What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Rotax Carb float SB

E

Ex Bonanza Bucko

Well Known Member
I have a new S-LSA from Vans. It has one of the engines targeted by the Mandatory SB. Here are questions I have about that because I am a long time owner of certified airplanes and I'm new to ELSAs and SLSAs.

1.)Will this SB turn into an AD if the problem persists?
2.)What do we expect from Rotax to fix this problem and when?
3.)What is the downside of ignoring this SB aside from the natural safety risk. IE who says that 60 days and/or 25 hours is "mandatory" beside Rotax?
4.)What incident produced this SB, where did it take place and when?

There may be other questions which you can suggest.

Thanks,
EBB
 
Ex Bonanza Bucko said:
I have a new S-LSA from Vans. It has one of the engines targeted by the Mandatory SB. Here are questions I have about that because I am a long time owner of certified airplanes and I'm new to ELSAs and SLSAs.

1.)Will this SB turn into an AD if the problem persists?
2.)What do we expect from Rotax to fix this problem and when?
3.)What is the downside of ignoring this SB aside from the natural safety risk. IE who says that 60 days and/or 25 hours is "mandatory" beside Rotax?
4.)What incident produced this SB, where did it take place and when?

There may be other questions which you can suggest.

Thanks,
EBB
Click to expand...
1) unlikely! But if people start crashing then things will change, no one has had a fatal crash as a result yet.
2)set up infrastructure in USA to service engines affected as well as supply new floats to those affected. Next 6 months!:confused:
3) if you ding your plane as a result of not following the SB then your insurance may not honor you claim. Call and ask them.
4) most likely a large number of warranty claims and field reports from dealers about replacing carb floats, some have been reposted here on the form from me and Roger Lee!;)
 
JetGuy:
Thanks. I think it may be time to put more heat on Rotax in this matter.
They have been way too quiet about it. If they want to replace Lycoming and Conitinental in the USA as they have in the rest of the world they need to get their tech and PR game up to standard.
EBB
 
EBB,

My mechanic just returned from Rotax recurrent training at Lockwood. This issue was discussed in depth.

Apparently even finding replacement floats that ARE affected (but which might be okay to use until the replacement) are hard to find.

One question he said was raised a lot was…if you follow the procedure to check the floats, and there isn't a problem you note in the logbook and repeat at 25hours/60 days…BUT what about if the floats don't pass?

He said Lockwood report that there are no kits with the official syringe etc to use to follow the procedure and Rotax have no idea when a suitable replacement part will be available, which would also be in high demand when it is.

Agree…seems Rotax completely dropped the ball on this one and probably (in my view) should have waited till a suitable replacement was readily available in order to affect a fix.

On the other hand if there have been enough airplanes with floats bad enough to cause rough running or even failures then I suppose they ad to DO something. Although, didn't they see this problem coming if they were getting increasing reports of bad floats?
 
EBB

I appreciate I am speaking from outside of the USA and in the rest of the world but please don't think that Lycoming and TCM are so much better than Rotax.

All of the Rotax manuals and continuing airworthiness data are available FOC on line.

Can the same be said for TCM and Lycoming....?

I'm sure that Rotax (and Bing who make the carbs) are doing everything they can to get the issue sorted.

Rotax issued an SB about the problem that has been widely promulgated by them, their dealers and airframe manufacturers who use Rotax 912 engines. How on earth is that keeping to quiet about it?! :confused:
 
This is for Aerofurb in UK and anybody else who has been following this thread. I appreciate Aerofurb's opinion and point of view; I like aviators from the UK a lot....one is a British Airways B777 captain who drops in to hang out in my hangar and to fly Bucker airplanes with us during a trip here from Heathrow about twice a month. He owns an RV6 and a J3 Cub:) I have another good buddy in Northumberland who flies a Rotax powered home built all over the place and sends me pictures from the air of "Cahsulls" covered in snow:)

I don't think that Lycoming and Continental are any better than Rotax when it comes to data and info. But those two companies have lots of dealers and mechanics all over the place in the USA who are used to handling service letters and ADs and Rotax does not.

Around here in Southern California, which should be a major market target for any light aviation company, it is danged hard to find Rotax technical help; on my field which is the biggest general aviation airport in Southern California (KSEE) there is one Rotax mechanic and he works out of the back his truck. We love him but we think he needs a shop and also that he needs almost daily communication from Rotax about the status of a problem such as this one.....he's in the dark just as much as we are.

So when Rotax is hung out to dry by a mechanical problem that potentially grounds their fleet and then says not much about how long the problem will last and also does not say what they are doing to come up with the parts and tools needed to fix it some of us get antsy.

My RV12 is my eighth airplane in the last 50 years; sometimes I have owned five of them at once.....got a "fleet discount" from Avemco:) With my son we have restored three antiques and he's presently working on another one. I have owned and flown two Lycomings and six Continentals and run four of them to TBO and then overhauled them again. But I have never been left to wonder where or when the parts and tools to fix a problem would come from. Continental pulled shenanigans on us as to light case IO 520s and also as to non VAR cranks which I think were borderline dishonest actions. But at least we could go to a local shop and get a problem fixed or a forecast of when it was gonna be fixed.....not so with Rotax.

Rotax is a fine company and their engines are better than the two majors in the USA IMHO. But if Rotax is going to compete as I hope it will they will need to get better at handling a problem like this. I think the light aviation industry in the USA will be much better......more flight students, more airplanes and a better future....... if Rotax succeeds.

EBB:)
 
EBB

I think it should be noted that manufacturers don?t set up dealer networks as such so a lack of Rotax friendly mechanics (we are called ?engineers? in Europe) can hardly be blamed on Rotax.

Are Lycoming and TCM directly responsible for the numbers of mechanics experienced on their motors?

