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

[Chunky]

Another thing to think about.

South Africa is such a small piece of the pie for Rotax. We are also the only ones doing all the bitching and moaning about the crank issue.

In Europe and the states, all engine manufacturers are on a big drive to end the life of all 2 stroke motors. With Rotax clearly leading the way in the 4 stroke Sport category I dont think they could give a damn about teh problems in SA.

Personaly I think its a good thing to tighten up the rules. To many Skoro-Skoro microlights out there. I have seen a few of the trikes owned by people doing alot of the bitching and moaning, and they shouldnt be allowed to taxi them at an airfield never mind fly them.

[Marc G]

Hi All.

Sorry about the late response. I've been offline due to internet problems, and just got them sorted out now.

My father (Roy) and I, are the new HKS agent in SA. We fitted the HKS to our raptor trike, and flew in the 2007 World Microlight Champs, where we were placed 2nd in the dual seater category. Robert Gassman, who also fitted an HKS, was placed 5th in the single seat category.

Although we had a few overheating, and power issues initially, it turned out to be a fault in the (non original) exhaust system. We fly a Raptor trike from Panorama (JHB). With 2 people, we climb at about 400-600fpm, and solo 600-800fpm. Depending on power setting and loading, we use between 6 and 10 litres/hr. The engine sounds good, and runs very well. At Sea level it performs extremely well.

I am very happy with the HKS. Although the HKS doesn't develop as much power as the 582, it develops substantially more than a 503. The engine is rated at 60hp for 5 min (rpm limitation), thereafter 55hp continuous power.

The HKS is a 4 stroke, 700cc, horizontally oposed boxer engine. It is similar weight to a 582, and turns in the same direction (meaning that you would probably be able to use your 582 prop on the engine.).

The 582 and 503 engines are excellent engines. I don't want to take business away from Aviation engines. Niren and Mike are good guys, and I'm sure that they will do what they can to help their customers.

For those of you who still want an alternative:

- We are willing to take Ranger's challenge, and offer the first 10 HKS engines, sold through me, at cost price (there are 2 sold already. I am reserving one for Gert Coetzee, if he wants it.) - so there are 7 left at cost.

- We are also willing to negotiate dealer discounts and commision for flying schools and manufacturers.

Anyone who is interested, please send me an email at flyingmarcg@yahoo.co.uk, or call me 0823923149, and I will send you any extra info that you may require. I will be back at home on monday, when I'll be able to reply.

Zulu1 - Paul... How's the progress on the fuel injection - I'm keen to find out. Please send me a mail.

Chunky - let me know if you want an engine.

I am also in the process of finding service centres, so any AP or AMO who is interested, please let me know.

Cheers,

Marc

[Morph]

Got word from Morph that clu-less from Morning Star was denied an ATF. I don't know the reason. Maybe Morph knows. MORPH?

Yes 300 hour overhaul. We have never done this in the Western Cape on any of our aircraft. Now Mike Cathrow is calling for proof in his logbook signed by an AP that the 300hour overhaul was done. What now? No ATF, Grounded. Even though I can tell you this plane is superbly maintained, him, like the rest of us are on limited budgets and can't afford this bullshit.

Flying is his passion, this is devastating to him.

[Morph]

Early responses show that they are going to add all their 2 stroke engines to the 300 hour rule.

Bye bye Rotax, Rotax bye bye.......

South Africa is such a small piece of the pie for Rotax. We are also the only ones doing all the bitching and moaning about the crank issue.

True, the rest of the world don't bitch because the rule is NOT enforced. It is accepted that the TBO's are recommended and it is the choice of the pilot to abide by them or not

Personaly I think its a good thing to tighten up the rules. To many Skoro-Skoro microlights out there.

Punish the good to get to the bad. The bad are illegal, no ATF's and will continue to fly anyway. In the meatime you have pushed those barely affording to fly out of the market completely and are unnecessarily enriching others.

[Henni]

Bye bye Rotax, Rotax bye bye.......

Soon most South African microlights will be powered by something else and we'll all be enjoying flying without being hazzled once again. Can't wait.

Funny thing is I'm now on my 8th microlight. Seven of those were powered by Rotax, one was powered by Cuyunia. I guarrantee that ALL my future microlights will NOT be powered by Rotax - PERIOD! And yes, there will be still a few to follow...It's such a pitty really as up to now I've mostly had only good things to say about this product range and yet now they contribute in the scheme to make flying unaffordable for me.

Once bitten, twice shy - this time round we'll know what to be looking out for in the new range of engines to be used before committing ourselves.

Henni

[rooikat]

The engines are not aircraft engines. Full stop.

So the 300-hour rule is perhaps the thin edge of the wedge. Win a concession to 450 hours, if lucky. How soon, then, before CAA outlaws the use of all Rotax engines in aircraft because it says on the box "Not For Aircraft Use"?

BTW, is the 912 desgined for aircraft? Or is there something nasty lurking in the forest there as well?

Rooikat

[skybound®]

CAA will accept an amendment but only if the person writing the document will accept FULL responsibility for any failures. Any person in their right mind would never ever put their name to anything of the sort.

