For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

[freightpilot27]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

For those of you who don't know....

MANDATORY Service bulletins are not actually mandatory for Part 91 operations... So, Unless you are flying charter for hire in your Taylorcraft, You are not obligated by the FAA or manufacturer publishing the service bulletin to comply with it.

BUT, I would never argue against the fact, its a good idea to comply.

[astjp2]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

Hank, your comments sound like its fact that the owner needs to tear down the engine. It all in the delivery. You have a lot of knowledge but when in the past you make comments similar to "use a part from a Model A" or to that effect, yes it may work, but I have never see you mention to the person you are providing the information to that they should consult their IA first to see what the IA is willing to accept.

A real overhaul on an A-65 is almost the same as an O-200, because every gear and tappet body needs to be inspected. Most A&P's dont have the equipment to check gears and lifter or any other hard parts. If the engine is a taper shaft crank, the adapter will probably fracture long before any internal damage occurs.

If I am comfortable with the owner and the intent is to keep it flying, I may be more willing to accomodate the paperwork, if the owner shoves something they read on the internet down my throat, it will be signed off UNAIRWORTHY with the list of unairworthy items in the log book. There are a lot of people on here that give their opinions, not many will back it up with a reg or other documented source. Tim

Tim, I think we are actually in agreement. You have to do what the feds say you have to do. If your A&P or IA wants more, but it is not supported by a regulatory requirement, you are free to go to another maintenance professional. There are minimum requirements he HAS to do, but the rest is open for discussion.
None of the rest of my levels are "required". I do them because I WANT to. Every time someone on this group finds something wrong with his plane, I look for it on mine. I don't have to, I want to. I also don't need a professional with me to do the great majority of them. When I do need a professional, I have friends with the tickets who will watch me to be sure I don't do something stupid.

My A&P/IA suggests a LOT of things when he does an annual. He usually has three lists, things he won't sign the annual unless I fix them, NOW (at least before I fly it again) things that will need fixing before the next annual (in his opinion) that I should watch and can take care of later, and things that just make him uncomfortable, but do not impact safety. There are generally some things he looks at me and asks why I am worried about it, but those are MY desires, not something that the feds require me to do. Good example was changing the plexi in the "D" window. The pilot can't even really see out of it, but I put new plexi in anyway, because I wanted to.

MANDATORY FAA requirements are just that, MANDATORY. I don't have to justify them, if I don't do them, the IA won't sign off my plane.

I must be missing something, why do you think I need to justify a mandatory inspection or tear down? If it is mandatory, you have to do it. I am not telling you to, the FAA is.

Hank

[astjp2]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

Bob, you are correct, just because Lycoming or Taylorcraft says do it, its not required by the FAR's until its an AD or the mechanic signs off the log book I.A.W. the S.B. I/A's have been violated because they signed off an engine overhaul IAW the lycoming service manual, the SB's were added to the most rescent manual and the SB's were not done, Theodore Wayne LAW v.s Administrator. Tim

For those of you who don't know....

MANDATORY Service bulletins are not actually mandatory for Part 91 operations... So, Unless you are flying charter for hire in your Taylorcraft, You are not obligated by the FAA or manufacturer publishing the service bulletin to comply with it.

BUT, I would never argue against the fact, its a good idea to comply.

[Ragwing nut]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

AS an IA, when did service bulletins become mandatory? That is a Lycoming requirement, NOT AN FAA REQUIREMENT!

When Lycoming started including service bulletins in their overhaul/repair manual. In order to be in compliance with the manual on a Lycoming, all service bulletins and ad's MUST be complied with even in the field under Part 91 and not just repair stations. Since the manual is an FAA approved document, it is a FAA requirement. Trust me I found out the hard way 7-8 years ago.

[astjp2]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

The Lycoming is ACCEPTABLE data, not approved, and you can write in exceptions to the manual with paragraphs or chapters you did not comply with. This is the same with Cessan/Piper manuals.

