Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:34 AM - CA weather (David)
2. 07:21 AM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Werner Schneider)
3. 07:29 AM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Shannon Hicks)
4. 07:29 AM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Tim Olson)
5. 07:33 AM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Phillip Perry)
6. 07:41 AM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Kelly McMullen)
7. 07:53 AM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Shannon Hicks)
8. 07:56 AM - Re: CA weather (David Saylor)
9. 08:02 AM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Werner Schneider)
10. 08:07 AM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Miller John)
11. 08:11 AM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Shannon Hicks)
12. 08:11 AM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Kelly McMullen)
13. 08:19 AM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Werner Schneider)
14. 08:27 AM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Kelly McMullen)
15. 12:05 PM - weather Monterey CA (David)
16. 12:29 PM - Re: FW: MT Governor failure (Werner Schneider)
17. 12:41 PM - Re: weather Monterey CA (Bob Turner)
18. 12:46 PM - Re: weather Monterey CA (Bob Turner)
19. 02:45 PM - MT prop governor (David)
20. 02:53 PM - Prop Governor Alternative (kearney)
21. 02:55 PM - Re: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. (tsts4)
22. 03:49 PM - Re: MT prop governor (Kelly McMullen)
23. 05:50 PM - Re: Re: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. (Phillip Perry)
24. 06:00 PM - Re: Re: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. (Shannon Hicks)
25. 06:05 PM - Re: Re: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. (Kelly McMullen)
26. 07:19 PM - Re: Re: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. (Rick Lark)
27. 09:14 PM - Re: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. (woxofswa)
28. 09:17 PM - Re: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. (woxofswa)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I am planning a trip to the Monterey area in late October and looking at the
current weather of fog morning and evening, I began to wonder what to expect
in October. Anyone have info on typical conditions in October along the
coast in the Monterey area?
David N46007
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
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: FW: MT Governor failure |
I got this morning a feedback from MT, that my Governor with
S/N 10G598G
is impacted and that I should send it to the factory to be fixed (this
is manufactured in 2010
Werner
On 17.08.2016 08:32, Werner Schneider wrote:
> I had just this morning an email feedback from MT Germany, they are
> working on a new SB which should cover the impacted serial numbers so
> they now seem to be aware of what is causing this issue?
>
> Werner
>
> On 17.08.2016 03:03, Tim Olson wrote:
>> I'm thinking that most of them were delivered around the same timeframe
>> and they are probably just differing failures but still related to some
>> issue that came around that timeframe. I bet the SB serial number range
>> is insufficient.
>> Because there are so many MT governors flying since 2005 that we would
>> hear of more if there were a large number of failures. That said, if
>> your governor was from 2011 thru 2013, I'd be concerned even if your
>> governor isn't within the S/N range.
>> Tim
>>
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: FW: MT Governor failure |
Werner,
What engine do you have?
I have an Aerosport Power IO-540 with 9.2:1 pistons and MT is telling me
that mine is impacted as well. From talking with MT in Florida, the engine
is what is driving the modification requirements. Ie Barret, Aerosport
etc....
Is this what others are hearing as well?
Shannon Hicks
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Werner Schneider <glastar@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> I got this morning a feedback from MT, that my Governor with
>
> S/N 10G598G
>
> is impacted and that I should send it to the factory to be fixed (this is
> manufactured in 2010
>
> Werner
>
> On 17.08.2016 08:32, Werner Schneider wrote:
>
>> I had just this morning an email feedback from MT Germany, they are
>> working on a new SB which should cover the impacted serial numbers so they
>> now seem to be aware of what is causing this issue?
>>
>> Werner
>>
>> On 17.08.2016 03:03, Tim Olson wrote:
>>
>>> I'm thinking that most of them were delivered around the same timeframe
>>> and they are probably just differing failures but still related to some
>>> issue that came around that timeframe. I bet the SB serial number range
>>> is insufficient.
>>> Because there are so many MT governors flying since 2005 that we would
>>> hear of more if there were a large number of failures. That said, if
>>> your governor was from 2011 thru 2013, I'd be concerned even if your
>>> governor isn't within the S/N range.
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>
>
Message 4
| 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: FW: MT Governor failure |
Thanks Werner,
If you are talking to someone there, see if you can get a feeling for
what the EARLIEST date a governor would have if it were affected.
I'm betting that we'll find it's somewhere after 2009 or 2010,
but I'll be more comfortable if I heard what they had to say.
Tim
On 8/18/2016 9:20 AM, Werner Schneider wrote:
>
> I got this morning a feedback from MT, that my Governor with
>
> S/N 10G598G
>
> is impacted and that I should send it to the factory to be fixed (this
> is manufactured in 2010
>
> Werner
>
> On 17.08.2016 08:32, Werner Schneider wrote:
>> I had just this morning an email feedback from MT Germany, they are
>> working on a new SB which should cover the impacted serial numbers so
>> they now seem to be aware of what is causing this issue?
>>
>> Werner
>>
>> On 17.08.2016 03:03, Tim Olson wrote:
>>> I'm thinking that most of them were delivered around the same timeframe
>>> and they are probably just differing failures but still related to some
>>> issue that came around that timeframe. I bet the SB serial number range
>>> is insufficient.
>>> Because there are so many MT governors flying since 2005 that we would
>>> hear of more if there were a large number of failures. That said, if
>>> your governor was from 2011 thru 2013, I'd be concerned even if your
>>> governor isn't within the S/N range.
