|
I agree with most of what you say Ernie. But what I am trying to point out is that:
1.) There are reasons to be concerned about the overall age of an engine.
2.) That just because you are not making metal, your oil consumption is normal, and your compressions are OK, that does not mean that you will not have a failure. Engines wear out, and the longer you run them, the more chance of a failure there is. In fact, my engine that failed met all three tests before the failure.
So yes, I do agree with you, I would rather fly behind an engine with 1500 hours than I would one with 20, but I also would rather reduce my risk by NOT flying behind a 2000 hour engine. The risk period for infant mortality is limited. The risk on a high time engine just keeps getting worse.
Kevin
|