What's legal ?

The answer is no, there is nothing. The reason is that we don’t disqualify parts, we certify them on the basis of testing. If the crankshaft meets every aspect of the quality definition for that part, then its good.

Passing testing will earn the part an 8130 tag. That is appropriate because the part has been confirmed to be in spec.

If your corrosion example above was not arbitrary, then ask yourself if this part can still meet the specifications when measured with a micrometer? Your Mk-1 eyeballs don’t see anything but what do the measurements say? And don’t sell it to me, it’s a time limited part, I want to know why it was removed before and why it was recently tested and certified.
 
bflynn said:
The answer is no, there is nothing. The reason is that we don’t disqualify parts, we certify them on the basis of testing. If the crankshaft meets every aspect of the quality definition for that part, then its good.

Passing testing will earn the part an 8130 tag. That is appropriate because the part has been confirmed to be in spec.

If your corrosion example above was not arbitrary, then ask yourself if this part can still meet the specifications when measured with a micrometer? Your Mk-1 eyeballs don’t see anything but what do the measurements say? And don’t sell it to me, it’s a time limited part, I want to know why it was removed before and why it was recently tested and certified.
Click to expand...
so....how much time is a crank limited to? o_O
 
KRyan said:
This probably isn't germane, but "red tagged" parts can be returned to service, with one important proviso.
Click to expand...
Technically it's possible. But very difficult and applicable only to specific type parts in specific situations. The Feds have slowly been defining the use of "destroyed" and "scrapped" (red tag) over the past 10 years. Just look at the recent Order 8100.19. If a part is green tagged unserviceable no issues. This issue has been ongoing for years and unfortunately I believe the hammer is about to come down and any article or product that was defined as scrapped or destroyed or "unrepairable" will be destined for the recycle center.
 
Tom-D said:
not give any criteria for corrosion on the prop flange, in fact they don't even mention it, Yet A.S.S. will red tag the crank for it.
Click to expand...
Since the "red tagging" is mostly an RS function, somewhere in the approved RS process specification there is probably a check for corrosion on the crank. And regardless what the O-300 manual states the RS process specification rules while the crank in within their system. There are a number of RSs that perform work in excess of the the OEM requirements as they are held accountable at a higher level than the OEM in some cases. If you ever have a chance to read a CRS RSM or QCM you will see the issues.
 
Bell206 said:
Technically it's possible. But very difficult and applicable only to specific type parts in specific situations. The Feds have slowly been defining the use of "destroyed" and "scrapped" (red tag) over the past 10 years. Just look at the recent Order 8100.19. If a part is green tagged unserviceable no issues. This issue has been ongoing for years and unfortunately I believe the hammer is about to come down and any article or product that was defined as scrapped or destroyed or "unrepairable" will be destined for the recycle center.
Click to expand...
I believe when that hammer comes down, it will with out better regulation on the subject, it will simply cause parts that are difficult to find, the owners will simply reuse as the manuals require.
there were days we simply removed parts inspected as require and re-used them. we never used methods that are use today.
 
Tom-D said:
To start with, the Overhaul manual for the 0-300-A thru D does not give any criteria for corrosion on the prop flange, in fact they don't even mention it, Yet A.S.S. will red tag the crank for it.
Click to expand...

Finally a reasonable scenario.
 
Bell206 said:
If a part is green tagged unserviceable no issues. This issue has been ongoing for years and unfortunately I believe the hammer is about to come down and any article or product that was defined as scrapped or destroyed or "unrepairable" will be destined for the recycle center.
Click to expand...

Well, no....

You can still buy scrapped parts from a junkyard. You just have to have them inspected by a knowledgeable person and have testing and measuring done to demonstrate that it's still a good part.
 
bflynn said:
You can still buy scrapped parts from a junkyard.
Click to expand...
I've been buying used parts from salvage (key term) yards for years. Never bought a "scrapped" part. Nor would I. Most parts come with a simple vanilla tag or a green unserviceable tag. Never a red tag. The yards I dealt didn't want the hassle or liability in deals with scrapped or suspect parts especially after Part 3 came out around 2006. FYI: while it might seem just simple semantics scrapped/destroyed/unrepaireable and a few others actually have implied meaning within certain FAA guidance.
 
The answer to your question is yes, I can. If the "disqualifying" flaw doesn't exist in the manufacturer service literature (both the OH manual as well as any subsequent service letters/bulletins) then the red tag is the opinion of one person and my opinion is as valid as theirs. And no, the opinion of the CRS does NOT need to be logged in the permanent records. If the crank needs service, then I'll tell the shop what I want done and if they don't want to do it my way, I'll find a shop that has a different opinion.