>>> Tim
>>>
Message 5
| 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: FW: MT Governor failure |
Did they tell you what the fix is and how their modification differs from the standard/defective
batch?
Phil
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 18, 2016, at 9:20 AM, Werner Schneider <glastar@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>
> I got this morning a feedback from MT, that my Governor with
>
> S/N 10G598G
>
> is impacted and that I should send it to the factory to be fixed (this is manufactured
in 2010
>
> Werner
>
>> On 17.08.2016 08:32, Werner Schneider wrote:
>> I had just this morning an email feedback from MT Germany, they are working
on a new SB which should cover the impacted serial numbers so they now seem to
be aware of what is causing this issue?
>>
>> Werner
>>
>>> On 17.08.2016 03:03, Tim Olson wrote:
>>> I'm thinking that most of them were delivered around the same timeframe
>>> and they are probably just differing failures but still related to some
>>> issue that came around that timeframe. I bet the SB serial number range
>>> is insufficient.
>>> Because there are so many MT governors flying since 2005 that we would
>>> hear of more if there were a large number of failures. That said, if
>>> your governor was from 2011 thru 2013, I'd be concerned even if your
>>> governor isn't within the S/N range.
>>> Tim
>
>
>
>
>
Message 6
| 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: FW: MT Governor failure |
I might see higher compression pistons affecting the prop via harmonics.
I do not see what else about the engines would have anything to do with
who put them together. For the most part, engines built by the reputable
shops mentioned will have flow balanced cylinders, well balanced
rotating parts and run smoother than a factory engine. I see nothing
about that has anything to do with the governor. So far we are not
getting any information beyond the service bulletin about where the
problem might lie.
On 8/18/2016 7:29 AM, Shannon Hicks wrote:
> Werner,
> What engine do you have?
>
> I have an Aerosport Power IO-540 with 9.2:1 pistons and MT is telling me
> that mine is impacted as well. From talking with MT in Florida, the
> engine is what is driving the modification requirements. Ie Barret,
> Aerosport etc....
>
> Is this what others are hearing as well?
>
> Shannon Hicks
>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Werner Schneider <glastar@gmx.net
> <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>> wrote:
>
> <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>>
>
> I got this morning a feedback from MT, that my Governor with
>
> S/N 10G598G
>
> is impacted and that I should send it to the factory to be fixed
> (this is manufactured in 2010
>
> Werner
>
> On 17.08.2016 08:32, Werner Schneider wrote:
>
> I had just this morning an email feedback from MT Germany, they
> are working on a new SB which should cover the impacted serial
> numbers so they now seem to be aware of what is causing this issue?
>
> Werner
>
> On 17.08.2016 03:03, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> I'm thinking that most of them were delivered around the
> same timeframe
> and they are probably just differing failures but still
> related to some
> issue that came around that timeframe. I bet the SB serial
> number range
> is insufficient.
> Because there are so many MT governors flying since 2005
> that we would
> hear of more if there were a large number of failures. That
> said, if
> your governor was from 2011 thru 2013, I'd be concerned even
> if your
> governor isn't within the S/N range.
> Tim
>
>
> ===================================
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> ===================================
> FORUMS -
> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
> WIKI -
> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
> ===================================
> b Site -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
Message 7
| 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: FW: MT Governor failure |
Kelly,
I'm just passing along what MT in Florida told me. They have my governor
in their shop and told me they have the parts on order from Germany to
correct the issue. Beyond that, I don't know what the specific issue was
other than they said it only affects non certified IO-540s.
I really wish someone from MT would at least get out in front of this and
post something.
Shannon Hicks
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com> wrote:
>
> I might see higher compression pistons affecting the prop via harmonics. I
> do not see what else about the engines would have anything to do with who
> put them together. For the most part, engines built by the reputable shops
> mentioned will have flow balanced cylinders, well balanced rotating parts
> and run smoother than a factory engine. I see nothing about that has
> anything to do with the governor. So far we are not getting any information
> beyond the service bulletin about where the problem might lie.
>
> On 8/18/2016 7:29 AM, Shannon Hicks wrote:
>
>> Werner,
>> What engine do you have?
>>
>> I have an Aerosport Power IO-540 with 9.2:1 pistons and MT is telling me
>> that mine is impacted as well. From talking with MT in Florida, the
>> engine is what is driving the modification requirements. Ie Barret,
>> Aerosport etc....
>>
>> Is this what others are hearing as well?
>>
>> Shannon Hicks
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Werner Schneider <glastar@gmx.net
>> <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>> wrote:
>>
>> <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>>
>>
>>
>> I got this morning a feedback from MT, that my Governor with
>>
>> S/N 10G598G
>>
>> is impacted and that I should send it to the factory to be fixed
>> (this is manufactured in 2010
>>
>> Werner
>>
>> On 17.08.2016 08:32, Werner Schneider wrote:
>>
>> I had just this morning an email feedback from MT Germany, they
>> are working on a new SB which should cover the impacted serial
>> numbers so they now seem to be aware of what is causing this
>> issue?
>>
>> Werner
>>
>> On 17.08.2016 03:03, Tim Olson wrote:
>>
>> I'm thinking that most of them were delivered around the
>> same timeframe
>> and they are probably just differing failures but still
>> related to some
>> issue that came around that timeframe. I bet the SB serial
>> number range
>> is insufficient.
>> Because there are so many MT governors flying since 2005
>> that we would
>> hear of more if there were a large number of failures. That
>> said, if
>> your governor was from 2011 thru 2013, I'd be concerned even
>> if your
>> governor isn't within the S/N range.
