vote on engine maintenance schedule

[lamercyfly]

Please urgently cast your vote on the following:

Do you believe that the engine maintenance schedule should be used as a guideline, and you should be allowed to use your discrection in deciding when to perform major overhauls etc.,

Obviously this is a wide topic, and I know that most probably 80% of microlights in SA use either the 503 or 582 engines.

However, I also know that everyone I have met, who owns and flies microlights, is very respectful of the engine and its limitations.

I know that I, if I flew a 912 motor, would be quite happy to TBO at 1 500hours. But from experience, I am NOT happy to TBO my 503 at 300 hours.

Anyway, no more discussions, there has been plenty of that.

Just your vote for now please.

If you would like to, you are welcome to post a message confirming your vote. Alternatively, you may remain anonymous.....

Thanks and regards.

[Louisvw]

I agree

[robmatthews]

I firmly believe that the Rotax Manual is only a guidline and not a hard and fast manual. I would say the manual was drawn up to protect Rotax in the event of a failure. We could draw up our own manual and give it to the Commissioner to approve.
I am also of the opinion that flight school aircraft should not fall into the commecial operations.A lot of aircraft are put onto the flight school books for owner training and once completed is left on the books as spare aircraft for the event that a school plane is not available.The school planes are also given a 25hr inspection.
My vote is Yes

[Miskiet]

The poll is confusing as the question is not clearly stated. Do you "I aggree" with the rotax manual or with David's comments?

I agree - Means you think the manual should only be used as a guideline


I disagree - Means you think we should follow the manual to the letter

[Hot Stuff]

I agree, the maintanance schedule should be used as a guideline only. I have a AP friend who has opened a 503 motor over 1000hrs and the crank and other things are still within specs.

[lamercyfly]

Sorry about the confusion.

The question which must by read is the quesiton on the poll line....

Agree or dissagree with that question, not with how I stated it in my message.

Thanks for picking that up.

I will correct it.

Regards.

[lamercyfly]

I have made the amendment.

I reads better now. Thanks once again for pointing the confusing wording out........

Both the poll question and the posting pose the same question now.

Later,

[glenvdm]

Hi guys, I work in the aviation industry everday of my life, i deal with larger aircraft engines than the rotax, but even here at Pratt & Whitney our manuals are not to the point, yes there are certain criterias that we must follow but generally the rule of thumb is that the manuals are guide lines only, it is up to the discretion of the engineer working on the engine to determine the serviceability of the parts and the engine as a whole, but I think this decision should only be done by someone competant in making the decision, someone who has a technical background. The intervals as to when to do certain maintenance tasks will however remain contraversial. At Pratt & whitney we offer extensions on engines for their TBO's and even the inspection intervals are extended, but that does come with more frequent cleaning and condition monitoring. With regards to the Rotax engines, I am all for doing extreme maintenance on the engines only when absolute necessary, I really think that the inspection intervals should be extended and should not be so strict. The Rotax engine is a proven engine.

[Andre]

I race motocross bikes aswell as flying trikes and as yet had to replace a crank on my bikes. What I do believe is to use the right oil (no cheap stuff) and do regular routine maintenance. The 300/600 TBO I believe is only to protect the manufacturer and should only be used as a guide. I don't believe my 582 works nearly as hard as my motocross bikes and I have never replaced a crank, pistons/rings yes but not a crank.

But believe you me when I start feeling uncertain no matter what the hours are or what the book says I will have a look at the crank

[Boet]

If it is not broken: Don`t fix it. Why replace a perfectly healthy 582 crank on 300 hours when they average 1000hrs without any problems? Very few of us has surplus money to waste. I think this will be a serious waste of our money.( That some of us do not have anyway) If the intention here is wrt flying safety: THIS IS ALL WRONG. People will tend to fly less, because it will become too expensive to fly. Flying less = less practise = less competent pilots = more unsafe flying and more accidents. So much for "flying safety".

[Astrix]

All Pilots, as a young pilot in the sport, there are a few concerns which were stressed by my instructor (Tip my hat to the dwarf) and the most important was SAFETY and that was a subject on it's own, as he did all our maintenance on our aircrafts and nothing mechanical happened to any of aircrafts in our club while he was working on it.

When he worked on the engin, there was no chance that you get away by let him do all the work himself, you as the novice are there to assist and learn. I have gained more knowledge by helping. Which no money could buy at the end of the day.

Let us keep it a guideline and have a club member (like my instructor) who know the engin inside out and that I could feel he promote SAFETY and that I have the confidence to ask him to do the sevice of my aircraft's engin again in the future. We do sign off in our logbooks, on what was done during the service and that is part the responsibility of the Chief Instructor of the club to confirm that is was done, is correct and according to the rules/policies.

Let us rather get more members qualified in our clubs who is prepared to do the Rotax course and let them do our maintenance.

Thanks to our instructors who are there to promote the sport and the SAFETY.

Happy landings

[ICEMAN]

When the approved maufacturers manuel clearly states that the engine is "prone to stop at anytime or place without warning" and is not endorsed as an aircraft engine then why all the fuss from the CAA powers to RTFM.......

[Brian Young]

Hi Dave,
I Agree with the changes. What I would like to know is WHO made the changes to Part 24 after Rob Matthews and Geoff Dyer corrected them, this is the big question???? where they aurthorised to do so????
I think the whole of part 24 should be suspended untill this mess has beed sorted out.
Brian

[nicojacobs]

I agree, the manual is and must be used as only a guide.

[lamercyfly]

Hi Asterix.

Thankyou for your great words of encouragement for instruction well done

I believe that is how it should be done. All instructors should present the 'line maintenance course', and if there is work to be done, the students should be 'roped' in to work with...........

That's how we taught at La Mercy, and we also had a zero engine problem at our field...............

Later,