Light Sport Aircraft survey

Those engines seem to have a bad reputation in the U.S. They are seen as
cheapo engines for people who can't afford "real" engines from cont or
lyc. One flight school I know of had diamond katanas with Rotax engines
and only got 900 hours out of them despite regular use. I don't know how
typical that is, but you often hear stories like that. Maybe it's the
Avgas we use over here (it certainly isn't good for small continentals
either, but like you said those can be fixed by just about anyone). Not
having owned or maintained an engine myself I don't know but I do know
their reputation is not good here. For example one of the new companies
(I think it was Liberty) was initially going to use a Rotax and got no
interest, changed to a Continental and now are taken more seriously.


I am fairly familiar with the Diamond/Rotax issues. The engines are not
bad. Whoever said that there are support issues was spot on. Whether this
will change with Sport Pilot remains to be seen.

There are several aspects of the Rotax engines that the average Lyc/con AP
will set precisely backwards without proper training and support. Neither
of which has been forthcoming from Bombardier.

rpellicciotti wrote:

Mark,
You have two options here. You can ground adjust the prop to limit the
speed or you can simply endorse your student for the required higher
speed training prior to solo. At least that is what I am told by the
folks I have talked with at EAA and FAA.

Regards,

Rick Pellicciotti
Belle Aire Aviation
LightSportFlying.com

I've asked around, and it seems solo in the faster plane isn't mpossible
until you have a signoff for the faster plane,

and the signoff is only given to sport pilots,,,,,,,,,,not students

not sure what the deal is,

i thought this was stupid from the gitgo,

obviously, the FnAA has backed down or is mistaken,

again, sport pile it, written by those who don't fly much about planes
they don't fly at all !

--
Mark Smith
Tri-State Kite Sales
1121 N Locust St
Mt Vernon, IN 47620
1-812-838-6351
http://www.trikite.com

W P Dixon wrote:

Gig 601,
Check out FAR 61.327 , you will find it there. Of course if you are
trining in a plane already faster, it's really no big deal. I think maybe it
was put in there to keep ultralighters from just hopping in a Luscombe

Patrick
student SPL


how do you do a cross country in a plane you are not signed off on ?

or is all the sprot pile it training dual ?

--
Mark Smith
Tri-State Kite Sales
1121 N Locust St
Mt Vernon, IN 47620
1-812-838-6351
http://www.trikite.com

Mark,
I believe it will work the same as getting a PPL. A PPL has to have a sign
off while a student in order to solo different planes. I believe you are
trying to make sport "pile" as you call it more complicated than what it is
...just because you don't like it.
There is a sport pilot place up in MASS. that is doing it's training in
Ercoupe's , which is alittle faster than the "high speed" cutoff Sounds
funny calling it a high speed cut off doesn't it! Evidently people are
soloing,..getting the endorsement to solo and soloing the Ercoupe.
I would imagine you can get an endorsement for it anyway, look at the
places that give PPL's taildragger endorsements with no solo , because of
insurance.

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech

"Mark Smith" wrote in message
...
W P Dixon wrote:

Gig 601,
Check out FAR 61.327 , you will find it there. Of course if you are
trining in a plane already faster, it's really no big deal. I think maybe
it
was put in there to keep ultralighters from just hopping in a Luscombe

Patrick
student SPL


how do you do a cross country in a plane you are not signed off on ?

or is all the sprot pile it training dual ?

--
Mark Smith
Tri-State Kite Sales
1121 N Locust St
Mt Vernon, IN 47620
1-812-838-6351
http://www.trikite.com

Morgans wrote:
"Lakeview Bill" wrote in message
. ..

Just out of curiosity, why do you dislike the Rotax?


How shall I count the ways?

They require their oil, their oil filters, their everything. You pay dearly
for this.

They always have seemed to be temperamental. Everything has to be just
right, to be even close to reliable.

See above. If everything is not just right, they are not reliable. I know
the 912 and 914's are not 2 strokes, but what pieces the 2 strokes are. I
know, some will testify that they have never had a minute's problem, but
there are more out there that have. My gut, and my but says to not trust
them. I don't and I won't. Gut means a llot, to me.

I have to disagree with your assessment of the Rotax 2-strokes here,
it's just not informed. I've owned 6 of them over the years (just now
got #7 delivered a few weeks ago), 5 503's and a 2 447's. I have
hundreds of hours in front of/underneath Rotax 2-strokes at this point
(500 hours as a rough guess) so I've gotten to know some of their
strengths and weaknesses.