Try and find the approved generator for a piper pacer, there is none listed in the type certificate, the only reference is in the parts manual, the FAA determined this was acceptable data but the manual is not APPROVED. Tim

When Lycoming started including service bulletins in their overhaul/repair manual. In order to be in compliance with the manual on a Lycoming, all service bulletins and ad's MUST be complied with even in the field under Part 91 and not just repair stations. Since the manual is an FAA approved document, it is a FAA requirement. Trust me I found out the hard way 7-8 years ago.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

I am dropping out of this discussion. You have to do what the mechanic who signs your plane off says. You can either do the maintenance he says, or find someone else who will sign your plane off without doing the maintenance, but to legally fly, you have to have your annual signed off.
I have NEVER said this engine has to be torn down, I haven't seen it and don't have the authority anyway. I said I WOULD TEAR IT DOWN. THAT IS THE FACT. When I said you could use a part from a different model plane, that is absolutely true, IF YOUR MECHANIC WILL SIGN IT OFF. Put it on and make the log entry of the approval IAW the FAA regs. Show me ANYWHERE that I have said you can ignore your IA or A&P and do what you want. IT'S NOT THERE. I NEVER SAID IT. I DON'T BELIEVE IT. If you don't like what your IA says you are free to find another one who agrees with you (if he exists) and get HIM to sign it.
Tim, I think you are probably a really good, conscientious IA, but you need to quote the whole thing when you quote someone. I do most of my own maintenance, but it is done with the concurrence of an A&P/IA within the FAA regs. Most people think I am TOO anal about following the regs!
Hank

[dejh22]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

I would like to hear more about this 1946 Taylorcraft for sale. Some pics would be nice.
Looks like it turned into a heated discussion.I may have no right to say anything here, but I have used this site to help me try to fulfill a dream my dad and I never got to do. I can read old threads and ask questions and get some of the best advice around. I must say that Hank was the one that really convinced me to give restoring a Taylorcraft ago. I actually first started communication with Hank on another site. I value his advice and I value the advice from all on this site. Hank has the right approach when questionable situations come up, " in my opinion" do all you can do to insure safety. If just doing the bare minimum
or going over board makes you feel safe, then that should be what you do. My I A told me to do an inner sleeve spice, looks better and a better repair. Also had an I A tell me a patch would be fine. Both are right. I went with a inner sleeve splice. My son will be flying this plane some day, I want it to be as safe as it can be! Hec, anyone of your children or grandchild might fly this plane some day, I want it to be as safe as it can be!

[Ragwing nut]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

The Lycoming is ACCEPTABLE data, not approved, and you can write in exceptions to the manual with paragraphs or chapters you did not comply with. This is the same with Cessan/Piper manuals.

Try and find the approved generator for a piper pacer, there is none listed in the type certificate, the only reference is in the parts manual, the FAA determined this was acceptable data but the manual is not APPROVED. Tim

If you write an exception that just means everything except the excluded item is serviceable, which is what you do when you fail an annual, you still fail the annual but your still not in compliance until the exceptions are met, which ultimately means in this case your Lycoming engine would not in compliance until those exceptions are met.

I have scanned and attach a copy of the Lycoming overhaul manual page 8 that states SB's are intergal part and used in conjuction with the manual. You can't circumnavigate the Lycoming overhaul manual when repairing a Lycoming engine under Part 91 operation. The repair manual is considered FAA approved data by way of a quality control manual that governs the operations of the manufacturer. The manufacturer writes the manual it dispenses following the guidelines set forth in its quality control manual. I have dealt with the FAA MIDO side for the last 12 years as a manufacturer which has a FAA approved document for continued airworthiness for our product in service just like Lycoming. AC43.13-3 is ACCEPTABLE because it is general practice, not specific to a particular item.

The only way you can circumnavigate the factory manual is with a repair station, which has its own quality manual on how it performs its operations, which only happens with another FAA approved document.


As far as the generator example, the parts manual is nothing more than a quick reference guide for part numbers. It does not tell you how to repair the engine, therefore is not an approved document.

