Training in your own aircraft
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: LA
Age: 53
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope the process will not be overly complecated as I will be training for my Private pilots license early next year in my own aircraft a Texan top class. The aircraft will be brand new. I am told I need to fly it for 25 hours before i can use it to be trained in. If anyone has any tips that I shall require to make this happen i would appreciate that you be forthcoming with your idea. Im looking forward to the instrument part as i have never done that before.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Goolwa
Age: 59
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Silver Spur, have replied.
Thanks for all the input everybody, it appears it is the "Engine on Condition" that is the sticking point. I am trying to get hold of someone in CASA who might be able to give me a straight answer (in writing!), but I won't hold my breath.
Thanks for all the input everybody, it appears it is the "Engine on Condition" that is the sticking point. I am trying to get hold of someone in CASA who might be able to give me a straight answer (in writing!), but I won't hold my breath.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AD Eng $/& is quite clear, operating a private aircraft on condition is relatively straight forward, main consideration is good record keeping, oil consumption, temp and pressure trends.
There is a very good article on TBO in the latest EAA magazine that debunks all the commonly held shibboleths.
Proerly Cared for most IO 360 in C172 will go well over TBO very reliably.
The ancillaries, oil lines and magneto drives are more of a worry than the core of the engine.
There is a very good article on TBO in the latest EAA magazine that debunks all the commonly held shibboleths.
Proerly Cared for most IO 360 in C172 will go well over TBO very reliably.
The ancillaries, oil lines and magneto drives are more of a worry than the core of the engine.
---- it appears it is the "Engine on Condition" that is the sticking point.
Remember ---- it is RECOMMENDED TBO, by the manufacturers, as far as FAA (or whoever) is concerned, it is just that, a recommendation, it has no regulatory force.
Indeed, the Australian practice of enforcing the R-TBO for commercial ops., and canning the many life extension extension programs that existed for many years ---- long before AD ENG 4 ---- is a direct result of the CASA lack of depth of knowledge re. piston engines, consequent on the retirement of the last bloke they had, who had real in-depth knowledge.
There were plenty of Chieftain engines running close to 3000 hours, there are plenty of C-152s in flying schools with upwards of 4000h on the engine.
Find another school.
If they are "head in the sand" (or somewhere else quite dark) about this, they are probably as ignorant about a whole range of things you need to learn.
Tootle pip!!