rising sunsep 08, 2016 · 4 rising sun e -magazine -septemer issue unfornately, the terms of the...

BEECH

STARSHIP

Rising Sun Aviation E - Magazine

SEPTEMBER ISSUE www.RisingSunIndia.in

Dear Readers,

In future, quick connectivity between the metros and smaller cities will

become the necessity.

We believe small and medium sized airplane can provide quick connectivity.

So, we promote light airplane and general through our magazine articles.

Being aware of your busy schedule we keep magazine short in terms of a

number of articles.

Enjoy Reading

Suraj Anvekar

[email protected]

CONTENTS

2

Avionics

Distraction

1

Beech Starship

4

Pickle your

Engine

3

Make Sure Pipe

Fits

31st Issue / SEPTEMBER 2016

www.RisingSunIndia.in 1 Rising Sun E - Magazine - SEPTEMBER ISSUE

IT’S BIG, it’s different, but there aren’t many left. It

is a story of innovation, big dreams, poor

management, bad timing, and one of the most

beautiful airplanes kept alive by a few dedicated

Starship owner-enthusiasts who work against all

odds to keep their near one-of-a-kind aircraft

airworthy and flying.

INVENTING THE FUTURE

The birth of the Starship started back in the late

1970s when the people at Beech began to think

about developing a successor to the highly success-

ful King Air.

In the early ’80s, Bill Brown, an engineer at Beech,

started a discussion with Burt Rutan by sending him

a sketch of a next generation rear-winged canard

aircraft.

Burt’s unconventional canard configurations

reduced drag, resisted stalls, and looked futuristic.

Raytheon’s acquisition of Beech in 1980 slowed

things down a bit so it wasn’t until August 1982

that Burt’s newly formed company, Scaled Compo-

sites, received a contract to develop a prototype

for the next generation Beech turboprop.

Burt and his team quickly developed a proof-of-

concept design they called the Model 115. Burt

used his own BASIC code to work out the aerody-

namics for an 85 percent scale prototype aircraft

incorporating a rear wing and forward canard.

The “baby” Starship prototype was roughly the size

of a King Air 90, and it first flew with Dick Rutan at

the controls in August 1983 powered by two small

Pratt turboprop engines.

BEECH STARSHIP


NOTHING IS EASY

Beech committed to the project and announced an

aggressive plan to certify the Starship by the end of

1985. It was to be the first certified aircraft with

wings and structure made from carbon fiber.

On top of that, it was to be the first turboprop

pusher business aircraft and the first to include a

full glass cockpit with FMS navigation capability.

The goal was to produce a single-pilot aircraft with

jet-like performance, enhanced safety, and

extraordinary efficiency with clear performance

advantages over the earlier King Airs.

The original idea was to achieve a 2,500 nm range,

a cruise speed of 400 mph, a certified maximum

altitude of FL410, and a weight below 12,500

pounds so that it could be flown without a type

rating.

Overall the engineering challenges were

significant—particularly when it came to the

composite materials. Instead of demonstrating

fatigue lifetime as with a metal structure, Beech

had to demonstrate the strength of the structure in

the event of numerous damage scenarios.

When problems were uncovered, Beech engineers

simply beefed up the structure. Engineers also had

to develop a way to embed a layer of conductive

material in the structure to provide lightning

protection.

On top of that, they had to satisfy new FAA

requirements to certify the design along with the

fabrication process, and the material—something

that had never been done. The net result of all of

this was a very strong structure that was also

considerably heavier than it might have been.

Aerodynamic issues contributed to the growing

weight problem as well. The flap system, which

includes a variable-sweep forward wing geometry,

added about 800 pounds of actuators and

structure.

During testing it was found that the Starship could

enter a deep, unrecoverable stall in the cruise

configuration under certain rear CG conditions, so

a stick shaker/pusher system was installed—on an

airplane that was initially supposed to be

stall-resistant in its takeoff and landing configura-

tion (as actually demonstrated by flight testing).


