Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:21 AM - Mandatory Service Bulletin 505... (scott fifield)
2. 09:20 AM - Re: Mandatory Service Bulletin 505... (Guy)
3. 03:00 PM - Re: Mandatory Service Bulletin 505... (Archie)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Mandatory Service Bulletin 505... |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "scott fifield" <scott428@tds.net>
Here's one for you experts out there...
My Lycoming O-320-D3G crankshaft failed compliance with S.B. 505, but not
until $600 of other work had been accomplished. My question is: Since the
application will be in an experimental aircraft (a Glastar), is this crank
viable?
I ask this because, the shop rep stated the crankshaft could be yellow
tagged for a 150 hp application, but not for the 160 hp that is the engine's
current configuration. Also, (off the record) he stated that he would have
no qualms running this crank indefinitely and that his shop had routinely
passed cranks in this condition (prior to the A.D. coming out in 1997).
BTW, this is a huge shop with an excellent reputation.
The crank is serviceable in every other way except failing the S.B. 505
criteria. Is the 10 hp difference justification for buying a new crank? Am
I nuts for considering its continuing service? What is the history of S.B.
505, i.e. what prompted its implementation?
Wanting to be safe-
Scott in Colorado
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Mandatory Service Bulletin 505... |
--> Engines-List message posted by: Guy <gvotuc@direcway.com>
Well I'm not a "expert" but I have researched and talked to a few concerning
this. SB-505 came out due to someone finding corrosion (pitting) inside the
hollow section of a crank on fixed pitch cranks. Seems to be a magnet for
dirt. The inspection calls for checking the area just aft of front pilot (
to 3.50 inches back ) with light and 4x magnifying glass. No corrison found
your all done..if pitting is found you can clean/ polish to remove corrosion
but must continue to inspect every 100 hrs and pass FPI (dye) test. To fail
SB-505 means corrosion was found and removal left I.D of bore less than 1
910 inches.
So... we have perfect cranks. Cranks that pass but with exceptions (100 hr
inspections) And cranks that fail 505. Most shops feel save flying on a NON
505 depending on how bad the corrosion was.
The newer SB-505 (1997) make NO distinction between 150-160 HP for 320
motors.
I'll have one in mine :>)
guy
From: engines-list@matronics.com
Subject: Engines-List: Mandatory Service Bulletin 505...
--> Engines-List message posted by: "scott fifield" <scott428@tds.net>
Here's one for you experts out there...
My Lycoming O-320-D3G crankshaft failed compliance with S.B. 505, but not
until $600 of other work had been accomplished. My question is: Since the
application will be in an experimental aircraft (a Glastar), is this crank
viable?
I ask this because, the shop rep stated the crankshaft could be yellow
tagged for a 150 hp application, but not for the 160 hp that is the engine's
current configuration. Also, (off the record) he stated that he would have
no qualms running this crank indefinitely and that his shop had routinely
passed cranks in this condition (prior to the A.D. coming out in 1997).
BTW, this is a huge shop with an excellent reputation.
The crank is serviceable in every other way except failing the S.B. 505
criteria. Is the 10 hp difference justification for buying a new crank? Am
I nuts for considering its continuing service? What is the history of S.B.
505, i.e. what prompted its implementation?
Wanting to be safe-
Scott in Colorado
.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Mandatory Service Bulletin 505... |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
As I understand it, there was only one failure.
(in England) of an aircraft that sat for long periods of time.
This is the only filed report that I am aware of.
Is/Are there more?
Archie
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|