Jim
 
Tom-D said:
To start with, the Overhaul manual for the 0-300-A thru D does not give any criteria for corrosion on the prop flange, in fact they don't even mention it, Yet A.S.S. will red tag the crank for it.
Click to expand...

upload_2019-2-6_20-2-10.png

If it needs more than "minor repair", it would be toast. From section 10, O-300 overhaul manual.
 
Couple things
JAWS said:
Also,

http://www.tcmlink.com/pdf2/SB09-14.pdf
Click to expand...
OBTW this is a 0-470SB.
things to show me.
Show me how deep a corrosion pit can be.
Show me what a minor repair of corrosion would be.

Off on a tangent again,, YOU have yet to tell us if any -- any-- repairable part can be used "returned to service" after being Red tagged by a CRS.
If you have no answer to this question stop posting.
 
Now most know why I didn't post an example, every one jumps on the example and does't answer the question .
 
Tom-D said:
OBTW this is a 0-470SB.
Click to expand...

Actually it isn't.

COMPLIANCE: At any time rust corrosion is noted on crankshafts in the area listed above. MODELS AFFECTED: ALL MODELS
 
From the TCM Standard Practices Manual:

Chapter 11. Non-Destructive Inspection
11-1. Visual Inspection
Perform a visual inspection on all parts not specified as 100% replacement (Appendix C-
2.3 or C-2.4) at overhaul. Examine parts prior to being cleaned for obvious evidence of
wear or leakage. Reject obviously damaged parts during the preliminary visual inspection,
there is no need to clean and perform non-destructive inspection on parts which cannot be
used. If condition is uncertain, clean with remaining parts after the preliminary exam,
according to the “Engine Cleaning” instructions in the Chapter 12. Verify the parts are
clean and free of all carbon, dirt, grease, oil, soot, varnish, gum, and paint.
1. Visually inspect the parts using at least a 10X (power) magnifying glass under good
lighting. Look for the following unacceptable conditions:
2. Inspect all studs for bending, looseness or partial removal.
3. Inspect all threaded parts for nicks, damaged or deformed threads, faces, or heads.
4. Identify areas that warrant further cleaning.
5. Label parts which fail inspection; indicating reason for failure and if repair is
possible or if replacement is required.
 
JAWS said:
Actually it isn't.

COMPLIANCE: At any time rust corrosion is noted on crankshafts in the area listed above. MODELS AFFECTED: ALL MODELS
Click to expand...
Even IF.. It still just requires a visual, and still doesn't show how deep the corrosion can be
 
JAWS said:
From the TCM Standard Practices Manual:

Chapter 11. Non-Destructive Inspection
11-1. Visual Inspection
Perform a visual inspection on all parts not specified as 100% replacement (Appendix C-
2.3 or C-2.4) at overhaul. Examine parts prior to being cleaned for obvious evidence of
wear or leakage. Reject obviously damaged parts during the preliminary visual inspection,
there is no need to clean and perform non-destructive inspection on parts which cannot be
used. If condition is uncertain, clean with remaining parts after the preliminary exam,
according to the “Engine Cleaning” instructions in the Chapter 12. Verify the parts are
clean and free of all carbon, dirt, grease, oil, soot, varnish, gum, and paint.
1. Visually inspect the parts using at least a 10X (power) magnifying glass under good
lighting. Look for the following unacceptable conditions:
2. Inspect all studs for bending, looseness or partial removal.
3. Inspect all threaded parts for nicks, damaged or deformed threads, faces, or heads.
4. Identify areas that warrant further cleaning.
5. Label parts which fail inspection; indicating reason for failure and if repair is
possible or if replacement is required.
Click to expand...
That is what TCM does, are we in the field required to Follow that manual?
 
Tom-D said:
That is what TCM does, are we in the field required to Follow that manual?
Click to expand...

From the TCM Standard Practices Manual:


Chapter 1. Introduction
1-1. Scope and Purpose of This Manual
This manual provides maintenance instructions for spark ignition, Standard Practices
operating on aviation gasoline (AvGas). These Instructions for Continued Airworthiness
(ICA) are supplied to the owner with the engine.

...

