, mounted on a single pad on the accessory case. The idea was to reduce the “real estate” and gear train complexity at the back of the engine.

The Bendix D2000/D3000 dual mag is basically two independent magnetos packaged into a single unit.
Frankly, this probably wasn’t Lycoming engineering’s best idea. I’ve been struck by how many aircraft owners and mechanics have bad experiences with these dual mags, some declaring that they would not fly any single-engine airplane that was dual-mag equipped.

The original D2000 dual mag was horribly unreliable, and most of them have long since been replaced with the improved D3000. Although the D3000 has pretty much dual everything—dual breaker points, dual coils, dual distributors and distributor gears—it still doesn’t provide the level of redundancy of two conventional magnetos.

One problem area has been the hold-down clamps that attach the mag to the engine. They have a history of coming loose—either because they were not properly torqued or because the magneto mounting flange or engine mounting pad was worn. When the clamps come loose, the dual mag can shift and that screws up the timing of both magnetos (not just one). Another single-point failure is the impulse coupling that drives the dual mag from the engine gear train. A dual-mag-equipped Lycoming engine has only one of these, rather than two, and an impulse coupling failure can take out the entire ignition system.

Although the dual magneto complies with the letter of the FAA’s two-source requirement, I can’t help but wonder whether it meets the spirit of the regulation. It just doesn’t provide the same level of redundancy as two conventional mags.

From: https://www.savvyaviation.com/how-mags-fail/

 

[Bell206]

I cannot conceive why the FAA ever approved its use.

Many years ago, I was told it was simply based on failure modes. Mechanical drive gear failures were basically nonexistent and if there was a drive failure it usually took out other drive gears that didn't require any redundancy. The electrical side was another matter.

 

[Racerx]

The dual mag, in my humble opinion, takes the redundancy of having two mags and tosses it in the dumpster.

I believe that's everyone including Lycoming's opinion.

 

[UngaWunga]

Is there a reason there is not a thru-hole in the shaft, or one all the way through to the other side, so that it’s not dependent on a little nub of a set screw? Did the original spring pin setup involve both sides of the shaft?

The staking doesn’t look like the staking in the instructions. Looks like both the threads in the hole and set screw need to be deformed to hold. And whatever thread locker properly applied, if applied at all.

I’d still want to get FAA and Lycoming involved for data sake.

The original design was a spring pin/roll pin set through the case into the shaft? And the replacement is a staked set screw?
That seems silly. Did the pin go all the way through the shaft originally? Curious replacement design.
Also from the pictures it looks like the replacement set screw might not have had its point lined up with the shaft when tightened and staked.

 

[WDD]

Also from the pictures it looks like the replacement set screw might not have had its point lined up with the shaft when tightened and staked.

Interesting. I’m still also part of the “where is the locktite” camp.

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

Weld it and send it.

 

[Racerx]

Weld it and send it.

I know a guy.

 

[Racerx]

The original design was a spring pin/roll pin set through the case into the shaft? And the replacement is a staked set screw?
That seems silly. Did the pin go all the way through the shaft originally? Curious replacement design.
Also from the pictures it looks like the replacement set screw might not have had its point lined up with the shaft when tightened and staked.

The stake was garbage. They smashed the top of the case, not inside the threads and on top of the set screw like the service instructions. I do like the roll pin better. Stakes are inconsistent, plus im not a fan of deforming a part like that. Now what when it needs to be done again? Less good threads than before.

But the original roll pin system failed 2 years ago so...

 

[UngaWunga]

I forget, did the original roll pin shear? Or fall out? If it sheared, there's probably not much a set screw can do better.

 

[Jim K]

The original design was a spring pin/roll pin set through the case into the shaft? And the replacement is a staked set screw?
That seems silly. Did the pin go all the way through the shaft originally? Curious replacement design.
Also from the pictures it looks like the replacement set screw might not have had its point lined up with the shaft when tightened and staked.

Spoke at length with Lycoming tech support this afternoon. Apparently the roll pin design was ditched some time in the 70's and replaced with the set screw. I don't think it went through the shaft, I believe just the end stuck into the shaft. The staking & loctite came in in 2007, one year after my engine was last overhauled. He felt that the repair job probably backed out due to the fact it was not staked as shown in the SI.