Beech wisely certified the aircraft for both single

pilot and crew operations, but it does require a

type rating, which made it more difficult to sell as a

“step-up” airplane.

SO, WHAT WENT WRONG?

Beech certainly misread the market in terms of

customer willingness to accept an aircraft with so

many new features. For many, the design was just

too radical and the price was too close to more

capable jets. It just didn’t make sense at a time

when the economy was struggling and customers

were jittery.

As a part of a $100 million industrial revenue bond

from the county that helped fund the new Starship

factory, Beech had agreed to build at least 53

airplanes to avoid having to repay the investment.

With sluggish sales and a commitment to build

airplanes, Beech came up with a plan to lease the

unsold airplanes.

Unfortunately, the terms of the lease were so good

that it made little sense for anyone to actually buy

an airplane. To further entice potential buyers, free

maintenance was offered, and operator’s flocked

to the maintenance centers.

They fixed anything and everything no matter how

big or how small, and the Starship quickly gained

an undeserved reputation as a maintenance

hog—among both customers and upper

management at Beech.

In the end, only 11 airplanes were sold, and in

1995, the decision was made to terminate the

program and cease all support. Beech recouped

much of the infrastructure and tooling investment,

but most agree that the company lost nearly $300

million on the Starship.

In spite of it all, Beech pressed on, spending lots of

money (some guess as much as $500,000 per day)

to get the first full-scale prototype flying. Beech

received FAA certification on June 14, 1988.

Estimates vary but Beech may have ultimately

dumped as much as $800 million into the whole

Starship program.

When the dust settled, the final certified product

fell short of numerous design goals. First, the

aircraft had gained nearly 2,500 pounds over the

targeted maximum weight of 12,500 pounds. The

MTOW for a Starship came in at 14,900 pounds,

and the fallout from all that extra weight meant

less fuel capacity, which translated into less range.

The Starship still has a respectable “book” range of

1,576 nm, but that’s far short of the original goal.

The size of the cabin had also grown—both in

diameter and length to accommodate two more

passengers and increase comfort, but those

changes also decreased the cruise speed.

GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS

Crew: 1-2 pilots Capacity: 6-8 passengers plus 2

crew

Length: 46 feet 1 inch Wingspan: 54 feet 4.7 inches

Height: 12 feet 11 inches Wing area: 280.88 square

feet

Empty weight: 10,120 pounds

Loaded weight: 15,010 pounds

Maximum takeoff weight: 14,900 pounds

Powerplant: Two Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-67A

turboprops, 1,200 shp each

Propellers: Two five-bladed McCauley propellers

Performance Maximum speed: 335 knots 0.60 Mach

Range: 1,576 nm

Service ceiling: 41,000 feet

Rate of climb: 2,748 feet/minute

Wing loading: 53.0 pounds/feet² Power/mass: 6.21

pounds/shp


UNFORNATELY, THE TERMS OF THE

LEASE WERE SO GOOD THAT IT

MADE LITTLE SENSE FOR ANYONE

TO ACTUALLY BUY AN AIRPLANE.

AN UNORDINARY OWNER’S STORY

Today, there are only five airworthy Starships still

flying in the world. Raj Narayanan, the owner two

Beech Starships in the United States.

Raj bought his first airworthy Starship in 2011 and

had the opportunity to purchase a second one

about two years ago. Raj has acquired a hangar full

of spares to help keep his fleet in the air.

He’s got multiple gear sets, numerous propeller

sets (many of which are brand new), environmen-

tal system parts, spare avionics components, racks

of avionics CRT displays, cabling, wing boots, and

bins full of almost everything else that goes in a

Starship. He even has the props from the original

Starship prototype.

A lot of people keep historic aircraft flying, but the

Starship is among the most challenging. It’s big, it’s

complicated, there weren’t many built, it’s a com-

posite airframe, and the support network is long

gone, so just how he keep a Starship airworthy?

