Is this the end of microlighting in S.A. ?

[John Boucher]

True.... but at R 277 000 (worst case scenario ) for 1500 hours for a 582 I would rather opt for automotive / motorcycle application for aviation!

[lamercyfly]

Dear Mike, you really are wanting to stir up a hornets nest this late in the game?

I say bollocks to your comment about this or that other manual you get when you attend a rotax course.

The CAR's state that you shall maintain your aircraft according to the manufacturers maintenance schedule.

the POH (ie, the one supplied by the manufacturer) has the Rotax operators and maintenance manual attatched. This is the manual that shall be used. Period.

Not some ruddy manual that you bring up at this late stage.

I am an Aero Club Approved Person, under the new Aero Club ARO, and I am rated for both repairs and inspection etc., etc., and I have never, never, ever, heard of this ruddy manual you now bring up.

What on earth possed you to add more fuel to the fire.

No one from CAA, no one on this forum, no one at Aviation Engines has even hinted at this manual you refer to. So what on earth were you hoping to achieve?

I am sure you can gather from my post that I am gat-vol with everything, and you really have not done anything positive (in my opinion), by adding this unnecessary, additonal burden which we may now have to address and fight........

Darn it man.........

Regards.

[Chunky]

[quote="lamercyfly"]Dear Mike, you really are wanting to stir up a hornets nest this late in the game?

I say bollocks to your comment about this or that other manual you get when you attend a rotax course.

The CAR's state that you shall maintain your aircraft according to the manufacturers maintenance schedule.

the POH (ie, the one supplied by the manufacturer) has the Rotax operators and maintenance manual attatched. This is the manual that shall be used. Period.

Not some ruddy manual that you bring up at this late stage.

I am an Aero Club Approved Person, under the new Aero Club ARO, and I am rated for both repairs and inspection etc., etc., and I have never, never, ever, heard of this ruddy manual you now bring up.

What on earth possed you to add more fuel to the fire.

No one from CAA, no one on this forum, no one at Aviation Engines has even hinted at this manual you refer to. So what on earth were you hoping to achieve?

I am sure you can gather from my post that I am gat-vol with everything, and you really have not done anything positive (in my opinion), by adding this unnecessary, additonal burden which we may now have to address and fight........

Darn it man.........

Regards.[/quote]

Dave

I am suprised at your outburst. Calm down old chap, and put your panties back on.

I am shocked to see the best fence sitter in the world taking sides?

[John Boucher]

You go boy!

[Duck Rogers]

I have been quiet throughout this whole issue but I concur with Dave.
Everyone's just speculating and adding fuel to the fire. Most of us are getting gatvol of the uncertainty and it doesn't help any if everyone just adds a little tail to this sorry saga. We're all talking the same language and I'm sure we all know by now what we want and what CAA's standpoint is.(at least they THINK they know)
There are people feverishly working on the issues, a Lawyer included.
Let's just quieten down and wait and see. The 27th February is not too far off.
I think we've flogged the horse to death by now, twice over.........or more.
My optimistic guess is common sense will prevail.

[gertcoetzee]

I am suprised at your outburst. Calm down old chap, and put your panties back on.

I am shocked to see the best fence sitter in the world taking sides?

Never take the insults of someone who prefers to remain anonomous seriously.

[John Boucher]

Sorry Duck......

I still wanna flog.......



Were not flogging a horse but an ol' snail....

[Aerosan]

When will this end how will it end WILL IT END 116

[John Boucher]

NEVER ENDING STORY

[Mike Cordeiro]

Dear Mike, you really are wanting to stir up a hornets nest this late in the game?

I say bollocks to your comment about this or that other manual you get when you attend a rotax course.

The CAR's state that you shall maintain your aircraft according to the manufacturers maintenance schedule.

the POH (ie, the one supplied by the manufacturer) has the Rotax operators and maintenance manual attatched. This is the manual that shall be used. Period.

Not some ruddy manual that you bring up at this late stage.

I am an Aero Club Approved Person, under the new Aero Club ARO, and I am rated for both repairs and inspection etc., etc., and I have never, never, ever, heard of this ruddy manual you now bring up.

