ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

The meeting place for gyronauts, gyronuts and those nuts about gyro's

Moderators: Condor, FO Gyro, Gyronaut

User avatar
fransstrydom
Look I'm flying
Look I'm flying
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:45 am

ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby fransstrydom » Thu May 28, 2015 8:10 am

SCARY PILOT
Sick and tired of the under achieving,overpriced,6100 rpm and replace the crankshaft,10 years and replace the crankshaft shitty engine?DESPAIR NOT.a Replacement engine,the S 44 is presently flying on a Sycamore testbed in the Northern province.This engine is a 4 cylinder 4 stroke boxer motor with fuel injection and turbocharged,That can easily produce a lot more power than the Rotax engine,and the system engineer and the test pilot claims a frugal less than 13 liters of fuel per hour.Power output of a typical 914 engine is 190Kg at 5700 rpm static thrust,and the S44 delivers 285 Kg at 5400 rpm.Cruise at 4000 rpm.The gearbox is locally manufactured and will swing a four bladed Wharp drive propeller.
The all important question everybody is going to ask is "What is the price and will it be relaible?"
As far as reliability is concerned,this is a proven motor,and failures (if you can call it that) was up to now related to engine management setup problems.
The other major advantage is that spares are available locally,and this engine can be maintained and overhauled by the agents or any qualified instances.Spares are affordable and so is the engine.
This whole debacle of the 10 year engines have now finally caught up with Rotax,now is the oppertunity to put them where they belong,the dustbin.
For technical detail contact Hennie at 072 743 6767
User avatar
JvTonder
Frequent Flyer
Frequent Flyer
Posts: 1321
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:47 am
Location: Rhinopark

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby JvTonder » Thu May 28, 2015 10:45 am

Frans is dit n Subaru motor?
Flying feeds the soul!
User avatar
fransstrydom
Look I'm flying
Look I'm flying
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:45 am

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby fransstrydom » Thu May 28, 2015 3:24 pm

Jaco,
I will have to converse in a foreign language.
Yes,it is the 1800cc motor.Because of the bad reputation (undeserved) i refrained calling it by name.This motor was installed at the then CHAYAIR AVIATION on Sycamore's.For that reason it is legal to install on a Sycamore.This motor is also FAA approved for aviation.Now put that in your pipe and smoke it.For years it has been tampered with by so called specialists.All to no avail.All it needed was someone with an understanding of how engines work and dedication to sort out the problems.Some of the problems were of aerodynamic nature.
I want to stress the fact that this engine is standard,no cam profiling,high compression or modifications.The amount of boost is very low,and the engine is not working hard at all.
SCARY PILOT
User avatar
Gyronaut
Toooooo Thousand
Toooooo Thousand
Posts: 2263
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 4:26 pm
Location: Morningstar - Cape Town, Western Cape

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby Gyronaut » Wed Jun 17, 2015 5:30 pm

(^^)

Dit is voorwaar goeie nuus vir sport vlieg en gyro's in die algemeen.

Die prys van 'n Rotax is disproportioneel duur teenoor wat mens kry daarvoor.
Hierdie geforseerde 10jaar overhaul op die Rotax is mos absurd as die masjien niks makeer nie?

Ons hou duim vas dat die engin se reputasie homself vinnig sal vestig.
Sterkte en hou ons asseblief op hoogte


Google Translate vir die wat net ingils vir selfverdediging gebruik.

This is indeed good news for sport flying and gyros in general.

The price of a Rotax is disproportionately expensive compared to what you get for it.
This forced 10years overhaul the Rotax Is just absurd if the machine has nothing wrong?

We are hoping that the engine's reputation will establish itself quickly
.
greg vos
Going for flight test
Going for flight test
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 5:12 pm
Location: FAFK

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby greg vos » Wed Jun 24, 2015 8:36 pm

why if this engine has now proven itself is it limited to the sycomore ? the sycomore had the same rotax mounting points and if this power plant is compatible why cant it be fitted to other gyrocopters? I have sent PM requesting technical info? no reply? can we have pictures of the unit with its gearbox?

Is the RPM compatible to the 912/914 the torque curve ? the output shaft center (height from crank to prop shaft center / versus mounting points?) to put it into simple terms what is needed if one would want to fit this into a gyro other than the now historical sycomore? from a SACAA requirement?

if the thing is to take on Rotax (witch I encourage) then surely you are under marketing its potential?
User avatar
Baitbird
Woohoo 100 posts - flying high
Woohoo 100 posts - flying high
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 10:50 am

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby Baitbird » Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:38 am

Frans is currently on leave.
He wil respond when he's back in civilization ( if that's at all possible in Africa)
Fake people worry about their image.... Real people just don't give a damn!!!
User avatar
fransstrydom
Look I'm flying
Look I'm flying
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:45 am

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby fransstrydom » Fri Jun 26, 2015 2:56 pm

Thank you Baitbird
Back and ready to go.Greg,i did send you a PM on the 3rd of June.Obviously i did it wrong,sorry about that.To answer your question about fitting an engine other than a Rotax 9 series to a gyro:
1)All gyro's in this country fall under the amateur build group.
2)No legislation as to what type of engine to be used.
The problem you will have is to convince the supplier/agent of your gyro to switch engines.
3)There are gyro's flying in this country with other brands of engines.
Apparently the representatives of Rotax that was here last week undertook to supply a special package deal for the 10 year and older older engines.We will have to wait and see what they come up with,but at this stage neither SACAA aeroclub or ARO'S are willing to take responsability for engines older than 10 years.The AP assumes that responsability the moment he signs out your aircraft,which is totally unfair to the AP.
As you are aware the AP scheme is non functional in this country,and the training scheme never came out of the blocks.Presently we are stranded with a totally disfunctional SACAA which is quite apparent if you read the news bulletins.
So,where does that leave us.There must be hundreds of engines that will not get a new ATF,unless your AP is willing to take the risk.The options will be to buy a new shortblock,or a new crankshaft(which according to the AP's is more expensive than a shortblock if you add the labour to rebuild the sub assembly.)There are only a handfull of AP's with hundreds of rebuilds,with the flying schools pulling rank,where does the recreational pilot figure.The cost involved (which is my estimate) will be in the region of R150 000,00 plus.I write this out so you can see how much money that is.Also bear in mind that it is quite possible to buy a new shortblock that can fail within hours.No official reply from the supplier/agents/manufacturer as to who is going to cover that cost.
Replacing the engine of aeroplanes with electrical motors would be the ultimate,but here is the problem.The recharge time to full capacity should be in the same order as filling your tank with fuel,even if you can extend your range to 3 hours.That is a no no and will be for a very long time.Recharghing points for many aircraft will have to be supplied,and what about traning schools.
The proposal to replace the Rotax engine is not to give them opposition,or to push them out the market.Because of the fact that the 1800 Subaru motor was on the Sycamore makes it easier to replace the engine.The Thrustline,CoG etc was sorted out in the factory.The problem was that the then manufacturer could never get the engine to perform the way it should.Hennie Maritz spend months and months to sort the problems out,and for instance,Eric Torr discovered that the engine alignment was out by seven degrees,engine up at the prop,so the more power you apply the more the engine fights the rotor.Peter Goldsmith discovered that the propeller was cavitating,again the more power,the less performance.The turbocharger was not matched to the engine,and Hennie installed a Garret 4 pump to provide a usable bandwith,rematched the exhaust system,build a new intake manifold.For those that is interested,Hennie is willing to set a day aside at a central airfield,bring his scales and do some static tests,even compare it to the Rotax engine,but please be carefull you dont break you crankshaft at 6100 rpm.
Technical detail can be obtained from Hennie Maritz 072 743 6767
User avatar
fransstrydom
Look I'm flying
Look I'm flying
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:45 am

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby fransstrydom » Sat Jun 27, 2015 2:42 am

foto  van gearbox.jpg
Sorry about the quality of the photo's.Will post more later
foto van gearbox.jpg (38.72 KiB) Viewed 1816 times
User avatar
fransstrydom
Look I'm flying
Look I'm flying
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:45 am

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby fransstrydom » Sat Jun 27, 2015 3:06 am

SUBARU INSTALSIE COMP.jpg
User avatar
fransstrydom
Look I'm flying
Look I'm flying
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:45 am

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby fransstrydom » Sat Jun 27, 2015 12:21 pm

SUBARU EA81.jpg
User avatar
fransstrydom
Look I'm flying
Look I'm flying
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:45 am

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby fransstrydom » Sat Jun 27, 2015 12:26 pm

I have a lot of literature concerning the EA81 engine,but unable to post it here.Google EA81 SUBARU for a host of information.
SCARY PILOT
greg vos
Going for flight test
Going for flight test
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 5:12 pm
Location: FAFK

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby greg vos » Mon Jun 29, 2015 11:46 pm

Thanks Frans, this is a most interesting thread, I have tried in vain to become a Tier 1 Rotax repair agent, so relate directly to your frustrations listed.
Rotax locally only have qualified staff to tier 3, (Tier 1 reserved for the factory only apparently) so as I see it the workmanship skills are really lacking when it comes to taking a TBO engine and rebuilding it and certifying it back to 2000 hours? With all offering a short block augmentation, and no investment in equipment or staff to take an older unit and simply rebuild it to within specification as if it was done at the parent facility. My thinking is I would send my Engineering staff to Austria and get them certified to Tier 1, Rotax Austria steer me back to Comet! So we go in circles and we are none the wiser or any closer to getting a professional outfit to rebuild these rather simple engines?
I know of a case in CT about 3 years ago wherein a well known AP from JHB (I won’t list his name to save him the embarrassment) diagnosed a 914 running problem to a crank problem and was almost insistent that the client purchase a new crank (then about 50K) the problem was later found to be an air-leak on a gasket (I will not say much more) Recently a friend sent his Rotax to Comet with an internal water leak evident since commissioning, was advised it was the water pump? This was at great cost as it had to be removed from his craft, sent for repairs, and the leak...well still there.. later identified to be in the heat exchanger! So my perception is the guys who we have to engage with for repairs to these units are really a bit back yard? Yet we are at mercy to use them in order to retain a ATF, and cannot use our own resources who could after some investment be more competent at diagnosing the Rotax engines and offer a better service?

