Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

M-14P TBO

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

Looigi

Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 80
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2017 7:00 pm Post subject: M-14P TBO

Hi All,



I am starting a new thread because I don't want to hijack any of the others here.  I know I am opening an old debate and I have also searched old posts but I have not found what I am looking for.



I am trying to find some documentation on the M-14P overhaul periods on a Yak-52 to satisfy our New Zealand CAA.  I have been told that paper work exists to backup TBO's other than the 750 + 500 + 500 + 500, scrap at 2250 hours that is 'popular' here.  Other guys here have managed to get TBO's past them with 2250 hours between overhauls!  In the absence of manufacturers data the CAA seem to believe Wikipedia, not that they can show me any manufacturers data to back that up either!!



They have said that if I can get a copy of an FAA approved Maintenance Program with longer TBO's they would accept that.



Does anyone have a copy of of such an FAA approved program that they would be willing to share please?

Is there any other information available that looks credible with longer TBO's?



Many thanks in advance

Chris

richard.goode(at)russiana
Guest

Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2017 12:18 am Post subject: M-14P TBO

The essential problem is that the Russians were extremely conservative;

working in a "military" environment and trying to employ 300 million people

- hence the very low TBO of these engines. But, those are the official

figures from the manufacturer. We know from experience that if operated

sensibly the engines are good for much longer TBOs. On the other hand, if an

engine is in a Sukhoi in airshow work; operating at 103%; rapid changes of

power settings, then you would be lucky to get more than 500 hours.



But the fundamental international practice is that the original manufacturer

dictates the TBO, and it is extremely rare that another body would give a

conflicting figure. This is particularly true in the USA where the engine is

not certified and is operated "experimentally" and therefore has no formal

TBO figure. So, I would be very surprised if the FAA, or indeed any other

aviation authority, had issued more generous figures for these engines.



Unfortunately, in Europe, we have to obey the original manufacturer's

figures. However, we no longer scrap an engine at 2250 hours but continue to

use them, as long as each component is completely tested and is the

equivalent of a new one.



Richard Goode Aerobatics

Rhodds Farm

Lyonshall

Hereford

HR5 3LW



Tel:  +44 (0) 1544 340120

Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129

www.russianaeros.com



--

Looigi

Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 80
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2017 12:49 am Post subject: Re: M-14P TBO

Thanks for that Richard.



Can you point me at some data on using the engine beyond the 2250 hours I can beat our CAA about the head with please?



Cheers

Chris

Ttail

Joined: 24 Jun 2013
Posts: 118

Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:59 am Post subject: Re: M-14P TBO

the Australian Warbirds Maintenance Schedule gives various TBO figures greater than 500hours depending on engine manufacturer. Would this be of assistance to you ?



Vedeneyev / Ivchenko M-14P On Condition up to 750 hours

then 500 hours After an overhaul up to 2250 hours.



Motorstar / Aeromotors M-14P/PF On Condition up to 1500 hours

then 500 hours After an overhaul up to 2250 hours.



These copied and pasted from the schedule.



Having said that in the last month or so we have also been given approval to continue past the TBO based on "On condition" .

Looigi

Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 80
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2017 4:33 am Post subject: M-14P TBO

Ttail,



Yes, that could be just what I am looking for. Especially the Aerostar information. 



Are you able to email me a copy please?



Many thanks

Chris



Sent from my iPhone, so typo's are bought to you courtesy of Siri. 



 	  Quote: 	
		   On 17/02/2017, at 23:59, Ttail <ttail(at)internode.on.net> wrote:

 

 

 

 the Australian Warbirds Maintenance Schedule gives various TBO figures greater than 500hours depending on engine manufacturer. Would this be of assistance to you ?

 

 Vedeneyev / Ivchenko M-14P On Condition up to 750 hours

 then 500 hours After an overhaul up to 2250 hours.

 

 Motorstar / Aeromotors M-14P/PF On Condition up to 1500 hours

 then 500 hours After an overhaul up to 2250 hours.

 

 These copied and pasted from the schedule.

 

 Having said that in the last month or so we have also been given approval to continue past the TBO based on "On condition" .

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=466325#466325

richard.goode(at)russiana
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:01 am Post subject: M-14P TBO

Of course Motorstar manufactured a large number of engines to fit into Yak

52, but they weren't given any design details or technology, so they can

obviously give 1500 hours "on condition" where the engines are being used

"experimentally" in the USA, but I would doubt whether this would be

formally accepted by an aviation authority unless it was in the context of

an aircraft, being operated in some restricted or experimental category.