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>> ===================================
>> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ===================================
>> FORUMS -
>> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ===================================
>> WIKI -
>> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>> ===================================
>> b Site -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.mat
>> ronics.com/contribution
>> ===================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 8
| 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 |
|
Hi David, I'm based at Watsonville just to the north of KMRY. October
typically has about the best weather of the year in Monterey, and
June-August about the foggiest. You could see a little fog, especially
before 10AM or so, but there are Salinas, Marina, and Watsonville as
nearby alternates. For the most part it should be pretty nice.
--Dave
On Thursday, August 18, 2016, David <dlm34077@cox.net> wrote:
> I am planning a trip to the Monterey area in late October and looking at
> the current weather of fog morning and evening, I began to wonder what to
> expect in October. Anyone have info on typical conditions in October along
> the coast in the Monterey area?
>
>
> David N46007
>
>
> ------------------------------
> [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
>
Message 9
| 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: FW: MT Governor failure |
They did ask the engine type and as I have two governors from them one
on a O-320 and the 2nd for an IO-540 I got only feedback by email so far
(still need to supply the O-320 serial which is at the airport).
They did not specific ask for the type details so I'm not sure it has an
influence.
I had so far only email contact but will try to get more details.
Cheers Werner
On 18.08.2016 16:42, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
> I might see higher compression pistons affecting the prop via harmonics.
> I do not see what else about the engines would have anything to do with
> who put them together. For the most part, engines built by the reputable
> shops mentioned will have flow balanced cylinders, well balanced
> rotating parts and run smoother than a factory engine. I see nothing
> about that has anything to do with the governor. So far we are not
> getting any information beyond the service bulletin about where the
> problem might lie.
>
> On 8/18/2016 7:29 AM, Shannon Hicks wrote:
>> Werner,
>> What engine do you have?
>>
>> I have an Aerosport Power IO-540 with 9.2:1 pistons and MT is telling me
>> that mine is impacted as well. From talking with MT in Florida, the
>> engine is what is driving the modification requirements. Ie Barret,
>> Aerosport etc....
>>
>> Is this what others are hearing as well?
>>
>> Shannon Hicks
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Werner Schneider <glastar@gmx.net
>> <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>> wrote:
>>
>> <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>>
>>
>> I got this morning a feedback from MT, that my Governor with
>>
>> S/N 10G598G
>>
>> is impacted and that I should send it to the factory to be fixed
>> (this is manufactured in 2010
>>
>> Werner
>>
>> On 17.08.2016 08:32, Werner Schneider wrote:
>>
>> I had just this morning an email feedback from MT Germany, they
>> are working on a new SB which should cover the impacted serial
>> numbers so they now seem to be aware of what is causing this
>> issue?
>>
>> Werner
>>
>> On 17.08.2016 03:03, Tim Olson wrote:
>>
>> I'm thinking that most of them were delivered around the
>> same timeframe
>> and they are probably just differing failures but still
>> related to some
>> issue that came around that timeframe. I bet the SB serial
>> number range
>> is insufficient.
>> Because there are so many MT governors flying since 2005
>> that we would
>> hear of more if there were a large number of failures. That
>> said, if
>> your governor was from 2011 thru 2013, I'd be concerned even
>> if your
>> governor isn't within the S/N range.
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>> ===================================
>> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ===================================
>> FORUMS -
>> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ===================================
>> WIKI -
>> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>> ===================================
>> b Site -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> rel="noreferrer"
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ===================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 10
| 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: FW: MT Governor failure |
Me too as Tim and mine are same vintage!
grumpy
> On Aug 18, 2016, at 9:29 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks Werner,
>
> If you are talking to someone there, see if you can get a feeling for
> what the EARLIEST date a governor would have if it were affected.
> I'm betting that we'll find it's somewhere after 2009 or 2010,
> but I'll be more comfortable if I heard what they had to say.
> Tim
>
>
> On 8/18/2016 9:20 AM, Werner Schneider wrote:
>>
>> I got this morning a feedback from MT, that my Governor with
>>
>> S/N 10G598G
>>
>> is impacted and that I should send it to the factory to be fixed (this
>> is manufactured in 2010
>>
>> Werner
>>
>> On 17.08.2016 08:32, Werner Schneider wrote:
>>> I had just this morning an email feedback from MT Germany, they are
>>> working on a new SB which should cover the impacted serial numbers so
>>> they now seem to be aware of what is causing this issue?
>>>
>>> Werner
>>>
>>> On 17.08.2016 03:03, Tim Olson wrote:
>>>> I'm thinking that most of them were delivered around the same timeframe
>>>> and they are probably just differing failures but still related to some
>>>> issue that came around that timeframe. I bet the SB serial number range
>>>> is insufficient.
>>>> Because there are so many MT governors flying since 2005 that we would
>>>> hear of more if there were a large number of failures. That said, if
>>>> your governor was from 2011 thru 2013, I'd be concerned even if your
>>>> governor isn't within the S/N range.
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>
>
>
>
Message 11
| 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: FW: MT Governor failure |
Ok, so I just hung up with Andy with MT in Germany. Here is what he told
me. In certain situations, the fly weights can become loose and cause the
failures that we have seen. They have already identified the modifications
needed and will be publishing SB 31 this coming Monday. All 860-3
governors manufactured between April 2010 and July 2013 are affected
regardless of the type of engine.
I did encourage him to post something so that they could get ahead of the
issue.
By the way, my governor is in that range.