If more people bought Rotax powered aircraft in the USA then the experience would be there to satisfy demand.

In Europe that?s what has been happening for the last 25 years and now most airfields will have Rotax friendly and experienced maintenance facilities.

Without doubt the USA drives the vast majority of what happens in worldwide powered general aviation. There are perhaps two exceptions to this rule ? one is the Rotax 91x series of engines and the other is diesel engines.

Diesel engines are far more popular in Europe than in the USA, both in the automotive world and in general aviation. In aviation we pay far more for aviation gas than you do Stateside. Currently we pay around USD$12/USG for 100LL. Jet A1 is available at a much more attractive price which is a huge factor in the popularity of Jet A1 burning diesel engines in the European GA scene.

Diamond make their Lycoming powered aircraft in Canada and diesel powered ones in Austria. Will the SMA powered C182 once it is certified or STC Centurion powered C172 prove a hit Stateside?

Rotax didn?t feature large in the USA until a few years back when the weight-limited LSA category came into being (apart from Predators which aren?t strictly GA....). Perhaps Rotax didn?t promote itself in years gone by because of potential liability concerns. Perhaps it wasn?t welcomed by many as it was built outside of the USA.

I remember seeing the C162 prototype at Sun?n?Fun with a Rotax 912 under the cowling. Why did Cessna ditch the 912 for the TCM O-200D? Probably not because the weight and balance figures didn?t work with the Rotax up front....

Rotax aero engines are most definitely a worldwide success and with the LSA category are even becoming an accepted alternative in the USA to the home grown heritage aero engines.

Sure Rotax sometimes have problems but no more than Lycoming and TCM etc. They certainly cannot be accused of avoiding their responsibilities.

Chicken and egg ? support the product as owner/pilots and the maintenance shops will soon be there to support you.

I?ll save posting my credentials and Christmas card list for another day.... ;)
 
I'm not interested in getting into a discussion, but am simply noting that my reaction to how Rotax operates is about like EBB sees it. I don't consider a Rotax a positive aspect of an airplane. My opinion based on my experience and observation only.
 
"If Rotax succeeds". ????? They have been around 25 years. That's nearly 30% of powered flight history. I Am pretty sure they have succeeded. I did not know a thing about Rotax until starting the -12 build. Since then, i have learned that they are a "new technology" style engine. If the only thing you are familiar with is Lyc or Cont then Rotax can be eye opening to say the least. As far as the SB's go :

1. Thank goodness they have them.
2. Be happy they notify they notify owner/operators of SB's ( I know a lycoming owner whose mechanic did not even know of an AD and was missed on 3 annuals ! )
3. Good information support network i.e. Rotax-owner.com and fly rotax. Com
4. Lockwood / LEAF are good knowledge bases and will do whatever they can to help.
5. The service shop network is building in the US. give it time.

Are there cons? Of course. But you can make a similar list with ANY aircraft engine. I am not here to sell Rotax engines or make excuses for so called missteps. However, calling Rotax a failure for issuing SB that affects a limited number is way off line. Owners and Pilots should do their own homework before crying an injustice over something that I Am positive will be resolved.
 
"If Rotax succeeds". ????? They have been around 25 years. That's nearly 30% of powered flight history. I Am pretty sure they have succeeded. I did not know a thing about Rotax until starting the -12 build. Since then, i have learned that they are a "new technology" mixed with old style engine. If the only thing you are familiar with is Lyc or Cont then Rotax can be eye opening to say the least. As far as the SB's go :

1. Thank goodness they have them.
2. Be happy they notify owner/operators of SB's ( I know a lycoming owner whose mechanic did not even know of an AD and was missed on 3 annuals ! )
3. Good information support network i.e. Rotax-owner.com and fly rotax. Com
4. Lockwood / LEAF are good knowledge bases and will do whatever they can to help.
5. The service shop network is building in the US. give it time.

Are there cons? Of course. But you can make a similar list with ANY aircraft engine. I am not here to sell Rotax engines or make excuses for so called missteps. However, calling Rotax a failure for issuing SB that affects a limited number is way off line. Owners and Pilots should do their own homework before crying an injustice over something that I Am positive will be resolved.
 
KALEWIS said:
"If Rotax succeeds". ????? They have been around 25 years. That's nearly 30% of powered flight history>>>
Click to expand...

To continue the history lesson, if I may.

Rotax have been around since 1920 and the name comes from 'Rotating Axle' for they invented the free wheeling hub for bicycles.

Engine-wise, apart from Ski-Doo engines since 1962, BMW and Aprilia motor cycle engines, Can-Am Spyder engines, kart engines as well as marine, ATV and industrial engines - they have been manufacturing aircraft engines since 1973.

The total tally now stands in excess of 7 million engines.

The 91x series appeared 25 years ago and they have sold over 50,000 examples in more than 200 aircraft types, amassing a total of some 40 million flying hours with a present annual total of 5 million hours.
 
I heard that too. They make fine engines and I'm very happy with my 912ULS. I flew it today for a couple of hours and had a super time.

My comment about Rotax succeeding does not refer to their long history in the engine business but rather to their current lack of adequate performance and/or information (IMHO) as to the carb float problem. To succeed in the USA they will need to deal with that better than they have.

I also don't expect Rotax any time soon to match the FBO/maintenance shop ubiquity of Continental and Lycoming.....can't do that....would take years. But it would be nice if we had an increased presence of those folks.

I'm afraid I have caused an international snit fit by my comments re Rotax and for that I am sorry. But I meant the comments and I still do:)

EBB
 
Well....we swiped Verner von Braun and got him to turn a V1 into an Atlas Centaur. Maybe we can kidnap the current Austrian version of good ole Werner and get him to turn a 912 ULS into an IO550 that burns about 5 GPH at 200 knots. :).

EBB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top