But it would certainly be worth a try!



Richard Goode Aerobatics

Rhodds Farm

Lyonshall

Hereford

HR5 3LW



Tel:  +44 (0) 1544 340120

Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129

www.russianaeros.com



--

Harv

Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 170

Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2017 1:43 am Post subject: Re: M-14P TBO

I would also argue this applies to props does it not?



So manufacturers TBO rather than any other thinking... Simple visual inspection and if it looks fine then it's fit for service

Looigi

Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 80
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Posted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 1:23 pm Post subject: Re: M-14P TBO

Thanks to all the guys and girls who have posted and messaged me.



Here is what I have learned.  The TBO on the M-14P is..... I still don't know!



Does anyone have any data from Vedeneyev themselves?



I have not been able to find an official manufacturers TBO.  DOSAF did their first overhaul at 750 hours, then 500 hour intervals and retired the engine at 2250 hours.  As they were essentially the only operator of these aircraft it seems these times have been accepted as though it was from Vedeneyev themselves.  All the overhaul facilities for the M-14P I contacted have adopted these figures as well.  Remember that they worked only for DOSAF, and of course it is to their commercial advantage to have these engines overhauled more often.



Their definition of "Overhaul" differs from ours too.  Again, I have not been able to find any official data, but their overhauls seem to align more with a "Survey" of an engine that is common in the marine industry.  Essentially a bulk strip, inspect, replace the stuffed bits and stick it back together.  In the military we used to call this an IRAN - Inspect And Replace As Necessary.



The lubricants we use are generally better than what these engines used to run on.  The dude at Termikas told me that the Wilga engine TBO is increased from 800 to 1000 hours if it is run on Aeroshell 100.  Given that Jill from M-14P said she has seen well looked after engines with 2200 hours TSO on them seems to reinforce our oil quality and just how robust these engines are too.  Again, no official data!



Wikipedia reigns supreme!



Chris

richard.goode(at)russiana
Guest

Posted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 12:12 am Post subject: M-14P TBO

Some corrections:



Those hours the TBO are quite specifically from OKBM - the Vedeneyev design

bureau. But also remember the background in that Russia was operating in a

"military" environment" and they were trying to employ 300 million people,

and it didn't really matter what they did or how long it took.



I think you're wrong about the quality of the overhaul. Original overhauls

in Soviet times were done to an extremely high standard, although, as we

have found out, the engines were built to very loose tolerances, I supposed

to help engineers who were not that skilled. But, once the Soviet Union

started collapsing in the early 90s, the quality of "overhauls" went down

dramatically, and in some cases was little more than a coat of paint. But

this was not official policy - simply a breakdown of the systems.



It is true that an engine which is carefully looked after; gently warmed up

and cooled; run on good quality Western oils and not subjected to aerobatics

can go to 2000 hours. But I can say that an engine in a hard-flown

competition Sukhoi, running at 104%; hovering with little airflow through

the cylinders; having rapid changes from full throttle to idle will probably

not last much more than 200 hours!



Richard Goode Aerobatics

Rhodds Farm

Lyonshall

Hereford

HR5 3LW



Tel:  +44 (0) 1544 340120

Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129

www.russianaeros.com



--

Looigi

Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 80
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Posted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 12:44 pm Post subject: Re: M-14P TBO

Thanks for your post Richard.



Do you have any of the OKBM data you refer?



I wasn't questioning the quality, merely the scope of the work.  I had the privilege of going to the Shakhty overhaul facility a bit over a year ago and I had a good look at their operation.  I have been a Licenced Aircraft Engineer for  many years now and I have worked at many places all over the world.  I can honestly say that the Shakhty plant is old, and not very impressive looking, but it was clean, tidy and as far as the work they turn out and the skill of the guys who work there goes, they would hold their own with anything I have seen elsewhere else.



And yes, I agree totally with your comments about engine life.  I have been told that the air race guys never even make three digits with their engine lives!.  



We have set overhaul periods for components here in NZ like anywhere, but for non-commercial operations we are allowed to run our engines on condition until it is out of limits (leak downs, oil consumption, SOAP etc), even then a cylinder change can sort most of that.  The reality is that all engines are on condition all of the time.  If a new engine starts making metal, or shows other signs of distress you deal with it the same as you would an old one.



