Nc97 Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Is there anything that says an engine run can be performed with a MLG door removed? I know the 71-00-1 pre-engine run inspection checklist says "Closed, Secured," but what about in the event a door is removed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Wilson Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Common sense would say it doesn't matter. Closed and off are identical for engine run purposes. You can even fly with them off, just restricted to a certain airspeed (don't remember the number anymore, gear is restricted to 165 KIAS so probably close to that). The only reason you need to close them for an engine run is the plane bounces its butt off and between bouncing and any airload stress from the props I imagine its possible to damage them. Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lkuest Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Would you perform an engine run with a drybay cover, AC panel, or engine cowling removed? The JG says all the panels must be secured, but you can use your general aircraft knowledge to justify your actions. I've done a max power engine run with the door removed, but I've also been told to do an engine run with open bleed air lines and didn't. The job guide also tells you to start up all 4 engines, so would you start them all up for a #3 leak check? It's one of those things you just have to use your own judgement on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nc97 Posted February 2, 2010 Author Share Posted February 2, 2010 Thanks for the input guys, but common sense doesn't cut it. I once ran #1 engine to NGI, but had the RH MLG door up. Lovely QA saw this, and then wrote me up for a DSV. Like I mentioned before, the 71-00-1 says "Closed, Secured." Is there anything that says I can run with any panel or door "Fully Removed?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mongo Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 I'm sure closed, secured is still a judgment call. why QA wrote you up for running #1 with the RH gear door open seems a little anal (a lot actually) even though I always had them closed. I know you could argue with the guy till your blue in the face and he would still come out on top. Secured is such a broad term. It coulda been removed and "secured" in the cargo pit and it would be legal just like Dan says for flying with one removed. If it aint a structural panel it just needs to be out of harms way. (removed or closed) I'm thinking Tiny may be digging through his books as we speak! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1300 Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Rules are not written for use by those with common sense. Rules are written as if nobody has any common sense or mechanical aptitude. Those who are working in Quality Assurance (or QC for us old guys) are not necessarily selected to work there because they have any common sense either. Unfortunately, those with authority are not necessarily those with knowledge or skills. Nobody that I am aware of ever wrote that the engines can be run with landing gear doors off. The writers may have figured that, since they cannot make a rule for every possible condition, we can figure some things out for ourselves. In the case of flying, we are allowed to fly with the landing gear doors removed up to 171 knots. I'd say that, since we are allowed to takeoff without them, we had better be allowed to run engines with out them. Do you think QA can figure their way through that train of thought? I wish you luck, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Martin Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 The -1 flight manuals in section 5 talk about limitations and state the aircraft can be flown with gear doors removed "if authorized or directed by MAJCOM" Max speed 200 KIAS with gear up and gear door removed. Lists a couple options. Still, common sense or a good C-130 QA will know they can run it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAXTORQ Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 The correct answer is NO IAW 1c-130h-71jg-00-1 . However this particular proceedure can be done IF a MOI is in place stating that you can do so. Consult your local QA for further info. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry myers Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Again, it seems, we have a situation where the experts have been unable to write the guidance so as to take out all judgement.:rolleyes:Is there any thing that would be damaged/harmed buy running engines missing the mlg door? Don't think so. If the JG stated don't operate engines with mlg door missing you would have your answer. This is a situation that calls for good judgement based on experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBowman Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 I would think that as long as the linkage was secured for the missing door - and the other door wasn't flapping in the breeze it should not have been a problem. However, I've not seen these job guides that are being cited. If the door was removed to FOM or for an in-shop repair, I would get with QA and seek the necessary blessing or waiver to run the engines. If I could not get the necessary blessings, I'd see if I could still fill out an AFTO 22. Our senior QA inspector was normally an APG or AR troop. Much more reasonable to work with. QA takes many a bad rap - some earned, some not. I didn't enjoy working there nearly as much as crewing, but it was a good experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEFEGeorge Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 I ran into some A.H. QA people at Cam Rahn. Trying to get a C-7 out of the phase docks, which is only scheduled for 1.5 days, the QA guys would check each and every flap bearing for any wear/movement. The dock Chief wanted no bearings replaced unless absolutely necessary since it created a FCF requirement. Too bad he never relayed that to QA since I was written up a few times for "out of limits" bearing wear. Four phase docks, about 80 birds, Phase inspection every 150 hours. Do the math.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1300 Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Yes, I can see that people just can't find the time to cover every eventuality in maintenance manuals. What a shame, leaving such decisions to the technicians to decide! We'll just have to write more manuals, I guess. Sometimes, while I miss the people I had working with me in the Air Force, I like the military maintenance manuals which are more complete in providing data, but I am glad that I no longer have to deal with all the garbage that come with it. The AF does not trust its people, so they write a ton of regulations. I guess, you are stuck asking the blessings of the QA guy, who may have been hired from AGE or the wash rack. IF you are really lucky, it may be a guy who actually knows something and you can be amazed that this supervisor let him go to QA when he needed him on the line. I wish you luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wil Sanchez Posted February 4, 2010 Share Posted February 4, 2010 Great conversation. Brought some forgotten memories. Did anybody ever jump the run chocks under full power. It is very exciting to say the least. Wil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1300 Posted February 4, 2010 Share Posted February 4, 2010 Actually, I would like to see it done. I've seen the time when we ended up off the concrete at the edge of the runway, and at full power; we could not get over the lip of the concrete back onto the runway. It sure laid some doubt in my mind if it is even possible to "jump" a real set of chalks, much less "run chalks." The concrete edge above ground level was less than eight inches high, and I had to use whatever I could find to build a ramp up for the tires before we could bet back onto the runway. I've never met anyone who ever jumped chalks either, but I am aware of the fun of doing power runs on ice. That is amusing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mongo Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Never jumped chocks but did have one do a 180 on ice. made the seat cushion into a smelly cone shape! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EClark Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Never jumped the chocks but had her jumping up and down bad enough to ask the engine and prop guys to hurry up it was getting scary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAXTORQ Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Jumped chocks once during a CERT run, it gets your attention. For us it normally happens on a very cool day winter mostly where the motors pull a ton of torq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Thanks for the input guys, but common sense doesn't cut it. I once ran #1 engine to NGI, but had the RH MLG door up. Lovely QA saw this, and then wrote me up for a DSV. Like I mentioned before, the 71-00-1 says "Closed, Secured." Is there anything that says I can run with any panel or door "Fully Removed?" There is a paragraph in the front of every single TO/JG that states that this book does not cover every single situation. There is also a MOI that discusses this. It usually states all panel, cowling, doors will either be completely installed or completely removed. CONDITIONS NOT COVERED BY THIS MANUAL. The instructions in this manual represent planned action for conditions normally encountered during maintenance. It is almost impossible to account for maintenance difficulties that may be only occasionally encountered. Therefore, the use of local decisions for general repair practices not involving safety of flight is encouraged to avoid unnecessary delay when coverage in the manual is incomplete. Any variation from procedures shall be consistent with standard shop practices and shall not detract from overall efficiency and operation of the equipment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awq134 Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Never jumped the chocks but had her jumping up and down bad enough to ask the engine and prop guys to hurry up it was getting scary. were these engine guys trying to resync at 900 TIT or pitchlock with only8,000 lbs of fuel. that's not a fun run, especially when your ground guy finds watching air traffic is more important then watching the chocks! this was desert ops of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.