Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Troubling Airworthiness Directive...
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

matt(at)n559rv.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 5:48 pm Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

I just received an AD in the mail regarding cylinder heads on Lycoming 320 and 360 engines manufactured by ECI. It requires that the 

cylinders be replaced before 800 hours or if you are over 800 than within 60 hours.... This could cost a fortune, who pays for this? I am a 

recent aircraft owner for the first time and have not encountered this before. I cant imagine that the manufacture (ECI) doesnt have some 

kind of liability. My engine just had an overhaul 40 hours ago!



- Matt

alexpeterson(at)earthlink
Guest

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:07 pm Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 I just received an AD in the mail regarding cylinder heads on 

 Lycoming 320 and 360 engines manufactured by ECI. It requires 

 that the cylinders be replaced before 800 hours or if you are 

 over 800 than within 60 hours.... This could cost a fortune, 

 who pays for this? I am a recent aircraft owner for the first 

 time and have not encountered this before. I cant imagine 

 that the manufacture (ECI) doesnt have some kind of 

 liability. My engine just had an overhaul 40 hours ago!

 

 - Matt


	


If you have the cylinders on an RV, compliance is not required.  However,

most RVers will comply, and I understand that for four new cylinders the

price from ECI will be $1300 total.  They aren't paying for the labor.

Welcome to an imperfect world.



Alex Peterson

RV6-A N66AP 708 hours (lucky, at least for now, to have Millennium

cylinders)

Maple Grove, MN

ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:25 pm Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

At 06:56 PM 1/26/2006, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



I just received an AD in the mail regarding cylinder heads on Lycoming 320 

and 360 engines manufactured by ECI. It requires that the

cylinders be replaced before 800 hours or if you are over 800 than within 

60 hours.... This could cost a fortune, who pays for this? I am a

recent aircraft owner for the first time and have not encountered this 

before. I cant imagine that the manufacture (ECI) doesnt have some

kind of liability. My engine just had an overhaul 40 hours ago!



- Matt


	


Before you get upset read the AD.  It is probably on their website and

may not even apply to you.



Ron Lee

matt(at)n559rv.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:52 pm Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

It is for a certified plane (Grumman). I guess that I dont have to comply until it is at 800 hours, but it will still hurt the resell value if I 

dont do it. 



How often do people get AD's that cost them thousands of dollars on a whim? At least with cars they are recalls and the manufacturer 

picks up the cost of replacement...



- Matt

--

dbris200(at)sbcglobal.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:59 pm Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

They're paying  $475 for labor, it's included in the $1350 exchange 

price that they are charging me. The AD doesn't affect all ECi 

cylinders, just the "Classic Cast". The replacements are "Titan" which 

are a step up. They also pay shipping one way.



Dave



 	  Quote: 	
		  If you have the cylinders on an RV, compliance is not required.  However,

most RVers will comply, and I understand that for four new cylinders the

price from ECI will be $1300 total.  They aren't paying for the labor.

Welcome to an imperfect world.



Alex Peterson

RV6-A N66AP 708 hours (lucky, at least for now, to have Millennium

cylinders)

Maple Grove, MN

eddyfernan(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 7:09 pm Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

FYI.  

 

This does not apply to the new ECI Titan cylinders that many kit builders including myself purchased.  Of course you can double check that with ECI .

 

Eddy Fernandez

RV-9a Finishing

ECI O-320

 

--

Larry Bowen

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 802
Location: NC, USA

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 7:09 pm Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

ECI will pay for a pro-rated labor reimbursement for removal & installation.



http://www.eci2fly.com/pdf/05-8.pdf 



last paragraph.



-

Larry Bowen

Larry(at)BowenAero.com

http://BowenAero.com

 



[quote] --

_________________
Larry Bowen
RV-8 SOLD,
RV-7QB in progress...

Kellym

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 8:03 pm Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

First of all, determine whether the AD applies to the exact serial 

number cylinders you have. Given your overhaul is so recent, it is very 

unlikely, but get with your overhauler and be CERTAIN. It is the owner's 

responsibility. An engine still under warranty is likely to get much 

more consideration than the basic coverage mentioned in the AD.



Matt Johnson wrote:

[quote] 

 

 It is for a certified plane (Grumman). I guess that I dont have to comply until it is at 800 hours, but it will still hurt the resell value if I 

 dont do it. 

 

 How often do people get AD's that cost them thousands of dollars on a whim? At least with cars they are recalls and the manufacturer 

 picks up the cost of replacement...

 

 - Matt

 

 

 --

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD

n395v

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 450

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 5:07 am Post subject: Re: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

 	  matt(at)n559rv.com wrote: 	
		  

How often do people get AD's that cost them thousands of dollars on a whim? At least with cars they are recalls and the manufacturer 

picks up the cost of replacement. 	


Do a search on the 400 series Cessna wing spar AD.



$60,000 out of every owners pocket because Cessna did a theoretical study that contains "confidential data not available to the public"



No reimbursement by Cessna, all out of the owners pocket.  It affects so many planes it will take Cessna 5 years to mfg all the kits.

_________________
Milt

Bruce(at)glasair.org
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:16 am Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

Perhaps it's time for a class action suit against Cessna.



