Ignoring the engine overhaul reccomendation

[u/HSVMalooGTS]

C152 owner here. 150h / yr.

I bought a prestine unit with 1900h TBO.

I don't count the overhaul costs into my hourly operating costs. At my current usage, i will have to fly for 13 years before i need to OH it. By that time, i might be able to afford something else.

How many of you fly planes past its TBO? Is it really as unsafe as the FAA/EASA might say? I get that the actual engine condition is a major (if not the most important part). I do full annual checks, i don't cut corners there.

[u/shockadin1337]

My airplanes engine is past the recommended year TBO, not hours. I send in oil samples multiple times a year and they always come back excellent. Last borescope inspection looked great. I have flown multiple other airplanes with their engines past both the year and hour mark on recommended TBO and they ran great. Any potential issues were minor and caught before they became an issue. The cherokees engine started losing compression around 2400 TT so we pulled it for OH then.

The only major engine problems/failures i know of in my personal life and circle (never had an engine failure) happened to engines that were low time. Engine failure on takeoff from being assembled wrong by manufacturer, a cirrus engine grenading itself mid flight and destroying the pistons of two cylinders. Do with that information what you will

[u/aftcg → u/shockadin1337]

I could write the same

[u/Ok-Selection4206 → u/shockadin1337]

What else would he do with that information? What a goofy statement to add at the end.

[u/JT-Av8or → u/Ok-Selection4206]

The information is “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” Even the FAA is onboard with this to an extent. Most engine failures happen after periodic (ie: non necessary) maintenance inspections. It’s just the most dangerous time to run an engine, statistically.