modified parts

Tom-D

Tom-D

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
34,740
Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Would this be a major or minor? lining a oil sump with a coating to prevent corrosion.
Adding this coating is an approved process in Canada.
 

Attachments

  • 20150415_213035.jpg
    20150415_213035.jpg
    277 KB · Views: 86
  • 20150415_213148.jpg
    20150415_213148.jpg
    250.9 KB · Views: 76
Last edited:
depends.....what is the result of that lining if it were to no longer perform it's intended function?

Hmmmm....now I see the pics. Not sure I'd like that. :no:...unless it were STC approved.
 
Last edited:
Checkout_my_Six said:
depends.....what is the result of that lining if it were to no longer perform it's intended function?

Hmmmm....now I see the pics. Not sure I'd like that. :no:...unless it were STC approved.
Click to expand...

Why would it need a STC? it does it meet the criteria of 43-A for a major?

(2) Powerplant major alterations. The following alterations of a powerplant when not listed in the engine specifications issued by the FAA, are powerplant major alterations.

(i) Conversion of an aircraft engine from one approved model to another, involving any changes in compression ratio, propeller reduction gear, impeller gear ratios or the substitution of major engine parts which requires extensive rework and testing of the engine.

(ii) Changes to the engine by replacing aircraft engine structural parts with parts not supplied by the original manufacturer or parts not specifically approved by the Administrator.

(iii) Installation of an accessory which is not approved for the engine.

(iv) Removal of accessories that are listed as required equipment on the aircraft or engine specification.

(v) Installation of structural parts other than the type of parts approved for the installation.

(vi) Conversions of any sort for the purpose of using fuel of a rating or grade other than that listed in the engine specifications.
 
there you go.....:yes:

btw....what do you suppose would happen if that liner decided to let loose....and clog the works up?....like we've seen with fuel tank liners? :nono:
Tom-D said:
Why would it need a STC? it does it meet the criteria of 43-A for a major?

(2) Powerplant major alterations. The following alterations of a powerplant when not listed in the engine specifications issued by the FAA, are powerplant major alterations.

(i) Conversion of an aircraft engine from one approved model to another, involving any changes in compression ratio, propeller reduction gear, impeller gear ratios or the substitution of major engine parts which requires extensive rework and testing of the engine.

(ii) Changes to the engine by replacing aircraft engine structural parts with parts not supplied by the original manufacturer or parts not specifically approved by the Administrator.

(iii) Installation of an accessory which is not approved for the engine.

(iv) Removal of accessories that are listed as required equipment on the aircraft or engine specification.

(v) Installation of structural parts other than the type of parts approved for the installation.

(vi) Conversions of any sort for the purpose of using fuel of a rating or grade other than that listed in the engine specifications.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
What is the "approval" in Canada? Does it fall into a bilateral agreement with the FAA?
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
there you go.....:yes:

btw....what do you suppose would happen if that liner decided to let loose....and clog the works up?....like we've seen with fuel tank liners? :nono:
Click to expand...

It has been in service for many years in Canada and hasn't caused any problems yet.

Since when is a coating a Part?
did your paint on your aircraft require a certification?

This is a ceramic baked on coating like the glass coating on your G/mothers old wood stove.

It ain't coming off, EVER.
 
bnt83 said:
What is the "approval" in Canada? Does it fall into a bilateral agreement with the FAA?
Click to expand...

Yes IAW the NY FSDO.

But the question is: Is it a major or minor alteration down here? can we use it on a engine log book entry?
 
Tom-D said:
It has been in service for many years in Canada and hasn't caused any problems yet.

Since when is a coating a Part?
did your paint on your aircraft require a certification?

This is a ceramic baked on coating like the glass coating on your G/mothers old wood stove.

It ain't coming off, EVER.
Click to expand...


If the surface is properly cleaned and prepared and it is a baked on coating. I would have 100% confidence in its adhesion..... Far better then the porous casing in its original form... IMHO... I say no problem..
 
