Continental (USA) extends engine TBO times for some...

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

From Today's AvWeb....

" CONTINENTAL EXTENDS TBOs, CERTIFIES DIESEL
For years, we've heard that the technology exists to extend engine TBOs beyond the normal 2000-hour recommendation and now Continental has done just that. It recently announced that it will extend the TBOs on many of its popular engines by 200 hours and, for frequently flown engines, by 400 hours. According to the company's Bill Ross, who we interviewed at Sun 'n Fun, this might not immediately mean much to Part 91 operators who aren't required to adhere to published TBOs, but for for-hire operators who are, the cost savings amount to as much as a 20 percent of the overhaul price, a substantial savings. More...

I wonder if......???
:hmm:

[43Inches]

the cost savings amount to as much as a 20 percent of the overhaul price, a substantial savings.

CASA used to allow even commercial operators to go past TBO under specific circumstance up to around 200 hrs. I reckon for every 1% you went past the recommended TBO seemed to add 2% to the typical overhaul price. Various components that normally could be overhauled and reused went beyond limits and had to be replaced at greater cost. In short it was a false economy and depends greatly if its a fixed price overhaul or not and if continental are actually introducing technology that truly extends the component life.

[Old Akro]

This Avweb article has a link to the Continental Service Document.

Continental Extends TBOs, Certifies Diesel (http://www.avweb.com/avwebbiz/news/Continental_Extends_TBOs_208528-1.html)

Why not read it before entering the debate. The TBO extension is model specific and has serial number restrictions and minimum monthly use requirements. It looks to me like it will have no difference to nearly all private operators.

[owen meaney]

43inches,
Agree with the extra cost for OH on an extended engine.
Although they are quoting "new" technology engines only to be eligible.

Rumour around that private and aerial work "ON Condition" piston engines will be dropped soon. i.e AD/ENG/4 A11 part 1.

[185skywagon]

As I read it, engines such as io550d's will be eligible provided they meet the usage criteria, ie average 40 hours/month. This allows a 200 hour tbo increase.

I don't agree that going over tbo by certain amount, will increase overhaul costs. That hasn't been my experience with 520 and 550 conty's.
By that, I mean 200-300 hours over..
They suffer more issues from lack of use rather than high use.
Cheers.

[Jabawocky]

Clever marketing is about it.

[Clearedtoreenter]

Rumour around that private and aerial work "ON Condition" piston engines will be dropped soon. i.e AD/ENG/4 A11 part 1.


Does that mean the manufacturers 12 year calendar overhaul requirement for all in addition to TBO?

[185skywagon]

Jaba,
It will be useful for me, I hope.

[43Inches]

They suffer more issues from lack of use rather than high use.

This is true, our fleet was utilised 7 days a week, probably averaged around 3-4 hours a day, the private larger aircraft that sat around tended to have more issues. Only about a third of the aircraft had Continentals though and they were problematic turbocharged ones that really struggled to make TBO. The only engines I remember on the exceedence program was the Lycomings and when the airwork aircraft went on condition one of our 0-320s made it to 2500hours, it cost a fair bit more than the others to overhaul though. Not sure what the record for keeping them going is, that was a 4th or 5th life engine as well.

I havn't had the pleasure of dealing with many 520/550 engines other than using them, most of ours were lower powered.

Also looks like after reviewing the PDF there's no "new" technology, just the cumulative effects of introduced technology since 1960. Looks like most of the new TBOs just come up to match what Lycoming already has out there.

[Grogmonster]

I have been running my IO-520 engines to a 2000 TBO for the last 20 years. Each and every engine has been within manufacturers specs after retirement. This was proved, and documented, by the very reputable engine shop that I used for overhauls. Our engines fall into the, "more than 40 hours per month", category. Fortunately we recently purchased two engines direct from the factory due to the strong Aussie dollar so we wont have to rely on our engine programme to get the 2000 hour TBO and can now extend to 2100 hours under the OEM instructions. Happy Days I say.

Groggy

[Jabawocky]

Groggy, TCM, now CMI are improving their act, however the engines you have had I gather are from a highly skilled workshop, I know of three, and I suspect you may have used one of them.

I reckon there is a 50/50 chance for similar life. Years ago, not so much.


185,
Jaba,
It will be useful for me, I hope.