The chief strength of the Rotax 2-strokes is the field experience
available. We know how to install them, prop them, jet them, load them,
maintain them and what parts and peripherals to use with them. This is
the _#1_ strength of the Rotax - it's not so much that it's such a
superior design (it's not much more than a snomobile engine with a
beefed up bottom end and slightly different metallurgy in certain places
like the pistons), but again it's field experience we have available for
setup, installation and running that really makes them reliable.

They are also the only 2-stroke on the market that can really do
continuous high power for hundreds and hundreds of hours without failure
(provided it's installed, setup and run right, of course).

The chief weakness is probably the same as for all 2-strokes; they can't
handle a lot of abuse such as lean running, underpropping and so on.
They also require more frequent maintenance (typically for leaking seals).

But the truth is, the rotax 2-strokes are very reliable, long lasting
engines.

I know a lot less about the 912, since I've never owned one, so can't
comment on those (I don't know of any rampant reliability problems with
them, though, from the fairly numerous locals who fly them).

They

don't sound "manly" enough. Kinda like a sewing machine, compared to a
Harley. Airplanes are supposed to be "cool", and they aren't. :-)

I kind of like the scream of a 2-stroke rotax, but that might just be
because I'm used to it. OTOH, the coolest sounding is the merlin in the
P51.....

LS
N646F

W P Dixon wrote:

Mark,
I believe it will work the same as getting a PPL. A PPL has to have a sign
off while a student in order to solo different planes. I believe you are
trying to make sport "pile" as you call it more complicated than what it is
..just because you don't like it.
There is a sport pilot place up in MASS. that is doing it's training in
Ercoupe's , which is alittle faster than the "high speed" cutoff Sounds
funny calling it a high speed cut off doesn't it! Evidently people are
soloing,..getting the endorsement to solo and soloing the Ercoupe.
I would imagine you can get an endorsement for it anyway, look at the
places that give PPL's taildragger endorsements with no solo , because of
insurance.

Patrick
student SPL


A friend has noted that this stupid provision in the proposed rule was
eliminated after almost everyone thought it was stupid,

again, written by folks who don't fly much about planes hey don't fly at
all,

but now you are saying students may take lessons in a plane that exceeds
the higher upper limit ?

I quit,,,,,,
--
Mark Smith
Tri-State Kite Sales
1121 N Locust St
Mt Vernon, IN 47620
1-812-838-6351
http://www.trikite.com

but now you are saying students may take lessons in a plane that exceeds
the higher upper limit ?

I quit,,,,,,


You can take lessons in anything that allows commercial operation or that
you own! The limitation is you can't solo in something exceeding SP
criteria unless you have a medical. Any lesson you take for PPL counts for
SP as far as time etc. it's just the practical and written test are
different (and number of hours).
So if you want you can do all your duel in a Cessna 150 (or 210P ;-) ). But
when you come to solo you will need a SP legal plane and a sign off.
Possibly even a single seater if your cfi is willing to sign you off! ;-0
John

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

They don't sound "manly" enough. Kinda like a sewing machine, compared to
a
Harley. Airplanes are supposed to be "cool", and they aren't. :-)

Yeah Jim. Know just what you mean. There I was, out in the desert slogging
along in my "manly" sounding Ducati when a rice-burning Yamazuki screamed
past me. . . again. Three 33-1/3 mile laps. When I pulled into the pits, the
winners had already packed up and gone home. But that Ducati still sounded
cool. POS!

Rich "Pass the Sake" S.

"Rich S." wrote

When I pulled into the pits, the
winners had already packed up and gone home. But that Ducati still sounded
cool. POS!

Yeah, but you were doing it in style. Cool counts!

It is already a given that sport planes are not going to be fast. Might as
well get the cool quotient up there! g
--
Jim in NC

In article , Morgans wrote:
They always have seemed to be temperamental. Everything has to be just
right, to be even close to reliable.

That certainly doesn't hold true on the 4-strokes. The 4-stroke Rotax
(914UL, the turbosupercharged engine) seems to be pretty robust. In
particular, temperature control is FAR better because it's mainly
thermostatically liquid cooled, so there are fewer concerns over the
engine cooling too fast in a descent or overheating in a climb.

They don't sound "manly" enough. Kinda like a sewing machine, compared to a
Harley. Airplanes are supposed to be "cool", and they aren't. :-)

They sound manly enough to me. They certainly FEEL manly enough when you
push the throttle all the way through to get max boost from the turbo.
Once in cruise, getting 50nm/gal (no wind) in the Europa is nice too.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"