Who's the engine mfgr?

[Veetail88]

Here's a softball for the brain trust.

ON the affidavit that I submitted to the FAA for registration I wasn't sure what to put down for the manufacturer of my engine, and I kind of didn't fill that out, and of course, it got kicked back.

So, All the parts were manufactured by Lycoming, but the motor was assembled by Mattituck/Teledyne Continental Motors.

So, who's the MFGR? Need something the FAA will automatically accept.

Thanks

[LifeofReiley]

Lycoming would be the answer...

[Ironflight]

What does it say on the dataplate Jesse? My Mattituck motors (from back when they were built in Mattituck, NY) actually say Mattituck TMX-O-360 (well, 320 on the other one). So Mattituck is the manufacturer of the motor, and that worked on both of my registrations. You can't go wrong with what's on the plate.

[erich weaver]

Originally Posted by LifeofReiley

Lycoming would be the answer...

Dont agree on this one. My engine is composed of ECI parts but assembled by Aerosport Power. Data plate says Aerosport Power on it. The engine manufacturer is whoever assembled the engine.

erich

[DanBaier]

Follow the data plate. If there is no data plate, if you have the build records to give you info as to when it was put together, call Mattituck and ask them for a data plate. Otherwise, make your own. (Have some fun. Call it a "Zippy & Fritz" O-361 - the actual Lyc displacement is 361, not 360.)

But, if it wasn't put together in Williamsport at the Lycoming factory, then it's definitely not a Lycoming and you don't want to make a data plate that says that when it isn't. Not likely, but if that surfaced in the airworthiness inspection, that might bring things to a sudden halt.

What the FAA wants is to be able to associate the engine in case of future ADs. So, for example, a couple of years ago when the ECi cylinders were under scrutiny, if you had a "Lycoming" you would have had to follow the AD (some insist that ADs don't apply to experimentals - to be argued another day). On the other hand, if you had a "TMX" (built by Mattituck) or something else, you could say, with a straight face, that the AD didn't apply since you didn't have a Lycoming. (Given the nature of the AD, probably not wise - but certainly "legal.")

Dan

[LifeofReiley]

If Lycoming Manufactured all of the parts, that would include the sump and it should have a Lycoming data plate installed on it. Anybody can fab a data plate and swap it out I guess, but there is a Big difference in Manufacturing and just the Assembly of manufactured parts.

[airguy]

So I'm assuming then that on my engine I would be the manufacturer, since I started with a legit Lycoming IO360 but I changed out the sump, vacuum pump get replaced with a standby alternator, I added the oil filter angle adapter, removed the engine-driven fuel pump, put a Jihostroj governor on instead of the original Hartzell, and a few other tweaks. Is that correct?

I never opened the crankcase or accessory case but I did a lot of other stuff to it, I don't see that I get to call it a Lycoming anymore.

[DanBaier]

If I remember the OP - this was an engine built by Mattituck from Lycoming parts. I'm not clear on whether that means it was repaired or overhauled "in the field" by Mattituck (still would be a Lycoming). Let's assume it started life as a Lycoming engine meaning it left the factory with a Lycoming data plate and survived the Mattituck work as such.

After your work and mods, if the engine still conforms to the type certificate data sheet then it is still a Lycoming. If you took a Lycoming and modified it, or performed maintenance on it that made it no longer conform to the Lycoming specifications, then it's no longer a Lycoming.

Simple explanation - if it originally could have been installed on an aircraft with a standard airworthiness certificate, and still can be, then it's a Lycoming. If not, I'd remove the Lycoming data plate and make up a name and consider it an experimental engine (for which a data plate is nice but not actually required).

If the mods you made are covered by approved data (STC, PMA, etc.) the engine could very well still conform to the TCDS but quite possibly not.

Hope that helps.

Dan

[Veetail88]

The engine was brand new from Mattituck. It was built from all new Lycoming parts.

The first paragraph of the sticker in the engine log reads,

"This TMX Experimental Aircraft Engine has been assembled according to the procedures listed in the latest revision of Lycoming Direct Drive Overhaul Manual P/N 60294-7 by Teledyne Mattituck Services at its Mattituck, New York facility. This TMX engine, although assembled for experimental use, has followed the same in-house FAA approved assembly and assembly inspection protocols used during the repair and overhaul of FAA certified engines."

They refer to it as a TMX engine.

At the end of the day, it doesn't seem like this is a huge deal either way and that my registration will move forward whatever I fill the blank in with.

What makes most sense to me however is Paul's original remark about the data plate. I'll be out to the hanger later today and see what exactly is marked on it and put exactly that on the registration.

I really thought this was a slam dunk question, but as usual on this forum, there are multiple trains of thought on this. Love this place!

As far as I'm concerned though, it's a Lycoming!

[Mel]

The only time this entry is critical is if you are asking for a 25 hr phase I.
When that is the case, the engine must meet it's type design, including the dataplate.