AD 96-12-06 supersedes AD 77-13-03, both of which require the timing to be set to 24 degrees BTC. The engine was originally certified with the timing at 28 degrees BTC. If you install a set of four Continental cylinders of p/n 641917 or higher or ECM or Superior cylinders the timing may again be set to 28 degrees.
Does anyone know what brought about this AD?
Dennis
AD 96-12-06
Re: AD 96-12-06
Hi dennis: you really need to go to FAA.gov and pull up that AD note. It has a contact Number you can Public service, for information. Applies t0 0-200 or 100 HP cont. engines. with heavy head cylinders. the change is really your option, and only suggested. that AD will also go into depth of why it came about! A fellow aviator Sunny
-
Paul Agaliotis
- Posts: 2589
- Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 18:49
- Location: San Martin, California
- Contact:
Re: AD 96-12-06
Dennis,
This a little sticky situation for CMC. There really was no big problem with head cracking, some broke and some didn't just like we have today. The "problem" coincides with the release of their new cylinders in 1977. The new parts were manufactured differently at the head/barrel interface, MSB94-8D has this information. Also, by chance, the new cylinders were now identified by a stamped part number in the base flange, making ALL cylinders manufactured prior to 1977 subject to the new AD, as they were unmarked. This was one of the first attempts to produce revenue via the regulatory policies. The manufacturer/owner created a safety situation and sells you the parts to satisfy their created situation, great work if you can get it.
And it hasn't stopped, remember the Marvel/Schebler floats and venturi's, ACA and the seats, the Sedan and the spar corrosion. The list just keep growing. There should be a little more investigation to these perceived problems.
Will the current AD stop all of the head cracking? I don't believe so, the operational environment will still cause the heads to break. If there was a bad run of heads they should all be removed from service. But don't condemn all of the products based on marketing of an improvement with the replacement item.
Paul
This a little sticky situation for CMC. There really was no big problem with head cracking, some broke and some didn't just like we have today. The "problem" coincides with the release of their new cylinders in 1977. The new parts were manufactured differently at the head/barrel interface, MSB94-8D has this information. Also, by chance, the new cylinders were now identified by a stamped part number in the base flange, making ALL cylinders manufactured prior to 1977 subject to the new AD, as they were unmarked. This was one of the first attempts to produce revenue via the regulatory policies. The manufacturer/owner created a safety situation and sells you the parts to satisfy their created situation, great work if you can get it.
And it hasn't stopped, remember the Marvel/Schebler floats and venturi's, ACA and the seats, the Sedan and the spar corrosion. The list just keep growing. There should be a little more investigation to these perceived problems.
Will the current AD stop all of the head cracking? I don't believe so, the operational environment will still cause the heads to break. If there was a bad run of heads they should all be removed from service. But don't condemn all of the products based on marketing of an improvement with the replacement item.
Paul
Mailing Adress : Paul Agaliotis 2060 E. San Martin, San Martin,Calif. 95046
Re: AD 96-12-06
While I fully agree there should be a 'statue of limitations' and some common sense (which certainly seems to be lacking all over nowdays) I'm always amazed how the aircraft industry can come up with a solution to a problem they caused and then charge the owner for it. The cylinders noted above are possibly a case in point and is the carburerator venuri AD and as Paul mentioned the list goes on. I remember buying a radio and transponder package (Terra) many years ago and somehow the frequency or something was wrong and even though it was brand new I had to pay $300 to bring it up to specs.
Now, a few years ago my son's 87 Mustang had near 100, 000 miles on it and was probably more than 10 years old when Ford issued a recall on the exhaust system and paid for all the parts and labor. I just got one on my 2008 Pontiac for a shift cable that will be fully covered. In one of my former lives I worked in warranty administration for a large truck factory branch and if it was safety related, they covered it....period.
On the other hand, I can see not covering 60 year old wood spars or damage that happens due to age and normal wear and tear.
My .02 cents worth.
Mike
Now, a few years ago my son's 87 Mustang had near 100, 000 miles on it and was probably more than 10 years old when Ford issued a recall on the exhaust system and paid for all the parts and labor. I just got one on my 2008 Pontiac for a shift cable that will be fully covered. In one of my former lives I worked in warranty administration for a large truck factory branch and if it was safety related, they covered it....period.
On the other hand, I can see not covering 60 year old wood spars or damage that happens due to age and normal wear and tear.
My .02 cents worth.
Mike