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

[Wargames]

Totally agree with flying-i.

Lets have a poll, not only to get everyones feeling on this, but also to see how many guys are having trouble with this part 24 thing. It will be better for us to know that we 'let say' 500 guys who want this to change, than just 50!!

I really want to fly legally, BUT ....!(CAA's but).

Those oke's that have the money to do TBO, must just hang on a while. Don't give CAA leverage on this. Regards.

[Chunky]

Guys Guys Guys

Why are you trying to find ways to spend your money. rather save it and buy that crank. The rules are not going to change.

At best the CAA will change the rules to extend the crank hours to around 400 or 450 but nothing more. When speaking to Mike Cathro yesterday he also indicated that AP's signing out aircraft that have exceeded the 300 hours without thecrank change are going to be investigated and most probably have their rating revoked.

My advice is start saving up and change that crank, The rules are not going to change very much or very soon.

[Carel]

Good to say saving up money for a new crank, what happened to affordabilty ? This is is one one of the main reasons why a lot of us are fly-ing.

Seriously looking at alternatives once my engine reached 300 hours.

[Wargames]

There is one thing that CAA forgot when they proclaimed the part 24 as legal. If I have to do a TBO on my engine,which have 420 hours on clock. Then I will forever only clock 5 hours per year on my plane. Just "flying enough" to validate my MPL every year. Then I will be flying within limits, and the CAA will have to wonder and ponder on why oh why do I change my spark plugs every hour??

There a strange thought!!

How is the saying going: "They had to put a honest man in jail for a crime he did not commit, to become a crook!!"

[Chunky]

I agree wargames, but that looks like the only option for now.

My Hobbs is also probably going to stop immediately after the crank replacement. Strange thing that, seems to be happening alot to the aircraft at our field.

Cheap Chinese Hobbs....

[skybound®]

I do not believe that all hope is lost so lets not toss the towel in just yet and accept that we are done and dusted.

From what I understand is that there is some action at Aero Club where they are preparing for the Carcom meeting and they will be taking our proposals forward and addressing these issues.

Dont get me wrong, I am also the moering for a number of reasons. The two that stand out the most are:

Why did nobody engage Aero Club or other bodies BEFORE these regulations were promulgated - we would have perhaps been able to halt the promulgation. Here I am looking at us folks. You, me and mcgee! We all have a role to play (other than tossing the stones once we are in the dwang)

What has been said about the two denied ATFs on the notion that they were commercial okes. That is absolute bollocks, as the regulations currently have no distinction between commercial and non commercial operators maintenance requirements.

If those two guys are reading this - challenge it mates - and ask for the chapter and verse to support the denial. Once again CAA not applying themselves fairly and apply the same bit of legislation in two completely different ways. Currently they would have to issue all ATFs or deny all of them.

[ICEMAN]

When speaking to Mike Cathro yesterday he also indicated that AP's signing out aircraft that have exceeded the 300 hours without thecrank change are going to be investigated and most probably have their rating revoked.

Thats all good and well now, but who was issuing the ATFs for the last 20 yrs with the same situation........... seems like a witch hunt to me

[Aviation Engines]

I have finally finished and sent through a proposal to CAA and if adopted by them will resolve this matter to the satisfaction of all role players in the industry.

[Wargames]

I have finally finished and sent through a proposal to CAA and if adopted by them will resolve this matter to the satisfaction of all role players in the industry.

Would you mind elaborating a bit on what the proposal says

[Morph]

When speaking to Mike Cathro yesterday he also indicated that AP's signing out aircraft that have exceeded the 300 hours without thecrank change are going to be investigated and most probably have their rating revoked.

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Nice approach, ground the entire Rotax 447/503/582/614 Microlight community (a significant volume of aircraft), punish the pilots with fines and then beat the AP's into submission or revoke their rating.

Let's change the name of CAA to KGB or Gestapo.

[skybound®]

Added to that Morph is the fact that they are punishing those that normally tow the line and are responsible. Tighter regulations will not make a crook more honest.

Before any of you disconect or break your hobbs , think a little longer term to when you come to sell your pride & joy. Prospective buyers will discount your value with incomplete records.

[Morph]

I emailed Rotax aircraft the following message. I still need to see the document from Rotax that specifies the crank needs to be replaced.

To whom it may concern

Could you please email me the document that specifies/recommends/demands/insists the replacement of the crank shaft every 300 hours for the 503 and 582 engines. This statement is NOT in the current maintenance manual. Our local CAA are enforcing this rule and effectively have grounded all Rotax engined aircraft in South Africa who have exceeded 300 hours and not replaced this component. However we have over the last 18 years of flying proven that this is a very expensive and completely unnecessary thing to do so as such have refrained from doing so. We have 503 engines in daily use running up to 1200 hours without crank shaft replacement

Currently I see the sales of Rotax engines dramatically drop/stop and them being replaced with more cost effective engines with longer TBO’s. The entire fleet of Rotax-powered planes now have the following options,

1. R35000 parts and labour to perform the 300 hour service.
2. R55000 replace the engine with a new 503/582, which will need the 300 hour service in the near future,
3. Dump the Rotax product and go for HKS, Jabiru and Hirth, cheaper to buy with longer TBO’s

I am the administrator of the largest microlight forums in South Africa, representing a community of 1600 pilots. The general consensus is option 3, dump Rotax

There are a number of threads regarding this, here is one of them - viewtopic.php?p=62946#62946

Greg Perkins, aka Morph
http://www.microlighters.co.za
Forum Administrator, Aircraft Owner and Pilot

[Aerosan]

I have a ski doo mach1 engine that can go into my plane.This is a type 643 There is no mention of anything in the manual for this watercraft about the crank or spark plugs. Rotax is refusing to comment and now what do I do?????

[skybound®]

now what do I do?????

Write your own maintenance manual and have it approved by CAA. Copy the current manual and instead of using replace - change to inspect and replace on condition.

Morph I did not see my mate last night regards the overhaul schedule. If we get load shed again today - I may take the chance and whip around to him and get it.

[Ranger]

In the mean time, Niren assures me that A-E are working very hard to get a new service plan approved by the CAA.

It's wierd that A-E now have to try hard to get approval for a NEW service plan when CAA never queried the existing one. After all CAA have to accept the manufacturer's recommendations. I dought that CAA will despute any changes made by A-E as that will make them liable should any changes they insist on backfire. A-E aren't working hard enough.