How PT-6 Turbines Are Overhauled

[@xav8tr974]

Nice to see these guys working patiently with their hands and taking pride in their work.

[@jrdeckard3317]

The final step is open-wallet surgery, performed while the customer is hanging upside down.

[@darreno1450]

lol!

[@awaitingthetrumpetcall4529]

I love the imagery...but...if something goes wrong in the air you can't pull over to the side of the road. Repair is still cheaper than replacement.

[@Native_love]

The most trusted and reliable turboprop in the world! Awesome!

[@Windtee]

Cool tour and workflow explanation!

[@ljohnbaptiste]

the black dude is my dad in this vid

[@9HighFlyer9]

Larry Sr. Just in this video or all the time? 😉

[@basimpsn]

What??

[@PRM256]

Reformulating the statement. The black guy in this vid is your dad.

[@christophermichaelson9050]

That's really neat. It looks like he takes his work seriously.

[@BrilliantDesignOnline]

Looks like a super professional shop to work for; cool.

[@tonnymampouya2583]

am so glad how you explain all this to now the fonctional of PT6 engine

[@leokimvideo]

That safety wire really stings if you get pricked by it

[@absalommikkelsen]

Great video. Very informative

[@chapmasi]

I read that standard 3500hr overhaul for the PT6 costs approx $250K....... I can see why

[@ghostrider-be9ek]

most owners already already putting money aside every hour, either by budgets or actual cashflow

[@RainbowManification]

Closer to 4 to 600k. And if you’re on a scheduled maintenance program you can extend that overhaul time up to 5000 hours

[@RossLeavitt]

I always wondered where the $500k goes. That makes sense now!

[@mojogrip]

Very neat"

[@Checkered_Demon00]

Super cool, I wanna work for an MRO doing overhaul….maybe even eventually NDT…gotta graduate AMT school first though…

[@johnrichards3773]

Nice job on the tour. Are they busy?

[@sugershakify]

Was hoping to finally see the machine that liquefies cash and injects into the parts :(

[@charliefoxtrotthe3rd335]

+sugershakify You did see the cash liquifier. It was that entire building! It takes cash and converts it over to parts and labor and profit at an astounding rate!

[@russella7263]

It’s smaller and harder to see at P&W overhauls. The ones used on Safran overhauls are much larger.

[@Mike4444x]

Are you saying there’s a HUGE markup with turbine overhauls? Similar to an oil change for a Mercedes Benz vs Toyota? 😜

[@ruming404]

How's the turbine balanced on the machine at 4:15?

[@mateospennati350]

That machine is used for assembly after its alredy been balanced

[@ubertown100]

Hell yeah good topic

[@maheralazzawi7814]

best engine and good job

[@divisioneight]

Are PT6's still made new from the factory or are they all rebuilt?

[@daytonasixty-eight1354]

They make new PT6 engines. There are new planes being build that use PT6 engines. They install new engines, not re-manufactured engines. There are several versions of the PT-6.

[@billyhess5263]

We (eaton aerospace/ Argo tech) make OEM fuel pumps all the time. Haven't made many spares, all for new OEM engines.

[@allancopland1768]

"Everything is spinning in the same direction'.... I suggest you take a much closer look at a PT6! .

[@davidcounts3781]

I think he was comparing it to a piston engine where things move in opposite directions.

[@eat_a_dick_trudeau]

Spinning in the same direction, as in not changing directions like in a reciprocating engine. Spergburger.

[@arnenelson4495]

I'm surprised they use calipers instead of more precise micrometers.

[@DanFrederiksen]

Anyone know what bearings they use? make and model

[@motoputz3201]

what a process

[@andreandrezao3727]

Good morning friends, my name is André de Paula, today I am a mechanic / inspector at the "AIR SPEED" company in Brazil, Rio de Janeiro, and I would like to ask a question with my dear friends, who have experience with the turbo-engine line. axis of the PT6 family. My question is: our company is starting to launch a review of these engines here in Brazil, and we are going to receive a PT6-27 to be converted to PT6-34, do you happen to have any biography or SB for this conversion?