Shannon Hicks
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Shannon Hicks <civeng123@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kelly,
> I'm just passing along what MT in Florida told me. They have my governor
> in their shop and told me they have the parts on order from Germany to
> correct the issue. Beyond that, I don't know what the specific issue was
> other than they said it only affects non certified IO-540s.
>
> I really wish someone from MT would at least get out in front of this and
> post something.
>
> Shannon Hicks
>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I might see higher compression pistons affecting the prop via harmonics.
>> I do not see what else about the engines would have anything to do with who
>> put them together. For the most part, engines built by the reputable shops
>> mentioned will have flow balanced cylinders, well balanced rotating parts
>> and run smoother than a factory engine. I see nothing about that has
>> anything to do with the governor. So far we are not getting any information
>> beyond the service bulletin about where the problem might lie.
>>
>> On 8/18/2016 7:29 AM, Shannon Hicks wrote:
>>
>>> Werner,
>>> What engine do you have?
>>>
>>> I have an Aerosport Power IO-540 with 9.2:1 pistons and MT is telling me
>>> that mine is impacted as well. From talking with MT in Florida, the
>>> engine is what is driving the modification requirements. Ie Barret,
>>> Aerosport etc....
>>>
>>> Is this what others are hearing as well?
>>>
>>> Shannon Hicks
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Werner Schneider <glastar@gmx.net
>>> <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>> <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I got this morning a feedback from MT, that my Governor with
>>>
>>> S/N 10G598G
>>>
>>> is impacted and that I should send it to the factory to be fixed
>>> (this is manufactured in 2010
>>>
>>> Werner
>>>
>>> On 17.08.2016 08:32, Werner Schneider wrote:
>>>
>>> I had just this morning an email feedback from MT Germany, they
>>> are working on a new SB which should cover the impacted serial
>>> numbers so they now seem to be aware of what is causing this
>>> issue?
>>>
>>> Werner
>>>
>>> On 17.08.2016 03:03, Tim Olson wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm thinking that most of them were delivered around the
>>> same timeframe
>>> and they are probably just differing failures but still
>>> related to some
>>> issue that came around that timeframe. I bet the SB serial
>>> number range
>>> is insufficient.
>>> Because there are so many MT governors flying since 2005
>>> that we would
>>> hear of more if there were a large number of failures. That
>>> said, if
>>> your governor was from 2011 thru 2013, I'd be concerned even
>>> if your
>>> governor isn't within the S/N range.
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ===================================
>>> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> ===================================
>>> FORUMS -
>>> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>> ===================================
>>> WIKI -
>>> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>>> ===================================
>>> b Site -
>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.mat
>>> ronics.com/contribution
>>> ===================================
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Message 12
| 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: FW: MT Governor failure |
Interesting. I wonder what non-certified features they perceive as
issues. Ignition?, Compression ratio? fuel injection? That should cover
most of it. Doesn't give me any comfort to have a certified engine built
by a well known reputable shop. I've only heard of ignition affecting
props, somehow modifying the harmonics a bit, but that still should have
nothing to do with the governor.
On 8/18/2016 7:53 AM, Shannon Hicks wrote:
> Kelly,
> I'm just passing along what MT in Florida told me. They have my
> governor in their shop and told me they have the parts on order from
> Germany to correct the issue. Beyond that, I don't know what the
> specific issue was other than they said it only affects non certified
> IO-540s.
>
> I really wish someone from MT would at least get out in front of this
> and post something.
>
> Shannon Hicks
>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com
> <mailto:kellym@aviating.com>> wrote:
>
> <mailto:kellym@aviating.com>>
>
> I might see higher compression pistons affecting the prop via
> harmonics. I do not see what else about the engines would have
> anything to do with who put them together. For the most part,
> engines built by the reputable shops mentioned will have flow
> balanced cylinders, well balanced rotating parts and run smoother
> than a factory engine. I see nothing about that has anything to do
> with the governor. So far we are not getting any information beyond
> the service bulletin about where the problem might lie.
>
> On 8/18/2016 7:29 AM, Shannon Hicks wrote:
>
> Werner,
> What engine do you have?
>
> I have an Aerosport Power IO-540 with 9.2:1 pistons and MT is
> telling me
> that mine is impacted as well. From talking with MT in Florida, the
> engine is what is driving the modification requirements. Ie Barret,
> Aerosport etc....
>
> Is this what others are hearing as well?
>
> Shannon Hicks
>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Werner Schneider
> <glastar@gmx.net <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>
> <mailto:glastar@gmx.net <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>>> wrote:
>
> <glastar@gmx.net <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>
> <mailto:glastar@gmx.net <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>>>
>
>
> I got this morning a feedback from MT, that my Governor with
>
> S/N 10G598G
>
> is impacted and that I should send it to the factory to be fixed
> (this is manufactured in 2010
>
> Werner
>
> On 17.08.2016 08:32, Werner Schneider wrote:
>
> I had just this morning an email feedback from MT
> Germany, they
> are working on a new SB which should cover the impacted
> serial
> numbers so they now seem to be aware of what is causing
> this issue?
>
> Werner
>
> On 17.08.2016 03:03, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> I'm thinking that most of them were delivered around the
> same timeframe
> and they are probably just differing failures but still
> related to some
> issue that came around that timeframe. I bet the SB
> serial
> number range
> is insufficient.
> Because there are so many MT governors flying since 2005
> that we would
> hear of more if there were a large number of
> failures. That
> said, if
> your governor was from 2011 thru 2013, I'd be
> concerned even
> if your
> governor isn't within the S/N range.