Bruce

www.glasair.org

 



--

Rhonda(at)bpaengines.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:29 am Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

Keep in mind that the longer you run the cylinders, the less ECI will

"discount" the replacement Titan cylinders.  



Rhonda



--

flyboy.bob(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 7:13 am Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

First make sure you cylinders are the ones affected . . . I'm told that

"Classic Cast" cylinders haven't been made since 2001??  "Titan" cylinders

(post 2001) are not included in the AD.  If you engine only has 40 hours on

it maybe they are ECi "Titan" cylinders?



Good Luck,

Bob

On 1/26/06, Matt Johnson <matt(at)n559rv.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  

 



 I just received an AD in the mail regarding cylinder heads on Lycoming 320

 and 360 engines manufactured by ECI. It requires that the

 cylinders be replaced before 800 hours or if you are over 800 than within

 60 hours.... This could cost a fortune, who pays for this? I am a

 recent aircraft owner for the first time and have not encountered this

 before. I cant imagine that the manufacture (ECI) doesnt have some

 kind of liability. My engine just had an overhaul 40 hours ago!



 - Matt

flyboy.bob(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 7:18 am Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

Another point . . . these cylinders were "certified" by the FAA to "perform

equal to the original manufacturer's part" . . .  shouldn't the FAA pick up

their share of the blame and cost??  Perhaps ECi doesn't agree with the

FAA's conclusion . . . it becomes a sticky situation?!



Regards,

Bob

On 1/27/06, Bruce Gray <Bruce(at)glasair.org> wrote:

[quote]

 



 Perhaps it's time for a class action suit against Cessna.



 Bruce

 www.glasair.org

 --

deruiteraircraftservices(
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 7:24 am Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

 	  Quote: 	
		   Perhaps it's time for a class action suit against Cessna.


	


I believe that's exactly the reason Cessna stopped making single engined 

airplanes in the 80's..............

flyeyes(at)mac.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 7:30 am Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

On Jan 27, 2006, at 8:12 AM, Bruce Gray wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   



 Perhaps it's time for a class action suit against Cessna.



 Bruce

 www.glasair.org



 (snip)



 Do a search on the 400 series Cessna wing spar AD.



 (snip)


	


C'mon Bruce.  A lawsuit on planes that haven't been manufactured in  

over 30 years? Should t-34 owners sue Beech for the wing spar ADs on  

those airplanes?  Small wonder that it's difficult to find honest  

support for older airplanes.

hemico

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 1

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 8:11 am Post subject: Re: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

Here is an interesting article on Aviation Product Liability.



http://www.avweb.com/news/avlaw/181885-1.html



Bob C...There is a small section in the article that speaks to FAA certification.



Regards,

Skippy

flyrv6(at)bryantechnology
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 8:15 am Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

That didn't stop the class action against Cessna for lack of shoulder

harnesses in their 30-40 year old planes.  Before the shoulder harness was

even thought of.



However, class action lawsuits award all the plaintifs enough money to buy

dinner for one and the lawyers millions.  What is the benefit?  I am not a

lawyer, so none for me.



Tim

Do Not Archive 

 

----

dan.beadle(at)inclinesoft
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 8:21 am Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

I am a C414A owner.  I watched this AD progress through.  The cost is

probably closer to $90K with real labor rates.  



FORTUNATELY, like the eci AD, it only applies in certain situations - in my

case with 18000 airframe hours.  I have 4500 hours on the airframe and fly

250 hours a year.  With a little math... That is another 52 years of service

I can expect.



And, if I were convinced that it were a safety issue now, I would apply the

AD.  $90K is only 15% of the value of the airplane.  And it is far less than

the value of my life.



I am a little bit miffed that Cessna will not share the engineering data so

we can understand it - but that is probably the result of lawyers afraid

that the data will hang them.



Dan

--

Dave Johnson

Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 7
Location: Erie, CO (48V, BJC)

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 10:21 am Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

In my humble opinion, that is precisely the wrong answer. I watched the 

Cessna 400 series wing spar AD unfold very closely, and at the core of 

it, pretty much everyone agrees that Cessna's actions were the result of 

trying to limit its exposure to liability suits. The only spar failures 

recorded were in airframes that always flew fully loaded, low down in 

the summer thermals, and with a light fuel load- precisely the 

conditions which apply maximum stress to the wing spars. BUT, Cessna is 

still on the liability hook for airplanes sold many years ago, because 

they have supplied parts for them which resets the liability period for 

another 17 years.



They are in an impossible situation with lawyers coming from all over 

the place to take a piece. Damned if they don't take action on the 

slightest indication of a problem, damned if they do because owners will 

sue them for making them spend the money. My opinion? Stop class action 

and liability suits on aircraft manufacturers, because that's the root 

of the problem (and promote an understanding among all of mankind that 

life has risks...the failure to accept this has created the litigious 

business climate we have today). The Cessna 400 series wing is built 

hell for stout, but that doesn't amount for shit in front of a jury.



Dave

Bruce Gray wrote:



[quote]



Perhaps it's time for a class action suit against Cessna.



Bruce

www.glasair.org

 



--

flyrv6(at)bryantechnology
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:02 am Post subject: Troubling Airworthiness Directive...

Dave, you are completely right IMHO but it shouldn't stop at aircraft

manufactures.  There should be very strict criteria applied to class action

lawsuits as well.

Tim 

 

----

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum