Good day All,

So I am in the Market for a 170. Why? Just because I like 170's.

I looked at an airplane yesterday here in "Canada". It was reasonably priced and in maybe a little better than average shape. The owner had engine issues a few years back so he purchased a used engine from an aircraft that sustained tail damage from a hangar collapse. The engine is an O-300. It is the correct engine as per the TCDS so no issues there. The engine work was done quite a while ago... 1996. My question is that in the engine log there is a sticker that says this about the engine work.....

"This engine overhauled in accordance with Continental overhaul manual P/N X30013. All cylinders overhauled by corona cylinder shop FAA RS# C5RY156N. Ref W/O 7044. Engine assembled using all new bearing, rod bolts, rod nuts, oil pressure spring, relief valve, crankcase attach bolts and gaskets. Carburetor overhauled by Airmotive Carburetor company FAA RS#FK35R504L. Ref w/o 1213. Starter overhauled by a Mag Time FAA RS #MT6R249L. REF w/o 1029. Both magnetos replaced with overhauled Electrosystems P/N 10-51365-39. REF 8130-3 forms."

Some Guy
A&P XXXXXXXXXX

My question.... does this constitute a "Major Overhaul" in the U.S. with just this data entry in the logs?

Anyone know if this legally constitutes a "major" in Canada now that the engine is in Canada?

Looking for some insight!

Macdon221

Yes, but bear in mind that "Major Overhaul" can mean a lot of things. Since he referenced the overhaul manual, it may be reasonable to assume he overhauled it in compliance with factory recommendations. Or not....there is such a thing as a "paper overhaul". Find out something about the overhauler.....his reputation will tell you a lot more than the paper.

MTV

Here is the FAA definition.

Pretty standard. Basically IRAN

FAR 43.2 - Records of Overhaul and Rebuilding

(a) No person may describe in any required maintenance entry or form an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part as being overhauled unless—

(1) Using methods, techniques, and practices acceptable to the Administrator, it has been disassembled, cleaned, inspected, repaired as necessary, and reassembled; and

(2) It has been tested in accordance with approved standards and technical data, or in accordance with current standards and technical data accepteble to the Administrator, which have been developed and documented by the holder of the type certificate, supplemental type certificate, or a material, part, process, or applicance approval under §21.305 of this chapter.

mtv wrote:.there is such a thing as a "paper overhaul". Find out something about the overhauled....his reputation will tell you a lot more than the paper.

MTV

Absolutely right!

There are paperwork wizards. Great writeups that the FAA loves. All of the t's crossed and I's dotted but who knows whats happening inside??

Then there are some old guys that are great engine builders but their write up skills are not too great.

When I bought my Canuck it was operating on a special approval for a above TBO engine. In the US it was looked at as 100 since bottom overhaul, new crank, bearings, case overhaul, etc.
The engine had 150 hrs since new Continental cylinders. Because it wasn't all done at once it wasn't considered a overhaul. To bring it up to overhauled condition was going to be $15,000.
I agree that whoever made the decision
To not overhaul completely when the lower was done wasn't thinking. Made it
good for me as the airplane was priced as a runout with a 150 hr. engine.
Big differences in how US and Canada look at "engine overhauls".
Dave

I have experienced the poor maintenance MTV is talking about. I worked for a pipeline patrol company that paid well but had very bad, budgeted maintenance that was hidden by excellent paperwork. I ran engines hot because it wasn't going to get fixed until major. I ran two weeks on one mag before I was due a new mag. I nearly burned an airplane because the mechanic wouldn't make an illegal weld and the boss wouldn't buy a new stack. I lost a windscreen and my right eye because the boss wouldn't allow a legal safety wire stitching. All while I was ordered to install new plastic interior in the freshly painted 172.

I had an engine in a Cessna that said (overhauled at this time) month, day, year, all AD's compiled with at time of overhaul!
Ain't legal anymore and had to remove the engine!! 300 hours on the overhaul!
Not much recourse!!

macdon221 wrote:..... My question is that in the engine log there is a sticker that says this about the engine work.....
"This engine overhauled in accordance with Continental overhaul manual P/N X30013. All cylinders overhauled by corona cylinder shop FAA RS# C5RY156N. Ref W/O 7044. Engine assembled using all new bearing, rod bolts, rod nuts, oil pressure spring, relief valve, crankcase attach bolts and gaskets. Carburetor overhauled by Airmotive Carburetor company FAA RS#FK35R504L. Ref w/o 1213. Starter overhauled by a Mag Time FAA RS #MT6R249L. REF w/o 1029. Both magnetos replaced with overhauled Electrosystems P/N 10-51365-39. REF 8130-3 forms." ....

"overhauled in accordance with Cont OH manual..." sounds like an overhaul to me.
Hopefully there are some yellow-tags (form 8130) for the crank etc having been magnafluxed and certified good.
That logbook entry is better than some I've seen, for example "engine overhauled this date" but with no description of what was done or what parts were replaced. My C145 overhaul came with a fresh logbook, with the first entry being written description of the work performed similar to yours, plus a separate list of engine parts with each item being notated whether new used or reconditioned, new limits or service limits, etc.

A good logbook doesn't mean a good engine (or vice versa) but it's sure nice to have.

Actually there was paperwork work orders and receipts for the carb, mags and starter. Also all 6 yellow cylinder tags were there. Did not notice anything about the crank.

Pretty normal, the 182 I just bought last year was wrote up very similar. I believe the difference in Canada vs US, is in Canada an A&P has to work under a licenced repair station to preform that kind of work. My A&P said he can do cylinder replacments and accessories, but can't get into the bottom end. I see field overhauls pretty common in the US, but not in Canada as per say. I could be wrong though.

Maybe A1Skinner will chime in and have a better answer.

Given a choice of good paperwork or good mechanical work, I'll take the good mechanical work any day. I think today's A&Ps and IAs do a better paperwork job than the old guys did, but that doesn't mean squat unless the work itself is done right. When I was working part time for the FBOs in Laramie 40 odd years ago, the old mechanic, "Mac" McDonald, did crappy paperwork. Unless you knew what had been done, it was hard to tell. Typical annuals read, "annual inspection per regs, all ADs OK." When we had a cylinder repaired on the Skylane, it read something like "#5 cylinder R&R, valve fixed." Sometimes he failed to log things at all--like the replacement of the 231's prop the year before I started flying it. Yet what he did was excellent workmanship.

Cary

Very good comments here, 180 mentioned something important, there are service limits and new limits, On the last engine overhaul I did I spent a lot of time going through piles of parts to find those that met "NEW limits" and assembled the entire engine to those standards.

Not really something a person would do with an engine you can just buy new parts for but the one I was building was an orphan and new parts supplies didn't exist.

You should have yellow tags for the crank, the cam, the cylinders and any other parts that were overhauled by a shop or someone other than the person who did the engine.

The sign off on the engine assembly sounded fine to me, just try to verify the quality of work done by the gentleman in question.

Mark Y. wrote:Pretty normal, the 182 I just bought last year was wrote up very similar. I believe the difference in Canada vs US, is in Canada an A&P has to work under a licenced repair station to preform that kind of work. My A&P said he can do cylinder replacments and accessories, but can't get into the bottom end. I see field overhauls pretty common in the US, but not in Canada as per say. I could be wrong though.

Maybe A1Skinner will chime in and have a better answer.

Sounds like an Ok overhaul to me. I just bought an 0-300 that has an almost identical entry.
As far as field overhauls go, an AME in Canada can do them. I can't do the NDT inspections, but I can do all the assembly. Any crank that has dynamic balancing, or any multi piece cranks is specialized maintanance though, so a regular AME can't touch them as far as assembly goes.
It really isn't cost effective for a guy who doesn't do it often to overhaul though. Unless it's on your own plane, a shop can just do it cheaper.

David

I think a "major" was signed off when the AMT stated that an overhaul was done IAW the Continental manual and that conclusion is supported by the reference provided to Part 43. That being said, I wouldn't have a "warm fuzzy" about the overhauled engine without some documentation stating that the case, crankshaft, and cams had passed a non-destructive inspection (magnaflux, eddy current, ultrasonic, as applicable). AME's can easily do dye penetrant inspections, but usually only FBO's or repair stations have the gear ($$) to do the other methods.

I'd also prefer a good mechanic to good documentation, but the flip side of that is that if you don't write something down it didn't happen.
That thought merits a thread all on its own.