> Tim
>
>
> ===================================
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
> ===================================
> FORUMS -
> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> <http://forums.matronics.com>
> ===================================
> WIKI -
> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
> <http://wiki.matronics.com>
> ===================================
> b Site -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
> ===================================
>
>
> ===================================
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> ===================================
> FORUMS -
> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
> WIKI -
> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
> ===================================
> b Site -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
Message 13
| 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: FW: MT Governor failure |
I need to correct this, MT Germany did ONLY ask for the serial numbers
not what type of engine!
I try tomorrow to find out more abot what is behind but you can imagine
they are busy....
Werner
On 18.08.2016 17:01, Werner Schneider wrote:
>
> They did ask the engine type and as I have two governors from them one
> on a O-320 and the 2nd for an IO-540 I got only feedback by email so
> far (still need to supply the O-320 serial which is at the airport).
>
Message 14
| 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: FW: MT Governor failure |
OK. Will have to see what the bulletin says, as I have 860-5 mfd 06/13.
On 8/18/2016 8:10 AM, Shannon Hicks wrote:
> Ok, so I just hung up with Andy with MT in Germany. Here is what he
> told me. In certain situations, the fly weights can become loose and
> cause the failures that we have seen. They have already identified the
> modifications needed and will be publishing SB 31 this coming Monday.
> All 860-3 governors manufactured between April 2010 and July 2013 are
> affected regardless of the type of engine.
>
> I did encourage him to post something so that they could get ahead of
> the issue.
>
> By the way, my governor is in that range.
>
> Shannon Hicks
>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Shannon Hicks <civeng123@gmail.com
> <mailto:civeng123@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Kelly,
> I'm just passing along what MT in Florida told me. They have my
> governor in their shop and told me they have the parts on order from
> Germany to correct the issue. Beyond that, I don't know what the
> specific issue was other than they said it only affects non
> certified IO-540s.
>
> I really wish someone from MT would at least get out in front of
> this and post something.
>
> Shannon Hicks
>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com
> <mailto:kellym@aviating.com>> wrote:
>
> <kellym@aviating.com <mailto:kellym@aviating.com>>
>
> I might see higher compression pistons affecting the prop via
> harmonics. I do not see what else about the engines would have
> anything to do with who put them together. For the most part,
> engines built by the reputable shops mentioned will have flow
> balanced cylinders, well balanced rotating parts and run
> smoother than a factory engine. I see nothing about that has
> anything to do with the governor. So far we are not getting any
> information beyond the service bulletin about where the problem
> might lie.
>
> On 8/18/2016 7:29 AM, Shannon Hicks wrote:
>
> Werner,
> What engine do you have?
>
> I have an Aerosport Power IO-540 with 9.2:1 pistons and MT
> is telling me
> that mine is impacted as well. From talking with MT in
> Florida, the
> engine is what is driving the modification requirements. Ie
> Barret,
> Aerosport etc....
>
> Is this what others are hearing as well?
>
> Shannon Hicks
>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Werner Schneider
> <glastar@gmx.net <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>
> <mailto:glastar@gmx.net <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>>> wrote:
>
> <glastar@gmx.net <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>
> <mailto:glastar@gmx.net <mailto:glastar@gmx.net>>>
>
>
> I got this morning a feedback from MT, that my Governor with
>
> S/N 10G598G
>
> is impacted and that I should send it to the factory to
> be fixed
> (this is manufactured in 2010
>
> Werner
>
> On 17.08.2016 08:32, Werner Schneider wrote:
>
> I had just this morning an email feedback from MT
> Germany, they
> are working on a new SB which should cover the
> impacted serial
> numbers so they now seem to be aware of what is
> causing this issue?
>
> Werner
>
> On 17.08.2016 03:03, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> I'm thinking that most of them were delivered
> around the
> same timeframe
> and they are probably just differing failures
> but still
> related to some
> issue that came around that timeframe. I bet
> the SB serial
> number range
> is insufficient.
> Because there are so many MT governors flying
> since 2005
> that we would
> hear of more if there were a large number of
> failures. That
> said, if
> your governor was from 2011 thru 2013, I'd be
> concerned even
> if your
> governor isn't within the S/N range.
> Tim
>
>
> ===================================
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
>
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
> ===================================
> FORUMS -
> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> <http://forums.matronics.com>
> ===================================
> WIKI -
> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
> <http://wiki.matronics.com>
> ===================================
> b Site -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
> ===================================
>
>
> ===================================
> -List" rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> ===================================
> FORUMS -
> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
> WIKI -
> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
> ===================================
> b Site -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> rel="noreferrer"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
Message 15
| 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: | weather Monterey CA |
I have flown some LIFR over my last 50 years but it is nice to know that
thing will probably be good in October. The company from which I retired 20+
years ago is having a reunion there at the Hyatt. I have a reservation there
but someone has suggested the ASILOMAR lodging; any thoughts there?
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Message 16
| 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: FW: MT Governor failure |
No I know why his phone was all the time busy :)
Thanks Shannon!
On 18.08.2016 17:10, Shannon Hicks wrote:
> Ok, so I just hung up with Andy with MT in Germany.
Message 17
| 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: weather Monterey CA |
It's been a long time but as I recall Asilomar is a retreat-conference-type place,
just a bit rustic. But not convenient to the downtown Hyatt.
BTW, if departing in IMC or night, take a look at the minimum climb gradients eastbound.
