Right – thanks for pointing that out.
I checked the B&C 410 backup alternator IM also – the 1700 hrs is a “recommendation”.
However, we don’t know what text will be in the EASA (or UK CAA – is this really real??) STC, if/when it arrives. EASA tends to be more prescriptive on this stuff.
@bathman – referring to that (unknown type) plane which you say comes with the Surefly mags, assuming it is G- or EASA-reg, what is the text of the AFMS on the magnetos?
Peter wrote:
On the topic of cost saving, read the ICA. Almost nobody does. The Surefly has a 2400hr life limit.
It’s a recommended interval for replacement OR factory inspection, but not an airworthiness limitation. Their airworthiness limitation section explicitly says “none”.
They now come as standard from the factory
An aircraft manufacturer can certify “anything” under their TC. Examples.
Whether that can be used in Europe to certify a Major mod, I don’t know. I know that in the FAA system you can use it, in specific ways.
It is also possible that, post-brexit, the UK CAA is more flexible on approvals based on US approvals. They might directly accept US STCs for example – even if they do it under the table to avoid p1ssing off EASA and compromising future CAA-EASA agreements. It would make sense, but a) I have not heard of this and b) always be ultra wary of “we are working on certification” statements which this business is full of and mostly they are BS, for years, or worse.
The EI business has a particularly bad history of pushing products out, and so far AFAIK nobody has managed to certify a standalone magneto replacement.
EDIT
On the topic of cost saving, read the ICA. Almost nobody does. The Surefly has a 2400hr life limit.
I thought it must have because it rotates so there must be something… Like the B&C alternator has a 1700 HR limit.
Compliance is return to factory, in the US.
I know of lycoming based sure fly magneto’s in service in the UK. They now come as standard from the factory so for some reason they are now allowed.
As for it being half a job well that may well be the case. Buy if the overall running costs are lower I’m all up for it.
Any thought on EASA? On of the club did install one in a DR400-105 when installing the overalled engine, I think it was the surefly rebadged by LYCO. I don’t know yet the status as it started flying last week.
Same deal
You keep one original mag, and still have to OH that one as normal.
This is a half-truth 
Yeah…
Also remember this:
Surefly are working on UK approval
Peter wrote:
Take a look at any spark plug in a Lycoming engine
OK, two then I actually got a carboard box full of these things, surplus from the Air Force (Saab Safari)
The basis principle is as Dan stated. If you could, you would install EI.
And the battery will keep it going for hrs if you load shed, and then there’s the other magneto system…
Bathman wrote:
Who cares.When the price of a Surefly mag is the same as that of a Slick and has a TBO of 2400 hours why would anyone fit a magneto that needs overhauling every 500 hours?
One would start caring at the moment of alternator failure. Surefly is electrically dependent.