It will only be useful if you send them to CMI, you cant get the same deal from DP, and I reckon he would do a better job.:ok:

[QFF]

I was under the impression that engine TBOs were manufacturer recommendations rather than mandatory airworthiness limitations (i.e. an engine at 2000hrs turns into a pumpkin and falls out of the sky).

What about the insurance companies, you say? Well, I wonder how many life insurances have not been paid out because the bloke didn't follow the doc's recommendation to have a prostate exam or ECG or lose weight or exercise more and kicked the bucket soon after.

[tnuc]

I have read the endorsement placed on a LAMEs workshop policy recently regarding engines on condition, they would only cover the workshop liability up to 125% of engine life in hours or calendar time.

[Andy_RR]

I'd like to know where TCM/CMI are finding the resources to do the engineering behind this. I understood that a bunch of their corporate engineering know-how has pretty much evaporated over the last few years.

Maybe whatever new guys they have found who don't know what they don't know are behind this?

Or perhaps the esteemed Mr Brogdon is back consulting for a fat fee?

[Big Pistons Forever]

The flying club I do a bit of part time teaching at has Transport Canada authority to run their Lycoming O 320 D2J engines (2000 hr TBO) to 3500 hours.
The last 2 engines made it to 3500 hours with no problems and were exchanged for Lycoming factory overhauled units.

The club got full core value for both so the extra 1500 hours was free time:ok:

Frequent use with good operating SOP's and good maintenance will allow most engines to easily exceed the manufacturers TBO.

It is low use and bad operating practices that kill engines, not hours since overhaul.

[PA39]

IMO I think engines should be judged on their "condition" not hours or calendar date. I know a tin can with engines done by the factory in 1979 which have 500 to run still, on condition due to being OOD but doesn't leak a drop, no excess oil consumption and compressions mid 70's/80 and strong as oxes. LAME's check parameters and report accordingly.:ok:

[Wally Mk2]

.........hey 'PA39' is BB still running around TW with a 'twin-can'?
He used to have a great workshop there (still may have 4 all I know) 'cause I used to work there:E
I imagine engine life is such a variable thing like most mechanical things.
My old Ford (BA) which is now 10 yrs old 300000+k's on it & it's just had the 2nd set of brake pads done, it's up to you as to how you want yr machinery to last:-)


Wmk2

[Horatio Leafblower]

BB is still there, I believe the show is for sale.

You're an astute aviation type Wally, why not make an offer? :}

[rutan around]

All aircraft engines are run " on condition " If your brand new 2000 hour TBO fuel to noise converter throws a con rod out of bed after 50 hours do you keep going because it still has 1950 hours to run?
Another thought. Allowing manufacturers to set TBO times is like putting a drunk in charge of a brewery. The shorter the TBO the more engines they sell. Tried to obtain some support for this line of thinking from a mate. His only comment was
" It's only a scam if you're not in it " Unfortunately I'm not in it. I'm just one of the mugs at the end of the line.
Mike Busch owns a C310 with TIO 520s. Continental gives them a 1400 hr TBO. He now has in excess of 2800 hours on each of them with all key indicators showing them to be healthy. One of his customers has 3200 hrs on a 2000 hr 4 banger.
I'm told that the airlines and military have operated on condition for decades. I recall reading some time ago that a QANTAS 747 ran an engine for 17,000 hours. I'll bet that engine didn't have some arbitrary TBO.

[PA39]

Yes Wally BB is still there....just. Like some of us, he's been around the traps too long. All is for sale but BB wants his pound of flesh!! ;) and on condition is exactly thet ON CONDITION. If its rooted overhaul the thing.

[RatsoreA]

Nobody more than I want longer engine life, having to overhaul 2 L/TSIO 360 KB's, but I think they are aimed at the lowest common denominator. Like the smoker that says he smoked a pack a day and lived to be 98, there are 100 under 40 smokers dying in hospital! I have no doubts there are 3-4000 hour engines running around with no problems. But there are a bunch more that litter workshop floors with rods out the side with 100's of hours still to run before TBO. Obviously, smokers aren't engines, which brings me to my point... It's not the hours that does them in, it's how those hours are spent, and how well it's cared for.

[Jabawocky]

RatsoreA

Yep :ok:

To make the point I should quote the legendary Geogre Braly.

"Its not how hard you run your engine, its how you run your engine hard"

No matter what you do or say this is true, however you must have a "conforming engine" to begin with.

And one that was built with care.

EOM