Some years ago a twin inexplicably took his time climbing and failed
to clear the hills to the east.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=459616#459616
Message 18
| 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: weather Monterey CA |
BTW, if you plan to explore the area, you'll want a rental car. But otherwise the
Hyatt is a short taxi ride, and the wharf area (restaurants) and the aquarium
are within walking distance.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=459617#459617
Message 19
| 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: | MT prop governor |
My prop governor is an MT P-420-17, serial 044016; I was one of the initial
purchasers of the certificated Lycoming IO540D4A5 from Vans. I believe the
engine came from Lycoming with the governor already installed. If I
understand correctly all the failures on the RV10 were the P-860-3 models,
so it seems that the "narrow deck" governor has not had a problem.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Message 20
| 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: | Prop Governor Alternative |
Hi
I was a bit concerned that my PCU5000X governor might have an exposure to the MT
issue. I was *told* that they shared common parts. To make a long story short
I sport to APS who distributes these units. Here is the note I received from
them (I told Sean I would post it here).
So for those facing the MT issue, there is another choice....
Cheers
Les
Les,
Briefly going over what we discussed earlier, the Aero Technologies,
LLC PCU5000X is manufactured by Jihostroj in the Czech Republic, we started
our partnership back in 2004 and it continues to today. MT Propellers governor
is manufactured by AVIA also in the Czech Republic but it is a competing
company with its own proprietary design. VAF Special is the code to use if you
want a PCU5000X at $1,250.00 USD plus shipping, normal MSRP is $1,600.00 USD.
Thank you for the phone call and being a loyal aviator.
Sean O'Keefe
Business Unit Manager
Aircraft Propeller Service, LLC D.B.A.
Aero Technologies, LLC
595 Telser Road
Lake Zurich, IL 60047
1(847) 541-1133 ext. 109
Direct Line 1(224) 676-6909
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=459620#459620
Message 21
| 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: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. |
philperry9 wrote:
> Basically I was just saying that I wouldn't knowingly be running it on the lower
end.. If carry as much as possible without giving it so much that it would
blow out.
>
>
> I should have mentioned that 90 kts was the limp-along speed reported without
over speeding (again).
>
>
> The over speeding has occurred in 2 of the 3. Both of those props became decorations
and the engine cases split for inspection. (I believe 1 owner found
it was cheaper/better to buy a new IO-540 than to repair the existing one.
That's 2nd hand knowledge from a reasonably good source though, so don't hold
me to it if it's wrong.)
>
>
> Phil
>
>
Sorry about the tardiness of this post as I just became aware of these threads
here on Matronics as I don't visit here anymore.
Anyway, Phil is correct that I limped home at 90 knots for about 20 min. I lost
about 1/2 to 3/4 of a qt of oil in the process (started the day with 8). Of
course at the time I had no idea that I was losing oil at all--all I knew was
I had no prop control and anything above 14" would run the RPM to redline.
--------
Todd Stovall
aka Auburntsts on EAA, AOPA, Purple Pilots, VAF, and RVairspace
RV-10 N728TT
Empacone, Wings, Fuse, Finishing
www.mykitlog.com/auburntsts
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=459621#459621
Message 22
| 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: MT prop governor |
The P-860-3 IS the correct governor for narrow deck engines. P-860-5 IS
the correct governor for wide deck engines. Vans has sold for at least
the past 10 years or more the P-860-3 for all engines, wide or narrow
deck. It can be adjusted to work with the wide deck, just isn't what MT
recommends.
I am running IO-540-D4B5 certified, overhauled engine from LyCon in
Visailia with P-860-5 governor manufactured in June of 2013. Time will
tell whether it is also involved. (the B5 variant has the big Bendix
S-1200 magnetos for better high altitude performance).
Saw Myron's governor today.
On 8/18/2016 2:43 PM, David wrote:
> My prop governor is an MT P-420-17, serial 044016; I was one of the
> initial purchasers of the certificated Lycoming IO540D4A5 from Vans. I
> believe the engine came from Lycoming with the governor already
> installed. If I understand correctly all the failures on the RV10 were
> the P-860-3 models, so it seems that the narrow deck governor has not
> had a problem.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Avast logo <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
>
Message 23
| 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: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. |
Perhaps it's just me, but having MT develop a solution to the gov so quickly makes
me uneasy.
To my knowledge, none if the failed gov's have been forensically examined by MT
in a lab.
Yet, they're getting ready to publish a solution?
Isn't step #1 to the solution a root cause analysis?
Even with a SB coming out, I'm still uneasy and ultimately skeptical that the solution
addresses a problem that isn't fully understood by them.
Or, perhaps they HAVE known the details and fully understood the potential for
failure, but failed to address it until the units began failing in the field?
I know that's conspiracy theory stuff, but it would be the only way they could
develop a solution for failures they haven't researched.
Either way, I'm uneasy with a solution that comes out of MT without having real
analysis performed on the failed parts.
Just had to get that off my chest because I feel like others are thinking (or feeling)
the same thing. Thanks for letting me rant for just a moment.....
Phil
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 18, 2016, at 4:54 PM, tsts4 <tsts4@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> philperry9 wrote:
>> Basically I was just saying that I wouldn't knowingly be running it on the lower
end.. If carry as much as possible without giving it so much that it would
blow out.
>>
>>
>> I should have mentioned that 90 kts was the limp-along speed reported without
over speeding (again).