Maybe Rainier would like to comment on how they intend protecting themselves with the re-write for the Jora operations.

Me thinks any accountability would be civil and less likely the state taking on someone.

[rainier]

CAA will accept an amendment but only if the person writing the document will accept FULL responsibility for any failures. Any person in their right mind would never ever put their name to anything of the sort.

Maybe Rainier would like to comment on how they intend protecting themselves with the re-write for the Jora operations.

Me thinks any accountability would be civil and less likely the state taking on someone.

I have learned that statements like you quote from CAA are both legally rubbish and generally to be ignored. CAA does not make laws. It attempts to follow them (badly, I know - they can't read and understand what a sentence means which is why we are having all these hassles in the first place).
Rotax does not accept any liability even before reaching 300 hours and no lawyer can touch them (they are not in the U.S. so that helps).
You can put on a Rotax and if your aerie falls out of the sky 30 minutes into the first flight - you can't touch Rotax (another reason why all this stuff going on around the 300 hour thing is so idiotic).

The engine manual (any engine manual) is generally worded in such a way to give reasonable advise to ensure reasonable performance and life expectency of the engine in reasonable safety. The current Rotax manual does not do that. This is why we are wording our own manual using reasonable operational specifications and limitations giving a reasonable life expectancy and reasonable safety. In no way does this mean the engine will never fail - assuming that is unreasonable and our manual is very clear on this. I don't care if CAA likes this or not - it's going in the manual and it is the manufacturers prerogative to do so.

If you take a Lycoming or Continental manual (any one of them) you will not find a single statement that their certified engine will not fail if operated within the specified limits and times. They can and they do fail (as many, many pilots have found out). There is no reason to load any Rotax with onerous conditions. It's complete bullshit.

There. Now you have me hot under the collar...

Rainier
(And yes - I will not touch another 582 or 503 in my life - even though they have matured to be excellent engines)

[Chunky]

Mark, If I decide to get my Trike legal again I will definately go that route. But unfortunately I think trikes are going to die a slow death.

There are to many 3 axis aircraft now that offer so much more than trikes. Unfortuantely times change and trikes seem to be out of favour at the moment.

These new rules arent going to help either as I dont see the point in putting a 912 on a trike, its simply a waste of money. To buy a decent trike you may as well buy a 3 axis and fly faster, safer further and in much more comfort.

But you definately got my vote for new engine of month for trikes.....

[ZULU1]

Please not Rotax bashing at all, I have had my HKS a while now..

Mark and interested parties, as Brett advised " I must have a crystal ball" I am pleased to report that with a decent exhaust and a real hash manifold built to get the engine going with the stock efi system made in this country.
As a result of this thread speeded up developments..yesterdays results..

Without changing prop pitch at all

Thrust before using standard carbs and ignition max rpm 6,200

With crude efi system and new tuned exhaust easily obtained 7,500

Then they stopped as it was over revving.

So in short those that want a standard carb motor can squeak quite a few hp more just by our exhaust mods and looks like quite easily can obtain good performance (582) at sea level with fuel injection. The beauty of fuel injection is that you can control all the important functions, egt,cht, ignition advance, rev limiting, tachometer outputs and really dont risk any motor damage.

I have offered Ranger all the dxf files for laser cutting and pdf/drg files for bending as I mounted my motor to ZU-LUI myself. I will hand same info to anyone who needs a retro fit. The development work is complete and has flown over 300hrs in a Aquilla. The solo wings fitment mounts the oil tank too low, I think this loses power. I use two fuel pumps, Facet and the Mikuni Rotax unit. I also installed a fork truck battery socket for cold days, it has such compression that I use a jumper pack to help the original battery.

The oil tank location is rather critical as I advised Mark and Robert (Lone Ranger) when installing for the worlds. The oil cooler is made in the Cape and dont change the design it works as I originally fitted two. It needs a cover for winter. I used braided pipe.
Only snag with the HKS is they take so long to run in, mine took a good 50 hrs before it developed any power, NC prop is the only prop I have found any good, changed plugs at 180hrs, oil every 100hrs, does 6 ltrs solo per hour and max 10 dual, fussy on idle as I battled to balance the carbs. But it runs as sweet as a nut on the cruise. I just wished that I had discovered the exhaust design from day one as this allows the engine to run cooler and develop more power. So yes its a very nice alternative. But with efi it makes a brilliant set up. Probably cost about 8k for a kit to modify with exhaust.
I have no commercial interest to sell the kits so Mark they are available for you to sell as a aftermarket kit..

Oh if buying used it must be after serial number 600 as before they were disasters..

They are almost a fit and forget package, like a car turn key and fly, still have to clean the air filters every 25 hrs. Oh and you must specify carb heaters.
Priced at R55k as it includes a gearbox its a good deal. I would imagine after seeing the HKS web ring it would be worth lobbying HKS to extend the tbo to 1,200 hrs.

If you view H Power in the states they are very popular over there.

zulu1

[rainier]

Please not Rotax bashing at all, I have had my HKS a while now..

