Hi all, I am in bad situation now. I have Continental IO360D in C172, with lost logs, tbo is on it’s limit, nearly 1500hrs.CAA requires FORM 1 of engine to issue ARC, so now my possibilities are overhaul (nearly 40 000 EUR – too expensive, don’t have a lot of money) or find any serviceable mid-time engine with log book and FORM 1 (it can be FORM 1 from last overhaul).
What companies here in EU are doing overhauls of Continental engines? I know about Norvic (very expensive), PMM WINGS (not responded yet), AEROENGINES (not responded yet), and that’s all I think.
So best for me will be any used mid-time engine, can be out of calendar date (as soon as I have plane in private use). Is here anyone, who has engine like that?
Or any engine out of date and needs to perform overhaul, just because of date? If it will be possible, I would change for mine engine (core for overhaul) and pay some reasonable money, for any serviceable engine for private use (out of date means unserviceable for commercial use).
Jelen wrote:
Hi all, I am in bad situation now. I have Continental IO360D in C172, with lost logs, tbo is on it’s limit, nearly 1500hrs.CAA requires FORM 1 of engine to issue ARC, so now my possibilities are overhaul (nearly 40 000 EUR – too expensive, don’t have a lot of money) or find any serviceable mid-time engine with log book and FORM 1 (it can be FORM 1 from last overhaul).
What companies here in EU are doing overhauls of Continental engines? I know about Norvic (very expensive), PMM WINGS (not responded yet), AEROENGINES (not responded yet), and that’s all I think.So best for me will be any used mid-time engine, can be out of calendar date (as soon as I have plane in private use). Is here anyone, who has engine like that?
Or any engine out of date and needs to perform overhaul, just because of date? If it will be possible, I would change for mine engine (core for overhaul) and pay some reasonable money, for any serviceable engine for private use (out of date means unserviceable for commercial use).
Can’t the logs be reconstructed from records at maintenance facilities or other separate documentation? My club lost all documentation of a PA28 in a hangar fire and the Swedish CAA permitted the logs to be reconstructed using, among other things, earlier ARC records. (Or whatever it was called at the time – this was before EASA.)
Loma Air / Belgium
PMM should find a solution.
Which NAA (EASA term for „CAA“) are you with?
I am under czech CAA (trying to register it. Registration is complete, but ARC will be issued after engine overhaul / exchange.) One solution will be engine check here in shop, asked CAA for permit to some inspection, and now waiting. Anyway, exchange with someone who fly his airplane commercialy and need to perform overhaul just for date expiration will be win win for both sides. Airplane was previously flown under LBA Germany, I wrote them and they can’t help me, because they don’t store these documents.
Czech is EASA. Why do you need a Form 1? Why is TBO relevant (it isn’t)!
Are you using a SDAMP (Part-ML)?
Yes, we are also EASA. I don’t know why I need FORM 1, CAA said they want to see FORM 1 for engine and propeller (prop has). TBO is also not relevant, but I already has engine past TBO, without Form 1 and logs. So if I change for another engine, it will be better for my peace of mind, if engine has any residual hours (it’s not necessary to be mid-time). And yes, I have maintenance program under Part-ML. I am also licensed B1/B2 mechanic-avionic, and I am doing all maintenance myself. But CAA was here twice to check airplane personally, and only thing, what divides me from ARC is engine FORM1. So change with someone will be less pain.For everyone.
Jelen wrote:
CAA said they want to see FORM 1
What is the history of the engine. A Form 1 should be provided when it was produced, overhauled or tear down inspected or similar work like shock load. When it was delivered with the airplane and no overhaul or major work was done ever since that Form 1 probably does not exist or stayed at the aircraft manufacturer. When an overhaul or other major work was performed there should be a Form 1 (why they need that is another question). Was the plane on German register during that time? If so the chances are very high it was done at Röder Präzision, Dachsel or Ghönert (less likely as they are the smallest of the 3) and they might have records on their work.
Why not maybe stay on the German register if switching registers might mean you need an engine exchange?
Also exchanging ad engine might not be that easy. Regulations change all the time but when I did investigate installing a used engine it was not that easy. Back then it would require a new Form 1 and you are back to where you did start…
There used to be a route whereby you could get an engine done by a US shop, with an 8130-3 as usual, and if you got an FAA DAR to generate an Export CofA for it (roughly $300 in the US, 2008) it was acceptable to European CAAs.
I personally know someone who did that. This search for example digs out old threads.
Then I heard the US stopped issuing the Export CofAs for components (engines and props basically) and the European CAAs may have had to accept these parts without it, or using some other route. One acceptance route which definitely exists is to get an EASA 145 company to inspect the part and issue an EASA-1 form, but
)I think @ultranomad may know more.
@Sebastian_G it was on german registration, then on polish, and now on czech. Engine has no major work since manufacture, so no possible to get FORM 1, I also tried to write to LBA, they answered politely, but no luck. Polish owner gave all paperwork with airplane, but also no luck there. Installing used engine is not big deal, as CAA said to me, FORM1 can be older, but last. Anyway plane is registered here, so I can not stay with previous NAA.
@Peter I was thinking also about engine from U.S., or send mine to U.S. for overhaul, but it would be expensive too, plus toll, duty, and other expenses, like shipping.
I don’t think @ultranomad may know more (I know him personally, we are based on same airport, and above that, we are related to same engine overhauling company (but this company is unfortunately not very familiar with TCM engines). The engine inspection will involve opening it up, minimum is cylinders removal, and these engines are not very happy with that work (asl long as cross bolts will hold main crankshaft bearings, and any discrepancy with torque, and installing it back, will resault to damage those bearings and will cause engine failure. And above that, I am afraid, that if engie was disassembled, warranty will be lost.
Something doesn’t check out. Why are you even involved with the CAA for the ARC?
On the basis of what AMP is the annual and arc performed?
If you bought a used plane, EASA registered, you shouldn’t need a Form 1 for an ARC. You can operate the engine on condition, unless there is an AD requiring any special inspections.