[@TheBillo733]

Nice

[@FINSuojeluskunta]

Most turboshafts have free turbines too. Allows you to start the engine without the load of the rotor or in this case the prop

[@tractorliewtractorliew7905]

good engineering thank

[@shodanxx]

Why is that shop so dark !

[@Naija4K]

On average how much does a well maintained PT6A-60A cost to overhaul ans how long does it typically take?

[@FutureSystem738]

If you have to ask, you can’t afford it 😢

[@JamesJesseGTA]

I wonder if job applications are currently being accepted. Only have classroom experience on the PT6 but I have my A&P rating.

[@rfresh1011]

Your hired!

[@sacempy]

Hola United Turbine,,, una vez estuve por ahí,,,, por si acaso tienen en Spanish,,, gracias

[@clarkpitts5393]

The G.G (Gas Generator) section turns opposite to the P.T. (Power Turbine) Section.

[@eat_a_dick_trudeau]

He meant it doesn't change direction like in a reciprocating engine, sperg.

[@clarkpitts5393]

I work on them, I know, what they do. I didn't say he was wrong. You're just another person trying to start shit on the internet.@@eat_a_dick_trudeau

[@JMGlider]

In your explanation you say the free turbine setup makes it different to a turboshaft, this is incorrect. A PT6B is a helicopter version, which is still a free turbine but also a turboshaft because of the mayor gearbox it is attached to. It is mainly wording, I know, and a bit confusing. Because all turboprops have gearboxes between them and the prop, so I don't know from which point it changes to a turboshaft by definition.

[@DouglasRossi-027]

On a turboshaft the rotor rotates 90° off the turbine rotation, while on a turboprop is in the same direction of the turbine shaft...

[@JMGlider]

@@DouglasRossi-027 Yes correct and agreed, good explanation, in contrary to the video. My point was that it is stated in the video that a 'free-turbine' setup defines a turboprop, which is not the case. There also fixed-turbine turboprops.

[@DouglasRossi-027]

@@JMGlider Yes, I think there was a miss conception of the term "turboshaft" in the video...

[@thammanoonkamfunt5470]

Good Job !!!

[@a-fl-man640]

big $. nice engine.

[@Milosz_Ostrow]

The turbine overhaul process is considerably longer and more involved than overhaul of a typical automotive reciprocating engine.

[@daytonasixty-eight1354]

Even the overhaul process of a piston airplane engine is longer than an automotive engine overhaul.

[@AMM1998]

Yes that goes without saying. You can overhaul a recip engine(automotive) in a day or two. It is a very different world when you start looking into how much documentation and tolerances impact the job time in aviation.

[@davem5333]

What makes the overhaul process and costs so much more for an aircraft engine over a car engine is the number of intensive and detailed inspection procedures, equipment and requirements. A car engine failure is generally a fairly minor inconvenience. An aircraft engine failure is often a fatal problem.

[@jlgarau]

Great...

[@junaxcabz1811]

How to apply SiR. I'm aircraft maintenance here in the Philippines

[@CurlousCam]

My A&P teacher is from the Phillipines here in the U.S.A.

[@lowfung3621]

I wonder what the power losses are when you force the incoming air to make four 90 degree turns before it is mixed with the fuel. The exhaust of course also generates negative energy through negative thrust and drag as it is expelled out of the front of the engine. Building a pusher prop version of the PT6 would probably be more powerful since the air could be fed directly into the compressor section.

[@ZZZHarpy101]

Look at the Piaggio Avanti. :)

[@LeonelEBD]

Afik is because it helps keeping the gearbox mechanism small and makes for an easier installation o small aircraft.

[@eugeneoreilly9356]

There will always be parasitic losses whether the airflow changes direction or not.Every engine that uses centrifugal compressors must initiate at least two 90 degree airflow turns.This is how a centrifugal compressor works,it trades air velocity for pressure.This is known as the Venturi effect and applies equally to liquids and gases.

[@jrdeckard3317]

No test run?

[@southjerseysound7340]

Did you actually watch the video 😂

[@vinceocratic]

Everything IS not spinning in the same direction. On a PT-6 the compressor turbines and power turbines spin in completely different directions.

[@eat_a_dick_trudeau]

Whoa simmer down Super Sperg. He meant they aren't changing directions like in a reciprocating engine.

[@sherwinsalvatori6997]

Am guessing your inventory is on mark

[@kazimaydin2017]

Hello first of all, I'm sorry my English is very bad. I have a PT6A-6. This engine; turbine blade, Thermocouple Probe, stator vanes's burned. How can I get these parts?

[@shodanxx]

Hello, if your vanes are burned beyond OHM limits you will need a new set of CT blades as well. Pratt & Whitney Canada Plant 5 in Saint-Hubert, QC, Canada can overhaul your engine but the PT6A-6 is a very old model and it might not be worth repairing.

[@ZZZHarpy101]

When he mentions stator, I guess he means PT stators not the CT ones. CT stators have their vanes eroded and FODed, not burned.Having an old model never been an issue as long as the engine have his Certificate of Airworthiness. He should probably look for an Authorized Service Center near him instead of having it shipped at St-Hubert. He mention having issue with his English language. He's probably not a north American operator. As for the old spare parts, as long as P&WC knows that one of their customer need one, I can assure they will provide it. Its a matter of pride and reputation to stand by the "Reliable Engine" logo. A couple of years ago, they even rebuilt two WASP for a replica of Amelia Earhart's airplane.

[@TheWalterHWhite]

The engineering is actually pretty easily explained. Longevity is equal to x times a thousand dollars. Where x is the hours flown. Simply put, the PT6 runs on crisp clean hundred dollar bills.

[@MeaHeaR]

OMG é Power-Phull

[@scottjustscott3730]

What does NDT stand for? It was called NDI in my day, sonny!👴✈

[@HerkCC]

Scott D Nondestructive Test. ...FPI and MPI.....some parts are x-ray and eddy current methods

[@ben3989]

so what does it cost to rebuild an average pt-6?

[@MasterChief-sl9ro]

$200,000.00 to $300,000.00.. They cap the cost at $300,000.00 for a normal functional power plant.

[@ZZZHarpy101]

The TBO and HSI varies depending if it's a small PT6 or a large PT6, from 2000 hrs for PT6A-38 to 6000 hrs for some PT6A-65 and 67 versions. But P&WC offer a pay-by-hour maintenance plan that most operators use to keep their maintenance fee as low as possible. Now some parts are replaced or reworked before attaining the TBO mark, making less likely to spend a $300k in one shot. Plus, there is less occurrence of extra worn out damage that happen when many parts get old and affect the performance of other.

[@the.digital.nomads]

so unlike his opener where he compares piston engines and turbine engines, turbine engines don't really have a longer TBO unless you go really big

[@loganadams6881]

He said at the BEGINNING that everything spins one way...did not look like that. While it was rotating??$$$$$$$$$: )

[@andymunnings9109]

👍

[@immortaljatt05]

IDK why people pronounce Turbine "Tur-bin" people forget what the E does lol

[@TRPGpilot]

Its that aberration called American 'English' I suppose. I remember the first time I heard 'eye-rack' (Iraq for actual English speakers) I almost spilt my cup of tea! . . .

[@bryanspilner]

why does he have puka shells on?

[@abdullahsekai4279]

''Everything is spinning in the same direction'' then you watch a video of how a pt6 operates and realise this is wrong

[@TrimeshSZ]

I think what he's trying to say is "Every part moves in a consistent direction, unlike a reciprocating engine"

[@eat_a_dick_trudeau]

When you're such a hyper focused insufferable SPERG, trying to show everyone how smart you are, you can't figure out he meant in relation to the parts of a reciprocating engine, which CHANGE DIRECTIONS. Swing and a miss rainman.

[@rogerfroud300]

It would be interesting to get some idea of the cost involved. There must be an absolute minimum and typical cost they could supply.

[@rkan2]

Not all engines wear the same though, once you start replacing the spinning parts, it probably gets quite expensive quickly.. Like thousands per blade. and tens of thousands for discs...

[@RossLeavitt]

It’s generally about $500,000.

[@Native_love]

There's no price for reliability.

[@phaecops]

And all they charge is $250,000.

[@ronjohnson9507]

Such a bargain

[@ronjohnson9507]

Need your pt6a overhauled? Call the bank.

[@sagemaster3408]

Everyone just wants to argue and be right and prove everyone wrong. We suck

[@JoseHernandez-eo3wu]

RIP united turbine

[@dr.mostafasokkar4821]

Overhauling

[@elzorro31]

By the time everything is said and done you owe them $500k .

[@primusairborne63]

I love how he opens up with the completely false statement: "all parts are spinning in the same direction..." Absolutely wrong. The compressor turbine and Power turbine spin in completely opposite directions.

[@kls8469]

Primus Airborne his statement is true if you don't understand it as " all moving parts goes the same way", but as "each part only goes one way". In a turbine engine, each part has one direction of motion, in opposition to a piston engine where parts are changing directions at least twice every rotation, hence avoiding accelerations on the parts or non uniform wear... It's kind of a semantic problem there, I think, although as I'm not English speaking born, maybe he should have said it some other way to be properly understood...

[@shodanxx]

Also implies at 1:50 that turboshaft engines are not free turbine, but the PT6B is a turboshaft engine and it is also a free power turbine design.

[@Chrismarquez7]

This technology is so old. I can’t wait till everything goes electric, simplified, efficient. No more ridiculous costs for overhauls. Aviation will finally be cheaper and more affordable.

[@jamesscott5407]

Yeah...just got to wait until they discover an efficient fuel source to give good sustained flight times...lithium ain't going to cut it...fission is dangerous and still to heavy and bulky...guess we will have to wait until we become a type 1 civilization in a century or two when we crack fusion!! Hydrocarbons aren't going anywhere anytime soon!!

[@9HighFlyer9]

It won't matter that the powerplant is simple. It's aviation and it'll always be expensive. There's always going to be inspections and time limited components. If there is no secondary income stream from parts, inspections and overhauls it doesn't really give much incentive to develop/certify the powerplants. As it is now they can expect to get your overhaul business every few years.

[@freetobe3]

Aircraft grade parts and maintenance are expensive because so much work has been put into them to function as long and as well and as safely as needed and beyond that for safe measure. Sure, fuel costs are big and so is the powerplant but electric powerplants and batteries would still need to be made way better than even the best on the road and would need to be maintained just as much, it's cheaper but not an insane amount.

[@TheReadBaron91]

They are still going to make you replace your battery every year, or every so often. At least for 20 years until they have a guarantee it will work.

[@eat_a_dick_trudeau]

🙄 Yeah... because batteries last forever and never have to be replaced at exorbitant cost. Doofus.

[@deeremeyer1749]

Uh, many turbines have parts and assemblies that "counter-rotate" and they still have "pressure pulses" that are causing vibration and resonance of parts. They're just so much less efficient and "leaky" than piston engines and waste so much more heat energy and pressure that the vibration and resonance is "cushioned" by the vibrations flowing through the engine. The ridiculously loud exhaust is all wasted energy. Similarly powerful piston engines burn a fraction of the fuel and produce a fraction of the noise to make as much power. Piston engines that burn as much fuel and make as much noise produce far more power.

[@ZZZHarpy101]

PT6A-6 weight 270 lbs and develop 578 hp vs the R-1340 that weight 930 lbs for a power of 600 hp. If the piston engine burns less fuel per hour as you said, remember the part of that fuel is uselessly wasted to lift its own extra engine weight. ;)

[@nikonblaze]

But did you see a piston engine on Airbus or rafale ?

[@abecoulter18]

Turbin is a Indian hat. It's. Turbine. Bine. Not bin

[@lawboy777]

No point trying to educate Americans buddy....

[@abecoulter18]

@@lawboy777 lol

[@eugeneoreilly9356]

Tur Bin Laden.

[@aftereffectstutorials9664]

Please India stop terrorism in Kashmir and other countries and try to love humanity.. Nice video Brother keep it up. I want to do job here I am interested To join you..

[@LBG-cf8gu]

Anoother example of why all those leased a/c in russia will never fly outside again.

[@blackblueandgreenmusick1897]

vt

[@LuizCma]

brasil ok.

[@eminye1]

"turban as apposed to to turbine"

[@eugeneoreilly9356]

Yes,one generates rotational motion while the other is worn on the head.