Rotax Crank Hour Extension.

[Wargames]

Seems like CAA does not want to budge in any way. Sad day.

[John Boucher]

The CAA apparently hold the view that these recommendations are always applicable, though the basis upon which this is the case may differ as between different CAA representatives. The different views of the Aero Club and the CAA mean that the CAA will not accept the Aero Club’s proposed general solution to the problem. The Commissioner instead required that the Rotax 2-stroke crisis be resolved by way of an “exemption” to the Civil Aviation Regulations (CAR’s). This will be processed and implemented almost immediately for an initial 60 days, during which period CARCOM will do what is necessary to implement the exemption for the medium term (ie - until the NTCA legislation is comprehensively reviewed and improved).

Such as Eskom, somebody switched the light off at the end of the tunnel...

I don't think much is going to change... okay, acceptance maybe - acceptance of installing a different motor with a TBO of 2000hrs or even a turbine sitting at 5000hrs

[John Boucher]

Documents are available now!

[RudiGreyling]

Well here I go again,
Lately I get very little time to browse the internet and debate, but I need to get something of my chest again!

Please READ carefully what was Suggested on the 300H to 600H extension.

If the crank are inspected and found within the 60% wear limit the same part can go back in.

CAA says they want to stop pilots "That don't maintain and fly until they DIE attitude"
Pilots say leave us alone, we know best, and those pilots don't exist!

Can you truthfully and honestly say that you feel 100% comfortable to let your 582 do more than 600 hours with out that crank being inspected? (NOT REPLACED!!! INSPECTED)?

I know I can't, and think this is a good and fair middle ground. But that is me!

Let us see where this is going to land up.

I am slowly starting IGNORE the people trowing stones at MISASA and NOT MISASA members!!

Some guys are using the MISASA resources like news, website, comitte time, the members' money to gather their ammo just to shoot misasa down.

If you are a Misasa member then yes ask your questions, throw your stones, and help.

If not a member then shut up and do not throw stones at an organisation you do not belong to.

For the opposition the glass is always 1/2 empty! Never mind they have not paid and received the 1/2 glass full for free!

Flame suit ON!
Rudi

[John Boucher]

Howdy Rudi

I don't think the chaps have a problem with a non-invasive inspection even at 2000hours for that matter....

Twas the statement of obligatory replacement at 300 hours that caused the chaos. The critics of Misasa are far and in between and the perception of these are this -

Any country, sport, housing complex etc. is as strong as the goverment, organisation, body corporate responsible for it! I might not be a member of MISASA but I am a member of AerClub of SA (SAPFA). this does not entitle me or any others to lodge unjustified criticism!

That said - AVIATION in SA will only be as strong and healthy as that which CAA permits within reason!

[Gadget]

Rudi, don't push it. Do not tell me to shut up, I have been a member for two years and decided not to join this year due to this mess. For two years promises were made and not kept so I believe I have the right to through stones. With regards to the crank issue, a lot of pilots maintain their plains quite well, I am one of them and yes I do feel comfortable flying my engine to 1500 hours without opening it. My engine is currently at 604 hours and when i recently took of the exaust to replace the seals there was no carbon, no blow by and the rings still looked fine, although they have never been replaced. So get you facts straight before you make statements like the one above. Some of the times after the crank was removed and re-installed or replaced the eniges ceased but a lot of engines are happilly running over a thousand hours. What gives you the idea these people who are now supposed to check our engines will actually do a better job than me. Remember they don't fly that plane.

[John Boucher]

074

Flame suit on Rudi.....

[Morph]

I am fully behind the revised maintenance proposal that Aero Club have issued. Let's see if there is any success

Rudi, don't blow the opportunity to let Misasa shine by you choosing to ignore previous and non members. Not the right approach

[Thatchman]

Fighting amongst ourselves is not going to solve anything. You will always have the extremes here. Not everyone is capable of maintaining their engine themselves and I am not refering to changing plugs or a minor service but to a proper inspection.

It is fair in my humble opinion to have a required inspection performed by a suitably qualified person at a reasonable interval. I agree with Rudi that 600 hours is reasonable for an inspection without a forced replacement if not required.

A level of maturity is required here between CAA and our representitives without bringing mud-slinging and other issues into the whole saga.

[John Boucher]

Mike & Niren.....

I can totally live with the proposed maintenance schedule as proposed!

If I could make a simple suggestion .... pretty please..... ?

Aviation Engines offers a simplified 1-day course for first line maintenance on either 503 or 582's. Successful completion thereof empowers us as Rotax operators to "properly" care for our babies as set out by the proposed maintenace schedule and that CAA recognises such efforts! Just a thought - shoot me down in flames...

I just that CAA shall be forthcoming in our favour!

[Hot Stuff]

John, I think it an excellent suggestion

[Andre]

As far as I'm concerned all I want at this stage is an answer. Just don't let me wast money and more flying time by not getting to a decision

I'm very happy flying my aerie with 604 hours on currently and even more and still believe it is unneccesary to change/inspect(open the engine) but to stay legal and keep the insurance people happy I will do whatever the law says.

I have not met any pilots that is flying to die, so we all look after our aeries and believe you me when it is neccesary will spend the money to keep it save

.

[Flightstar]

Mike & Niren.....

I can totally live with the proposed maintenance schedule as proposed!

If I could make a simple suggestion .... pretty please..... ?

Aviation Engines offers a simplified 1-day course for first line maintenance on either 503 or 582's. Successful completion thereof empowers us as Rotax operators to "properly" care for our babies as set out by the proposed maintenace schedule and that CAA recognises such efforts! Just a thought - shoot me down in flames...

I just that CAA shall be forthcoming in our favour!

HOOR-HOOR!!

[Aviation Engines]

I am confident that the Alternate Rotax 2-Stroke Maintenance Schedule will be accepted by the CAA - you will be advised when it is implemented.

To help with the maintenance and overhauls:

1. We are presently putting together 2-stroke overhaul courses for experienced persons/AP’s with the intention of appointing such persons as Rotax 2-Stroke Service Centres to undertake the 2-stroke overhauls when those are required.

2. Within the next 2 months we will schedule dates for 2-Stroke Line Maintenance courses – I will publish the exact dates on our web site.

I am pleased to see that the Aero Club, MISASA and the CAA are working on amendments to the regulations that definitely WILL allow owners to do their own maintenance on their own aircraft and engines.

[Wargames]

I have just read the proposal from Aeroclub to CAA, and I am very impressed with the way they went about it.

I am at two minds here:

1) By what manual are we as rotax owners suppose to go by, the manual that we recieve on buying a engine, or the one kept by the professionals that work on the engines??

My answer, is that we need to go by the manual in my hand, and that is the one that say nothing about a crank change. No why do CAA want to work on the other manual that no one knew about??

2) I was in owe at the starts, and then by what the other countries was doing. They are doing a lot less, than what we did under the LS1 rules, and now CAA can't see that. I was shocked by the statements on the responsibilities and risks, and that all that was with the owner of the plane anyway.

The letter from aeroclub was actually in plain english, and understandable by all. Now it is time that CAA starts seeing this. But I wonder who is keeping them from changing NTCA to a more pilot friendly state.

Just my loud thinking