Printable View
Fellow EAA'ers-
In reading around the web, I've seen some people say that they've rebuilt a certified engine (say, an O-200), instead of building a Corvair or VW conversion, or instead of paying a shop to do this (I assume). Can you do this and still have the blessing of the FAA?
Thanks.
In an experimental you are free to do what whatever you want (for the most part, there are some limitations).
If the rebuilt engine is for a certified airplane, the engine will need to be overhauled and signed off either by an A/P or a Part 141 shop. (I think it is A/P, but might be an IA)
Tim
If the use of a certificated engine is the basis for a shorter phase I test time, then the engine has to be maintained as a certificated engine (i.e. by an A&P). If it's not maintained as a certificated engine, then anybody can work on it. At least that's the way it used to work.
If you build a homebuilt, you can rebuild whatever engine you choose to install. Consider yourself blessed.Quote:
Originally Posted by brian_thomas
Any A&P can rebuild an engine. That is part of what the "P" means. And I will mention that Part 141 is flight schools not engine overhaul facilities.
So an individual can work with an A&P to tear down and rebuild an engine. You need to know the A&P really well and do it in his or her shop so that they can supervise and sign-off the work. If you can do this you should finish with a certificated engine that can go on any airplane.
I will note that the Lyco and Continental overhaul manuals assume that you already know what you are doing and know the "tricks" of the trade, plus have the special tools that make some of the more complicated assembly operations go smoothly. So if you want a reliable engine, you really want to work with an A&P who builds engines. There really is no other support system for a homebuilder who wants to rebuild an engine locally. An alternative is to go to something like the Superior Air Parts Build School. But otherwise it is really really tough to build up a good engine by just reading the book. And you will be the first guy to the scene of the accident...
Even if you just tear an engine down and your friendly neighborhood A&P does the assembly while you hand him or her tools, you learn a huge amount about the internals of your engine. And when you fly, you should have lots of confidence in it. Definitely a worthwhile process to do.
Best of luck,
Wes
N78041
This is why once you install a certified engine on something not certified it can not go back on a certified airplane, not without a complete tear down and inspection.
Tony
Only true if you fail to maintain the engine, and keep the paperwork up to date, to certificated engine standards. If I install a certificated engine on my homebuilt, keep up with AD's, log the maintenance and annual inspections, then it remains a certificated engine. Stop doing those items and you have a problem. But then why ignore AD's and inspections, which are for the safety of the owner and pilot? It is much more expensive to recover from a crash than to skip AD's and inspections.
I take care of my engine. It takes me places I want it to bring me back from. Hiking or swimming is not attractive.
So to get back to the original poster's question, most A&P's are completely capable of rebuilding a small engine like an O-200. And many will work with you to make a rebuild a learning experience and maybe lower the out of pocket $$.
Best of luck,
Wes
N78PS
Wes,
Correct. I was thinking 145. Certified Repair Station.
Tim
Used to be a AP could not split the case only an AI, that no longer true?
Clarification, WLIU, when you write "keep the paperwork up to date to certified standards."
Let's say I have a certified engine and perform my own conditional inspections that may involve an A&P's help (checking compression, say, or even substantial work) but not his signature - doesn't it fail certified standards?
The same with AD's. As the repairman of my plane I see an AD is issued on the magneto and perform the work myself, and sign off in the logbook that I did it. Does the FAA recognize it as in compliance, even though I'm not an A&P? Heck, forget the FAA, would an A&P recognize it as being done, or would he go back, double check, and then sign his own name saying the AD was satisfied?
In the Experimental world it's a "who cares," but in the thought exercise that someone was going to take my engine and put it on a certified engine it might be a whole different matter.
Incorrect. As long as any maintenance is in compliance with FAA requirements for that engine, and all engine maintenance is logged in the engine logbook & signed off by an A&P it is still considered to be a legal, certified engine.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1600vw
What he said. An FAA certificated and rated individual must sign all of the paperwork for the engine to retain its certificated status. You as an amateur builder can not sign the engine off if you want it to remain certificated. That said, you can sign the condition inspection for the airframe as you know.
Engines are quick and easy to annual. They really are. So why cheap out and buy yourself future trouble?
As for who can sign off the overhaul, I have to confess that all of the mechanics that I work with are A&P's with IA's. So it might require an IA. But there are lots of those guys are around and most are good to have a beer with too. I like having another set of eyes look at my work and another brain to bounce ideas off of and solicit advice from. They teach me stuff and I teach them stuff. Its good to have friends.
Best of luck,
Wes
N78PS
Plus, if the engine is kept "legal" it can be sold for quite a bit of $$ separately from the airframe if you ever want to.
Basically, An A/P can do a major overhaul of a piston engine as long as it does not have an integral supercharger. Then you would need an I/A to return the engine to service. Wes, I would love for you to buy me a beer some time. I would enjoy the conversation.
Dave
AP/IA
NC2329
I won't debate the wisdom of having an A&P look at the engine annually or at longevity points along the way - that's self evident.
The issue comes up most often at TBO's versus "as needed."
Or the dreaded "I don't work on experimentals" attitude. There are A&P's that are willing to look at a certified engine on an experimental but refuse to put their signature anywhere near them.
I'm lucky - our local A&P digs aircraft of all sorts!
[edit]
Personally, I'd rebuild my aircraft engine in the same way I'd rebuild my car's engine - with a checkbook. I have no qualms about rebuilding a carburetor, though, since I'm putting a VW engine on my plane!
Never was true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Chips
I think you are mistaken but it's no matter.
Never is a long time, how far back you going?
I rebuilt a VO360A1B in 1979, did all the work under his supervision and he signed it off, at that time I am all most certain I was told by the AI that a AP cannot split the case, but again, no matter at this point.
According to Part 43, Appendix A, the following tasks are considered "major repairs" and therefore can not be returned to service by an A&P:Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Chips
(i) Separation or disassembly of a crankcase or crankshaft of a reciprocating engine equipped with an integral supercharger.
(ii) Separation or disassembly of a crankcase or crankshaft of a reciprocating engine equipped with other than spur-type propeller reduction gearing
Integral superchargers and planetary reductions are radial engine components not applicable to the common opposed engines. There is nothing to prohibit an A&P from splitting the case on a direct drive opposed engine, never has been.
The above excerpt of Part 43, Appendix D was first published in 1964 and was in effect in 1979, as it is today.
Well maybe.. they must have done it prior, to be legal in doing it now.
65.83 Recent experience requirements.
A certificated mechanic may not exercise the privileges of his certificate and rating unless, within the preceding 24 months—
(a) The Administrator has found that he is able to do that work; or
(b) He has, for at least 6 months—
(1) Served as a mechanic under his certificate and rating;
(2) Technically supervised other mechanics;
(3) Supervised, in an executive capacity, the maintenance or alteration of aircraft; or
(4) Been engaged in any combination of paragraph (b) (1), (2), or (3) of this section.
When any certified engine has been removed from an EXP aircraft and placed in service on a certified aircraft, it must have an airworthy inspection by any A&P and the appropriate entries made in the aircraft maintenance records. All modifications must be properly documented on a STC or field approval. It matters not, who preformed maintenance prior to this inspection, the person returning it to service buys off all prior sins. they are responsible for the airworthy condition of the engine.
That clears up any question of that error.Quote:
Originally Posted by martymayes
All I.A.'s are A&P's with Inspection Authorization.. An I.A. does inspections and can return an aviation product to service after a major repair or alteration and that's what he is allowed to do. A&P's do maintenance & repairs. An A&P can return an engine to service without an I.A.'s signature in most cases.