Question of the Week
*** PREVIOUS RESULTS ***
Last week, AVweb reported that the Cessna 172S that lost its propeller in the skies over St. Augustine, Florida at the end of May had experienced a crankshaft failure — and that the crankshaft was a Lycoming. In light of recent crankshaft developments, we asked our readers if this was a cause for concern, especially where Lycoming is concerned.
Your responses were split across the entire spectrum of possible answers:
21% of those who responded were not concerned with the crankshaft failure, agreeing with our statement This doesn't necessarily have anything to do with Lycoming parts or its manufacturing process. This segment was the largest of those who have replied to our poll at press time — but only by a thin margin.
18% were at the other end of the spectrum, saying this incident made you extremely concerned about Lycoming's ability to produce a reliable engine.
Another 18% cited the fact that this crankshaft failure was different than those mentioned in Lycoming's recalls. (It occurred at a different place on the crankshaft.) This, our readers said, made them more concerned, not less concerned.
17% of respondents said they were very concerned about Lycoming and left it at that.
13% admitted to us that they fly older airplanes or ones that aren't affected by the Lycoming crankshaft issue.
And 12% said they were not particularly concerned, because this failure wasn't one of those behind the recent Lycoming recalls.
For real-time results of last week's question, click here.
*** THIS WEEK'S QUESTION ***
2006 has been full of exciting announcements, innovations, and power struggles. This week, AVweb wants to know which of the hottest happenings in general aviation is at the top of your watch list.
Have an idea for a new QOTW? Send your suggestions to firstname.lastname@example.org.
This address is only for suggested QOTW questions, and not for QOTW answers or comments.
Use this form to send QOTW comments to our AVmail Editor.