37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 394050 |
Time | |
Date | 199802 |
Day | Fri |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : zzz |
State Reference | US |
Altitude | agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0 |
Environment | |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | general aviation : personal |
Make Model Name | Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | other |
Flight Plan | None |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | Other |
Function | flight crew : single pilot |
Qualification | pilot : instrument pilot : private |
ASRS Report | 394050 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | Other |
Function | other personnel |
Qualification | other other : other |
Events | |
Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : critical non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other other : unspecified |
Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
Consequence | Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Aircraft |
Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
I own and am flying an aircraft with defective connecting rods and other parts in the engine, which I consider dangerous. The defective parts are the results of an engine overhaul. The details are as follows: 1) FBO did not comply with tcm overhaul manual X30594A, page 72-30-13, item 35 which mandates that connecting rods stamped 626119 must be replaced. They also ignored tcm sb M86-11 which covers the same subject. Tcm CSB96-13 is also applicable because FBO pulled #5 cylinder on dec/xx/96, 1 month after CSB96-13 was issued (see enclosure C). The connecting rods in my engine were installed in 1977 and were stamped 626119 and are less than 0.610 not 0.625 as required. I contacted ZZZ FSDO and received a ludicrous reply (enclosure D). I filed a civil complaint for the cost of replacing the connecting rods and was denied. I now have 1 of 2 options: 1) keep the aircraft and pay for the replacement of the connecting rods and other parts that I consider defective, or 2) sell the aircraft 'as is' and let the buyer beware. I have chosen to sell the aircraft. Apparently I am the only person who considers the engine dangerous. Tcm is not overly concerned, it took me 10 months to get a copy of X30594A overhaul manual. Furthermore, they do not have the authority/authorized to enforce their overhaul requirements, no one does. The service bulletins are a farce. The only legal aspect is that FBO stated on my invoice that they had complied with the manual X30594A. I based my civil complaint on the premises that they had lied to me, but to no avail. Even the FSDO condones FBO use of the old connecting rods and other junk parts they consider 'svcable.'
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A C172 ENG WAS OVERHAULED IN NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S SVC BULLETIN.
Narrative: I OWN AND AM FLYING AN ACFT WITH DEFECTIVE CONNECTING RODS AND OTHER PARTS IN THE ENG, WHICH I CONSIDER DANGEROUS. THE DEFECTIVE PARTS ARE THE RESULTS OF AN ENG OVERHAUL. THE DETAILS ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1) FBO DID NOT COMPLY WITH TCM OVERHAUL MANUAL X30594A, PAGE 72-30-13, ITEM 35 WHICH MANDATES THAT CONNECTING RODS STAMPED 626119 MUST BE REPLACED. THEY ALSO IGNORED TCM SB M86-11 WHICH COVERS THE SAME SUBJECT. TCM CSB96-13 IS ALSO APPLICABLE BECAUSE FBO PULLED #5 CYLINDER ON DEC/XX/96, 1 MONTH AFTER CSB96-13 WAS ISSUED (SEE ENCLOSURE C). THE CONNECTING RODS IN MY ENG WERE INSTALLED IN 1977 AND WERE STAMPED 626119 AND ARE LESS THAN 0.610 NOT 0.625 AS REQUIRED. I CONTACTED ZZZ FSDO AND RECEIVED A LUDICROUS REPLY (ENCLOSURE D). I FILED A CIVIL COMPLAINT FOR THE COST OF REPLACING THE CONNECTING RODS AND WAS DENIED. I NOW HAVE 1 OF 2 OPTIONS: 1) KEEP THE ACFT AND PAY FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE CONNECTING RODS AND OTHER PARTS THAT I CONSIDER DEFECTIVE, OR 2) SELL THE ACFT 'AS IS' AND LET THE BUYER BEWARE. I HAVE CHOSEN TO SELL THE ACFT. APPARENTLY I AM THE ONLY PERSON WHO CONSIDERS THE ENG DANGEROUS. TCM IS NOT OVERLY CONCERNED, IT TOOK ME 10 MONTHS TO GET A COPY OF X30594A OVERHAUL MANUAL. FURTHERMORE, THEY DO NOT HAVE THE AUTH TO ENFORCE THEIR OVERHAUL REQUIREMENTS, NO ONE DOES. THE SVC BULLETINS ARE A FARCE. THE ONLY LEGAL ASPECT IS THAT FBO STATED ON MY INVOICE THAT THEY HAD COMPLIED WITH THE MANUAL X30594A. I BASED MY CIVIL COMPLAINT ON THE PREMISES THAT THEY HAD LIED TO ME, BUT TO NO AVAIL. EVEN THE FSDO CONDONES FBO USE OF THE OLD CONNECTING RODS AND OTHER JUNK PARTS THEY CONSIDER 'SVCABLE.'
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.