3 speed Dodge Ram Van oil consumption

"AZGuy" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:09:32 -0400, Matt Whiting
> > wrote:
>
> >AZGuy wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:20:47 -0400, Matt Whiting
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>AZGuy wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 06:49:28 -0400, Matt Whiting
> > wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>>>Everything else isn't even close to equal. It is pretty well
documented
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Where could I see this documentation?
> >>>
> >>>Yahoo, Google, etc. with these keywords: most engine wear occurs start
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Tried that. All you get are ads for various oil additives that start
> >> with the same unsupported statement of "most engine wear occurs....".
> >> Saying something doesn't make it true.
> >>
> >> I'm interested in documents that show the results of actual tests
> >> proving that an engine started and stopped x number of times wears
> >> out X number of running hours sooner then one that isn't.
> >
> >I don't think I've seen such a test as the cost of doing so would be
> >horrendous. I've seen over the years data from fleets of aircraft that
> >shows clearly that airplanes flown a lot of hours as a function of the
> >number of engine starts last many more hours TBO than airplanes that
> >experience a lot of start/stop cycles.
> >
>
> I don't understand that statement. Based on my somewhat limited
> knowledge of air craft requirements I thought that regardless of how
> an aircraft was operated the engine HAD to be overhauled at a fixed
> number of hours of operation even if it was running perfectly.

If the aircraft is flown for hire the engine must be overhauled at the
manufacturer's specified TBO, if not flown for hire there is no TBO; all the
engine has to do is pass an annual condition inspection.