Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Continental MSB05-8B Camshaft Gear IO-470, IO-520, IO-550

  1. #1
    behindpropellers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    6,480
    Post Thanks / Like

    Continental MSB05-8B Camshaft Gear IO-470, IO-520, IO-550

    Rumor has it that it will become an AD requiring that this gear is replaced.
    http://www.tcmlink.com/pdf2/MSB05-8B.pdf
    Piper J-5A C-90 N40877
    J-5 Project Pictures

  2. #2
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    8,021
    Post Thanks / Like
    looks allot like idiot engineer designed beefed up gear that don't fit..... great!!!!

  3. #3
    180Marty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Paullina, Ia
    Posts
    1,814
    Post Thanks / Like
    What's the difference between an 0-470 and IO-470 with respect to this gear issue, other than one isn't named in the MSB?
    Could it be something to do with the gear that drives a fuel pump on the IO's?

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Arizona & Alaska
    Posts
    261
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mike mcs repair View Post
    looks allot like idiot engineer designed beefed up gear that don't fit..... great!!!!

    That's the best they could do? Requiring a modification of the case!! Pretty sad that they didn't find a cheaper solution than this.

  5. #5
    Dave Calkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    4,996
    Post Thanks / Like
    This Madatory Service Bulletin revises and upgrades the previous 2005 Sevice Bulletin to "mandatory". That is "mandatory" for working airplanes, not private guys.

    However, if someone (an engine builder) since 2005 when the new gear was "recommended" put in the new gear without relieving the engine case as required by the original bulletin........you will have issues.


    I got word thhis morning from Continental that factory Remanufactured engines since then are good for service.

  6. #6
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    8,021
    Post Thanks / Like
    http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news...-228892-1.html


    Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    831
    Post Thanks / Like
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0950.JPG 
Views:	47 
Size:	146.7 KB 
ID:	31010

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    831
    Post Thanks / Like
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0951.JPG 
Views:	48 
Size:	1.12 MB 
ID:	31011

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Jenks, America
    Posts
    4,018
    Post Thanks / Like
    Joy
    "Don't feed the hipsters"

  10. #10
    Dave Calkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    4,996
    Post Thanks / Like
    MgHallens post shows what can happen

    The Avweb article linked by MCS has a misleading statement. "...camshaft gear can be inspected by removal of the starter.." Nope!!!!!

  11. #11
    okmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Pryor, OK
    Posts
    771
    Post Thanks / Like
    I just got off the phone with Texas Skyway's, they say their information says new and remans after Aug. 9, 2005 are not affected.

  12. #12
    okmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Pryor, OK
    Posts
    771
    Post Thanks / Like
    Update on Continental MSB08-5B From today's Aero News Network "Propwash":

