Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

SB569 - when did the 12 year crank life limit start?

There is some very interesting stuff around on this.

I got the following opinion from one source:

A review of the most recent AD (2012-19-1) directly from the FAA's website: the AD adds a third time of compliance which reads, "no later than 12 years from the date the crankshaft was put in service or was last overhauled."

So, to be compliant with the AD, it appears that the crankshaft has to be replaced by the 12 year anniversary of the date it was put in service, which is the manufacture date in the logbook.

If this is true, many planes (whose owners have left it till the last minute, or hoped to sell the plane without the buyer spotting the SB569 issue and yes this happens and I have seen several examples) are now flying without a CofA.

An alternative interpretation is that the 12 years starts from the issue of the original aircraft CofA, which will obviously be later, and in the case of Socatas could be a year or more later.

When I did SB569 I used the Lyco $2000 crank offer (which allowed the work to be done by an independent engine shop) but this ended in Feb 2009. After that, due to the very high price of the crank, the only cost effective way forward has become a new or reman exchange engine from Lyco.

One European engine distributor claims the 12 years is ending on Feb 2009, which I am pretty sure is wrong; he is just getting it mixed up with the ending of the $2k crank offer.

The bottom line is that if the plane for sale is discounted by the right amount, the deal is a good one because the buyer will end up with a known quantity at the front of the plane.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Your alternator belt and spark plug that have been sitting on your shop's shelf for 5 years are "put in service" when they get installed in your aircraft and a logbook entry is made.

Why should it be different for crankshafts?

I don't know but since an engine is a self contained component, with its own standalone certification, what might matter is when the engine was assembled, not when the engine was installed.

I certainly don't see a case for the 12 years starting with when the aircraft got its CofA.

This says

The AD requires that the crankshaft be replaced at the earliest of the following: the time of the next engine overhaul as specified by Lycoming, the next separation of the crankcase, or no later than 12 years from the time the crankshaft first entered service or was last overhauled.

What does "entered service" mean? Surely it means the first engine run.

I've tried phoning Lyco but every person I get put through to is just an answering machine - 001 570-323-6181

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

The bottom line is that if the plane for sale is discounted by the right amount, the deal is a good one because the buyer will end up with a known quantity at the front of the plane.

Friends of mine bought their 550 powered aerobatic aircraft from an insurance company with an almost calendar timed out crank, discounted appropriately. Then they bought the crank kit from the previous owner of the aircraft for $2K... Long after Lycoming had stopped selling them at that price. I think he got paid out reasonably by the insurance co and must've been feeling generous!

I think after a couple of years of trials and tribulations with the aircraft, they'll end up doing OK with it.

I have just spoken to Lycoming USA.

The relevant date is the date of installation of the engine in the airframe.

This will normally be the first entry in the engine logbook.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

The relevant date is the date of installation of the engine in the airframe.

When I had to comply with SB569 (a year ago) I got the answer: "the first engine run". In my case first engine run was October 1999, while installation of the engine in the airframe was February 2000. Because it was not much time difference between these two dates, I didn't want to fight CCAA (our Agency) and performed engine replacement in November 2011.

LDZA LDVA, Croatia

The relevant date is the date of installation of the engine in the airframe.

Sure, how else could they push loads of engines to companies like Socata and collect the money right away while the engines are piling up in the customer's warehouse?

When I had to comply with SB569 (a year ago) I got the answer: "the first engine run".

Where did that come from?

Sure, how else could they push loads of engines to companies like Socata and collect the money right away while the engines are piling up in the customer's warehouse?

Not sure how far your tongue was stuck in your cheek

I have no idea of what sort of credit terms Socata got from Lycoming, but Socata did have a very pressing reason to make the first engine logbook entry (the installation date) within 1 year of the date on which Lyco shipped the engine, otherwise it would have had to go all the way back to Lyco for an overhaul (lots of €€€€€ wasted). Curiously, with a number of engines, including mine, the two dates were just a few days short of 1 year

But I don't see how this 1 year gap is relevant to SB569, because the 12 years starts with the engine installation date (according to Lyco).

It is obviously farcical, IF you are going to stick a 12 year life limit on the crankshaft, to not count the time the engine sat on the shelf at Socata, but lots of things in aviation are based on bizzare principles...

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

When I had to comply with SB569 (a year ago) I got the answer: "the first engine run".

Where did that come from?

From Lycoming - I can't find this e-mail but it was also confirmed at TB forum and required by Croatian Agency. I didn't want to argue because of 3 months difference.

LDZA LDVA, Croatia

A minute ago I read at TB forum that was the date when aircraft had received factory CofA e.g. first entry to logbook.

LDZA LDVA, Croatia
12 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top