Nervous about Rotax

On 01/22/08 09:48, Allen wrote:
"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Morgans,

I WILL NOT ever EVER put my but in the air with a Rotax providing the
power.

Period.


Yeah, mass crankshaft recalls and mid-time overhauls are just great!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

As compared to this:

From AvWeb
Rotax Gearbox MSB Issued
Rotax has issued a manadatory service bulletin affecting specific 912 and
914-series engine gearboxes after a fault was found with the material used
in making the gears. Under severe operating conditions, it's possible for
gear teeth to break. The fix calls for replacement of the gears but the good
news is that Rotax is paying the shot. Removal and replacement of the
gearbox, the gear set and the installation of the new gears is all covered,
as is the freight. This is a significant test of Rotax's constantly
expanding service and supply network as its engines flood the mainstream
aviation network, particularly in the U.S., thanks to the burgeoning
popularity of the Light Sport Aircraft category. The MSB comes two weeks
before the Sport Aviation Expo in Sebring, Fla. where about 80 percent of
the aircraft will be Rotax-powered and their owners and manufacturers ready
to give feedback.

What's your point? Replacing the gears in the gearbox is going to be a whole
lot easier than replacing a crankshaft. Plus,the manufacturer is offering to
pay for it. This is not even in the same ball park as a crank recall (IMHO).


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...
On 01/22/08 09:48, Allen wrote:
"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Morgans,

I WILL NOT ever EVER put my but in the air with a Rotax providing the
power.

Period.


Yeah, mass crankshaft recalls and mid-time overhauls are just great!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

As compared to this:

From AvWeb
Rotax Gearbox MSB Issued
Rotax has issued a manadatory service bulletin affecting specific 912 and
914-series engine gearboxes after a fault was found with the material
used
in making the gears. Under severe operating conditions, it's possible for
gear teeth to break. The fix calls for replacement of the gears but the
good
news is that Rotax is paying the shot. Removal and replacement of the
gearbox, the gear set and the installation of the new gears is all
covered,
as is the freight. This is a significant test of Rotax's constantly
expanding service and supply network as its engines flood the mainstream
aviation network, particularly in the U.S., thanks to the burgeoning
popularity of the Light Sport Aircraft category. The MSB comes two weeks
before the Sport Aviation Expo in Sebring, Fla. where about 80 percent of
the aircraft will be Rotax-powered and their owners and manufacturers
ready
to give feedback.

What's your point? Replacing the gears in the gearbox is going to be a
whole
lot easier than replacing a crankshaft. Plus,the manufacturer is offering
to
pay for it. This is not even in the same ball park as a crank recall
(IMHO).


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

What's your point? If we are slinging stones there are plenty of targets.

--

*H. Allen Smith*
WACO - We are all here, because we are not all there.

Yeah, but you hear about O-200s routinely going well past TBO, to 2400 hours
at least (one guy claimed most fo the ones he knew about went to 3000 with
no problems, but I'm not sure how much I believe that). OTOH, the consensus
seems to be that Rotax 912s don't seem to want to make it past 800 or so,
never mind the 1500 rated TBO.


My instructors put close to 1500hrs on a rotax in a year with just
routine maintenance. Last time I flew it, it had around 1480hrs. The
plane was a Evektor Sportstar.

On 01/22/08 10:23, Allen wrote:
"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...
On 01/22/08 09:48, Allen wrote:
"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Morgans,

I WILL NOT ever EVER put my but in the air with a Rotax providing the
power.

Period.


Yeah, mass crankshaft recalls and mid-time overhauls are just great!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

As compared to this:

From AvWeb
Rotax Gearbox MSB Issued
Rotax has issued a manadatory service bulletin affecting specific 912 and
914-series engine gearboxes after a fault was found with the material
used
in making the gears. Under severe operating conditions, it's possible for
gear teeth to break. The fix calls for replacement of the gears but the
good
news is that Rotax is paying the shot. Removal and replacement of the
gearbox, the gear set and the installation of the new gears is all
covered,
as is the freight. This is a significant test of Rotax's constantly
expanding service and supply network as its engines flood the mainstream
aviation network, particularly in the U.S., thanks to the burgeoning
popularity of the Light Sport Aircraft category. The MSB comes two weeks
before the Sport Aviation Expo in Sebring, Fla. where about 80 percent of
the aircraft will be Rotax-powered and their owners and manufacturers
ready
to give feedback.

What's your point? Replacing the gears in the gearbox is going to be a
whole
lot easier than replacing a crankshaft. Plus,the manufacturer is offering
to
pay for it. This is not even in the same ball park as a crank recall
(IMHO).


What's your point? If we are slinging stones there are plenty of targets.


Didn't you read what I wrote? Here it is again if it helps you:

Replacing the gears in the gearbox is going to be a whole lot easier than
replacing a crankshaft. Plus,the manufacturer is offering to pay for it.
This is not even in the same ball park as a crank recall (IMHO).



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

"Thomas Borchert" wrote

Yeah, mass crankshaft recalls and mid-time overhauls are just great!

I believe I stated my position quite clearly, if you had taken it all in
context.

I know that the "big two" engine makers have some problems, but they are
likely, (IMHO) more likely to keep running when compared to Rotax engines.

While a recall on crankshafts and premature needed overhauls are a pain in
the wallet and the butt, very few engines have stopped producing power in
the air.

As far as massive recalls go, how about the redrive gear recalls for Rotax?
It seems everyone has problems that require recalls, and Rotax is not
immune.
--
Jim in NC

"Jay Maynard" wrote

One theme I heard at Sebring was that Rotaxes never make it to TBO. OTOH,
I've also had people tell me they run forever. What's the difference? If
it's maintenance, how do I make sure mine gets the kind that lets it run
forever, instead of the kind that needs an overhaul at 800 hours?

One thing that I think is vital, is to use exactly the oil that the owner's
manual says to use, even down to the brands, so if it says Rotax brand, pay
the difference, and use it. I know of one major problem in a Rotax because
a brand besides Rotax was used.

Also, read all of the owner's manual, and all service bulletins, and follow
every little nuance, exactly. The little picky things that you would not
think matter, make all of the difference for a Rotax.

That is the biggest kicker, I think. If treated exactly right, down to
dotting the "i's" and crossing the "t's" many have found the 912 family of
engines to do quite well. The problem is that sometimes things conspire to
keep all the t's crossed, whether it be because of an important
preoccupation of flying an airplane, or things on the ground not being done
the right way, be it from ignorance, or not enough attention to detail.

I have a feeling that time will tell what the possible pitfalls are, with so
many Rotax engines being put online in the LSA's. I just am not in favor of
being the one to be part of the test.
--
Jim in NC
--
Jim in NC

"Mark Hansen" wrote

Replacing the gears in the gearbox is going to be a whole lot easier than
replacing a crankshaft. Plus,the manufacturer is offering to pay for it.
This is not even in the same ball park as a crank recall (IMHO).

How easy it is to do a repair is not an important issue, in this
discussion, IMHO. If you stay alive is what should be important, and the
only thing. Both could cause a total power failure, and if it happened at
the wrong time, it could be fatal. Isn't that the ONLY thing that is worth
talking about? It is to me. Everything else is chicken ****.

I have to say that it is noticed and appreciated that Rotax is willing to
pay for the repairs. That should have been the case for any manufacturer
that drops the ball on any issue like the two being discussed here. Those
that did not fully pay should be ashamed of themselves.
--
Jim in NC

Morgans,

but they are
likely, (IMHO) more likely to keep running when compared to Rotax engines.


Yes, I did read that part of your opinion, in context. Can you provide the
numbers to even remotely support that statement? I don't think so. Not by a
long shot.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

As you said "nearly everyone else building an LSA period" uses Rotax
912s. That fact alone tells you that in a very short time of a couple
years or less every airport will have 912s actively flying if not
already. There must be a hundred or more different model LSAs selling
and selling and selling so 912s will be the most common light engine
over any other. I doubt mechanics will choose to lose all that
potential income by not working on 912s. I read more and more in the
Light-Sport Aircraft group about pilots that find flying too expensive
so they are moving to LSA. Others say they don't want to risk losing
their medical so they just start flying LSA. What ever the reasons are
more and more 912 powered planes are flying so more mechanics are
getting exposure to the Rotax. I've been in the UL and now LSA
flying for twenty three years and don't see anything growing faster
then the LSA side of aviation. Theory says they should only get
better and they work great now. Most of the people on the LSA group
fly with Rotax so ask them some questions.

Have a good day and stay out of the trees!
See ya on Sport Aircraft group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/



On Jan 20, 11:46*am, Jay Maynard
wrote:
I spent a day and a half at Sebring looking at aircraft. As I expected,
there are only a few that fit what I'm looking for. Of those, only one (the
AMD Zodiac XLi) uses a Continental engine. Everyone else (and, indeed,
nearly everyone else building an LSA period) uses Rotax 912s.

I'm not fond of the idea of flying behind a Rotax. I know there are lots of
them out there (although I doubt what one guy told me, that there have been
more flight hours on Rotax engines than there have been on Lycomings and
Continentals put together), and I know that lots of folks like them, but I'm
not at all sure they're for me.

I live in Fairmont, Minnesota, a town of 11000 50 miles from anything. I'd
like the local A&P to be able to do maintenance on the engine, and fix it if
it breaks. I also need to feed it a steady diet of 100LL, as every gallon of
automobile gas sold in Minnesota must have at least 10% ethanol (and that's
supposed to go up to 20% in 2010).

I'm told the Rotax runs fast (red line on the Tecnam Sierra I sat in was
5500 RPM, and supposedly everyone recommends idling no lower than 2500), and
that it has very tight tolerances, and demands lots of special tools. Yeah,
it's just different, not necessarily worse - but there's a difference
between that and an O-200, where if I find myself at some random field with
a mechanic, I can be confident he can at least get it running.

The Zodiac's seating looks weird, although I'm reserving judgment until I
get to actually sit in one (the one they had at the show was being delivered
to a customer there today, so they didn't let anyone sit in it, and I didn't
get to go take a demo flight in the one they had there for that purpose).
I'd still like other options, but unless I'm convinced that the Rotax isn't
going to find itself at some point sitting in the hangar while the engine is
shipped off to another state for repair (or, worse, waiting on a replacement
cylinder that never comes because they're all being put on new engines),
there aren't any.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC * * * * * * * * *http://www.conmicro.comhttp://jmaynard.livejournal.com* * *http://www.tronguy.nethttp://www..hercules-390.org* * * * * * * (Yes, that's me!)
Buy Hercules stuff athttp://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390

In article writes:
Jay,

Effectively enough? I would guess so, but it'd be nice to be sure.

Well, to answer that question you'd need to start with conclusive evidence that
there is such a thing as shock cooling in air-cooled engines. You won't find it
and many people having learned and forgotten more stuff about engines than I
will ever know doubt very much it exists. That siad, yes, it is commonly
accepted that shock cooling is not an issue in liquid-cooled engines.

It was my understanding that the Rotax had liquid cooling of the cylinder
heads, and air cooling of the cylinders. That wouold leave something to
shock cool.

Perhaps these engines are less sensitive than a tubercharged TIO-550...

Alan