I approached Comet who said I cannot build or repair Rotax as Im not a AMO? yet offer no advise on why if I invested in staff training at the head office to train my staff and invest in specialised equipment needed to rebuild and diagnose Rotax engines cannot open a local Rotax rebuild facility offering the local consumer a fast turn around and more affordable solution to a expensive TBO

So your efforts on this are very well received with myself thinking they (Rotax) need a solid competitor? I look forward to your efforts spilling over to where we would be able to retrofit this motor to other Rotax 912 /914 applications with little fuss.

This 10 year irrespective of hours rebuild is certainly getting my attention, and I wish you all the best with your efforts.
User avatar
fransstrydom
Look I'm flying
Look I'm flying
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:45 am

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby fransstrydom » Tue Jun 30, 2015 8:32 am

Morning Greg
i am currently involved in discussions with SACAA,RAASA and Comet aviation.Stil waiting for satisfactory explanations.
No replay from Comet as yet.It seems to me like there must be two versions of the Rotax 9 series engines.a Local factory builds aircraft in which they are comfortable to go on tours around the world.I would like to know how much more those engines cost,i dont want the Hong Kong ones.
Coming back to the competition.I want to stress the fact that i am not involved in the business of the Subaru possible replacement engine.I do not handle the marketing side of it,Rotax handles that part.It doesnt even have to be a Subaru.As a law abiding citizen i am concerned about the total silence regarding this secret clandestine meeting that was held the week before last.My question to SACAA and Raasa is easy.If anybody aplies for an ATF today with a engine older than 10 years,without replacing the crankshaft ,willyou get it?The answer must be a simple "yes \" or "No"If i want to play this game,i want to know where the goal posts are.Lately it seems as if these decisions are made on an arbitrary basis,depending on how the inspector feels that day.The department of transport wants to regulate this airspace to the point of the expiry date of the Rennies in your first aid kit,but the taxi industry can do whatever they like,the poor whitey is very accommadating,and he also pays the salaries of these self so called civil servants that wants to make your life difficult.Maybe we should kick the Aeroclub and start a union.The goverment always listens to what the unions say.
As far as the AP's are concerned.These poor guys work themselves to a stanstill,seven days a week,for almost no money,or at least that is what they say.Offcourse they will do all in thair power to protect their jobs.Is that maybe the reason that they will do everything in their power to keep competition out of the marketplace.I am also a technical person,and for that reason i know some of these guys on a personal basis.They know my point of view and this discussions will eventually lead to them be out of a job.This is a lose,lose situation for everybody,if nobody flies,there will be no need for an AP.i Would like to advocate that we scrap the AP system,and allow the motor industry to do what they do best.Some of our AP'S are not motor mechanics and hopefully they do a proper job.
We have come to a place where decisions have to be made,important and serious decisions.The system as it now has fallen apart,possibly because of the heavy handed and over regulated approach.The ARO system is also bound to fail,if it hasnt already.Harsh things have to be said now,and openly.
Francois Strydom 078 267 6145
User avatar
Tumbleweed
Toooooo Thousand
Toooooo Thousand
Posts: 2348
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:14 pm
Location: FASC

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby Tumbleweed » Tue Jun 30, 2015 4:14 pm

Stupid question.

How many Rotax approved Ap's are there to rebuild engines and what is entailed for a certified AMO - authorised to and regularly rebuilding certified aircraft engines, to get rated or recognised to work on Rotax engines?

Will we even afford it?
Sling ZU FYE - For Your Entertainment
greg vos
Going for flight test
Going for flight test
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 5:12 pm
Location: FAFK

Re: ALL SYCAMORE OWNERS

Postby greg vos » Tue Jun 30, 2015 5:44 pm

Tumbleweed wrote:Stupid question.

How many Rotax approved Ap's are there to rebuild engines and what is entailed for a certified AMO - authorised to and regularly rebuilding certified aircraft engines, to get rated or recognised to work on Rotax engines?

Will we even afford it?
Its complex and i dont feel like typing for an hour, but to get it rebuilt and to be re issued with a fresh 2000 hours TBO requires a certain amount of work this is determined by the serial number and associated service bulletins, indicating what components need replacing.

question is witch AP would you employ to do a 200K or more rebuild? many I have met I will not let them rebuild my lawn mower! but then I have one hell of a lawn mower vhpy I want an engine built in a sterile workshop with calibrated tools and the engineer trained to level 1 at Rotax, from what I have learnt is that in SA the highest trained Rotax mech is level 3?.... This was confirmed to me in writing by Niren (Commet)

yet Rotax Aus will not let me send my Engineer (BSc UCT) for training saying we must go through Comet? ...so the wheel turns AP's offering to fit a short block with your old Turbo and carbs and not being able to certify it to as new status ???? so then what do we get for our 200 - 260K

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests