When one of those fancy glass displays fail – and they do – you have extended downtime (IFR) and high cost repairs.
Indeed, and basically nothing can be done without dealer visit – because most “glass” involves dealer-only config codes. I have often posted here that when I look at the sort of planes I see in far away locations, they tend to not be glass – presumably because the owners are too nervous about getting something fixed on say some Greek island. And the flight to the repair place has to be in perfect wx – because you have lost so much stuff in one go. This is less so the case than say 10 years ago but only due to practical reality, not due to free choice.
But we are back to the TB20 GT context which will have reasonable avionics already. We are not talking about 1970s stuff… It is basically what I have except I have put in 2 × EHSI. This is perfectly good stuff and you will spend 40k+ just to get LPV
Peter wrote:
and you will spend 40k+ just to get LPV
Yes, a very expensive tool for extremely limited benefits!
What does LPV approach do for you on an single engine piston (SEP) airplane? I suppose you´re capable of planning and executing IFR LPV approaches, but in reality are you going to plan AND fly to low (IMC) LPV minima on an SEP? There´s so many foreseen and unforeseen threats in low level IMC flying on an SEP. Of course it´s nice to be able to legally fly an LPV approach the day the sh@t hits the fan – but that´s certainly risk management and risky business. I would think that a “basic” GPS allowing for a 3D approach (or even simply 2D LNAV) with LNAV/VNAV minima’s would be sufficient, in addition to ILS capabilities.
3D LPV approach capabilities are for multi-engine airplanes, unless of course your risk behavior tolerates the threats of SEP low level IMC flying. It´s a personal choice.
Interesting point to add is that ive found many planes around with good avionics, but very few with solid airframe/engine. So, i think its more rare to have that, and youre more likely to recoup expenditure on new engine. At the very least, if i am looking to sell a plane in solid condition, its much more likely to go for top dollar by someone desperate to ‘just fly’. Especially in season etc.
Carrying out a project overhaul is a long, albeit predictable, process. I asked for a few quotes from reputable shops (because i was about to buy a TB20 with a ‘shagged’ engine earlier), Nicholson Mclaren quoted me 2-3 months (they had all the parts), Norvic didnt get back with a quote after 2 weeks, Lycoming quoted me 365-400 days lol, Deltaair quoted 3-4 months. So, if you add slippage to that (call it 1 month), assembly/disassembly time, shipping time, we are talking about 5-6 months to get an overhaul properly done to the Lycoming standard (no roller tappets though). Pricing was quite similar around £52k all in (Lycoming were big outliers at much higher but had roller tappets).
So, 5-6 months and 50k is no joke! Maybe everyone here is used to overhauling engines in the good old days when it took a month and cost 20k.. but these days its a lot more difficult. At my flying school, it also took them more than 6 months to get one of their PA28s overhauled as well..
Then on top of all this you run the highest risk of engine failure..(statistically right after overhaul).
JohnH may have some fresh information, also, as he’s doing his engine.
Roller tappets need a new crankcase.
I am not sure it ever took a month literally, but I got mine overhauled in the US in about 4 weeks plus shipping. The shipping was cocked up though. 2nd time I did it I went for an exchange engine (from the US again) which was obviously much faster.
Over here, N-M have a reasonable reputation; the rest not really.
Do you need to overhaul? Is the engine knackered? Have you checked oil analysis?
Yes people spend money on “eye candy”; more so if they don’t fly much 
Instead of looking after their plane properly.
It had 1800 hours, was around 30 years old, last oil analysis looked a bit suspect, so we were planning to get a new one done (then it fell through due to autopilot being broken). I thought I’d use the engine to get my training done (think touch and go’s pfls etc!) Then going for the overhaul..
I suppose it might still have life in it but I certainly plan on doing 500 hours or more.. hence eventually I’m quite likely to need a new engine. Why not do it up front and enjoy the fruits of it is my thought process. Especially that its 3x the official lifespan. And also it had a prop strike and damaged the engine mount many years ago (although was shock tested etc].
Silly question but can a US shop overhaul an engine on a G reg?
Of course but you need to use a shop which is EASA approved and can issue a dual release 8130-3 form (roughly, the US version of the European Form 1 but with the EASA approval number in Box 13). @A_and_C will know of any recent changes.
The big US engine shops have EASA approvals.
The resistance in Europe to doing this is largely “cultural”, plus people tend to feel that chucking the engine in the back of a van is easier even if the shop at the end of the journey has a poor reputation.
The resistance in Europe to doing this is largely “cultural”
Might not be cultural as such, but in support of the local economy…
Peter wrote:
The resistance in Europe to doing this is largely “cultural”,
Or to avoid customs hassle, as you are exporting and reimporting the engine. Also, if you do an overhaul outside the EU you have to pay your own national VAT on the work while if you do it within the EU you (usually) pay VAT of the country where the work is done. This alone can mean a 5% or so difference in cost if you live in a high VAT country. Not to mention that shipping costs are included in the VAT base.