I sent Chris the following email, and attached the pictures that are posted upthread:

> Chris-
>
> I had asked my local mechanic, Jim Schuler, to contact you last week regarding a repeat of the governor idler shaft failure that you repaired for me in 2022. Since that time, they have removed the prop and prepared the engine for removal from the airframe. They also removed the idler shaft plug from the front of the engine and the shaft itself which slid out easily with a magnet. With the shaft and the governor out of the way, they were able to get some borescope photos of the set screw. I'll attach those along with photos of the shaft and plug.
>
> It is clear from the wear on the cap that the shaft has been spinning for a long time, removing at least .080" of steel from the plug.
>
> I sent these photos to Lycoming tech support, and asked what could cause a repeated failure in this area. Their response was it appeared that the set screw was either not installed correctly (not deep enough or missed hole in shaft), or else backed out due to not be staked as prescribed in SI 1343. The SI was published after the engine was last opened up, so the 2022 failure was likely also due to the set screw backing out.
>
> At this point we are trying to determine how to move forward. I thought that at a minimum you should be made aware of what we found, and would be interested if you have any further thoughts.

His response:

Jim,
Very strange it would happen again. The set screws are always verified by a second inspector on installation. I have seen a repair to cases before with damage in that area that have encountered the same problem. It may need to be machined out in that area and a replacement “threaded slug” installed. There is the AD and it was staked according to that but maybe the SI was revised and I’ll check it out. Makes me wonder if there is an anomaly in the set screw hole itself. We have never encountered this issue in the past. I’ll try to keep costs as minimal as possible and incorporate the SI for the larger shaft and set screw if you send it to us. While we warranty IRAN engines for 1 year or 100 hrs on the repair, it’s difficult to do more just because of other parts that could be problematic and cause issues that don’t get worked during the repair itself.

So. There is no AD on this engine. There is an AD on the aerobatic version, which basically says "stake the set screw as shown in SI 1343". The Si was last revised in 2016. Since he seems to be unfamiliar with SI 1343, I'm guessing no loctite.

I'm debating on asking him when he could work on it. I don't have a lot of confidence though. Possible he might look at that SI and email me again tomorrow, but I'm not holding my breath.

I figured out that he charged 11K, not 20, so that's....a little better I guess. That jives with the $8500 + parts G&N quoted me for an IRAN today. 4-6 months. I added up the parts Lyco requires to be replaced, and the list comes out to $2500. All are in stock with Airpower. At this point, I'm leaning towards doing it myself with supervision. We could probably have it back together by the end of October...assuming the case isn't damaged too much.

Speaking of which I reached out to Divco. No answer, no voicemail. So I sent an email. Will try again tomorrow. Reached out to a couple junkyards about cores....no return calls.

G&N did tell me that it's no big deal to convert engine model numbers. I was impressed that when I asked about converting a K1A5 to a K1G5, without a second's hesitation he told me all the differences and parts needed. He says they can file a 337, stamp the engine tag with a "C" for changed, and make a note in the logbook. Unfortunately the K1A5 core I was looking at must've sold over the weekend.


In other news, my mechanic found SAIB NE-08-32:

SPECIAL AIRWORTHINESS INFORMATION BULLETIN

Aircraft Certification Service Washington, DC U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration

CE-08-32

July 3, 2008

This is information only. Recommendations aren’t mandatory.

Introduction

This Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) alerts owners, operators, and certificated repair facilities of Lycoming Engines O, IO, LIO, AIO, AEIO-320 Series; O, LO, IO, LIO, AIO, AEIO, TO, TIO-360 Series; O, IO, AEIO, TIO, LTIO-540 Series; AEIO, IO-580 Series; and IO-720 Series, Wide Cylinder Flange Engines that are equipped with a front crankcase-mounted propeller governor. Wide cylinder flange engines are identified by the suffix “A or E” in the engine serial number. At this time, this airworthiness concern isn’t an unsafe condition that would warrant airworthiness directive action under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 39.

Background

Illustrations of the description below can be found in Lycoming Engines Service Instruction (SI) No. 1343B.

During engine manufacture, overhaul, or any time the propeller governor idler gear shaft is installed in the engine crankcase, a set screw, part number (P/N) AN565B1032H3, H4, or H5 is installed through a section of the crankcase and into a hole in the shaft. This set screw installation is designed to prevent any movement of the propeller governor idler gear shaft.

