Magneto 500 hour inspections: My opinion
Posted: Thu Aug 29, 2013 3:32 pm
If we assume only a 75 mile average speed of a Cessna 170 Plain, A, or B on an average 1 to 1.5 hour flight. That comes to 37,500 miles traveled in 500 hours. If you drove your old points operated ignition system car engine for 37,500 miles without a tune up your car would not be running properly. You would most likely have a tune up performed. Just resetting the timing would not be all that was performed. You would likely get new plugs, rotor, points and distributor cap. Possibly even plug wires.
Would you do less for your aircraft engine? Talking with aircraft owners for over 41 years has shown that many would like too. You cannot believe the issues that are found in magnetos that are taken apart for inspection at 500 hours. Letting AD’s be the only reason you would choose to look at a magneto at a minimum of 500 hours is just a bad idea. To a small degree you can’t compare car ignition systems to that of an airplane. Cars operate in a much dirtier environment. They do not have shielded ignition systems. Massive electrode plugs only last about 500 hours anyway. But the magneto is just a self powered distributor and the operating principles beyond the rotating magnet and impulse coupling are the same. 500 hour inspections should be considered a minimum for a magneto.
Concerning the AD’s on Bendix magneto's
AD 78-09-07 R3 was superseded by AD 96-12-07 was Superseded by AD 2005-12-06. AD 78-09-07 R3 & AD 96-12-07 required the repetitive inspection of the Impulse couplings installed on the magnetos at 500 hour intervals and the possible replacement of riveted impulse couplings with Snap ring couplings. AD 2005-12-06 superseded the older AD’s and removed the requirement for the 500 hour inspection of any Bendix series magneto installed on any engine except those installed on Lycoming AEIO-540, HIO-540, IO-540, 0-540, and TIO-540 series engines. So that it does not apply to any Bendix magneto installed on an O-300 or C145 engine. Read the AD’s and service bulletins.
My opinion: Interesting thing here is that if your engine only had one impulse coupling only the magneto with the impulse coupling required any work. I think AD 2005-12-06 was one of the worst ideas the FAA has come up with for a couple of reasons. It was the only thing that caused people to perform a 500 hour inspection on their magnetos. Although none of the AD’s require a 500 Hour inspection of the magneto. (Only the impulse coupling) the magnetos often received a 500 Hour inspection at the time they were removed for the impulse coupling inspection because it made sense to perform it while they were removed. The new AD removed that leverage. The old AD’s even once the Snap ring Impulse coupling was installed was not a terminating action for the 500 hour repetitive inspection? I think the only reason the older AD’s were revised is that it is assumed all riveted impulse couplings possibly installed on Bendix magnetos have been replaced. This does not suppose that an engine could have been sitting around for years without the work being performed. And now it does not apply. The old AD also allowed the continued operation of riveted impulse coupling magnetos if they passed inspection. I have found Bendix impulse couplings that would not pass the required inspection both riveted and snap ring type installed on many different engines other than the engines listed in the new AD. I have seen the riveted impulse couplings damage engines (Stopped them from running) by breaking the gears because the broken rivet parts fell into the gear train. (There was a time before snap ring impulse couplings). I think AD 2005-12-06 should never have been written. I also think there should be an AD on any impulse driven magneto short of an AD requiring 500 hour repetitive inspections on the internals of any magneto. This would only force good practice.
AD 73-07-04 was superseded by AD 94-01-03 R2 = R 94-01-03 R2 TELEDYNE CONTINENTAL MOTORS: Amendment 39-9271. Docket 93-ANE-44. Revises AD 94-01-03 R1, Amendment 39-9006, which revises AD 94-01-03, Amendment 39-8785. Supersedes AD 73-07-04, Amendment 39-1731 (Bendix AD). This AD could have replaced coils & rotating magnets in certain magnetos and had to be accomplished at the next 100 hour inspection, the next annual inspection, the next progressive inspection, or the next 100 hours time in service (TIS) after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first. The effective date of this AD was June 28, 1995. (If it has not been accomplished your airplane has been sitting a long time or someone is really negligent).
