Engine failure after a service

[Morph]

This thread was spawned by the following message from alanmack

To change the "same old" moan - what about a new one > I also get grumpy about technical issues - at 230 hrs my engine has been fully overhauled. 1st time - my fault the Nemo story (new crank and everything else except tyres). 2nd time at 130 hrs since the time before - why - to comply with 150hr maintenance recommendation and when stripped new pistons etc were recommended & when it's open I feel you may as well save on the labour to open again at 300hrs? - Then 5mins into first flight after overhaul/maintenance engine ceased off Shark Point on 27 Dec 2007. So now for the 3rd time at 130hrs and 5minutes. Why am I grumpy - no body can tell me why and I know of two other planes that went down in December 2007 within the 1st hour of flight after an overhaul. I believe that we must be able to find the reason to learn from. If anyone out there is interested I will send you the short block and the piston/rings to evaluate.

Why is this

Your greatest risk of anything going wrong with an engine is always straight after a service, plugs not put in tight, connectors not firm, incorrect torque etc. This is true for anything, cars, bikes, TCA and NTCA aircraft etc. Never ever have a plane, vehicle serviced just before a long trip. Give a few hours proving flight cabbage patch tests before embarking on that trip.

In this case I would say replacing the pistons and rings would IMHO require a new running in period. I am not sure if this was done but 5 minutes in the air if the motor was not run in could result in a seize which I believe is the case here

IMHO do not, I repeat do NOT strip the motor unneccesailry, you are just asking for k@k. To open the motor every 150 hours is absoluttely rediculous. Here is the western Cape we remove the exhaust manifold and check for carbon buildup. If rings are still loose and no blow by, close up and continue flying. We have 503's in excess of 1000 hours and not been opened.

Unfortunately part 24 is forcing us to change this, which I predict will increase the incidences of engine failure. Why can they not see this

There is one little 447 here that finally had a crank failure. This little engine has been running faultlessly for 17 years and 970 hours. Unopened in all that time.

[African Grey]

Agree 100% with you.

Every one of the 582 engines opened up (mostly at the insistance of new owners) all between 300 and 450 hrs (5 of) were an ABSOLUTE waste of time and money.

Hone marks still visible in the bores, everythng within spec and precious little carbon build up.

I must add that these aircraft were regularly used....!

[Aerosan]

If it aint broke don't fix it...........

[African Grey]

Agree too Aerosan

But we have to.....! That's why the regs are absolute nonsense.

How many cranks have failed that folk are aware of....?

I think I know of one.....some time ago at Balito - Dve Jackson's strip...BUT that's all. If they are run correctly, surely you will pick up a vibration before failure....?

[ZULU1]

Mine went at 190 hrs, symptoms were the engine overheated seriously and wouldn't reach power. It was the crank. And yes its Ballito. ZU -CEW.

Fortunately I missed the power lines and it was beyond flyability but didn't seize.

Ciao Paul (zulu1)

[Aerosan]

IMHO if it ran for so long and there is NO indication that something is wrong, you are as safe as can be. Truthfully, in all the years I butchered 2- motors, I knew that if it was going to fail it would be just after a re-build.
San

[Wargames]

Hi guys,

found this.

Proper break-in of your engine is the most critical aspect for determining the longevity and performance of your engine. Engines not properly broken-in will often fail within the first minutes of operation. Ring failure and piston seizure are the most common symptoms of an improper break-in procedure.

If you have a pre-mix system (mixing oil and fuel in the fuel tank), then you should richen the ratio to about 32:1 for the first ten gallons of gas. If you have an injection system (putting oil in a separate oil tank [also known as autolube]), then you should put 50:1 premix in the fuel tank along with the oil injection system for the first ten gallons of gas.

During the first 10 gallons of gasoline, there should be NO full throttle operation. First idle the engine for about 10 minutes to ensure that the engine is properly warmed-up. Then begin varying the throttle position up and down, up to 20% throttle for a half hour. Then come back and let the engine cool off completely - it should be a good 30 min break. After it cools down, you may now ride it up to 50% throttle for another half hour or so. Then come back again and let it completely cool down again. Now you can go out and ride up to 90% throttle. Continue this for the remainder of the 10 gallons, never holding one throttle position for more than a few seconds. Do not run at a steady throttle position and do not go to 100% throttle. After your first tank of gas, replace your plugs with fresh ones. For the second tank, you may ride normally with one exception - do not hold it at 100% throttle for more than a few seconds. After the second tank of gas, you are completely broken in and may ride anyway you like.

