Oil filter AD coming out.

I’ll have to check mine and see if that’s the one I have.

I beleive that’s what forced a road landing of a chicken hawk at the neighboring airport a couple years ago... the guy had to dive under a traffic light on short final! Not a dent in the bird - so it turned out fine but scary stuff
 
I thought every knew that the fiber gaskets are no good.

the proper installation is to use 2 AN-900 copper crush gaskets. and torque to 160 Lb/Feet
 
Isn’t the whole design flawed? The STC spin-on-filter-on-a-long-pipe has too much lever arm. Too much risk of it loosening and losing all your oil in flight.
 
Tom-D said:
the proper installation is to use 2 AN-900 copper crush gaskets. and torque to 160 Lb/Feet
Click to expand...
I think you mean 65 ft/lb... 160 might be a little too much!
 
jbDC9 said:
OMG... you used the words loose and lose properly, and in the same sentence no less! My hero!

Seriously, lotta stupid people out there that just can't get that right...
Click to expand...

After 25 years of internet callouts for improper homophone usage, there is still no shortage of those that apparently refuse to learn the difference between the two words.

It's really annoying.
 
bnt83 said:
Looks like an oil filter adapter issue to me.
Click to expand...
Little of both,, the proper gaskets for a start. There are three different adaptors that effect the leakage, each should be done right.
 
The adapter design, which has a long moment arm leading to the filter mass, looks problematic in a vibration-rich environment. Gasket deterioration can lead to loss of securing torque and more vibration, which damages the gasket... It's the same kind of problem you can have with the dipstick tube attachment (BTDT) except for a more serious failure mode.
 
chemgeek said:
The adapter design, which has a long moment arm leading to the filter mass, looks problematic in a vibration-rich environment. Gasket deterioration can lead to loss of securing torque and more vibration, which damages the gasket... It's the same kind of problem you can have with the dipstick tube attachment (BTDT) except for a more serious failure mode.
Click to expand...
That is why you should use a AN-900 crush gasket, rather than a fiber POS they provided.
then tighten to the proper torque.
 
Tom-D said:
That is why you should use a AN-900 crush gasket, rather than a fiber POS they provided.
then tighten to the proper torque.
Click to expand...
But does that not mess up the STC requirements? Don’t you have to install exactly the way the STC says? Unless you are installing it as a minor mod, but can you do that since it is on the engine?
 
Matthew Rogers said:
But does that not mess up the STC requirements? Don’t you have to install exactly the way the STC says? Unless you are installing it as a minor mod, but can you do that since it is on the engine?
Click to expand...

No, the most current instruction apply.
 
3393RP said:
After 25 years of internet callouts for improper homophone usage, there is still no shortage of those that apparently refuse to learn the difference between the two words.

It's really annoying.
Click to expand...
Some of us can't afford both. I have a looser at the airport, but when I need a tighter, I just flip the looser over and use it. It works most of the time.
 
I think the effect of this thread affects me to the point of believing that I have two too many to fix the problem. I need to lose the loose one whether the weather is good or not because my bare head can’t bear the stress of standing here only to hear the principles argued again by the principal pontificators of this forum.
 
3393RP said:
After 25 years of internet callouts for improper homophone usage, there is still no shortage of those that apparently refuse to learn the difference between the two words.

It's really annoying.
Click to expand...

Since when are lose (looz) and loose (loos) homophones?
 
chemgeek said:
Since when are lose (looz) and loose (loos) homophones?
Click to expand...

That was the point. "Improper... usage" and "the difference between the two words" covers it, I think. :rolleyes:
 
I think I'll stick to my screen and 25 hour oil changes.
 
Oil filter adapter probably gets turned every time the filter is removed because the filter is installed two..to..too..tight.
 
I might go back to my screen...
 
Mine isn’t the one in this new AD but has its own AD where you just paint across it and the place it screws into. If paint doesn’t line up, bad juju is starting.

Of course most folks say the paint was lined up just fine before the thing blew off due to vibration and destroying the threads themselves from being unholy loose for lots and lots of hours.

So .. my AD accomplished very little. But giving it a physical tug of not so hard variety every so often will likely tell you more than the paint line will.

Especially if the safety wire is holding everything kinda lined up like it tends to.

A brief read of this one seemed to indicate that unlike mine, this new one has a known metallurgy problem.

Mine has caused a few engine failures over the years but not because the metal it was made of wasn’t behaving as the materials engineer expected it to. Just from improper installs and maintenance.

Soooo... the paint line is fine.
 
denverpilot said:
Mine isn’t the one in this new AD but has its own AD where you just paint across it and the place it screws into. If paint doesn’t line up, bad juju is starting.

Of course most folks say the paint was lined up just fine before the thing blew off due to vibration and destroying the threads themselves from being unholy loose for lots and lots of hours.

So .. my AD accomplished very little. But giving it a physical tug of not so hard variety every so often will likely tell you more than the paint line will.

Especially if the safety wire is holding everything kinda lined up like it tends to.

A brief read of this one seemed to indicate that unlike mine, this new one has a known metallurgy problem.

Mine has caused a few engine failures over the years but not because the metal it was made of wasn’t behaving as the materials engineer expected it to. Just from improper installs and maintenance.

Soooo... the paint line is fine.
Click to expand...
I believe the AD you speak of is the old Cessna adaptor..
best check, because the adapters are not the same.
 
As Nate mentioned, there has been a similar AD on Cessna 182s with oil filter adapters for decades. You stripe some putty on the adapter neck so you can verify it hasn't moved. You replace the putty every few years, when it gets hard to see. It is a rare AD that can be signed of on by the owner/operator (must be at least a private pilot) at the time of the oil change. You just note with the oil change in the log "Complied with AD 96-12-12 by visual inspection".

https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_...3B453D53CE6D9DCC86256849005A0715?OpenDocument
 
Tom-D said:
https://www.faasafety.gov/SPANS/not...-cZOSU-QjryxcoCPBg704YVZeNjY30dKoj0js-qhL-vug
Click to expand...
Thanks for the heads-up on this. I did another oil change on mine today and looked at the filter adapter. Mine is one of the SB-001 units. I don't however find any kind of hole or lug that a safety wire can be attached to. Yes, I did look at the pictures in the SB. I will contact my A/P about this, but I'm interested to know if anyone else has rectified this on their airplane. How did it go?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top