First, Raj has a formal degree in aviation safety

engineering. He also holds an FAA-issued Part 65

repairman certificate with return to service

authority under the firm’s Part 145 repair station

authority, which includes the Starship airframe

and power plant.

He and his people are experts at composites and

that’s one of the key features that drew Raj to the

Starship. If something needs repair, Raj can

engineer a solution, his people can do the repair,

and he can sign it off.

Raj said that he was especially drawn to the

Starship because in principle it could last for

another hundred years—or more. Even though he

flies mostly for business, it’s clear that the Starship

isn’t just a business proposition.

It’s something that Raj is very passionate about. He

reports that the airplane will cruise at 320-330

KTAS at FL340-FL350, and that he’s comfortable

with flight plan legs up to about 1,200 nm.

Both of his Starships are RVSM (reduced vertical

separation minimum) certified and climb to FL410

in about 30 minutes while maintaining a cabin

altitude of about 8,000 feet. That’s very close to the

performance of many light jets.

Today, many aircraft ranging from a Cirrus to the

Dreamliner are made of composites, and integrated

glass panels are considered standard equipment,

but only one other business aircraft, the Italian

Piaggio P.180, has been successful with a

rear-engine, pusher, canard configuration

employed by the Starship. Beech may have been

ahead of its time with the Starship.


Avionics Distraction aircraft accident

THE NEW AIRPLANES are not harder to fly, and

the pilots are no less experienced or capable. The

extra time goes entirely into learning to use the

avionics.

A pilot with the appropriate category and class

ratings can jump in and fly an airplane with the

most capable and complex avionics without a

single hour of instruction on the new technology.

The transition to a complex avionics system

mattered for a corporate pilot who had accumulat-

ed more than 15,000 flying hours when his

company purchased a Beech King Air 200GT.

The pilot had an ATP certificate, held several jet

type ratings, and attended annual training classes

at major simulator-based facilities. He had logged

more than 5,000 hours in the King Air 200.

The day prior to the accident the pilot and two

passengers flew a King Air 200 to Georgetown,

Texas, to trade in on the King Air 200GT. The new

airplane was equipped with a Rockwell Collins Pro

Line 21 integrated avionics system that included

flat glass primary and multifunction displays and a

highly capable flight management system (FMS).

There is no record that the pilot had any

experience operating the Pro Line 21 system

Like most recently built turbine airplanes the King

Air 200GT had a cockpit voice recorder. No flight

data recorder was installed, nor was it required.

The voice recorder captured the conversation

between the pilot and one of the passengers—who

the NTSB calls the “assisting pilot”—as they were

being vectored for an ILS approach into Baton

Rouge, Louisiana.

They had flown the King Air 200GT there from

Georgetown, after taking delivery of the airplane

the previous day, to drop of the assisting pilot,

who had experience with the avionics and knew

how to operate the system.

The recorded conversation sounds familiar to any

experienced pilot who has learned how to use an

integrated avionics system. The weather was VFR,

but the pilots were planning to fly the ILS

approach.

The pilot didn’t understand how to use the FMS to

select the approach, or how the legs would

sequence or what he would see on the glass

primary flight display (PFD). He made comments to

the other pilot that “I don’t know what we’re doin’

now,” and later said, “This right here ain’t the

heading. I don’t know what it is.”


None of the recorded comments and confusion

were unusual for a pilot’s first flight with a new

avionics system. The Pro Line 21 system is no more

complicated to operate than other sophisticated

integrated systems.

The pilot sounded distracted throughout the

remainder of the approach and landing.

The assisting pilot took over communications with

controllers and ran the checklist for landing in

addition to operating the FMS and displays.

The pilot was accustomed to “steam gauges” for

the basic engine and system information such as oil

pressure and oil temperature and had a hard time

finding that information on the multifunction

display (MFD) even as they taxied in after landing,

or even how to turn the avionics system of .