This is not a reference to rotax engines, just engines in general.

IMHO, whether you TBO your engine, or just open it up, remove everything and replace, the break-in procedure should be the same. The rotax 503 break-in procedure takes about 60min. This would make it clear why there is engines breaking down within an hour. Damage done in the first hour of engine operation, can sometime just reduce the engine life significantly, although the engine will still seem to work perfectly for a time.

Everything need to be perfect in the engine. The build need to perfect, and the break-in. You can do one correct, but not the other and you will have problems.

This said, if you have a dud, he will just leave you everywhere.

Looking at this, then with the rotax being opened up every 150 hours, you should loose 1 hour for breaking in, which leaves 149 hours of flying in between, and then with the risk of rebuilding and breaking in to live with.

This brings me back to the issue of this topic. Through the regulations, they are increasing the chance of a engine breakdown.

So now the next question:
I thought that regulations is supposed to make flying safer. Did someone loose their mind?? and who was it??

[alanmack]

Thank you for the valuable discussion. There are a few matters that are fundamental to fully understanding the relatively simple result.

I decided to do the Aviation Engines 503/582 course at the end of last year. I enjoyed the course very much but was surprised to find the extent of work needed ito the maintenance schedules. I believe that our sport requires stringent adherence to the guidelines of those with more experience than I have. My trike was at the Raptor factory getting new shocks etc in preparation for a planned month's holiday with much flying hoped for on the Wild Coast. My trike had 130 hrs on the engine after a complete rebuild including a new crank and everything else inside. (Nemo story - submerged at sea). Thus expecting to exceed the 150hr milestone I decided to do the full 150hr maintenance service. Cost some R12k plus.

Whilst my trike was at Raptor I phoned Niren at AE who advised that I should not have the job done by Manfred as he is not a recognised Rotax service agent. There are only two Gauteng accredited agents. AFOS at Rand and Gideon in Brits. I phoned AFOS and was advised that they did not do much 582 work. Brits just seemed too far. Now what?

I have discussed this matter with Mike Blyth and have told him that in my opinion they need to get into the market and accredit more service agents. He agreed to give this attention.

I then phoned Mr Much Respected A (MRA) and asked for advise. Lets try and keep individuals out of this please and try to learn from the mistakes.

MRA recommended MRB and so I took my trike to MRB after stopping off at AE for a box full of spares. MRB suggested new pistons and rings and I really do hold him in high regard and agreed without question. When collecting the trike I enquired as to what I needed to do before heading off on my perch along the Wild Coast. MRB said that all that was needed was "circuits and bumps" to be on the safe side. Given the prospect of an engine out I took my trike to MRC for it to be test flown for the "circuits and bumps" recommended but I did not call for a complete "break in" procedure as this was supposed to have been done already. When I collected it from MRC I did not have the opportunity to discuss the test flights which I was advised went extremely well.

Bad weather, Xmas etc saw the wing built on Dec 27th. Great day for flying. 1st job - drive up the hill for cell signal and phone MRC. MRC assured me that the test flights were perfect and that I should enjoy the flying.

Still cautious > as whilst I have not had an engine out my brother-in-law has had 5! Joys of a BMW! I then drained the tank and refilled after filtering the fuel using an expensive water removing filter imported from the USA and yes added oil at 50:1 Then I changed the jets to coastal 165 Jets. Did a preflight and taxied to the beach. Those of you that have stayed at Ozone on the Wild Coast Gaggle fly-away will know the area. I then taxied to the far river about 1.5km away and warmed the trike up with intermittant higher reving - no max - keeping it below 80degrees. I then ran the motor against the sand dune for short bursts allowing cooling time for about 20minutes. In all I suspect that the engine must have been running for about an hour plus when I took off. The temperature at take off was 77degrees. With pretty much a beach all the way to Dwesa Point I climbed and cruised along the coast. When the engine ceased the temperature was 84 degrees. I tried to restart twice to no avail and then well you fly the plane.