>>
>>
>> The over speeding has occurred in 2 of the 3. Both of those props became decorations
and the engine cases split for inspection. (I believe 1 owner found
it was cheaper/better to buy a new IO-540 than to repair the existing one.
That's 2nd hand knowledge from a reasonably good source though, so don't hold
me to it if it's wrong.)
>>
>>
>> Phil
>
>
> Sorry about the tardiness of this post as I just became aware of these threads
here on Matronics as I don't visit here anymore.
>
> Anyway, Phil is correct that I limped home at 90 knots for about 20 min. I lost
about 1/2 to 3/4 of a qt of oil in the process (started the day with 8).
Of course at the time I had no idea that I was losing oil at all--all I knew
was I had no prop control and anything above 14" would run the RPM to redline.
>
> --------
> Todd Stovall
> aka Auburntsts on EAA, AOPA, Purple Pilots, VAF, and RVairspace
> RV-10 N728TT
> Empacone, Wings, Fuse, Finishing
> www.mykitlog.com/auburntsts
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=459621#459621
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 24
| 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: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. |
I agree with Phil 100%. Every time I speak with MT, I get a new
"Definitive" answer. I am really disappointed in how MT has handled this
situation so far. This does not give me great confidence in their company.
I wish they would come out publicly and at least tell us they are looking
into it. All of the info we have is second hand and most contradictory.
Shannon
On Thursday, August 18, 2016, Phillip Perry <philperry9@gmail.com> wrote:
> <javascript:;>>
>
> Perhaps it's just me, but having MT develop a solution to the gov so
> quickly makes me uneasy.
>
> To my knowledge, none if the failed gov's have been forensically examined
> by MT in a lab.
>
> Yet, they're getting ready to publish a solution?
>
> Isn't step #1 to the solution a root cause analysis?
>
> Even with a SB coming out, I'm still uneasy and ultimately skeptical that
> the solution addresses a problem that isn't fully understood by them.
>
> Or, perhaps they HAVE known the details and fully understood the potentia
l
> for failure, but failed to address it until the units began failing in th
e
> field? I know that's conspiracy theory stuff, but it would be the only w
ay
> they could develop a solution for failures they haven't researched.
>
> Either way, I'm uneasy with a solution that comes out of MT without havin
g
> real analysis performed on the failed parts.
>
> Just had to get that off my chest because I feel like others are thinking
> (or feeling) the same thing. Thanks for letting me rant for just a
> moment.....
>
> Phil
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Aug 18, 2016, at 4:54 PM, tsts4 <tsts4@verizon.net <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >
> <javascript:;>>
> >
> >
> > philperry9 wrote:
> >> Basically I was just saying that I wouldn't knowingly be running it on
> the lower end.. If carry as much as possible without giving it so much
> that it would blow out.
> >>
> >>
> >> I should have mentioned that 90 kts was the limp-along speed reported
> without over speeding (again).
> >>
> >>
> >> The over speeding has occurred in 2 of the 3. Both of those props
> became decorations and the engine cases split for inspection. =EF=BD (
I believe
> 1 owner found it was cheaper/better to buy a new IO-540 than to repair th
e
> existing one. That's 2nd hand knowledge from a reasonably good source
> though, so don't hold me to it if it's wrong.)
> >>
> >>
> >> Phil
> >
> >
> > Sorry about the tardiness of this post as I just became aware of these
> threads here on Matronics as I don't visit here anymore.
> >
> > Anyway, Phil is correct that I limped home at 90 knots for about 20
> min. I lost about 1/2 to 3/4 of a qt of oil in the process (started the
> day with 8). Of course at the time I had no idea that I was losing oil
at
> all--all I knew was I had no prop control and anything above 14" would r
un
> the RPM to redline.
> >
> > --------
> > Todd Stovall
> > aka Auburntsts on EAA, AOPA, Purple Pilots, VAF, and RVairspace
> > RV-10 N728TT
> > Empacone, Wings, Fuse, Finishing
> > www.mykitlog.com/auburntsts
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=459621#459621
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
Message 25
| 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: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. |
They may have had some information from the racing/aerobatic community.
The Red Bull racers from my understanding used MT governors as well as
props on their IO-540s. I can check, as one or two of them are based at
my home 'drome.
On 8/18/2016 5:59 PM, Shannon Hicks wrote:
> I agree with Phil 100%. Every time I speak with MT, I get a new
> "Definitive" answer. I am really disappointed in how MT has handled this
> situation so far. This does not give me great confidence in their company.
>
> I wish they would come out publicly and at least tell us they are
> looking into it. All of the info we have is second hand and most
> contradictory.
>
> Shannon
>
> On Thursday, August 18, 2016, Phillip Perry <philperry9@gmail.com
> <mailto:philperry9@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> <javascript:;>>
>
> Perhaps it's just me, but having MT develop a solution to the gov so
> quickly makes me uneasy.
>
> To my knowledge, none if the failed gov's have been forensically
> examined by MT in a lab.
>
> Yet, they're getting ready to publish a solution?
>
> Isn't step #1 to the solution a root cause analysis?
>
> Even with a SB coming out, I'm still uneasy and ultimately skeptical
> that the solution addresses a problem that isn't fully understood by
> them.
>
> Or, perhaps they HAVE known the details and fully understood the
> potential for failure, but failed to address it until the units
> began failing in the field? I know that's conspiracy theory stuff,
> but it would be the only way they could develop a solution for
> failures they haven't researched.
>
> Either way, I'm uneasy with a solution that comes out of MT without
> having real analysis performed on the failed parts.