What on earth possed you to add more fuel to the fire.

No one from CAA, no one on this forum, no one at Aviation Engines has even hinted at this manual you refer to. So what on earth were you hoping to achieve?

I am sure you can gather from my post that I am gat-vol with everything, and you really have not done anything positive (in my opinion), by adding this unnecessary, additonal burden which we may now have to address and fight........

Darn it man.........

Regards.

DAVID

You need to calm down before you have a heart attack, You profess to know everything but yet you don,t even seem to know how to control your emotions??

Now to answer to your question.
You are wrong, the CAA is working acording to this manual and yes it does exist.

CAA is working on a solution for this issue, and lastly, tell me Mr Daniels what have YOU done to solve this issue???? Please don`t portrait yourself as an almighty by underminig other peoples coments. It looks cheap.

Now I realise the sarcasm, when you talk about Mike Cathro wich i find him to be a down to hearth person well worthy of the respect that he has earned.

P.S. This is me out of this forum.

[Gyronaut]

I prefer to look for solutions in this than listen to the mudslinging, which I choose to ignore.

I have a question. NTCA are not prescribed to with regard to choice of engine - right?

If I modified an engine in any way, is it still the original? For e.g. If I removed the branding from the cylinder-head cover plate and any other 'branding' who's to say its not an XYZ-582 type of engine without any predefined maintenance ritual. Could I be denied an authority to fly?
I've seen no "VIN Plate" requirement?

Tongue in cheek of course...

Len
ZU-EDN

[John Boucher]

Is it a ROTAX or a BOMBARDIER or a BRP or maybe even CAN-AM

What happens if you add SKY-DOO to the casing.....

Maybe build a lekker expansion box which will up the HP?

Interesting to hear what the fundi's will have to say....

By the way Mike.... with technology as it is today, I am curious to hear how many motor car cranks would be replaced if similar conditions compared to flying an aviation engine ie. START - WARM UP - FULL POWER - CRUISE - POWER DOWN - STOP were adhered to?

[rainier]

I prefer to look for solutions in this than listen to the mudslinging, which I choose to ignore.

I have a question. NTCA are not prescribed to with regard to choice of engine - right?

If I modified an engine in any way, is it still the original? For e.g. If I removed the branding from the cylinder-head cover plate and any other 'branding' who's to say its not an XYZ-582 type of engine without any predefined maintenance ritual. Could I be denied an authority to fly?
I've seen no "VIN Plate" requirement?

Tongue in cheek of course...

Len
ZU-EDN

Well, not a joke.
The procedure would be:
Write up a mod form and pay your R400 application fee. As you are replacing the engine with another type (even if it's the same) you must do this. Furnish your own maintenance manual and get a new aircraft manual approved.
If it gets accepted at the technical department (if it is technically correct it will) you are no longer flying a stock Rotax engine.
This procedure actually is required if you modify a Rotax engine - a relatively common modifiction for example would be to install a non-Rotax exhaust to tickle a bit more power out of the pistons.
It's all about following procedures - if you do, CAA will too...

Another possibility is that of derating. You probably know it is common to derate engines to increase their life span.
It is reasonable to do so on many of our typical 582 installations as many aircraft will cruise at a very low power setting. Sometimes a trike might need as little as 50% or even less - that is quite a bit less than what a normal aircraft would tend to fly at - 75-80% cruise power setting being the norm.
Technical will ask for documents and might ask you do provide Rotax's opinion - but hey, anything goes....

Rainier

[Chunky]

[quote="Mike Cordeiro"][quote="lamercyfly"]Dear Mike, you really are wanting to stir up a hornets nest this late in the game?

I say bollocks to your comment about this or that other manual you get when you attend a rotax course.

The CAR's state that you shall maintain your aircraft according to the manufacturers maintenance schedule.

the POH (ie, the one supplied by the manufacturer) has the Rotax operators and maintenance manual attatched. This is the manual that shall be used. Period.

Not some ruddy manual that you bring up at this late stage.

I am an Aero Club Approved Person, under the new Aero Club ARO, and I am rated for both repairs and inspection etc., etc., and I have never, never, ever, heard of this ruddy manual you now bring up.

What on earth possed you to add more fuel to the fire.

No one from CAA, no one on this forum, no one at Aviation Engines has even hinted at this manual you refer to. So what on earth were you hoping to achieve?

I am sure you can gather from my post that I am gat-vol with everything, and you really have not done anything positive (in my opinion), by adding this unnecessary, additonal burden which we may now have to address and fight........

Darn it man.........

Regards.[/quote]

DAVID

You need to calm down before you have a heart attack, You profess to know everything but yet you don,t even seem to know how to control your emotions??

Now to answer to your question.
You are wrong, the CAA is working acording to this manual and yes it does exist.

CAA is working on a solution for this issue, and lastly, tell me Mr Daniels what have YOU done to solve this issue???? Please don`t portrait yourself as an almighty by underminig other peoples coments. It looks cheap.

Now I realise the sarcasm, when you talk about Mike Cathro wich i find him to be a down to hearth person well worthy of the respect that he has earned.

P.S. This is me out of this forum.[/quote]

Right on the money Mike...

I was at the same function as Mr Cordiero on Friday night when the conversation came up with Mr Cathro.

To Reiterate what he said. the rules are not going to change. The CAA will be enforcing the maintenance as shown is this manual.

If there were any chance of the rule changing, why is Mr Cathro changing hiw school fleet over to HKS.

Rules are Rules and unfortunately this one is not going to change. In the near future its going to be another topic to argue about. No more flying of Cheetah's, Jabirus, Joras, Storks....(The list goes on and on) on a MPL.

Quick suggestion. Do your PPL's soon and save up for that 300 hour crank change.

[lamercyfly]

Hi Chunky and Mike.

Guys, you are wellcome to your views.

Mike Cathro and I go back a long way (we attended the same instructors course way, way back)

Mike is only a junior staffer at CAA. I don't care for his opinions on this matter. I do care for his opinions on many other issues, though. He is a darn fine instructor, and he knows Jabirus and Raptor trikes like the back of his hand.

I am aware that he has personally accepted, at long last, responsibility for these laws getting promulgated in their current format, as he did not perform his task when he was Head of Technical for MISASA. He personally asked my wife, in the corridors at CAA, last year, and I quote "When are you and David going to sort this Kak out" He furthermore in a conversation only last week, asked us (misasa) to please do something about these laws, and once again admitted to our chairman that it was an oversight on his behalf for not dealing with it properly during his term of office. I have written elswhere on this forum of the fact that I stood in the foyer at CAA, and had a heated argument with Andre Swanepoel and Mike Cathro about these laws (this was about 2 years ago!!) I have always been against them, and both Andre and Mike were adamant that they were good laws and that SA needed them. Guess who Mike works for now..... But Mike has realised, in hindsight, that the laws are horribly flawed. But too late, and now individuals, together with Aero Club and MISASA are trying to amend them to become more realistic.

So, your pessimistic views are really not enjoyed by myself, nor, I am certain, by the other folk working hard to present realistic amendments before the CARCOM meeting later this month.

Now, don't get me wrong, I am NOT lambasting Mike Cathro. I do NOT want to apportion blame on anyone. I am just shocked that he (Mike Cathro) is not doing more to help from within the ranks of CAA, considering the info I have just written above.

I think I have said enough on this debate now, and do not wish to carry on rehashing this thing.

Like I said, you are wellcome to your views, and you are wellcome to write them, but please don't defend Mike. He is wellcome to come and defend himself. I remember Mike Cathro having a friendly dig at me during one MISASA committee meeting, where he said that he really enjoyed reading my writings on the internet, as I was always writing things 'as they were' and usually getting some-ones 'goat' up...... I never thought that one day I would be possibly getting Mike's 'goat' up

Cheers guys, and pleeeez, zero hard feelings, O.K. Like you, I just wanna fly......and have fun..

Regards.