Yes you guessed - the only patch with rocks was where my glide had to end but thankfully there was a stretch of beach. Steep approach, not enough height for an orbit, saw a fast approach and well the front wheel dug in on soft sand and well it ended being expensive and I spent quality family time with my foot up. If you're a Doc - RICE - Rest Ice Compact and Elevate!

This time I'm doing the run in. It takes about 2minutes for the temp to go from about 60 to 80. I then taxi the full length of Petit and back at idle then the next 2 minutes - using the Rotax guide - starting at 5min at 3500 then 5 min at etc etc etc for an hour. Two week-ends later I'm still at it.

Many say go fly. BUT this chicken will "do the time" on the ground. The trike was rebuilt by MRB who replaced the front short block, piston and rings. The cease marks are on two opposite sides of the piston with the sleeve marks directly in line with the torgue down bolt holes.

Niren at AE said he cannot diagnose the cause and this is the verdict of a number of people. One expert, MRD, says that as the sleeve marks are opposite the torgue down bolts that the head was not torgued down properly. This is disputed but those that I have discussed this opinion with.

In December two other trikes ceased in the 1st hour of flight after an overhaul and Dave Jackson in Ballito has undertaken to investigate for lessons to be shared. I'm sending him the short block (now replaced) and the piston tomorrow. I'll keep you posted.

What do I think? I believe that opening an engine that is running fine is taking it into a risky situation that should not be under estimated. Three in December alone! How many more? I've taken the evidence to Andre Swanepoel at the CAA for the evidence is that opening engines should not be done unnecessarily. See the remarks of experts on my Editor unplugged report on the MISASA website. Also how can they recommend this if accredited service agents are in short supply? I think that this matter is relevant to not tinkering with engines at 300 hrs and I intend to get to the bottom of this to prove this point. So many experienced people with 20 plus years of experience simply cannot be wrong. The CAA however wants stats not opinions - anyway if it works so be it.
Remember that the 150 hour maintenance matter (which this is) also begs expert opinion and decision.
Apologies for the long story.

[Boer]

Don't scratch where it doesn't itch.
This is why we must submit our engine hours on the MISASA survey so that this info is available for discussions with the CAA.
Come on guys lets stand together and get this done - it takes less than 5
minutes.

[FlyBoy05]

i totally agree on this matter

moenie krap waar dit nie juk nie,anders gaan daar net probleme wees!!

dis tyd dat c.a.a dit besef.
volgnes my han beide engines 503 en 582 maklik gaan tot en met n 1000 hour en dalk nog meer.

die bewyse is daar
503----1200hour ja kyk mooi training
582----800 hour surprise training

ek krap nie en sal ook nie krap nie al se c.a.a wat

[Abe]

Hello Boer!
Regso, en soos ek onder algemeen gesê het:

Hi Gadget and other fliers in predicament.
I am in the fortunate position of flying a microlight with an engine that has no limit on hours to rebuild or replacement, but I feel your pain!
Now, the other evening, sitting on my stoep watching the sunset, I thought I had a thought of note. Now, as those that know me, know that this seldom happens to me, I thought I should share this thought....
Preamble:
If, as it professes (enough s's there?) the high and mighty CAA has flight safety at heart, how can it condemn a specific Rotax engine as soon as it has proven to be reliable? I hear it says on the box, not for aviation, and in the manual: liable to stoppage at any moment, so how can CAA improve on reliability by insisting on a rebuild just as a specific engine has been nicely run in? I cannot recall any fatality directly attributed to the Rattex stopping, but many lives could lately have been saved by rocket deployed parachute systems.
Now my thought:
Short of insisting on mandatory fitting of parachute systems like in Germany,
SACAA should give owners of aircraft fitted with whole aircraft rescue parachute systems the leeway to maintain their own aircraft and to exceed manufacturers recommended item replacement times based on condition, still subject to MPI by a CAA approved person.
I think aviation safety will be improved.
FlySafe!
Abe.
Yes, I import the GRS from www.galaxysky.cz as a service to fellow pilots, at cost plus expenses.