AD 94-06-09 still applies and if it has not been performed by now your airplane has been in violation of the AD for a while. It was required within 10 hours of the effective date of the AD. May 20, 1994. It is still applicable but. It was a onetime AD once accomplished. Read the AD
AD 94-01-03 R2 is still applicable. If AD 94-01-03 or 94-01-03 R1 were accomplished no further action is required. In our case This AD’s may have replaced both the coil and rotating magnet in the S-20 series magnetos. It is still applicable however. In any case once accomplished it is a terminating action and no further work is required. The AD is not repetitive. Read the AD
Would you do less for your aircraft engine? Talking with aircraft owners for over 41 years has shown that many would like too. You cannot believe the issues that are found in magnetos that are taken apart for inspection at 500 hours. Letting AD’s be the only reason you would choose to look at a magneto at a minimum of 500 hours is just a bad idea. To a small degree you can’t compare car ignition systems to that of an airplane. Cars operate in a much dirtier environment. They do not have shielded ignition systems. Massive electrode plugs only last about 500 hours anyway. But the magneto is just a self powered distributor and the operating principles beyond the rotating magnet and impulse coupling are the same. 500 hour inspections should be considered a minimum for a magneto.
Concerning the AD’s on Bendix magneto's
AD 78-09-07 R3 was superseded by AD 96-12-07 was Superseded by AD 2005-12-06. AD 78-09-07 R3 & AD 96-12-07 required the repetitive inspection of the Impulse couplings installed on the magnetos at 500 hour intervals and the possible replacement of riveted impulse couplings with Snap ring couplings. AD 2005-12-06 superseded the older AD’s and removed the requirement for the 500 hour inspection of any Bendix series magneto installed on any engine except those installed on Lycoming AEIO-540, HIO-540, IO-540, 0-540, and TIO-540 series engines. So that it does not apply to any Bendix magneto installed on an O-300 or C145 engine. Read the AD’s and service bulletins.
My opinion: Interesting thing here is that if your engine only had one impulse coupling only the magneto with the impulse coupling required any work. I think AD 2005-12-06 was one of the worst ideas the FAA has come up with for a couple of reasons. It was the only thing that caused people to perform a 500 hour inspection on their magnetos. Although none of the AD’s require a 500 Hour inspection of the magneto. (Only the impulse coupling) the magnetos often received a 500 Hour inspection at the time they were removed for the impulse coupling inspection because it made sense to perform it while they were removed. The new AD removed that leverage. The old AD’s even once the Snap ring Impulse coupling was installed was not a terminating action for the 500 hour repetitive inspection? I think the only reason the older AD’s were revised is that it is assumed all riveted impulse couplings possibly installed on Bendix magnetos have been replaced. This does not suppose that an engine could have been sitting around for years without the work being performed. And now it does not apply. The old AD also allowed the continued operation of riveted impulse coupling magnetos if they passed inspection. I have found Bendix impulse couplings that would not pass the required inspection both riveted and snap ring type installed on many different engines other than the engines listed in the new AD. I have seen the riveted impulse couplings damage engines (Stopped them from running) by breaking the gears because the broken rivet parts fell into the gear train. (There was a time before snap ring impulse couplings). I think AD 2005-12-06 should never have been written. I also think there should be an AD on any impulse driven magneto short of an AD requiring 500 hour repetitive inspections on the internals of any magneto. This would only force good practice.
AD 73-07-04 was superseded by AD 94-01-03 R2 = R 94-01-03 R2 TELEDYNE CONTINENTAL MOTORS: Amendment 39-9271. Docket 93-ANE-44. Revises AD 94-01-03 R1, Amendment 39-9006, which revises AD 94-01-03, Amendment 39-8785. Supersedes AD 73-07-04, Amendment 39-1731 (Bendix AD). This AD could have replaced coils & rotating magnets in certain magnetos and had to be accomplished at the next 100 hour inspection, the next annual inspection, the next progressive inspection, or the next 100 hours time in service (TIS) after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first. The effective date of this AD was June 28, 1995. (If it has not been accomplished your airplane has been sitting a long time or someone is really negligent).
AD 94-06-09 still applies and if it has not been performed by now your airplane has been in violation of the AD for a while. It was required within 10 hours of the effective date of the AD. May 20, 1994. It is still applicable but. It was a onetime AD once accomplished. Read the AD
AD 94-01-03 R2 is still applicable. If AD 94-01-03 or 94-01-03 R1 were accomplished no further action is required. In our case This AD’s may have replaced both the coil and rotating magnet in the S-20 series magnetos. It is still applicable however. In any case once accomplished it is a terminating action and no further work is required. The AD is not repetitive. Read the AD