Cessna Deadstick Landing

[MIflyer]

If you want to see a cool pilot handling a very serious engine failure, check out this Youtube video:

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Wow.

 

[cvairwerks]

Ed Frye had one grenade right after takeoff in his 210. Same kind of destruction in his engine. Interestingly, Ed ran full monitoring and was able to show the relevant numbers as it came apart.

 

[MIflyer]

One day back in 1995 an Aerostar came into our airfield with one turning and one not. There was oil all over the Left wing behind the dead engine. The owner took the cowl off. It turned out that one of the bolts holding a rod on the crankshaft had broken. The rod went up, broke the case just under the fuel distribution manifold, and then slid up the barrel of the cylinder, cutting a nice notch in the cylinder wall, until it got to the fins.

The owner was in a quandary. He'd had both engines overhauled at the same place at the same time. And while there was an Airworthiness Directive out on rod bolt failures for that engine, the one that failed was not of the lot covered by the AD. He had to replace that failed engine but should he replace both of them? He said that he was considering buying two zero time engines, replacing the failed engine, and sticking the other new engine in the back of the airplane in case the Right one did the same thing.

 

[Gnomey]

Good one!

 

[Elvis]

One day back in 1995 an Aerostar came into our airfield with one turning and one not. There was oil all over the Left wing behind the dead engine. The owner took the cowl off. It turned out that one of the bolts holding a rod on the crankshaft had broken. The rod went up, broke the case just under the fuel distribution manifold, and then slid up the barrel of the cylinder, cutting a nice notch in the cylinder wall, until it got to the fins.

The owner was in a quandary. He'd had both engines overhauled at the same place at the same time. And while there was an Airworthiness Directive out on rod bolt failures for that engine, the one that failed was not of the lot covered by the AD. He had to replace that failed engine but should he replace both of them? He said that he was considering buying two zero time engines, replacing the failed engine, and sticking the other new engine in the back of the airplane in case the Right one did the same thing.

ALWAYS err on the side of safety.
Replace both engines. That right side engine just might be a ticking timebomb.

 

[gumbyk]

ALWAYS err on the side of safety.
Replace both engines. That right side engine just might be a ticking timebomb.

Wait for the analysis of the failure - you may just be putting the timebomb in there in place of a good engine.
An analysis will tell you if the bolt has been over-torqued, or the failure was a one-off that isn't likely to be repeated.

From memory (if it's the AD I'm thinking of), the applicable AD had the serial number range of bolts extended.

 

[MIflyer]

Replace both engines.

Actually, experienced A&P's say to NEVER replace both engines on a twin at the same time from the same supplier.

It's like the two guys who are on the golf course and it starts to rain. They take shelter under a tree and the rain keeps falling. One of them says, "What do we do when this tree gets soaked through?" The other guy replies, "No problem! There are hundreds of trees on this golf course and we will just move to another one." Problem is the trees - and the engines - are getting soaked through simultaneously.

 

[Elvis]

Wait for the analysis of the failure - you may just be putting the timebomb in there in place of a good engine.
An analysis will tell you if the bolt has been over-torqued, or the failure was a one-off that isn't likely to be repeated.

From memory (if it's the AD I'm thinking of), the applicable AD had the serial number range of bolts extended.

Both engines had been overhauled at the same time.
Chances are very good the faulty bolt was used in both engines, upon reassembly.
This is why I suggested swapping out both.
Since a directive has been issued, its a good chance the faulty bolts have been eliminated from any future use.

 

[Elvis]

Actually, experienced A&P's say to NEVER replace both engines on a twin at the same time from the same supplier.

It's like the two guys who are on the golf course and it starts to rain. They take shelter under a tree and the rain keeps falling. One of them says, "What do we do when this tree gets soaked through?" The other guy replies, "No problem! There are hundreds of trees on this golf course and we will just move to another one." Problem is the trees - and the engines - are getting soaked through simultaneously.

..but in this case, it stands a good chance the faulty bolt may be in the other engine as well.
Thus my suggestion.
The replacement engines did not come from the same people who rebuilt the engines that were installed at the time of the incident.
Since there's a directive already issued, the faulty bolts should've been pulled from the assembly line, so I would have more faith in the replacement engines than the ones they're replacing.

 

[MIflyer]

But the bolt that failed was not one of the lot that were designated as faulty.

 

[Elvis]

But the bolt that failed was not one of the lot that were designated as faulty.

Still, there's a directive out, citing a potential problem.
You wanna take chances at 10,000 feet, have fun with that.

 

[gumbyk]

Still, there's a directive out, citing a potential problem.
You wanna take chances at 10,000 feet, have fun with that.

If that's your attitude, you'd never get into an aircraft.
EVERY aircraft has Airworthiness Directives out on it, citing 'potential problems'

I've even seen airworthiness directives released to solve problems caused by airworthiness directives....

And then, what level of directive do you really start worrying about? Airworthiness Directives? Service Bulletins? Service Instructions? Service Letters? They are all issued to solve potential problems.

 

[MIflyer]

If they have iDed the problem as specific to a certain lot of bolts with a known defect, there is no reason to tear everything else down. If you are not sure, then maybe you have to at least investigate to find out. But usually such problems are associated with a specific lot of parts or else a specific repair facility over a specific time period.

Service bulletins issued by a manufacturer but not accompanied by an FAA issued Airworthiness Directive are optional for the owner.