The FAA  is involved and has been since I screamed bloody murder about my engine failure in 2010 and sent broken parts to Continental via the FAA back  then for examination.   (They were ancient, with 1968 revision numbers.)  The (probably continuing) investigation is being carried out of the FAA FSDO Van Nuys office, and they have been in touch with Barrett Performance Engines as I confirmed via some emails  to Barrett.  So the FAA is involved, and we need to keep them involved.

 

Preliminary findings with my engine showed paperwork from vendors showing that all the work done on my crankcase, for example, was done by top quality shops and met all requirements.  Yet when my crankcase was inspected, it was out of spec, over machined, and scrap.  So one becomes suspicious of false paperwork prepared in advance of the FAA visits.  But the shop practices used seem consistent as reported here:  recycle out of spec or junk parts to save money, and pass them off as high performance engines.

 

Also these engines are EXPERIMENTAL, and so not subject to  certified engine rules.  I think  that is the gap that was jumped through to allow PE to produce the products that have been reported here.  I  suspect they are under much scrutiny from the FAA, but the FAA  can only do what the regs require, and is dependent on us to report what we have found.  They remain silent on their investigations and actions as they must.

 

Those of you that use Barrett for engine rebuilds (or anyone else, for that matter), be sure to ask them to document and report all findings to the appropriate FAA authorities.  The Barrett folks know who to contact. 

 

That is the best we can do short of showing up in person and raising hell, and getting the word out as far and  wide as possible.  No magazine will touch it because of legal implications, so spreading the word far and wide is the best we can do.

 

Fred