My Bonanza A36 has been affected by this problem. I purchased a low hours plane (500 hours) and put it on the N reg but last year decided after al the N reg fuss to move it back to the G reg to try to tow the european line and had a top end overhaul done at the same time at a cost of many thousands of pounds. During the transfer process the CAA dropped the bombshell that I now need a new engine as it was 12 years old which I was not best pleased about but then agreed to a 20% extension so I have about another 18 months and then I can

a. use it entirely privately (which wont work as I rent it to myself and a couple of others)

b. Buy a new engine despite my current one probably only being on 800 hours and just been part overhauled

or

c. Go back to the N reg. I will probably choose this option as I wont be able to afford anything else.

I am staggered at the outrageous rule mongering that makes peoples life hard for no justifiable reason. I do not believe that the U.S. does not care about safety and they have a much larger G.A Fleet than Europe to make these judgements on. W**kers make these rules up!

Could someone please clarify any item about 'engine replacement' for me? Is a major overhaul of the engine considered sufficient, or does one literally need to install a brand-spanking new engine after the required period?

No I think it means an overhaul but in many cases the price isnt much different as far as I can work out.

That's a relief! Either way the cost is high (overhaul against full replacement) but the former could save a few grand. I have been trying to look for official documentation regarding this on both the EASA and CAA website but can't find anything. More than likely I am looking in the wrong place or am missing the text after drowing in what can only be described as poor, officious language!

Morgo

Document you're looking for is CAP747. It's huge but accessible via the CAA search facility.

Many thanks for that! You are quite right, a rather huge document. I see that all the pertinent information is at the end of the file and happily confirms that engine life is all with regards to the period between overhaul.

TBO extensions
 

Hi folks. In the past six weeks or so, I have tried to get full clarification from the CAA over this issue.

OK,OK. You can stop rolling around the floor now.

As you can all see from what has been posted above, there is more clarity here than within the corridors of the Belgrano.

My own surveyor, a very senior surveyor and GA experienced man, has done his best to assist me in this muddy issue.

Two things have rocked the boat at the CAA. The first was an aircraft that had an engine still installed after 46 years. Now, you and I would consider that a testament to the designer for getting it pretty right, the owners/operators for looking after it properly, and the engineers for maintaining it correctly. The CAA have looked at it rather differently.

The second issue is AD's. There is a rumour that an overhauler has whined to the CAA about AD's that are due at overhaul. We concentious engineers have been certifying engines on TBO extension, aware that when the engine finally gets overhauled that the relevant AD's due at overhaul will be done at that time.

Crunch time. The CAA legal beagles have advised the CAA that, in order to ensure that the CAA is not found wanting (i.e. exposed in a 'sue- everybody' world) that the manufacturers recommendation of TBO is to be used to decide when an AD due at overhaul is to be complied with.

What this means is that EVERYBODY with an engine running on TBO extension in accordance with GR 24 that is subject to AD's due at overhaul, will be GROUNDED until the AD's are complied with, once the CAA publish the ruling. It will not matter if your engine is on calendar or hours extension.

By my loosest reckoning, this will affect around 2000 aircraft. Picture the scene - 1500+ owners queing at the overhaulers and deciding if it is worth one visit for the AD compliance followed a relatively short time later for an overhaul.

In this age of supply and demand, I suspect that overhauler rates will rise to welcome this desperate influx of work.

If it is true that an overhauler has indeed rocked the boat over this issue, then the cinic in me believes that this is not a safety issue, but purely greed. You decide.

So what happens when all 2000 aircraft suddenly turn up for the ADs to be complied with - are we all grounded while we wait for our toys to reach the head of the queue

Nice planning CAA

Or should we run this past EASA and ask them for a judgement?

Any ideas AOPA/PFA?

So that's 1/5th of the entire fleet of G registered aeroplanes. Are they have a laugh?

What planet are they living on?

Probably the same planet, indeed the same country, where school trips are being cancelled just because the accident liability is too high.

{edit}I can see both sides of the arguement. I do feel that, as a society, we are less able to judge risk as previous generations. However, looked at from CAA point of view, engine failure is a problem that can be addressed and, from a precautionary point of view, if 20% of the aircraft will be affected then maybe there's something wrong with the way GA is run in Britain.

The arguements on both sides will run and run.

What is the safety data supporting this?

We all know most GA planes are old wrecks, but they have been for as long as most people can remember and I am not aware of planes plummetting down everywhere with failed engines.

IO you are tempting fate now. Engine will expire for sure this weekend! :)

Camlobe

If you have any engines on extension that have AD’s applicable at overhaul, you had better inform the owners that they are possibly flying without a valid CofA !!!!!

See GR24 para 3.1.1 for items that must be complied with, in particular (b)

“Compliance being shown with any applicable Airworthiness Directive which
requires compliance at engine overhaul, unless otherwise agreed by CAA.”

I have never been able to get CAA agreement to extend any of the applicable AD’s.

ACX

ACX, your point is completely valid.

However, at this moment, the CAA have not published a ruling stipulating compliance with AD's due at overhaul to be complied with at manufacturers stated figures.

The CAA have been accepting that, as the engine is not being overhauled yet, then these AD's are not due yet. When the engines are overhauled, then all applicable AD's must be complied with. It is the CAA's interpretation of this which is about to change, following advice from their legal department.

Those customers of mine presently enjoying TBO extensions have been personally briefed by myself giving them as much forewarning as possible of the potential ruling and its implications. This includes the potential invalidation of C of A's until compliance with aforesaid AD's.

It has also been my experience that the CAA do not extend AD's.