    Continental Motors Issues Explanation Of Service Bulletin On Cam Gears Says They Are Working To Ease Burden On Aircraft Owners And Operators Continental Motors has provided ANN with an explanation of its recently-released MSB05-8B, which the company says has caused much speculation and some confusion in the GA community.
    According to the release, Continental Motors and the FAA are working as fast as possible to make sure that, while ensuring the highest levels of safety, owners and operators of aircraft equipped with Continental engines will not be burdened with unnecessary costs.
    In 2005, Continental Motors superseded Cam Gears P/N’s 631845, 655430, 655516, or 656031with a new part, P/N 656818.
    Continental Motors issued Service Bulletin SB05-8 recommending the replacement of the older design parts at the next overhaul or when the gear is accessible.
    Production of parts P/N 631845, 655430, 655516, or 656031 was discontinued in August 2005, and since then, only the P/N 656818 was produced and installed in factory new or factory rebuilt engines manufactured by the Continental Motors factory and sold as spares.
    In July 2009, SB97-6 (Mandatory Parts Replacement at Overhaul) reiterated the need to change the parts mentioned above with the new design parts.
    In late 2016 and early 2017, as part of the ongoing FAA Continued Operational Safety program, reports of camshaft gear fractures were provided to the FAA. A statistical assessment was accomplished by the FAA, and the initial data indicated an AD was merited. The FAA then asked CMG to reformat the current bulletin into a format compatible with FAA AC 20-176 to facilitate an AD. Continental Motors subsequently superseded SB05-8A by MSB05-8B at the FAA request.
    Continental Motors is working diligently with the FAA to make significant amendments to MSB05-8B. We expect this to happen in the next 15 days.
    Our team is working on three main issues to alleviate the burden potentially imposed on aircraft owners and operators:
    Change the mandatory replacement of the camshaft gear to a visual inspection procedure allowing “on condition” operation until the engine is overhauled, replaced, or the gear is accessible.
    Change the time limit imposed by MSB05-8B, to values that still ensure that the appropriate level of safety is attained, but does not dictate a mandatory overhaul time limit.
    Publish alternative means of compliance, to allow camshaft gear replacement without complete engine disassembly.
    According to Continental Motors Group, the following engine models are potentially affected:
    Aero-News Network Propwash - Issue 208/21 04.20.17 Page 1 of 22 According to Continental Motors Group, the following engine models are potentially affected:
    IO-470-U, V
    IO-520-A, B, BA, BB, C, CB, D, E, F, J, K, L, M, MB, N, NB, P, R L/TSIO-520-ALL LIO-520-P IO-550-A, B, C, D, E, F, G, L, N, P, R IOF-550-B, C, D, E, F, L, N, P, R TSIO-550-A, B, C, E TSIOL-550-A, B, C Engines manufactured or rebuilt at the Continental Motors factory after August 9, 2005, are not affected as the new design part was installed since that date, unless the cam gear in the engine has been replaced during a maintenance event with an earlier, superseded gear.
    Common Questions:
    How do I know if my engine is affected?
    After checking the list of models potentially affected, please verify the following: My engine was manufactured or rebuilt by the Continental Motors factory after August 9, 2005. Your engine is not affected, if the cam gear was not replaced during other maintenance since the engine left the factory.
    Only engines manufactured or rebuilt at the Continental Motors Factory before August 9, 2005, are potentially impacted by MSB05-8B. Inspect your logbook or other paperwork for indication of replacement of part numbers 631845, 655430, 655516, or 656031 by P/N 656818. If evidence is found that the original gear (P/N 631845, 655430, 655516, or 656031) was replaced by P/N 656818, follow instructions in MSB-05-8B.
    If no evidence of parts 655430, 655516, or 656031 replacement is found: Use inspection instructions of MSB05-8B to determine the part number of the camshaft gear installed. Use the part number found to determine if replacement is necessary or not and follow instructions in MSB-05-8.
    If the engine was manufactured or rebuilt by the Continental Motors factory before August 9, 2005, and has been field overhauled since that date, or the case has been disassembled for any reason for a field repair, inspect the logbook or other paperwork for indication of replacement of part numbers 631845, 655430, 655516, or 656031 by P/N 656818. If evidence is found that the original gear (P/N 631845, 655430, 655516, or 656031) was replaced by P/N 656818, document in logbook, no further action required.
    If no evidence of parts 655430, 655516, or 656031 replacement is found: Use inspection instructions of MSB05-8B to determine the part number of the camshaft gear installed. Use the part number found to determine if replacement should be performed or not and follow instructions in MSB-05-8.
    Why issue a MSB mandating compliance within 12 years of manufacturing date?
    Continental Motors has always indicated that engines should be overhauled when reaching 12 years after manufacturing, factory rebuild or field overhaul or after reaching the TBO set for the engine. Although many owners operating under PART 91 choose not to observe this, we stand behind this recommendation. There are many parts, metallic or not (gaskets, O-rings etc.) that age with the engine. These parts need replacement after time in service or because age can modify their structure. The certification process ensures that an engine reaching TBO will not be adversely affected by engine run time or because of the aging of some materials. The fact that many planes are not hangared and are parked on a ramp, some in hot and humid or maritime climates, is also a factor to consider in the aging of airframes and engines.
    Has Continental Motors requested the FAA to issue an AD on this subject?
    No. The FAA COS team reviewed the data related to these gear reports and performed statistical analysis. Their analysis showed that an AD was warranted and the FAA requested that CMG rewrite the related service bulletin in a format corresponding to FAA AC 20-176 to support the pending AD activity. Continental Motors never requested the FAA to issue an AD.
    Is it by design that Continental Motors issued MSB05-8B twelve years after issuing SB05-8?
    No. The fact that twelve years have passed between the original issuance of SB05-8 and MSB05- 8B is purely coincidental.
    Likes Steve Pierce liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Reground camshaft? Educate me please
    By skukum12 in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 01-26-2016, 09:18 AM
  2. Yellow tagged camshaft or new
    By PA-22/20-160 in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 03-11-2014, 11:22 AM
  3. O-235 Camshaft
    By wyndzer in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-15-2013, 02:22 PM
  4. Measuring camshaft wear
    By Ruidoso Ron in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 02-26-2006, 07:53 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •