• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

FAA Proposes Emergency AD For Lycoming Rods

There's a list of serial numbers in Table 1. Do I understand that the AD applies to all of those serial numbers AND all of those overhauled after 11/15, or is Table 1 an exhaustive list, including all of the overhauls?

What I'm really asking is this: as I'm trying to buy a Supercub and talking to sellers, do I need to ask them for the serial number of the engine in addition to the time of the last overhaul?
 
Lycoming service bulletin 632A.
https://www.lycoming.com/sites/default/files/SB632A Connecting Rod Identification.pdf

I would want to know at the very least if the connecting rods and or the bushings were replaced during the time frame in question. It's possible that any engine outside of the serial numbers listed could be applicable. Consider if Joe local mechanic did the overhaul replacing the rods when he did so. The date is more telling than the serial number.
 
Last edited:
They are now up to revision B. https://www.lycoming.com/content/service-bulletin-no-632-b
The bad thing is after talking to Ken Tunnel at LyCon before Oshkosh they have been finding the bad bushings for 3 years and returning them to Lycoming. His people discovered how easy some of the bushing pushed in the rod. Too bad Lycoming techs were not that aware and no one at Lycoming investiigated why these bushing were be returned. If you are a shop that installed these defective bushing Lycoming is doing nothing for you. No warrantee for the labor to check or replace.
 
As I read it, either you are named by serial number, or you overhauled the engine on or after 11/15 or after you need to pull the jugs. I am amazed that Lycoming would leave field overhauled engines with no mercy whatsoever. It was their part, and they sold that part to the field with the implication that it was merchantable. I would sue and I hope a lot of people do sue. This was a gross failure of QC on their part. I know they will say, "Oh to inspect each and every part would raise the cost". Give me a break, if they had modern inspection methods, a modern optical comparator could have done a dimensional analysis of each part faster than a blink of the eye. And they wonder why people are leaving general aviation.
 
There's a list of serial numbers in Table 1. Do I understand that the AD applies to all of those serial numbers AND all of those overhauled after 11/15, or is Table 1 an exhaustive list, including all of the overhauls?

What I'm really asking is this: as I'm trying to buy a Supercub and talking to sellers, do I need to ask them for the serial number of the engine in addition to the time of the last overhaul?

Yes also ask when it was overhauled.
 
As I read it, either you are named by serial number, or you overhauled the engine on or after 11/15 or after you need to pull the jugs. I am amazed that Lycoming would leave field overhauled engines with no mercy whatsoever. It was their part, and they sold that part to the field with the implication that it was merchantable. I would sue and I hope a lot of people do sue. This was a gross failure of QC on their part. I know they will say, "Oh to inspect each and every part would raise the cost". Give me a break, if they had modern inspection methods, a modern optical comparator could have done a dimensional analysis of each part faster than a blink of the eye. And they wonder why people are leaving general aviation.

Did you read the article I linked. Pretty interesting what Continental is doing.
 
Continental bought ECI. ECI has had PMA engine parts for Lycomings for a long time. They also make an approved 0-360 clone.
 
Continental bought ECI. ECI has had PMA engine parts for Lycomings for a long time. They also make an approved 0-360 clone.
Continental is actually PMAing entire Lycoming engines and planning to certify them

Sounds like there is more in the works as well which means Lycoming is going to have to step it up. Competition is good in my opinion.
 
It was a win for Continental. Thet bought the capability to make Lycoming parts and the technology to improve their own cylinders. I think ECI had their eyes on a PMAd 0-320 for quite awhile. Meanwhile their position in the exp engine market has focused on the 340 and they have nothing to offer in the 390-400 category.

Edit- early morning brain fart. Superior is who makes the approved 0-360 clone.
 
Continental is getting ready to eat Lycoming's lunch. It absolutely amazes me that the suits at Textron will say it is too capital intensive to improve their business, but apparently the ChiComms don't see it that way. Pouring millions into Continental they obviously see a market that Textron does not. They have acquired Bendix mags, ECI etc plus built an entirely new plant. The PMA'd parts for Lycoming's is a dagger aimed at Lycoming's heart.
 
If Lycon overhauled an engine during that timeframe, and was actively rejecting and returning out of spec bushings to Lycoming, can one assume the installed parts were within spec?
 
The aviation revolving door has Lycoming it it this time. I had a plane with a TCM engine that had a critical SB issued for sub-spec rods. I didn't know about it until after my plane spit a rod through the case in flight. That was an ordeal. An identical plane crashed soon after in Lake Clark Pass after it broke a rod. From my perspective an AD sounds better than an ignored CSB.
 
What convinced the owner to do it? Factory engine? I wonder if the factory will support the costs when the engine is on an exp airframe?

It was a recent prop strike due to the nose gear failing while taxiing. He ended up with a factory new or overhauled from the insurance money. It was still under warranty. And yes the factory is paying for it.
 
Just finishing my first airplane. Pretty new engine so I am going to get it done within the 15 hours per the AD easily.

IMG_6507.jpg

IMG_6501 (2).JPG

ST-531
IMG_6502.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6507.jpg
    IMG_6507.jpg
    128.2 KB · Views: 962
  • IMG_6501 (2).JPG
    IMG_6501 (2).JPG
    228.7 KB · Views: 269
  • IMG_6502.jpg
    IMG_6502.jpg
    91.4 KB · Views: 266
Last edited:
Back
Top