[astjp2]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

43.13 is now approved in some instances, as of 2010

43.13-1B - Acceptable Methods, Techniques, and Practices - Aircraft Inspection and Repair [Large AC. This includes Change 1.]
Date Issued
September 08, 1998
Responsible Office
AFS-640
Description
This advisory circular (AC) contains methods, techniques, and practices acceptable to the Administrator for the inspection and repair of nonpressurized areas of civil aircraft, only when there are no manufacturer repair or maintenance instructions. This data generally pertains to minor repairs. The repairs identified in this AC may only be used as a basis for FAA approval for major repairs. The repair data may also be used as approved data, and the AC chapter, page, and paragraph listed in block 8 of FAA form 337 when:

a. the user has determined that it is appropriate to the product being repaired;

b. it is directly applicable to the repair being made; and

c. it is not contrary to manufacturer’s data.

signature.pdf (PDF)
CONTENTS.pdf (PDF)
Chapter 01.pdf (PDF)
Chapter 02.pdf (PDF)
Chapter 03.pdf (PDF)
Chapter 04.pdf (PDF)
Chapter 05.pdf (PDF)
Chapter 06.pdf (PDF)
Chapter 07.pdf (PDF)
Chapter 08.pdf (PDF)
Chapter 09-10.pdf (PDF)
Chapter 11.pdf (PDF)
Chapter 12-13.pdf (PDF)
APPENDIX.pdf (PDF)

[astjp2]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

What about IRAN? Inspect and Repaired As Necessary? You can specifically call out procedures in a manual that you followed. If you put "overhauled IAW lycoming service manual" you are screwed. If you write it as "Inspected IAW page 22, paragraph 3.5, Figure 3.9, etc. of lycoming service manual dated July 2008" you are not responsible for the content of the rest of the manual because part 43 requires you to only document the work performed, if you did not do the service bulletin, then dont document that you did..... These are only examples, not actual figures....Tim

[Ragwing nut]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

What about IRAN? Inspect and Repaired As Necessary? You can specifically call out procedures in a manual that you followed. If you put "overhauled IAW lycoming service manual" you are screwed. If you write it as "Inspected IAW page 22, paragraph 3.5, Figure 3.9, etc. of lycoming service manual dated July 2008" you are not responsible for the content of the rest of the manual because part 43 requires you to only document the work performed, if you did not do the service bulletin, then dont document that you did..... These are only examples, not actual figures....Tim

i agree with what you are saying here, but the Lycoming service bulletin specifically states tear down is mandatory with sudden prop strike. "I documented what i did and did not comply with the service bulletin because Part 43 said I did not need to" does not work in court of law or in an FAA investigation when that engine has a crankshaft failure 2 hours or 200 hours later because you failed to follow a service bulletin. By Lycoming specifically including service bulletins in their FAA approved repair manual, you can't play stupid and ignore what or how you were told to comply with on page one of the manual after the revision listings.

[fearofpavement]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

Well, this has really taken a bunny trail but essentially I agree with astjp2 regarding service bulletins. Unless a service bulletin is required by an AD (which is a revision of FAR 39), no matter how "mandatory" the manufacturer says it is, it is NOT mandatory. An engine overhaul is a different situation than an aircraft engine that is in service. A mechanic can take an engine completely apart, replace any parts he wants and reassemble it and put it back in service without complying with any of the manufacturers service bulletins, service letters, service instructions as long as the logs do not indicate that the engine was overhauled. It would keep its same time since overhaul but the owner could be comfortable with its airworthiness. The FAA makes it very clear that THEY are the ones that regulate aviation, not private companies.

However, what is "legal" and what is "prudent" may be two different things. When I get a "mandatory service bulletin" do I pitch it in the trash? NO, I pay very close attention to them and decide whether in "our situation" it should be complied with. Do I accomplish every mandatory bulletin? No.

Regarding prop damage, I always consider issues such as the extent of propeller damage, what was struck, what rpm the engine was operating at, whether or not the engine has counterweights, etc.

Would I recommend a tear down on the engine in question? Not sure without more data but probably because struts are steel and it likely put a lot of torque on the crank. This would be different kind of force than a ground impact such as a nose over. Those are more likely to bend the crank flange.

[magman]

Re: For sale 1946 Taylorcraft BC-12D

A big player in this would be the insurance co. policies.

At this time they will cover most prop strikes IF you have Hull Ins.

I generally write the estimate to cover:

Engine Removal ,shipping (out) teardown, reassembly (shipping (in) & reinstall.

Mount Removal, shipping (out) , inspection a@ Kosola , AWI or ?,repairs ( if any) freight (in)reinstall

Prop- freight, repairs, reinstall.

Note that while the engine is torn down the Ins. folks will NOT pay for a MOH.

They do NOT pay for rusted or worn-out parts.

No one will reassemble with these defective parts.

FYI- Most Insurance Companies don't like me!