Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Which is the better system for recording an aircraft's Total Time in Service (or pilot's flying time for that matter)?

 

There are at least two ways of recording an aircraft's TTIS - Tacho time or Hobbs Meter time. Although aiming for the same target, the two methods record different things.

 

Tacho time is a recording of the time an engine has been operating. It is linked to engine revolutions per minute (RPM). Tacho Time records the time at some specific RPM. It is most accurate at cruise RPM, and least accurate while taxiing or stationary with the engine running. At these times, the clock runs slower. That might be an accurate measurement of wear and tear as one would expect the engine components to be less stressed around idle speed.

 

Hobbs time is time recorded by an electrically powered clock. The Hobbs meter can be activated in a number of ways:

 

  1. It can measure the time that the electrical system is on. This maximizes the recorded time.
     
  2. It can be activated by oil pressure running into a pressure switch, and therefore runs while the engine is running. 
     
  3. It can be activated by another switch, either an airspeed sensing vane under a wing  or a pressure switch attached to the landing gear. In these cases, the meter only measures the time the aircraft is actually flying.
     

 

 

 

With method 2, the Hobbs reading will be closest to the Tacho time, but will always be higher because  of the slower reading rate of the Tacho when the engine is at low revs. With method 3, the Hobbs meter records the time that the airframe was subjected to in-flight forces. With method 1, leave the Master turned ON when you hangar the plane and your maintenance period will be short, without any flying being done. 

 

What is the best way to record TTIS to balance the needs of good maintenance and economical running? Each method introduces inaccuracies. Perhaps the compromise is to wire the Hobbs meter to the oil pressure switch so that Hobbs time and Tacho time are more closely aligned. The Hobbs meter will account for the under reading of the Tacho on the ground to account for engine use, and allow for structural wear to the airframe during movement on the ground.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 Whatever you pick you are supposed to stick to and there are (sometimes) adjustments within the definition(s)  ie  Use different servicing times.  From engine start to engine shutdown would be good enough for me. It's one that's widely used. If it's related to engine RPMs as well there's a good relationship to hard use and light use (idling and taxi (which are often the same).  Having it begin co incident with with electrical power ON isn't too realistic for airframes/engines etc. . Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use flight time. From start of take off run to standstill after a flight. That includes taxi back to start point or wherever, but not taxi to start of take off run.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use tacho time as it is the only meter I have. VDO don't provide any data on the speed it runs at at low/idle RPM. I always assumed it was just a clock activated when the tacho began to read RPM when the engine is running.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The information I have is that RAA aircraft should run on hobbs and GA on tacho.

 

That not particularly being my opinion, good or bad, but from what I've seen.

 

There was a local aircraft that was changed from ga to RAA rego.

 

It was maintained by a LAME under tacho hours in GA.

 

RAA wanted it maintained under hobbs, so it "gained" a couple of hundred hours unfortunately. 

 

Note, it contained both hobbs and tacho meters.

 

If it was me, I would have probably just continued on tacho, and not sought clarification....?

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotax require engine hours recorded from start to stop, puts engine hrs about 10% above airframe hours. My old Cessna had  the Hobbs  with a vacuum air switch which cut in at around 25 kts. IAS. Vacuum provided by an external horn.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Mewp - Rotax (and I believe other engine suppliers) specify Hobbs/engine time - Makes sense that an engine should be serviced and recorded for all time it is running anything less is a misrepresentation. Propeller time is also best recorded as engine time.

 

In small, simple, fixed wing, aircraft, engine time is the significant measurement - airframe hours is not usually a factor of note. I would go so far as to suggest calendar (and possibly no, landings) time may have more significance to airframe than Hobbs/engine or other measurements.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Individual interpretation is not actually available and the authority would have the final say. On pressurised aircraft pressure cycles are recorded and are significant in airframe life but not so with firebombers where they would operate unpressurised and are subject to a lot of landings and rough air operation so are in no mans land  where a lot of inflight failures are happening. Special use aircraft (aerobatic) have more rigid inspection schedules and lifed parts and  a "G" meter. Heavy landings require inspections and that applies to any aircraft( even your Optimistic MK1). It's really a lot of commonsense. Aeroplanes aren't made like bulldozers as they have to FLY and things that fly well are LIGHT. Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Even fewer pressurised bulldozer owner/builders.

 

I’m not so sure....many bulldozer drivers I’ve seen look like they’re going to pop, usually their shirts already have. 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In a hired plane, you don't want the hirer to feel under financial pressure to taxy out quickly and possibly interfere with other aircraft. So for this application, a hobbs type that only cuts in at 25 knots is better, using this as the cost basis makes taxy time free.