If the set screw is not properly installed and the crankcase threads are not peened to lock the set screw, the set screw can loosen and back out. If the set screw backs out, the propeller governor idler gear shaft can move, eventually separating from the engine, resulting in a loss of engine oil and a loss of engine power. Additionally, the engine oil has, in three of the reported accidents, been deposited on the windshield, restricting the visibility of the pilot during an emergency landing.

There are seven documented accidents/incidents of this set screw backing out of the engine crankcase. Two of the accidents resulted in fatalities. In one of the most recent incidents, the pilot was able to return to the airport. The damaged engine parts from this incident included the following:

- Crankcase
- Crankshaft
- Camshaft
- Connecting rods
- Counterweights
- Pistons
- Cylinders
- Oil pump impeller
- Accessory housing

Lycoming Engines issued SI No. 1343B to clarify the peening process after the set screw is installed and to add the application of Loctite 290 to the set screw threads before final assembly of the set screw. The Loctite 290 is not used instead of peening the threads, but is used in addition to peening, to provide an additional method of retaining the set screw.

Recommendations

1. During initial installation of the set screw, ensure the set screw is aligned with, and enters, the hole in the propeller governor idler gear shaft.
2. Once alignment is achieved, remove the set screw and use Loctite 290 on the set screw threads as specified in Lycoming SI 1343B as an additional method of set screw retention.
3. Install and tighten the set screw until it bottoms out in the hole in the propeller governor idler gear shaft.
4. Peen the crankcase threads as specified in Lycoming SI 1343B, except peen the threads of the hole directly on top of the set screw; do not peen the set screw as indicated in Fig 3 of SI 1343B.

Cliff's notes: The original peening method wasn't working, so Lyco added loctite and updated the peening to whacking the interface between the screw and the threads. AD 15-02-07 was later issued against the aerobatic engines only because "low level maneuvering leaves less time to react to an engine failure". 7 documented cases, 3 oil covered windshields, 2 fatalities, as of 2008. So apparently I'm a member of a pretty exclusive club. Almost got to do it twice....

 

[WDD]

At the minimum he skipped the locktite.

 

[cowman]

Spoke at length with Lycoming tech support this afternoon. Apparently the roll pin design was ditched some time in the 70's and replaced with the set screw. I don't think it went through the shaft, I believe just the end stuck into the shaft. The staking & loctite came in in 2007, one year after my engine was last overhauled. He felt that the repair job probably backed out due to the fact it was not staked as shown in the SI.

My engine was last overhauled by Lycoming in 2002 so I assume I've still got the roll pin.

 

[Racerx]

Spoke at length with Lycoming tech support this afternoon. Apparently the roll pin design was ditched some time in the 70's and replaced with the set screw. I don't think it went through the shaft, I believe just the end stuck into the shaft. The staking & loctite came in in 2007, one year after my engine was last overhauled. He felt that the repair job probably backed out due to the fact it was not staked as shown in the SI.

I sent Chris the following email, and attached the pictures that are posted upthread:


His response:


So. There is no AD on this engine. There is an AD on the aerobatic version, which basically says "stake the set screw as shown in SI 1343". The Si was last revised in 2016. Since he seems to be unfamiliar with SI 1343, I'm guessing no loctite.

I'm debating on asking him when he could work on it. I don't have a lot of confidence though. Possible he might look at that SI and email me again tomorrow, but I'm not holding my breath.

I figured out that he charged 11K, not 20, so that's....a little better I guess. That jives with the $8500 + parts G&N quoted me for an IRAN today. 4-6 months. I added up the parts Lyco requires to be replaced, and the list comes out to $2500. All are in stock with Airpower. At this point, I'm leaning towards doing it myself with supervision. We could probably have it back together by the end of October...assuming the case isn't damaged too much.

Speaking of which I reached out to Divco. No answer, no voicemail. So I sent an email. Will try again tomorrow. Reached out to a couple junkyards about cores....no return calls.

G&N did tell me that it's no big deal to convert engine model numbers. I was impressed that when I asked about converting a K1A5 to a K1G5, without a second's hesitation he told me all the differences and parts needed. He says they can file a 337, stamp the engine tag with a "C" for changed, and make a note in the logbook. Unfortunately the K1A5 core I was looking at must've sold over the weekend.


