FAA Invites Comments On Lycoming Engine AD

  • E-Mail this Article
  • View Printable Article
  • Text size:

    • A
    • A
    • A

If you have comments, questions or suggestions regarding the FAA’s recent Emergency Airworthiness Directive now in effect for hundreds of Lycoming engines, the FAA is ready to hear from you. The AD, which was published on Aug. 10 and officially took effect Aug. 15, went straight to Final Rule, meaning there was no prior public discussion. But aircraft owners and other interested parties still are welcome to weigh in. “We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this final rule,” the FAA says. “We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this final rule because of those comments.” The FAA will accept comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time, Sept. 25.

“We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide,” notes the FAA. “We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this final rule.” Commenters may submit their remarks by mail, via the internet or by dropping them off at the Department of Transportation offices in Washington. Details can be found online. So far six comments have been posted. One aircraft owner based in Colombia says the 10 hours allowed for compliance is not realistic because “it is very complicated to get the special tools and spare parts,” especially for operators outside the U.S. Others say Lycoming’s estimates of labor costs are unrealistic and those costs shouldn’t be absorbed by the owners.

Comments (1)

Let me see if I understand the situation correctly. Lycoming farmed out conn rod assemblies to a subcontractor who didn't notice that the piston end bearings didn't fit correctly. Then, Lycoming assembled engines and didn't notice themselves. They also sold some rods to their distributors. In both cases, internal QA didn't work. And now they expect operators to not only absorb the cost and underestimate the time allowance for what can be a complicated repair. Give me a break, Lycoming! And we haven't even addressed the down time for the airplane or why the FAA surveillance of their QA allowed this.

If I were impacted ... especially if the airplane was in revenue service ... my lawyers would already be preparing the paperwork. This is not going to go good for Lycoming.

Posted by: Larry Stencel | August 23, 2017 1:42 AM    Report this comment

Add your comments

Log In

You must be logged in to comment

Forgot password?


Enter your information below to begin your FREE registration