Australian Government Lobs Shot At Engine Manufacturers

[Brian Abraham]

From Avweb

In a 269-page report released last month (28.5 MB PDF http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2007/pdf/B20070191.pdf), the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) took a thinly veiled stab at reciprocating engine manufacturers, alleging that industry-wide "poor communication, complacency, lack of knowledge, distraction, lack of teamwork, fatigue, lack of resources, pressure, lack of assertiveness, stress, lack of awareness, and accepted norms" contributed to 20 engine-failure-related aircraft accidents reported to the ATSB between January 2000 and December 2005. The report, titled "Aircraft Reciprocating-Engine Failure: An Analysis of Failure in a Complex Engineered System," states that 1,270 reciprocating multi-engine aircraft flew a total of about 220,000 hours during the study period. The events detailed in the report "are dominated by combustion chamber component melting, plain bearing breakup or movement, and the initiation and growth of fatigue cracking in components that are designed to have a life not limited by fatigue."

Engine reliability has declined, the report suggests, because manufacturers have failed to effectively gather and act upon information on the performance of engine sub-systems and components. "Recurrent propulsion system failures suggests that system adjustment or correction, through an effective feedback process, is not occurring," the report states.

[nomorecatering]

Have just read all 200+ pages and it makes very frightening reading. It seems that the US manufacturers f piston engine cannot designe a reliable powerplant, and cannot be relied on to produce components that meet their own specifications. Quality control is sadly lacking.
Lycomming and continental should be making pots and pans.

Bring on Thielert turbo Diesels.

[Andy_RR]

Actually, it surprises me that the OEMs allow their engines to be rebuilt. I noticed that all the examples were given as 'time since overhaul', not total time in service. You wouldn't get many automotive OEM's taking responsibility for reused components and engines overhauled by a third party.

I'd be interested to find out how many of the examples were factory new engines.

Also, it surprises me how little emphasis is given to adequate engine cooling, given that many of the failure modes discussed can be initiated (or at least accelerated) by inadequate cooling.

In my opinion (and experience) there are way too many variables in assembly, installation and operation of aero engines to draw much meaningful conclusion from the data presented (other than that there is way too much variability!)

A

[Chimbu chuckles]

But you don't see them mandating engine monitors (especially in older piston twins operated commercially) and the education package that goes with them:rolleyes:

There is not a thing wrong with overhauled piston aircraft engines. As long as they are done properly they can be better than new ones.

Properly means new cylinders from someone like Millenium and Gamijectors/engine monitor.

I strongly suggest the only reason things look like they are getting so much worse is that some people are doing cheapy overhauls reusing cylinders etc (valves) that should rightly be trashed.

Yes the OEM manufacturers have had quality control issues from time to time...that happens.

You think Thielert haven't?

You're dreaming.

Operated with the right gear and knowledge these engines can operate safely for double their TBO...the worry is this may be a shot across the bows from a Govt department who clearly, from this report, don't seem to understand all the issues.

I'd hate to see Schedule 5 die and draconian measures put in place in an ignorant over reaction to the % of aircraft operators who are their own, and our, worst enemies.