>
> Just had to get that off my chest because I feel like others are
> thinking (or feeling) the same thing. Thanks for letting me rant
> for just a moment.....
>
> Phil
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Aug 18, 2016, at 4:54 PM, tsts4 <tsts4@verizon.net
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> <javascript:;>>
> >
> >
> > philperry9 wrote:
> >> Basically I was just saying that I wouldn't knowingly be running
> it on the lower end.. If carry as much as possible without giving
> it so much that it would blow out.
> >>
> >>
> >> I should have mentioned that 90 kts was the limp-along speed
> reported without over speeding (again).
> >>
> >>
> >> The over speeding has occurred in 2 of the 3. Both of those
> props became decorations and the engine cases split for inspection.
> (I believe 1 owner found it was cheaper/better to buy a new IO-540
> than to repair the existing one. That's 2nd hand knowledge from a
> reasonably good source though, so don't hold me to it if it's wrong.)
> >>
> >>
> >> Phil
> >
> >
> > Sorry about the tardiness of this post as I just became aware of
> these threads here on Matronics as I don't visit here anymore.
> >
> > Anyway, Phil is correct that I limped home at 90 knots for about
> 20 min. I lost about 1/2 to 3/4 of a qt of oil in the process
> (started the day with 8). Of course at the time I had no idea that
> I was losing oil at all--all I knew was I had no prop control and
> anything above 14" would run the RPM to redline.
> >
> > --------
> > Todd Stovall
> > aka Auburntsts on EAA, AOPA, Purple Pilots, VAF, and RVairspace
> > RV-10 N728TT
> > Empacone, Wings, Fuse, Finishing
> > www.mykitlog.com/auburntsts <http://www.mykitlog.com/auburntsts>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=459621#459621
> <http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=459621#459621>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ===================================
> -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> ===================================
> FORUMS -
> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
> WIKI -
> lank">http://wiki.matronics.com
> ===================================
> b Site -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
Message 26
| 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: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. |
Guys, I can add that the tone of the emails I have received from MT echo
what Phil and Shannon have said. It appears to me they are deflecting any
blame, in my opinion, for a poor design and or engineering, which has
resulted in significant engine damage. I'm certainly disappointed in
them. I hoped they would "step up to the plate". Remains to be seen if
they will.....
Rick
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Phillip Perry <philperry9@gmail.com> wrote
:
>
> Perhaps it's just me, but having MT develop a solution to the gov so
> quickly makes me uneasy.
>
> To my knowledge, none if the failed gov's have been forensically examined
> by MT in a lab.
>
> Yet, they're getting ready to publish a solution?
>
> Isn't step #1 to the solution a root cause analysis?
>
> Even with a SB coming out, I'm still uneasy and ultimately skeptical that
> the solution addresses a problem that isn't fully understood by them.
>
> Or, perhaps they HAVE known the details and fully understood the potentia
l
> for failure, but failed to address it until the units began failing in th
e
> field? I know that's conspiracy theory stuff, but it would be the only w
ay
> they could develop a solution for failures they haven't researched.
>
> Either way, I'm uneasy with a solution that comes out of MT without havin
g
> real analysis performed on the failed parts.
>
> Just had to get that off my chest because I feel like others are thinking
> (or feeling) the same thing. Thanks for letting me rant for just a
> moment.....
>
> Phil
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Aug 18, 2016, at 4:54 PM, tsts4 <tsts4@verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > philperry9 wrote:
> >> Basically I was just saying that I wouldn't knowingly be running it on
> the lower end.. If carry as much as possible without giving it so much
> that it would blow out.
> >>
> >>
> >> I should have mentioned that 90 kts was the limp-along speed reported
> without over speeding (again).
> >>
> >>
> >> The over speeding has occurred in 2 of the 3. Both of those props
> became decorations and the engine cases split for inspection. =EF=BD (
I believe
> 1 owner found it was cheaper/better to buy a new IO-540 than to repair th
e
> existing one. That's 2nd hand knowledge from a reasonably good source
> though, so don't hold me to it if it's wrong.)
> >>
> >>
> >> Phil
> >
> >
> > Sorry about the tardiness of this post as I just became aware of these
> threads here on Matronics as I don't visit here anymore.
> >
> > Anyway, Phil is correct that I limped home at 90 knots for about 20
> min. I lost about 1/2 to 3/4 of a qt of oil in the process (started the
> day with 8). Of course at the time I had no idea that I was losing oil
at
> all--all I knew was I had no prop control and anything above 14" would r
un
> the RPM to redline.
> >
> > --------
> > Todd Stovall
> > aka Auburntsts on EAA, AOPA, Purple Pilots, VAF, and RVairspace
> > RV-10 N728TT
> > Empacone, Wings, Fuse, Finishing
> > www.mykitlog.com/auburntsts
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=459621#459621
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
Message 27
| 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: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. |
My RPM tracking at moment of PG failure.
(http://s125.photobucket.com/user/myronnelson/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zps3roqgp1p.jpeg.html)
--------
Myron Nelson
Mesa, AZ
Flew May 10 2014
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=459633#459633
Message 28
| 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: MT P860-3 Prop Gov fail. |
FYI to Hartzell buyers.
Van's lists their two Hartzell govs wrong in their catalog. They list them as for
"IO" or "O". According to Hartzell, fuel delivery makes no difference. They
should be listed as for narrow deck or wide deck.
--------
Myron Nelson
Mesa, AZ
Flew May 10 2014
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=459634#459634
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! --
|