1-1.1. Instructions for Continued Airworthiness
Continental Motors Part No. M-0, is supplemental, as defined by Title 14 CFR§33.4, to
the maintenance and overhaul manuals listed below. Together, this manual and those listed
below comprise the instructions for continued airworthiness for applicable engines. This
manual, and the overhaul manuals and component service manuals (as applicable to
engine specification) listed below are delivered to the customer with the engine. Service
documents and Airworthiness Directives may also affect ICAs. Refer to Section 1-2.5 for
instructions to check current publication status.
 
JAWS said:
Poor maintenance is still poor maintenance the world over.
Click to expand...
Well in this case it's just you bloviating, And you still haven't answered the question while chasing the tangent example.
 
JAWS said:
From the TCM Standard Practices Manual:


Chapter 1. Introduction
1-1. Scope and Purpose of This Manual
This manual provides maintenance instructions for spark ignition, Standard Practices
operating on aviation gasoline (AvGas). These Instructions for Continued Airworthiness
(ICA) are supplied to the owner with the engine.

...

1-1.1. Instructions for Continued Airworthiness
Continental Motors Part No. M-0, is supplemental, as defined by Title 14 CFR§33.4, to
the maintenance and overhaul manuals listed below. Together, this manual and those listed
below comprise the instructions for continued airworthiness for applicable engines. This
manual, and the overhaul manuals and component service manuals (as applicable to
engine specification) listed below are delivered to the customer with the engine. Service
documents and Airworthiness Directives may also affect ICAs. Refer to Section 1-2.5 for
instructions to check current publication status.
Click to expand...
O-200 / 0-300 crank shafts are no longer supported by TCM
 
Tom-D said:
YOU have yet to tell us if any -- any-- repairable part can be used "returned to service" after being Red tagged by a CRS.
Click to expand...

It depends.

I have seen combustion liners scrapped by one company, yet repaired by another. The second company had an approved propitiatory repair available. It sometimes does pay to hang onto scrap and make some phone calls.

Joe Blow re-certifying cranks to make a quick buck and 'help a buddy out', not so much.
 
Tom-D said:
O-200 / 0-300 crank shafts are no longer supported by TCM
Click to expand...
JAWS said:
It depends.

I have seen combustion liners scrapped by one company, yet repaired by another. The second company had an approved propitiatory repair available. It sometimes does pay to hang onto scrap and make some phone calls.

Joe Blow re-certifying cranks to make a quick buck and 'help a buddy out', not so much.
Click to expand...
NO,, it either is legal or it isn't.

and there ya go again trying it interpose an example.

And OBTW read this AC and tell me where the ICAs are of any of the old engines.

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_33_4-1.pdf
 
Tom, you got an answer, it just wasn't one you want to hear.

Having an item get a red tag is not a death sentence. If it can be repaired, reinspected and shown to be in spec for that part, then it can reused. If it cannot, then it's a dead part.

I think you're talking specifically about a crankshaft with some level of corrosion. Are you willing to put the work in to put the item back into spec? Can the item be put back into spec? If not, then you have an anchor for your new boat.

That's the question and the answers
 
bflynn said:
Tom, you got an answer, it just wasn't one you want to hear.

Having an item get a red tag is not a death sentence. If it can be repaired, reinspected and shown to be in spec for that part, then it can reused. If it cannot, then it's a dead part.

I think you're talking specifically about a crankshaft with some level of corrosion. Are you willing to put the work in to put the item back into spec? Can the item be put back into spec? If not, then you have an anchor for your new boat.

That's the question and the answers
Click to expand...
It seems simple, doesn't it? Without a regulatory definition or quasi-regulatory guidance, "unrepairable" is in the eye of the beholder, filtered by the availability of equipment to do the job.
 
He wants an exact definition, down to the .0001. There isn't one, so he lashes out.

Someone must have dared to reject his coveted crankshaft based on their knowledge and processes and certifications that he doesn't have. Sucks to be him.
 
bflynn said:
He's trying to liquidate and there's good money to be made from a good crankshaft.
Click to expand...
Not at all,,, The liability issue is too great for me.

The question was simply, Is it legal?
FSDO says this
the FAA does not recognize tags issued from Repair Stations, They only recognize 8130-3 tags. They leave the airworthiness to the installer. And would only get involved if there were a smoking hole.
In the case of a crankshaft, it will be assigned a Serial number when it is inspected and reworked. That serial number record would be deadly In a liability suit.
I like my house, no way Would I sell a red tagged item as good.
I have sold used cranks, they went as USED as REMOVED. (cheap)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top