About an hour later the pilot and the assisting pilot

were back in the cockpit preparing for the pilot to

fly the King Air to its new home base at McComb,

Mississippi— solo.

The assisting pilot was heard talking the pilot

through each step of the checklist including engine

start.

The assisting pilot then talked the pilot through

every step to initiate the avionics and enter

McComb into the FMS as the destination. The

weather was broken clouds at 7,500 feet with 10

miles’ visibility.

The pilot called for a VFR clearance and requested

2,000 feet, which was issued by controllers. It was

only 52 miles to McComb.

After about 11 minutes of running checklists and

setting up the avionics, the assisting pilot asked,

“Are you comfortable?”

The pilot replied, “I’m, I’m nervous, but I think I’m

all right. I’ll figure… I just the only thing I’m nerv-

ous about is I don’t want to mess up while I’m in

their airspace here. And, and get in trouble.” Baton

Rouge is Class C airspace, but McComb is not.

The assisting pilot then showed the pilot how to

enter the assigned transponder code and how to

select frequencies on the comm radios, and said,

“That’s it, man.”

He also suggested hand flying instead of using the

autopilot, and showed the pilot several different

display formats on the PFD screen and also how to

operate the flight director.

With best wishes all around the assisting pilot

asked for the left propeller to be feathered so he

could exit without being blasted by prop wash.

After the assisting pilot left the only recordings

were communications with ground control and

tower, and aircraft sounds and alerts from the sys-

tems.

About one minute, 12 seconds after the engine

sound indicated takeoff the altitude alert chime

was heard indicating the King Air was near 2,000

feet. The tower controller then called telling the

pilot to switch to departure frequency.

As the pilot was switching to departure a tone

believed to be the gear warning horn sounded very

briefly.

In the King Air when the throttles are reduced

beyond a preset point and the landing gear isn’t

down the gear warning horn sounds. But the tone

can be canceled with the press of a button, and

that’s what NTSB experts believe happened in-

stead of the throttles being advanced to silence

the horn.

The pilot was accustomed to “steam

gauges” for the basic engine and

system information such as oil pressure

and oil temperature and had a hard

time finding that information on the

multifunction display (MFD).


Twenty-three seconds after the gear warning tone

was recorded there was a sound believed to be the

stall warning horn. The sound could be heard as

the pilot called departure control reporting that he

was leveling at 2,000 feet.

About eight seconds later the autopilot disconnect

warning was heard. Shortly after the autopilot dis-

connect tone the stall warning horn began to bleat

again.

At the same time airflow sounds changed, which

investigators believe was a change in engine power

or propeller pitch. The pilot continued pretty

normal replies to departure control.

About 23 seconds later the enhanced ground

proximity warning system (EGPWS) was heard an-

nouncing “500 feet” followed by “too low gear”

followed shortly by “pull up pull up.”

As the EGPWS automated voice continued the pilot

keyed the mic and told departure, “I’m fixin’ to

crash.” The recording ended less than four seconds

later.

A review of the radar track showed the King Air

started a turn to the assigned heading not long

after takeoff. The groundspeed was 124 knots

increasing to 128 knots.

Radar showed the airplane reaching an altitude of

1,200 feet and appearing to turn on course. Before

radar contact was lost the altitude was down to

400 feet and groundspeed to 102 knots.

Several witnesses reported seeing the King Air

flying low before dropping and striking the roof of a

house.

The accident site was about 3.5 miles northeast of

the departure airport in a residential area. There

was a post-crash fi re that, along with the severity

of impact, made the crash un-survivable.

Why would a highly experienced pilot with

thousands of hours of time in the same type of

airplane lose control under benign weather

conditions and so shortly after takeoff ?

Investigators couldn’t find any indication of

preimpact problems with the airplane, and the

pilot never mentioned a problem or emergency

situation to controllers.

The NTSB probable cause finding for the accident

is “the pilot’s failure to maintain adequate

airspeed during departure, which resulted in an

aerodynamic stall and subsequent impact with

terrain. Contributing to the accident was the pilot’s

lack of specific knowledge of the airplane’s

avionics.”

Advanced avionics can do so much to guide us, but

until we learn how to operate and understand an

integrated cockpit all of that capability can also be

a distraction.

No matter how advanced and capable an avionics

system may be we can always see the airspeed,

attitude, and altitude, but the hard part is to

remember that’s what matters most.


This article is based solely on the NTSB report

of the accident .

MAKE SURE THE PIPE FITS PIPE THREADS ARE USED in virtually every aircraft

built today, from ultralights to Boeing’s finest. We

use pipe thread fittings throughout the aircraft,

including fuel systems, brakes, oil, hydraulic,

coolant, and even pitot-static systems.

The pipe fitting is an area that has only been

touched on lightly. We continue to see confusion,

problems, and even accidents as a result of

misunderstanding the subject of pipe fittings.

PIPE THREAD TYPES

The most common types of tapered pipe thread

used are the National Pipe Tapered Thread (NPT).

The NPTF is also referred to as Dryseal American

National Standard Tapered Pipe Thread (ANSI

B1.20.3). This thread was designed to provide a

leak-free seal without the use of Teflon tape or

sealing compound. It is essentially the same thread

as the NPT with the root and crest of the threads

modified to provide an interference fit during

installation.

Time has shown that this often works okay during

the initial installation, but the use of fittings with

the NPTF thread on subsequent removal and

reinstallation will almost certainly leak without the

use of a thread sealant.

PIPE THREAD SIZE

The most common sizes used in light aircraft are

1/8 inch, 1/4 inch, and 3/8 inch.

Until you become familiar with the different sizes,

you can use the size chart above to help with iden-

tification.

MATERIAL

For easy identification aluminum aircraft fittings

are anodized blue and steel fittings are plated

black.


LEAKING FITTINGS

The problem of leakage arises as a result of the

design of the threads, particularly on an NPT

thread where the root and the crest are truncated

as shown above.

This design allows for a helical passage from the

inside of the fitting through the root and the crest

of each thread to allow fluid to pass around the

perimeter of the thread until it can escape, pre-

senting itself as a leak.

The purpose of thread sealant is to fill in this pas-

sageway between the crest of the male and female

thread. It is not possible to stop a leak on a pipe

thread by tightening the fitting. This is because

tightening the fitting does not eliminate this pas-

sageway. If you find that you have a pipe fitting

that is leaking, the only method by which you can

eliminate the leak is to remove the fitting, reapply

thread sealing compound, reinstall, and tighten

properly.

TIPS FOR PROPER INSTALLATION OF FITTINGS

WITH THE NPT

Tip 1. Before installation inspect both the fitting

and the boss. The boss is the raised area on a com-

ponent that is drilled and threaded for the fitting.

Inspect both the fitting and the boss for damage

and cleanliness. Clean, if needed.

Tip 2.

Apply the proper thread sealant to the threads of

the fitting to be installed. The type of thread seal-

ant used will primarily depend on the type of fluid

used in that system.

Each manufacturer of a system component may

also decide the proper thread sealant to be used

considering factors other than the type of fluid

such as temperature, environment, vibration, and

whether the part is removed for service routinely.

The amount of thread sealant needed is limited to

the amount that will fill the void where the threads

are truncated on the fitting.

Ensure that no thread sealant extends to the end

of the threads where it could be ingested into the

fluid system. Many an engine has quit because of

thread sealant or Teflon tape being ingested into a

carburetor or fuel-injection system plugging a fuel

passage.

A note regarding the use of Teflon tape: Although

there are some instances where the manufacturer

recommends the use of Teflon tape on a pipe

fitting, this is an area to tread carefully.

The potential of Teflon tape being ingested into a

fluid system is a high enough risk that most manu-

facturers recommend the use of a pipe sealant in-

stead. In addition, the use of Teflon tape substan-

tially reduces the amount of friction during installa-

tion.

This can lead to over-torquing of the fitting and

cracking of the boss in which it is installed. And

because of the low friction of the Teflon tape, this

also leads to loosening of the fitting in high-

vibration environments.


Tip 3.

Install the fitting ensuring that it remains concen-

tric to the hole in the boss during the installation

process. Pipe threads are notoriously easy to cross

thread.

The fitting should rotate two to three turns

smoothly by hand until finger tight. If it rotates less

than two turns or more than three and a half

turns, this is an indication that there is a possible

problem.

Tip 4.

Once installed finger tight, continue to tighten

using a wrench. For the smaller size fittings, 3/4

inch and smaller, tighten between two and three

turns beyond finger tight.

Because of the nature of the tapered pipe thread,

the tightening procedure is somewhat discretion-

ary. Although torque guidelines can be found in

some publications, the proper installation requires

that you develop a “feel” for the proper torque.

A good rule of thumb is to turn until the fitting is

tight enough to prevent movement or loosening

and then slightly more, if needed, for proper fitting

alignment.

Not tightening enough could result in the fitting

becoming loose and leaking. In contrast

over-torquing could result in cracking the boss.

Cracking is particularly common when

over-torquing where there is a thin cross section at

the boss and the material is manufactured from

aluminum or magnesium.

The quality of the threads, both internal and exter-

nal, varies greatly and will have some effect on the

amount of tightening necessary. After final installa-

tion, you should have between three and a half

and six threads fully engaged.

Tip 5.

Ensure that there are no side loads or bending

loads applied to pipe fittings. There are literally

hundreds of examples of system failures and

airplane crashes as a result of improperly

side-loading a pipe fitting. A Rotax 912 S powered

Tecnam light-sport aircraft was modified to

accommodate the installation of a Hobbs meter

pressure switch.

The original oil pressure sender was removed from

the oil pressure port on the side of the engine. A

commercial grade brass T fitting was installed with

a 1/8-inch brass pipe nipple into the oil pressure

port.

The oil pressure sender and the Hobbs meter pres-

sure switch were installed into the T fitting. The

added weight and the extended arm of these two

components resulted in overloading and

subsequent failure of the brass pipe nipple.

This caused a loss of oil pressure and an off-field

landing, resulting in substantial damage to the

aircraft.

Now that you understand a little bit more about

the use of pipe fittings in aircraft, you should be

able to approach pipe fitting from a little different

perspective.

We have provided some generic information and

rules, which should help you to make better

choices regarding the use of pipe fittings.

However, the tips and information here should

never take precedence over the manufacturer’s

recommendations for your particular aircraft.


“OUR EXPERIENCE HAS shown that in regions of

high humidity, active corrosion can be found on

cylinder walls of engines inoperative for periods as

brief as two days.” —Lycoming Service Letter

L180B

Let’s say Pilot flies 100 hours per year and splits his

flight time equally between months. The result is

8.33 hours per month. If every flier were like above

Pilot no one would ever have to preserve an

engine for inactivity. But if we fly a lot during

some months and hardly at all other months then

preserving engine is required.

First here’s a couple of don’ts.

Don’t pull the prop through by hand during periods

of inactivity. This actually displaces any existing oil

film. Don’t idle the engine on the ground or do a

ground run in lieu of pickling the engine.

Both of these practices will ratchet up the

likelihood of rust since the oil temperature will

never be elevated long enough to boil off the

moisture produced during the combustion process.

WHAT’S NORMAL ENGINE ACTIVITY?

If you put 50 hours on your engine soon after

putting it into service, your engine will have some

protection against corrosion (rust) due to a buildup

of varnish.

Once the varnish layer is there, in favorable

(average) atmospheric conditions these engines

may remain inactive for several weeks without

evidence of damage by corrosion.

Lycoming states that the “desired” flight time for

its air-cooled engines is at least one continuous

hour with oil temperatures from 165°F to 200°F at

intervals not to exceed 30 days.

Continental Motors Inc. (CMI) says, “The best

method of reducing the likelihood of corrosive

attack is to fly the aircraft at least once a week for

a minimum of one hour.” So who’s right? The

answer for your airplane depends on the

environment.

“If the airplane is operated close to lakes, oceans,

or rivers and in humid regions, there’s a greater

need for engine preservation than those operated

in arid regions.” —Lycoming Service Letter L180B .

For those located in a high corrosion area it’s

important to be proactive in protecting your

engine, but it’s not so hard.

One simple tool that’s been proven to delay the

onset of and reduce internal engine rust is Cam-

Guard.

If you know your engine will sit longer than 30

days, take additional steps. The new buzz word in

engine preservation is vapor phase corrosion

inhibitor (VPCI). Lycoming recommends Cortec

VpCI-326. One quart is all you need to “pickle”

your engine.

Pickle your Engine


Here’s the short version of the long-term

storage process:

(30-90 DAYS)

1) Drain engine oil and remove the filter.

2) Install a new filter and fill the sump with oil

conforming to MIL-C-6529 Type II (mix Cortec VpCI

-326 with oil in the proper ratio).

3) Run the engine until the oil temperature reaches

180°F. Shut the engine down.

4) Spray an atomized preservative oil conforming

to MIL-P-46002, Grade 1 (Cortec VpCI326) at room

temperature through the spark plug hole. Rotate

the engine throughout the process to locate the

piston in the cylinder being coated at bottom dead

center.

5) Re-install the spark plugs.

6) Seal all engine openings (breather tube,

carburetor or fuel-injection air inlet, exhaust pipes,

etc.). Add a “Remove Before Flight” streamer at

each sealed location and a “Do Not Turn Propel-

ler—Engine Preserved—Preservation Date _____”

flag to the propeller.

INDEFINITE STORAGE (MORE THAN 90 DAYS)

Indefinite storage includes all the steps above plus

two more:

1) Install dehydrator spark plugs (MS27215-1 or -2

or AN4062-1) in the upper spark plug holes.

2) Seal the openings listed above in Step 6 with a

bag filled with silica gel desiccant beads.

It’s recommended that the desiccant be inspected

every 15 days to maintain the indefinite

preservation.

If the desiccant color changes from bright cobalt

blue to a pinkish color between inspections, the

desiccant must be dried prior to further use.

Desiccant beads are dried by heating in an oven at

200°F to 220°F until the blue color returns.

HOME BREW PICKLE OIL

The MIL-C-6529 Type II preservative oil is called

out by Continental and Lycoming can be purchased

as Royko 482, Phillips Aviation Anti-Rust 20W-50

oil, and AeroShell 2F.

These are termed “fly-away” oils since the engine

manufacturers state that they don’t need to be

drained prior to the first flight when returning an

engine to service.

Continental Motors says this oil can be used during

engine break-in for 25 hours or for four months,

whichever occurs first; Lycoming for 50 hours over

the TBO of the engine.

Rather than buying one of these special oils it’s

easy to mix your own engine oil since you probably

already have in shelf in your hangar.

Simply mixing one part of Cortec VpCI 326—about

$20 per quart at most aviation supply houses—

with 10 parts of single-grade engine oil results in

“pickle oil” that conforms to the spec.

The remainder of the quart of Cortec VpCI is

sprayed into the cylinders since it alone conforms

to the top cylinder preservative spec.

RETURN TO SERVICE

To return the engine to flight status simply remove

the plugs and desiccant bags, spin the prop

through by hand to make sure most of the fluid is

pumped out of the cylinders, install the spark

plugs, change the filter, and drain and change the

oil back to your preferred oil.

There are methods—that differ greatly from the

Lycoming and CMI methods—of preventing rust in

an inactive engine. Let’s take a look at a couple.


Thanks for Reading

rising sunsep 08, 2016 · 4 rising sun e -magazine -septemer issue unfornately, the terms of the...

Documents