Login: 
Passwort: 
Neuanmeldung 
Passwort vergessen



Das neue Heft erscheint am 1. Mai
Fliegen ohne Flugleiter – wir warten auf ...
Eindrücke von der AERO 2024
Notlandung: Diesmal in echt!
Kontamination von Kraftstoffsystemen
Kölner Handling-Agenten scheitern mit Klage
Unfall: Verunglücktes Änderungsmanagement
Engagierter Journalismus aus Sicht des eigenen Cockpits
Engagierter Journalismus aus Sicht des eigenen Cockpits
Sortieren nach:  Datum - neue zuerst |  Datum - alte zuerst |  Bewertung

4. September 2022: Von Charlie_ 22 an Charlie_ 22

Die "Wahrheit" liegt wohl irgendwo in der Mitte. Diese Statement von Mike Busch habe ich gefunden. Du hast aber recht, dass auch Camguaerd keine Zulassung von TCM hat;

Mike Busch:

I’ve researched this quite extensively (including with my Principal Maintenance Inspector at the FSDO who oversees my IA activities).

There is no such thing as an FAA-approved oil additive.

ASL Camguard has been “accepted” by the FAA Engine & Propeller Directorate for normally aspirated engines. What that “acceptance” means is that the FAA wrote ASL a letter saying that they are persuaded that Camguard “does no harm” when used in normally aspirated engines.

ASL has requested such “acceptance” from the FAA Engine & Propeller Directorate for turbocharged engines, but the FAA has indicated that they will require ALT to submit the results of endurance tests that ASL anticipates will take them at least two years to complete. Thus, do not expect FAA type acceptance any time soon.

There is no regulatory requirement that an oil additive be FAA “accepted.” People have been using Marvel Mystery Oil in aircraft engines for five decades (at least) and I’ve yet to hear of one of them being busted. I actually used a little in one of my engines years ago (the statute of limitations has run) when I detected some valve lifter clatter. The lifter clatter cleared up. NOTE: This is NOT an endorsement of MMO!!! I do not use it and do not recommend it except in abnormal circumstances.

The issue of TCM acceptance is a totally different matter. TCM specifically does not accept ANY aftermarket oil additive, even those that have been FAA accepted. In fact, TCM states that the use of any aftermarket lubricants may void TCM’s warranty. The reference is TCM SIL99-2B. In fact, however, I am unaware that TCM has ever denied warranty coverage based on the use of any aviation oil additive, and it’s clear from the wording of SIL99-2B that TCM is primarily concerned about the use of automotive products in aircraft engines.

Bottom line: I have written extensively and spoken publically about my own experience using Camguard in the turbocharged engines of my own airplane. I have done this quite high-profile under FAA scrutiny and I have received no push-back from anyone in the FAA. I have discussed this issue face-to-face with my FAA PMI, who told me that while he’s not exactly thrilled about my public endorsement of Camguard in the context of turbocharged engines, he knows of no regulatory issues that would make such use problematic.

As for TCM, their stance against the use of aftermarket additives applies to all additives and all engines equally. In theory, TCM could deny warranty coverage on the basis of the use of any aftermarket additive in any TCM engine, whether normally aspirated or turbocharged. In practice, I have never heard of a single instance in which they did so.

The language is SIL99-2B is clearly CYA boilerplate. With respect to Camguard, the issue is moot anyway because TCM does not offer any warranty for engines in SR22 Turbos (Cirrus provides the warranty for those engines).

SIL99-2B has a lot of problems. For example, I have been using Aeroshell W100 in all my TCM piston engines for well over 4 decades. If you look at the list of approved aircraft oils in SIL99-2B, you’ll observe that Aeroshell W100 is NOT on the list! (Aeroshell W100 Plus is on the list, but the non-Plus variety that I have always used is not on the list.) However, SIL99-2B also says:

Lubricating oils qualified for use in Teledyne Continental Motors engines are required to meet SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) specifications.

SAE specification J 1899 (formerly MIL-L-22851) is the approval for aircraft piston engine ashless-dispersant oil.

SAE specification J 1966 (formerly MIL-L-6082E) is the approval for aircraft piston engine non-dispersant mineral oil.

Aeroshell W100 meets SAE J 1899 and MIL-L-22851 (says so right on the bottle).

Just use whatever oil and additives you think best (as long as they’re intended for use in piston aircraft engines), and don’t worry about the FAA or TCM. There is no oil police.

My recommendation is to use either Aeroshell W100 single-grade or Phillips X/C 20W-50 multigrade and to add at least 5% ASL Camguard (1 pint per 10 quarts) at each oil change. (A little extra Camguard doesn’t hurt, and a 10% concentration is recommended as a “pickling oil” if the aircraft will be idle for a significant length of time.) For our Savvy clients, we recommend W100 with Camguard as our first choice unless the airplane is likely to encounter unpreheated cold-starts in sub-freezing OATs, in which case we recommend Phillips 20W-50 with Camguard.

We have several Cirrus clients who had lousy looking oil analysis reports and cleaned up nicely after a couple of oil changes with Camguard. I have seen the same thing occur in at least a dozen engines in non-Cirrus aircraft (Bonanzas, Centurions and twin Cessnas) as well. I have documented my own oil analysis results from my own airplane in considerable detail in several aviation magazines. I am personally persuaded that the stuff works quite well and has no adverse side effects. (If I wasn’t , I sure wouldn’t be using it in my own engines, which are now approaching 200% of TBO.) I used Camguard quietly for almost two years before I started talking about it in public, because I was skeptical and wanted to see plenty of data before putting my reputation on the line.

Mike Busch


1 Beiträge Seite 1 von 1

 

Home
Impressum
© 2004-2024 Airwork Press GmbH. Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Vervielfältigung nur mit Genehmigung der Airwork Press GmbH. Die Nutzung des Pilot und Flugzeug Internet-Forums unterliegt den allgemeinen Nutzungsbedingungen (hier). Es gelten unsere Datenschutzerklärung unsere Allgemeinen Geschäftsbedingungen (hier). Kartendaten: © OpenStreetMap-Mitwirkende, SRTM | Kartendarstellung: © OpenTopoMap (CC-BY-SA) Hub Version 14.22.03
Zur mobilen Ansicht wechseln
Seitenanfang