In other news, my mechanic found SAIB NE-08-32:


Cliff's notes: The original peening method wasn't working, so Lyco added loctite and updated the peening to whacking the interface between the screw and the threads. AD 15-02-07 was later issued against the aerobatic engines only because "low level maneuvering leaves less time to react to an engine failure". 7 documented cases, 3 oil covered windshields, 2 fatalities, as of 2008. So apparently I'm a member of a pretty exclusive club. Almost got to do it twice....

I would definitely forward that saib with something along the lines of "I guess I'm not the only one...it probably wasn't the case"

But I wouldn't give him the time of day to work on it. Couldn't follow instructions the first time. Because "we don't follow si's". Giving him a second crack would be a fool me twice thing. My guess is the only anomaly to the set screw hole are the threads he boogar'd up. He is the one that had to drill and tap the hole no?

 

[WDD]

I’m not sure why you’d want him to do the work again. Why would you expect a different outcome?

 

[MBDiagMan]

I've talked to a couple of A&Ps at different shops and they've all told me that small shops could do overhauls but almost none of them are going to anymore for liability reasons. Lawyers ruin everything I guess.

On the dual-mag issue I've looked at it too. I think just about everyone looks at the design and says WTF were they thinking. OTOH do the actual stats support the idea that there's a notably higher failure rate with these mags? I haven't seen any good evidence to support that- obviously at one time Lycoming thought it would be just fine. Is this a case of it just not looking good but not actually being a problem in practice?

Personally if it was a minimal cost/time difference I'd probably want to get rid of the dual-mag too but when we're talking a 2-year turnaround time and (I presume) a hefty price difference... IDK what I'd do there. Depends on the cost/wait alternative and stats I suppose.

I was at a safety seminar at Air Salvage of Dallas many years ago. The proprietor is an incredibly experienced man who goes out and gathers up wrecked planes and is an authority on determining accident causes. The NTSB even consults him. I know this is true because my late wife’s twin sister used to work for the NTSB. He showed us a pile of scrap that had once been an airplane with one of those mag systems. The plane had been flying at night when that little gear turned loose and no one survived. He went through the proper way to service that system.

I have carefully avoided buying or flying an aircraft with one of those mags. Everyone should make their own personal decision about that.

 

[Jim K]

My engine was last overhauled by Lycoming in 2002 so I assume I've still got the roll pin.

Again, lyco support said they changed to the set screw in the 70's. As I understand the timeline, your engine likely has an unsecured set screw. I would recommend performing SB 1560, which involves removing the prop & checking the shaft with a magnet to ensure it's tight.

My experience has shown that the plug will withstand somewhere more than 400 and less than 800 hours of the shaft turning, so pulling the prop off and checking every 500 hours would seem to be a reasonable thing to do.

But I wouldn't give him the time of day to work on it. Couldn't follow instructions the first time. Because "we don't follow si's". Giving him a second crack would be a fool me twice thing.

That's kind of where I'm at. If he's not going to stand behind it willingly, I can't force him. Aviation is a small community.

He is the one that had to drill and tap the hole no?

No. I believe Lyco made that change decades ago, if I understood the tech support guy correctly. TBH, I can kind of understand how he missed the staking and loctite if he didn't bother to look up SI's. Even if he saw that one, he may have assumed it didn't apply because the spring pin wasn't there. I think he just put it back together the way it was.

I was at a safety seminar at Air Salvage of Dallas many years ago. The proprietor is an incredibly experienced man who goes out and gathers up wrecked planes and is an authority on determining accident causes. The NTSB even consults him. I know this is true because my late wife’s twin sister used to work for the NTSB. He showed us a pile of scrap that had once been an airplane with one of those mag systems. The plane had been flying at night when that little gear turned loose and no one survived. He went through the proper way to service that system.

Small world moment...Lucky Louque from ASOD (who may have been the guy you're talking about) took care of this airplane for several years and hung this engine on it.

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

I wonder if a key way would have been better. Machine a groove in both the back of the shaft and the case, install the key. Similar to how a harmonic balance is installed on a crank. Overkill? Maybe. Difficult to machine the case vs drill and tap for the set screw in a hangar. But will prevent catastrophe (accidents, injuries, death).

 

[Jim K]

I wonder if a key way would have been better. Machine a groove in both the back of the shaft and the case, install the key. Similar to how a harmonic balance is installed on a crank. Overkill? Maybe. Difficult to machine the case vs drill and tap for the set screw in a hangar. But will prevent catastrophe (accidents, injuries, death).

The Narrow Deck versions of the 540 (O-540) use a keyed idler shaft. I suppose when they designed the wide flange version doing away with the keyway was a cost/labor saving idea.

 

[Racerx]

No. I believe Lyco made that change decades ago, if I understood the tech support guy correctly. TBH, I can kind of understand how he missed the staking and loctite if he didn't bother to look up SI's. Even if he saw that one, he may have assumed it didn't apply because the spring pin wasn't there. I think he just put it back together the way it was.

Got it. I was under the assumption you still had the roll pin. So going back to the first incident, do you know what secured the set screw besides divine intervention? If they didn't issue the SI until 07, but we're using the set screw for the previous 30 years.

 

[Jim K]

Got it. I was under the assumption you still had the roll pin. So going back to the first incident, do you know what secured the set screw besides divine intervention? If they didn't issue the SI until 07, but we're using the set screw for the previous 30 years.

I was too until talking to Lycoming. I think up until 2006, the set screw was held in by hopes & dreams. He mentioned that the factory had started peening the screw in on the top of the hole before then, but didn't know when. I found an article online from when the SAIB was released stating that some engine shops had been using loctite before then as well. Seems like it has been a semi known issue for a long time.

 

[Kitch]

The whole situation sucks big time. The bright side is you found it on the ground and not airborne with your family onboard. I've come to the conclusion when my airplane is broken in the grand scheme of things it's a minor inconvenience. Yes it is aggravating and gets my blood pressure up and causes me to scream things like "I'm selling this f@ckin thing" but at the end of the day it's what we love to do so we press on and write lots of checks. My personal opinion (not that you asked) If you have an A&P that will work with you I'd tear it down and build it yourself it's just nuts and bolts.

In other news I need to find out if this is the setup I have in my AC1A5 540.

 

[RockyMtnFlyer]

I was able to visit my plane today. Here's a macro shot I took of the shaft. Not sure if it really tells anything different though.

View attachment 134405

Was the plane happy to see you? Or, was that a shaft in it's pocket?

 

[3393RP]

At the minimum he skipped the locktite.

Or it wasn't applied according to the manufacturer's instructions.

1. Make sure nuts and bolts are clean and free from oil or dirt. Both surfaces must be clean to develop the full bonding strength.

 

[Jim K]

So, progress. Spoke with Divco today. They have a case that can be reconditioned to the k1g5d spec. He said 4 weeks, maybe sooner. $1600, which I thought was more than fair to not have to worry about the slightly chowdered shaft bore, plug hole, and set screw hole. That gives me a reasonable amount of time to disassemble and inspect my engine and hopefully have all the tools and parts ready to put it back together when the case arrives.

 

[MBDiagMan]

The cheapest retract overall cost would be a Culver Cadet. Also designed by Al Mooney, before the Mooney Mite. There is one for sale on BS right now for $30k in excellent condition. It burns 3-4GPH and flies about 130MPH. Learn to hand prop before buying. Keith will provide TW instruction upon sale.

Again, lyco support said they changed to the set screw in the 70's. As I understand the timeline, your engine likely has an unsecured set screw. I would recommend performing SB 1560, which involves removing the prop & checking the shaft with a magnet to ensure it's tight.

My experience has shown that the plug will withstand somewhere more than 400 and less than 800 hours of the shaft turning, so pulling the prop off and checking every 500 hours would seem to be a reasonable thing to do.

That's kind of where I'm at. If he's not going to stand behind it willingly, I can't force him. Aviation is a small community.


No. I believe Lyco made that change decades ago, if I understood the tech support guy correctly. TBH, I can kind of understand how he missed the staking and loctite if he didn't bother to look up SI's. Even if he saw that one, he may have assumed it didn't apply because the spring pin wasn't there. I think he just put it back together the way it was.


Small world moment...Lucky Louque from ASOD (who may have been the guy you're talking about) took care of this airplane for several years and hung this engine on it.

Yes, Lucky at ASOD is who I was talking about.