Preservation of uninstalled parts.

Bell206 said:
FWIW: Unfortunately, from a marketing standpoint, a number of owners get caught in that "like new tolerances" line of thought simply because they don't understand how the system works. It's no different than "experimental" parts/equipment which equally has zero regulatory significance. But the choice is yours.
Click to expand...
bull scat..the FAR stands for all to read, way to many certified mechanics have have signed off it that way to say they are wrong now.
The FAA wrote it that way for a reason.
 
Last edited:
Bell206 said:
FWIW: Unfortunately, from a marketing standpoint, a number of owners get caught in that "like new tolerances" line of thought simply because they don't understand how the system works. It's no different than "experimental" parts/equipment which equally has zero regulatory significance. But the choice is yours.
Click to expand...
The Only thing you need to understand is simple, FAR 43.2 allows an A&P to overhaul any engine to rebuild standards.
 
Tom-D said:
..the FAR stands for all to read... FAR 43.2 allows an A&P to overhaul...
Click to expand...
Perhaps you should read them also. 43.2 is only for maintenance entries for overhaul and rebuild, where as 43.3 details who is authorized to overhaul and rebuild. Can't get any simpler than that. ;)
Tom-D said:
to overhaul any engine to rebuild standards.
Click to expand...
??? Nobody said a mechanic could not overhaul... an engine to new part tolerances and limits??? So don't quite follow your point there in the context of the thread.
 
Salty said:
Tell me the answer you’ll accept and I’ll post it for you.

honestly, I’m not sure why anyone responds to the troll bait anymore. Any attempt to answer the question results in abuse heaped upon the responder.
Click to expand...

I used to defend Tom, but his "bait, then berate" approach to all his posts is one of the weirdest attitudes on any forum I have read. It seems like he thinks he's being socratic, but it just comes across as being a dou****. I'm now going to find out how to not see his posts.
 
Salty said:
Any attempt to answer the question results in
Click to expand...
FWIW: the only reason I reply to the question is, unfortunately, some people will believe some of the info stated with that question. I simply provide an alternate opinion. It was this type issue that led to my 1st post on PoA after an old client followed one such posting down the proverbial rabbit hole.
 
43.3 Persons authorized to perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, and alterations.
(a) Except as provided in this section and §43.17, no person may maintain, rebuild, alter, or perform preventive maintenance on an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part to which this part applies. Those items, the performance of which is a major alteration, a major repair, or preventive maintenance, are listed in appendix A.

(b) The holder of a mechanic certificate may perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations as provided in Part 65 of this chapter.

65.87 Powerplant rating; additional privileges.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, a certificated mechanic with a powerplant rating may approve and return to service a powerplant or propeller or any related part or appliance, after he has performed, supervised, or inspected its maintenance or alteration (excluding major repairs and major alterations). In addition, he may perform the 100-hour inspection required by part 91 of this chapter on a powerplant or propeller, or any part thereof, and approve and return it to service.

(b) A certificated mechanic with a powerplant rating can approve and return to service a powerplant or propeller, or any related part or appliance, of an aircraft with a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category after performing and inspecting a major repair or major alteration for products that are not produced under an FAA approval, provided the work was performed in accordance with instructions developed by the manufacturer or a person acceptable to the FAA.
 
Bell206 said:
FWIW: the only reason I reply to the question is, unfortunately, some people will believe some of the info stated with that question. I simply provide an alternate opinion. It was this type issue that led to my 1st post on PoA after an old client followed one such posting down the proverbial rabbit hole.
Click to expand...
Too bad you can't read the FAR and understand FAR 43.2 is the rule that pertain not 43.3
A multitude of A&Ps have understand this rule for years. FARs 65.87 does give the privileges to the mechanic.

It couldn't be clearer.
(b) No person may describe in any required maintenance entry or form an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part as being rebuilt unless it has been disassembled, cleaned, inspected, repaired as necessary, reassembled, and tested to the same tolerances and limits as a new item, using either new parts or used parts that either conform to new part tolerances and limits or to approved oversized or undersized dimensions.
 
Last edited:
Lndwarrior said:
I used to defend Tom, but his "bait, then berate" approach to all his posts is one of the weirdest attitudes on any forum I have read. It seems like he thinks he's being socratic, but it just comes across as being a dou****. I'm now going to find out how to not see his posts.
Click to expand...
When I'm right, I'm right. Bell can give his Privileges away If likes.
 
Bell206 said:
Perhaps you should read them also. 43.2 is only for maintenance entries for overhaul and rebuild, where as 43.3 details who is authorized to overhaul and rebuild. Can't get any simpler than that. ;).
Click to expand...
We were discussing US citizens, until you brought up foreign nationals.
 
Tom-D said:
We were discussing US citizens, until you brought up foreign nationals.
Click to expand...

Bell206 said:
:confused:
Click to expand...

thumb_alcohol-may-intensify-the-effects-of-this-medication-men-united-8634951.png
 
Ryanb said:
Lots of third party repair stations and overhaul facilities that can rebuild to ‘like new’ tolerances.
Click to expand...
no they cannot. they can overhaul to new tolerances but the word REBUILD can only be used by the manufacture.


section 1.1
Maintenance means inspection, overhaul, repair, preservation, and the replacement of parts, but excludes preventive maintenance.

section 43.3
(b) The holder of a mechanic certificate may perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations as provided in Part 65 of this chapter.
(c) The holder of a repairman certificate may perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations as provided in part 65 of this chapter.
(e) The holder of a repair station certificate may perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations as provided in Part 145 of this chapter.
(j) A manufacturer may—

(1) Rebuild or alter any aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance manufactured by him under a type or production certificate;

notice the only part that uses the word rebuilt is in reference to a manufacturer. also part 65 makes no mention of REBUILD.
a overhaul to new tolerances a d a rebuild may be identical in how it is done, but only the manufacture can use the word REBUILT to describe it and they are also the only one that can then call it zero time and issue a new log book with no carry over time.
 
unsafervguy said:
no they cannot. they can overhaul to new tolerances but the word REBUILD can only be used by the manufacture.


section 1.1
Maintenance means inspection, overhaul, repair, preservation, and the replacement of parts, but excludes preventive maintenance.

section 43.3
(b) The holder of a mechanic certificate may perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations as provided in Part 65 of this chapter.
(c) The holder of a repairman certificate may perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations as provided in part 65 of this chapter.
(e) The holder of a repair station certificate may perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations as provided in Part 145 of this chapter.
(j) A manufacturer may—

(1) Rebuild or alter any aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance manufactured by him under a type or production certificate;

notice the only part that uses the word rebuilt is in reference to a manufacturer. also part 65 makes no mention of REBUILD.
a overhaul to new tolerances a d a rebuild may be identical in how it is done, but only the manufacture can use the word REBUILT to describe it and they are also the only one that can then call it zero time and issue a new log book with no carry over time.
Click to expand...
A manual, is not a FAR. 43.2 give the rule, not a manual.
 
unsafervguy said:
no they cannot. they can overhaul to new tolerances but the word REBUILD can only be used by the manufacture..
Click to expand...
NOT true.
READ the FAR again.
Geees .... I thought I was finished.
 
kyleb said:
I thought you were “out”. C’mon man. Please spare us the Tom picks a fight with the world drama.
Click to expand...
I didn't pick the fight. Bell changed the subject, and made the subject "REBUILD" and never answered the question.

Get it right.

Have noticed, when Bell doesn't the know the answer he avoids the subject. normal operation with him. And his groupies eat it up.
 
Last edited:
Time to put down either the bong or the keyboard Tom.
 
Tom-D said:
Bell changed the subject, and made the subject "REBUILD"...
Click to expand...
I would never change your subject or words… Post #1, Sentence #1 below…..;)
Tom-D said:
An engine that was rebuilt but never run, how long can it set?
Click to expand...


Tom-D said:
And his groupies eat it up.
Click to expand...
Figures. I get to a point in life when I finally have groupies, but instead of scantily clad females, I have a group of hard-legged aviation aficionados and professionals. I wonder if Sac Arrow is available to be my new Groupie Manager?????
Tom-D said:
Any way I'm out.
Click to expand...
Before you leave... again… could you help a brother out with the meaning of the post below. This is one I can't truly figure out. Good luck with your endeavors.
Tom-D said:
We were discussing US citizens, until you brought up foreign nationals.
Click to expand...
 
Only the manufacturer or someone authorized by the manufacturer can zero time an engine rebuild. A mechanic can "rebuild" an engine but it's called an overhaul to new tolerance and it continues the time in service log, ie. it's zero time since major overhaul and xxxx total time in service. If he wants to market it as a rebuilt engine, that's marketing. The fact that his "rebuilt" engine has a couple thousand hours total time and zero since MOH should be the clue that the its not a manufacturer's rebuild.
 