The issue I am having is that our CAA have put these planes into a Restricted Limited category which means they treat them as a certified aircraft built to a standard, they just don't know what the standard is.  Because manufacturers data is scarce or unobtainable, Chinese whispers (sorry CJ6 guys) and Facebook seem to be being held up as gospel.  Add into the mix the difference in manufacturing and regulation philosophies, the breakup of the Soviet Union and the language barrier and my frustration levels rise.



What I think I am hearing is that I am just going to have to suck it up, accept that there isn't a right answer and make the most of it.  



Now, where are my OCD pills....?  



Chris

hess737(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 2:46 pm Post subject: M-14P TBO

I'll see what data I have but it's limited mostly to inspections and power chart



Richard Hess

C 404-964-4885



 	  Quote: 	
		   On Mar 13, 2017, at 4:44 PM, Looigi <cdoburton(at)gmail.com> wrote:

 

 

 

 Thanks for your post Richard.

 

 Do you have any of the OKBM data you refer?

 

 I wasn't questioning the quality, merely the scope of the work.  I had the privilege of going to the Shakhty overhaul facility a bit over a year ago and I had a good look at their operation.  I have been a Licenced Aircraft Engineer for  many years now and I have worked at many places all over the world.  I can honestly say that the Shakhty plant is old, and not very impressive looking, but it was clean, tidy and as far as the work they turn out and the skill of the guys who work there goes, they would hold their own with anything I have seen elsewhere else.

 

 And yes, I agree totally with your comments about engine life.  I have been told that the air race guys never even make three digits with their engine lives!.  

 

 We have set overhaul periods for components here in NZ like anywhere, but for non-commercial operations we are allowed to run our engines on condition until it is out of limits (leak downs, oil consumption, SOAP etc), even then a cylinder change can sort most of that.  The reality is that all engines are on condition all of the time.  If a new engine starts making metal, or shows other signs of distress you deal with it the same as you would an old one.

 

 The issue I am having is that our CAA have put these planes into a Restricted Limited category which means they treat them as a certified aircraft built to a standard, they just don't know what the standard is.  Because manufacturers data is scarce or unobtainable, Chinese whispers (sorry CJ6 guys) and Facebook seem to be being held up as gospel.  Add into the mix the difference in manufacturing and regulation philosophies, the breakup of the Soviet Union and the language barrier and my frustration levels rise.

 

 What I think I am hearing is that I am just going to have to suck it up, accept that there isn't a right answer and make the most of it.  

 

 Now, where are my OCD pills....?  

 

 Chris

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467258#467258

richard.goode(at)russiana
Guest

Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:05 am Post subject: M-14P TBO

I have had a look through our files for original OKBM lifetime statement.

However, after 30 years of dealing in these engines, and the Russian

keenness for paperwork we literally have thousands of pages in our archives

and I couldn't immediately find it without spending a lot of time. However,

surely these hours, whether over- conservative or not, are so widely known,

and indeed I suspect the only interest people have is to increase the

permitted hours in those countries where they have to be followed.



Unless things have changed significantly at Shakty, I am sceptical of the

quality of work coming out of any Russian factory. Over the years, I have

visited all the factories - OKBM; Voronezh Manufacturing Plant; Veenitsa;

Shakty, and the common problems they all have today are that they are

under-funded; occupying large and very expensive to run factories as well as

being very short of parts. In particular Voronezh, which was the central

source of spare parts, sold everything related to M 14 engines last year.



You're lucky if you can operate your engines on condition - in Europe we

have to follow the strict manufacturers figures - mind you I'm always rather

sceptical of the hours in the aircraft logbooks of private owners!



We have had similar problems in Europe in that we had been using a "Mickey

Mouse" Russian registration which, about 14 years ago the various European

authorities declared (and quite correctly) as being illegal. Effectively

this would have grounded most Yaks and Sukhois in Europe. Fortunately I had

a friend running certification at EASA and he created a completely

artificial category of "restricted certification" for all Sukhois; Yak

18T/54/55. I suspect that is where your authorities have come up with your

legislation. Then the non-certified aircraft like 50; 52 were left for the

individual national authorities to decide whether to accept them or not, and

the majority of countries don't accept them, although in a number of cases

they will accept the aircraft if they have some form of restricted or

experimental registration from another country - a total lack of

coordination.



Richard Goode Aerobatics

Rhodds Farm

Lyonshall

Hereford

HR5 3LW



Tel:  +44 (0) 1544 340120

Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129

www.russianaeros.com



--

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum