Hello,
I recently had the two magnetos on my aircraft sent away for overhaul as part of its annual inspection. They were refitted and one failed about thirty minutes into my second flight ‘post annual’ (a little over two hours after overhaul) – just before I coasted out over the Irish Sea!
In passing I happened to mention this to a few friends and of that small number I spoke to, TWO have had magnetos fail not long after overhaul at the SAME SHOP (theirs failed within a few months – they both did better than my two hours!) within the last TWO years.
I’m not inclined to immediately ‘go nuclear’ and involve the FAA and the CAA (this shop has dual approvals) but if I can find any more people who have had mags fail prematurely after overhaul at this same place, then this is not an isolated incident, they clearly have a serious issue, people could end up hurt (or dead) and I think I have a moral obligation to at least suggest to the CAA / FAA that they take a close look at what’s going on with these people.
So, has anyone had a magneto fail prematurely after overhaul? If so, would you be prepared to ‘private message’ me the name of the facility where the overhaul took place?
Were they really ‘overhauled’ with Form One, meaning zero hours lifetime reset?
What was the total time the core served?
Just a while ago I had one magneto acting weird and found it was never zero’ed.
It had almost 8,000h on 500h inspection cycles – with the usual lifetime limit 1,800+200 …
Found out shop never checked life time limits on magneto cores – did improve QA now …
Never thought on checking myself though, will do now.
Good question? They were returned with a ‘Form 8130’ which documented the 500 hour inspection.
You have a right to be angry. I would first question the shop and ask them why they think this is happening and what they are doing to avoid a recurrence.
Depending on response I would ask to see a copy of the MOR they must have filed with the authorities and take it from there.
If I have a chance, I will avoid overhauling two critical redundant components simultaneously: I would do one now and the other one on the next check. If unable, then I would do a few low-risk flights before risking overwater or mountains or deserts or…typically the highest risk of some mechanical component going wrong throughout its life is during its post-maintenance infancy. For magnetos, the risk goes up again after 600-700hrs post OH or post-500hr check: they do wear by design.
Julian wrote:
Good question? They were returned with a ‘Form 8130’ which documented the 500 hour inspection.
What does Section 11 of the FAA 8130-1 = EASA Form One say?
If it is not NEW or OVERHAULED, go back through the records when one of the two was last issued. If you ordered an inspection, the shop only does an inspection, probably without checking records, as they assume (and also most probably have the right to be free to) you did, and in the end – you overlooked a parts life time limit. Part ML maintenance, with or without CAMO, so who is responsible for life time limits?
I would be careful to blame a shop before checking whether it’s my fault. If your maintenance schedule allows it, you may be totally legal to go ‘on condition’ for certain parts. What does your maintenance program/schedule state to magnetos life time limits? If nothing, limits apply. Keep in mind, any shop could argue it’s on your risk when declaring ‘on condition’.
If the shop issued an ‘OVERHAULED’ Form One, but only did an ‘INSPECTED and REPAIRED’, you have all rights to be angry and I’d get serious with the shop.
Yes, I had this once and the shop had to beg big sorry, while doing the correct overhaul according to procedures. In my case it was rather easy as it was visibly obvious they didn’t do what they wrote on paper (carb not OH’ed but only repaired). After this, my maintenance crew now does a documented visible inspection of all incoming parts whether they comply with the status on the issued Form One. Yes, they quite frequently find discrepancies and ask for the labor sheets and once in a while the shop in question asks to return the parts for rework at the moment you ask.
It’s an imperfect world.
The “form” means nothing.
This is just really bad workmanship / quality control.
But this is not unusual. Mag overhauls/IRAN is a simple enough task, yet there is so much bad work. All nicely protected by the European Form 1 system.
Peter wrote:
Mag overhauls/IRAN is a simple enough task
Overhaul and IRAN are not the same – two different procedures. IRAN is easy, indeed, and can in principle be done by everybody but does not count to zero hours used, for a good reason. Overhaul needs special equipment and quite some expertise – the prices North a thousand are justified, imho, but only if the work was really done. IRAN beyond life time limit is stupid and yes, I missed that myself.
Yes; an OH involves a replacement of specified parts, paint stripping, NDT, etc. Same as with an engine.
It will be interesting what the outcome of this one is.
The quailty or the replacement parts is pretty shocking to.
But as Peter says comes from an approved company with an approved piece of paperwork.