I know of WWII engines that were pickled in new condition and when they are popped out of their can, they get a complete overhaul so there must be some period of time where even a properly preserved engine has outlived its service life sitting unused and must be overhauled before use. Is there a regulation requiring overhaul before use? I don't know but seals and hoses dry out and who knows what transpires over decades of storage. I suppose the answer to the OP question is to install the engine and run it and see how it performs after storage or just bite the bullet and disassemble and check everything and then reassemble and install it. If I bought a "rebuilt" engine that has sat around for several years, I would expect that engine to be discounted substantially from a freshly rebuilt one.
 
Witmo said:
Only the manufacturer or someone authorized by the manufacturer can zero time an engine rebuild. A mechanic can "rebuild" an engine but it's called an overhaul to new tolerance and it continues the time in service log, ie. it's zero time since major overhaul and xxxx total time in service. If he wants to market it as a rebuilt engine, that's marketing. The fact that his "rebuilt" engine has a couple thousand hours total time and zero since MOH should be the clue that the its not a manufacturer's rebuild.
Click to expand...
That is not what the FAR says.
Only a manufacturer can a provide a new engine, now matter how many old parts in it.
 
Witmo said:
I know of WWII engines that were pickled in new condition and when they are popped out of their can, they get a complete overhaul so there must be some period of time where even a properly preserved engine has outlived its service life sitting unused and must be overhauled before use.
Click to expand...
Show that to me. That is what I'm looking. I need a statement that will say, that I can use or not used this engine.
Many old WWII engines were used as canned, We used 3350s that were dated 1943, Those were the ones we prefered.
The engine that was used on my Fairchild was canned in 1943, ran great I worried so I tore it down, big mistake :)
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
Show that to me.
Many old WWII engines were used as canned, We used 3350s that were dated 1943, Those were the ones we prefered.
Click to expand...
It’s a matter of personal preference and risk management. I think @Witmo is speaking from anecdotal knowledge. I have flown behind very old canned engines but also know folks that take them to their preferred engine guy for a tear down and inspection.
 
for those doubt check AC 43-11, it has in effect since 1976

there is a update 3/29/07

check 91.421.©
AC 43-11 CHG 1 3/29/07

c. Overhaul manuals clearly stipulate the work that must be accomplished during the engine overhaul and outline limits and tolerances used during the inspections. There is no dictionary that provides a commonly accepted standard definition of all the terms used in the aviation industry. The terms discussed in this AC are offered for information purposes only and are not to be considered as definitions set forth in 14 CFR. The only definition in 14 CFR regarding engine overhaul is the word “rebuilt.” This is defined in § 91.421, Rebuilt engines maintenance records.
 
Last edited:
Tarheelpilot said:
It’s a matter of personal preference and risk management. I think @Witmo is speaking from anecdotal knowledge. I have flown behind very old canned engines but also know folks that take them to their preferred engine guy for a tear down and inspection.
Click to expand...
that is prudent, but what is the rule?
 
Bell206 said:
If this is stopping at 43.2(a)(2) then you are talking about an overhauled engine not a rebuilt engine. Big difference. ;)?
Click to expand...
AC 43-11 CHG 1 3/29/07

c. Overhaul manuals clearly stipulate the work that must be accomplished during the engine overhaul and outline limits and tolerances used during the inspections. There is no dictionary that provides a commonly accepted standard definition of all the terms used in the aviation industry. The terms discussed in this AC are offered for information purposes only and are not to be considered as definitions set forth in 14 CFR. The only definition in 14 CFR regarding engine overhaul is the word “rebuilt.” This is defined in § 91.421, Rebuilt engines maintenance records.
 
Witmo said:
Only the manufacturer or someone authorized by the manufacturer can zero time an engine rebuild.
Click to expand...
time continuing for a used engine still can be rebuild.
Many overhaulers Zero time since overhaul = 0 and call it rebuilt
 
Tarheelpilot said:
I’m not aware of a rule. Is there one?
Click to expand...
There’s not one for an engine on an aircraft, why must there be one for an engine off the aircraft?
 
Tom-D said:
time continuing for a used engine still can be rebuild.
Many overhaulers Zero time since overhaul = 0 and call it rebuilt
Click to expand...
Isn't that what I said? Only the manufacturer of someone authorized by the manufacturer can rebuild and issue a new logbook with no time on the engine, period dot. Anyone else doing the rebuild will continue the total time in service of the engine and zero the time since Major Overhaul.
 
Tom-D said:
That is close, I am more interested in how can long can it set prior to some thing MUST done.
Click to expand...
depends on how it is being stored, doesn't it? A friend of mine had an R755 that he kept submerged in a vat of engine oil. It was kept that way for many years (about 20) with no issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top