 

For changing the oil, tacho time is probably better.  I have thought about oil additives and concluded that frequent oil changes ( 25 hour tacho time ) is probably a better way to go. The best Jabiru engine I have ever seen ( based on leakdown ) has an owner who uses 12.5 hour oil change time.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Changing the oil at 12 hours might not have been the only thing he did differently. 25 should be OK but it depends on usage . Long flights with no dust involved could easily allow extra Hours without any damage.. Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jabiru recommend oil change every 50 hours but 25 hours for schools with usually a lot more takeoffs & landings. I change mine every 25 hours. It is cheap ($50.00 for Aeroshell 100 plus and a new oil filter) and I do not have to top up between changes. It is also good to keep an eye on everything else under the cowl at the same time. Oil stays pretty clean for the 25 hours as well.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My oil gets changed at 25 hours too. The quantity in a Jabiru is not so great that it is too expensive. It is the additives which are used up I reckon.

 

Apparently some car service places use recycled oil, and this is probably ok as long as they carefully replace the additives. I doubt that they do, I reckon they just filter it really well so it looks new.

 

At a Cam-guard presentation, the story was told that the man behind Cam-guard was an oil-company executive who wanted this additive in the aviation oil but he was not allowed to because of the cost. So he started Cam-guard.

 

Gosh its hard for us ordinary blokes who have no testing labs to sort out the BS from the truth in this sort of thing.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 The darkening of the oil us caused by rich mixture and that's more on the ground  and full throttle than other times. Darkening doesn't mean the additives are used up or that the oil is no good. The polymers in multigrade oils do  get degraded . That's why the multigrades are worn out quicker than straight grades. Again, unless you leave it in for a long time, you won't be affected.  Metal in the filter is a cause for engine examination  . That's the most important thing of all. Draining your oil after a longish flight is a good time to do it. . With a flat bottomed sump  some of the muck will stay there .Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I drain my oil I always lift the right wheel on to a block so the oil is directed to the sump plug & in theory most of the goo if there is any. Dunno if it works but I feel better about it.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I do the same with all the vehicles I service. IF the things had a funnel shaped bottom in the oil tank it would stop the problem. In the small Continental the sump is bottle shaped and can easily be removed and cleaned properly with a bottle brush and kero. Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
When I drain my oil I always lift the right wheel on to a block so the oil is directed to the sump plug & in theory most of the goo if there is any. Dunno if it works but I feel better about it.

 

Also make sure dipstick is removed. Helps to increase the outflow velocity, taking any ‘goo’ with it ...... Bob 

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
When I drain my oil I always lift the right wheel on to a block so the oil is directed to the sump plug & in theory most of the goo if there is any. Dunno if it works but I feel better about it.

 

My dog does the same.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

At a Cam-guard presentation, the story was told that the man behind Cam-guard was an oil-company executive who wanted this additive in the aviation oil but he was not allowed to because of the cost. So he started Cam-guard.

 

Gosh its hard for us ordinary blokes who have no testing labs to sort out the BS from the truth in this sort of thing.

 

I believe aeroshell 100 plus has the required lycoming additive.

 

 The darkening of the oil us caused by rich mixture and that's more on the ground  and full throttle than other times. Nev

 

I think you are correct. My Lyc 0-320 oil is always much cleaner than the flying school aircraft I see. I always  lean on the ground and any time 75% power or less is used as per lycoming's instructions. Flying schools used to teach don't touch the red knob unless  above 5000'    

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Disgusting as it might seem, but to drag this thread back on track ...

 

The crux of the argument is the need to define "time in service" which is the figure upon which scheduled maintenance is based.

 

The FAA defines "time in service" as: "With respect to maintenance time records, means the time from the moment an aircraft leaves the surface of the earth until it touches it at the next point of landing."

 

With regard to engine TTIS, the FAA obviously considers any operation of the engine on the ground is not included in TTIS. Therefore, time in service can be measured by the use of a an existing hourmeter activated when the forward motion of the aircraft exceeds the stall speed of the aircraft.

 

With its usual commitment to serving the aircraft operating public, CASA has failed to define "time in service" in the Civil Aviation Regulations. However, to them it is a big No! No! to set the expiry of a maintenance release with reference to time recorded by a tacho. Basically, if the learned people of the FAA are happy to have time in service recorded as the time between lift-off and return to ground, then I suggest that their thoughts be followed here.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...