Good news is that we are fitting an HKS to a new Jora being built for the University of Stellenbosch.
This aircraft will be used for their unmanned observation platform development (initialy with real flesh and blood pilot) and the HKS was chosen due to low fuel burn.

Interesting work you guys are doing with the HKS - I'm interested. Perhaps my own Jora needs this (even though the 582 has only 110 hours on the clock so far).

Rainier

[Griffin]

Good news is that we are fitting an HKS to a new Jora being built for the University of Stellenbosch.
This aircraft will be used for their unmanned observation platform development (initialy with real flesh and blood pilot) and the HKS was chosen due to low fuel burn.

Rainier

Good choice. I was worried about the orgional decision to fit a 582. They will also be making the plane to industry as a test platform. When are you delivering it?

[flying-i]

Great that this has spawned development in other motors, but this is not about Rotax or HKS or any other engine. This is about rules and regulations being changed and then not being appropriate for the industry they are supposed to protect.

Now I can only assume that the CAA has done this with a view to increase safety. There is obviously a pile of incident/ accident reports that indicate a high percentage of crank failure as well as engine outs due to the non compliance of the manufacturers recommended maintenance plan. No doubt Obert Chakarisa and Andre Swanepoel have studied these reports and can quote stats that will confirm the need to enforce this out of touch legislation.

So lets have it CAA, show us the proof that safety is being compromised by adhering to LS1. Show us the documented history which has lead to this harsh legislation.

We as an industry do not have to gather data to prove this to the CAA as it is already in evidence around the world and and in SA. The CAA will only waste our time as we are divided around the country and do not represent one united front.

Reasonable people will only follow reasonable laws and regulations, these are not reasonable and the people will not follow. I am not going to change my rotax and I am not going to change its crank - it is a safe and reliable engine.

Once again the CAA has lost a fantastic oppertunity to work with the people. The moral high ground is yous for now but it will not last.

Talking aviation used to be fun, now I am surrounded by very angry aviators and these are the cream of the knowledge base - the very people that CAA should be consulting when putting legislation in place. Surely the authorities can see the damage being done?

Once a gain I suggest that we stand united and get behind Dave Daniels and let him take this up on our behalf from a legal point of view. We have already wasted much time and a massive percentage of us are now flying illegally.

CAA = civilians against aviation.

[rainier]

No doubt Obert Chakarisa and Andre Swanepoel have studied these reports and can quote stats that will confirm the need to enforce this out of touch legislation.

Ahem..., you really think so ?

So lets have it CAA, show us the proof that safety is being compromised by adhering to LS1. Show us the documented history which has lead to this harsh legislation.

They don't have to prove anything to us. The only thing that is going to change this significantly at this stage is called a "class action".

We as an industry do not have to gather data to prove this to the CAA as it is already in evidence around the world and and in SA. The CAA will only waste our time as we are divided around the country and do not represent one united front.

Yes - I think you will find that we are quite united in our opposition to the new regulations (which are far more serious than just engine stuff - this affects ALL of your aircraft and the way you interact with it).

Reasonable people will only follow reasonable laws and regulations, these are not reasonable and the people will not follow. I am not going to change my rotax and I am not going to change its crank - it is a safe and reliable engine.

A reasonable statement - but you're out of luck. I quote "It's the law" this comes directly from somebody I know very well at the CAA. There is not even a question if a regulation is right or wrong or even if it has been missinterpreted. The CAA enforces whatever it sees to be the rule at the time - this is also why the rules change depending on who you speak to.

Once again the CAA has lost a fantastic oppertunity to work with the people. The moral high ground is yous for now but it will not last.

Talking aviation used to be fun, now I am surrounded by very angry aviators and these are the cream of the knowledge base - the very people that CAA should be consulting when putting legislation in place. Surely the authorities can see the damage being done?

Does it affect the pay of the CAA person enforcing the new law if he enfoces it ? No. But he can get into trouble if he does not. Right or wrong does not enter the picture.
It's law now. To change this requires an act of Parlament.

Once a gain I suggest that we stand united and get behind Dave Daniels and let him take this up on our behalf from a legal point of view. We have already wasted much time and a massive percentage of us are now flying illegally.

Dave, myself and others have been ranting and raving for the last two years warning what was going to happen.
Aeroclub DID attempt a feabile and reasonable intervention but was simply fobbed off. "Held at arms length" as somebody else quoted to accurately.

CAA = civilians against aviation.

Sad.
But true.

Rainier

[skybound®]

So Folks,

Since I hear so many different versions and opinions of what is happening, may be happening and could or should be happening, our Neil de Lange from Aeroclub suggested that we have a feedback meeting.

This meeting will once again be held at the EAA Woods Auditorium and the purpose of this would be to:

1 feed back on progress.
- we knew this would take time!

2 Streamlining and checking.
- that no items are left out!
- there are many, so we do need to help remind is needed.

3 Observe that our CAA & Aeroclub are singing to the same tune.
- for this we need the CAA people involved there too.

So, watch this space ... 27 03 2007 is the planned date!

Think he meant 2008 though