N801BH said:
If the surface is properly cleaned and prepared and it is a baked on coating. I would have 100% confidence in its adhesion..... Far better then the porous casing in its original form... IMHO... I say no problem..
Click to expand...

These sumps that are treated are cleaned by glass bead, then the coating is applied and baked.
 
Tom-D said:
It has been in service for many years in Canada and hasn't caused any problems yet.

Since when is a coating a Part?
did your paint on your aircraft require a certification?

This is a ceramic baked on coating like the glass coating on your G/mothers old wood stove.

It ain't coming off, EVER.
Click to expand...
it ain't an approved part....it's been modified. ....you did catch the "or" in that phrase...right? :yikes:

Call the NY ACO or FSDO....they'll hep ya out. :D

btw....you don't want that to be a major alteration...unless you are willing to pay a DER to validate that. Cause the 337 will need a data source from somewhere's and likely will not come from a FSDO.
 
Last edited:
Since when do we have corrosion on the inside of an oil sump? You would think that would be the last place for corrosion to happen.
 
dell30rb said:
Since when do we have corrosion on the inside of an oil sump? You would think that would be the last place for corrosion to happen.
Click to expand...

These are magnesium sumps that get water under the oil and rot like a bad apple.

like this??
 

Attachments

  • 20140619_214048.jpg
    20140619_214048.jpg
    535.3 KB · Views: 46
  • 20140623_183030.jpg
    20140623_183030.jpg
    489.8 KB · Views: 46
you very well could be right Tom....I wouldn't sign that off unless someone validates that mod. If it were on the "outside" of the part it'd be a no brainer....but it ain't.

It could be an approved mod in Canada....and approved defacto via our bilateral agreements with Canada....NY will know that.
 
Last edited:
Checkout_my_Six said:
Call the NY ACO or FSDO....they'll hep ya out.
Click to expand...

Here's the catch with doing that.

The first thing the the NY FSDO wants to know is what the certification number is in Canada.

The guy who does this in Canada will not disclose to any one down here what number is because he knows we can do the treatment too. and we won't ship these sumps to him any more. ( we don't know the coating's trade name) but if he gives us the number we can look it up.

He is protecting his investment in the time and money he spent in Canada to get Transport Canada approval.
 
well then, there is this.....:lol:

Wonder if he can use the Canadian info as data to get a US STC?
 
dell30rb said:
Guess I can see that for engines that don't run very much or run too cool.
Click to expand...

even engines with a iron sumps have rust in them because water is always present in the oil. leave it set for a period, it will settle out.
 
i can see both sides of this. side one it's really just paint. side two, hartzell has said for years that polishing one of their props invalidates the TC. who knows?

bob
 
Tom-D said:
think money. vs units completed. it simply isn't worth him doing the paper here.
Click to expand...
How much does it cost to make a phone call to the NY ACO and get the ball rolling? He already has units operating....that should count for something?
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
How much does it cost to make a phone call to the NY ACO and get the ball rolling? He already has units operating....that should count for something?
Click to expand...

I've talked him, he says no, the liability here is too big of a risk.
 
Tom-D said:
Here's the catch with doing that.

The first thing the the NY FSDO wants to know is what the certification number is in Canada.

The guy who does this in Canada will not disclose to any one down here what number is because he knows we can do the treatment too. and we won't ship these sumps to him any more. ( we don't know the coating's trade name) but if he gives us the number we can look it up.

He is protecting his investment in the time and money he spent in Canada to get Transport Canada approval.
Click to expand...

:goofy:

What paperwork comes with the part post treatment? There should be at least an 8130 or TCCA form One with it.

There's a lot that smells in this story (like his approval is imaginary)
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
Here's the catch with doing that.

The first thing the the NY FSDO wants to know is what the certification number is in Canada.

The guy who does this in Canada will not disclose to any one down here what number is because he knows we can do the treatment too. and we won't ship these sumps to him any more. ( we don't know the coating's trade name) but if he gives us the number we can look it up.

He is protecting his investment in the time and money he spent in Canada to get Transport Canada approval.
Click to expand...

He's not using Glyptal to coat them, is he?
 
dell30rb said:
Guess I can see that for engines that don't run very much or run too cool.
Click to expand...

No I think it's pretty common. I had to throw out the accessory case of my C85 because of corrosion in the oil pump. I bought a brand new one and you wouldn't believe the difference in weight between the two, the new one has no magnesium.
 
bnt83 said:
:goofy:

What paperwork comes with the part post treatment? There should be at least an 8130 or TCCA form One with it.

There's a lot that smells in this story (like his approval is imaginary)
Click to expand...
Canada does not run 8130s.
 
It's beautiful. It's a dang oil pan, and I could just stare at it. It's art.

(as usual, I have nothing of value to add; just wanted to compliment you on that beauty)

I take extra time to seal my carb on my dirt bike, and my airbox, add insulation around my tank, spend time fine-tuning the jetting, etc, and can appreciate details like these that take hours but will most likely go unappreciated by the next buyer.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
put it on C-eBay.....maybe someone from Canada will want it back? :D
Click to expand...

Yep that's what you want to do, pay $750 for a good sump, then another $450 for the treatment, then put it on e-bay.

IMHO it is a minor alteration. But on the other hand, I'd probably say nothing in the engine log either.
 
Tom-D said:
Yep that's what you want to do, pay $750 for a good sump, then another $450 for the treatment, then put it on e-bay.

IMHO it is a minor alteration. But on the other hand, I'd probably say nothing in the engine log either.
Click to expand...
then why did you even bother to ask here? :rolleyes:...but, you 'd better be ready to bet your ticket on it. If that green gue comes loose and clogs up the works....then it's game over for Tom's airplane bidness.

I just don't know enough about that process to have enough confidence in it to be OK with it. Because of the failure mode effects....I do know from analyzing systems that it'd be considered a critical safety item on a detailed design drawing.:yes:
 
Last edited:
I don't see how you can substantiate a claim that it's a minor alteration if you don't even know what it is.

Looking forward to the future, suppose you see on an article about internal engine coatings interacting with engine oil to cause a fatal crash. Was it the same stuff?

Owner has no way to know if he has the same stuff in his engine, because nobody put it in the log book.
 
Last edited:
Refer to FAA documents....

FAA Definitions begining with the letter M

Maintenance. Inspection, overhaul, repair, preservation, and the replacement of parts, but excludes preventive maintenance.

Major alteration. An alteration not listed in the aircraft, aircraft engine, or propeller specifications—

(1) That might appreciably affect weight, balance, structural strength, performance, powerplant operation, flight characteristics, or other qualities affecting airworthiness; or

(2) That is not done according to accepted practices or cannot be done by elementary operations.

Major repair. A repair:

(1) That, if improperly done, might appreciably affect weight, balance, structural strength, performance, powerplant operation, flight characteristics, or other qualities affecting airworthiness; or

(2) That is not done according to accepted practices or cannot be done by elementary operations.


Minor Alteration. An alteration other than a major alteration.

Minor Repair. A repair other than a major repair.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
These are magnesium sumps that get water under the oil and rot like a bad apple.

like this??
Click to expand...

How long did it take to get to this level of "corrosion" crud? 30 years? 60 years? I think glass beading it back to bare metal and installing it without the coating would be less expensive for the owner and safer.

What is the cost of glass beading & coating?

IMHO it is way over kill for a non problem.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
then why did you even bother to ask here? :rolleyes:...but, you 'd better be ready to bet your ticket on it. If that green gue comes loose and clogs up the works....then it's game over for Tom's airplane bidness.

I just don't know enough about that process to have enough confidence in it to be OK with it. Because of the failure mode effects....I do know from analyzing systems that it'd be considered a critical safety item on a detailed design drawing.:yes:
Click to expand...

I agree. Way over kill IMHO, and no upside for the customer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top