Whats going on in NZ with their regulations with Rotax

[Kyle Communications]

I just got this video link from a guy who I follow on Youtube and he has been getting a Ibis going in NZ. He has had dramas with a older engine and got EP to do work on it. Now the NZ aviation bosses have enforced the time constraints on uncertified Rotax engines. Whats the video start at about 17 mins

 

 

 

 

 

[Thruster88]

Lycoming also have a 12 year recommended TBO. There are many certified VH aircraft flying "on condition" in private and air work categories in Aus, I doubt NZ is any different, but if you rebuild the engine with non approved parts and make a YouTube video about it you could be up $hit creek. 

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

What he is bitching about is what about all the VW and the subaru etc...they havent been time limited...its a generic thing in NZ and only for Rotax

 

 

[Downunder]

How stupid. Someone can fit ANY old POS conversion engine and fly but a "proper" aircraft engine with a known history of reliability after hours and time limits is now banned?

 

I wonder if ex casa employees are now in jobs over the ditch.....

 

Wouldn't surprise me if it was a push by Rotax either......commercial interests 

 

 

[fallowdeer]

Very long story.  Part 103.207 (a)(2)(iii) which is about the issuing of flight permits states that the applicant for a permit to fly shall provide, amongst other things

 

" A statement that any inspection, replacement, overhaul or other maintenance of the microlight aircraft or its engine or engine components that is considered mandatory by the manufacturer has been complied with..."

 

This literal interpretation by the CAA of the relevant section of part 103 seems to be correct and has only recently been interpreted to mean that Rotax engines past calendar or hours are no longer airworthy.

 

So the issue has been how to come up with a way  to run Rotax engines on condition

 

After lengthy and involved negotiations with the CAA by a consortium of various interested parties and groups a  draft policy, rewrite call it what you will to enable these engines to be run on condition was reached, subject to ongoing monitoring of engine health. 

 

It is my understanding that the airworthiness division of the CAA and the various groups as above were in agreement over what had been written and the procedures to be followed to allow on condition.

 

None what I believe was proposed was too onerous and was just things we should be all doing such as leak downs,  temperature and pressure monitoring and recording oil consumption and so on.

 

I have heard and I must stress this is only my opinion and rumour that the legal section in the CAA has raised some questions over  over what has been agreed as above and that this has  created a stumbling block.

 

However from what I've heard a way to run Rotax engines on condition will eventually be arrived at in this country, it will just be a while till we get there.

 

I certainly hope so.

 

Peter

 

 

[IBob]

As I recall, plans were also afoot to bring other engine types under some similar program, so this is not directed solely at Rotax engines.

 

Clearly the guy is upset, so I won't comment on his other assertions except to say our skies are definitely not filled with microlights held together with HomeDepot bolts, or engines held on in strange and precarious ways; and while the community is understandably very concerned at the possible impacts of this legislation, it is a very long way off 'dying'.

 

 

[jetboy]

The new interpretation / diisertation is not specific to Rotax,  seems that Rotax are more affected because they have calendar items and times which most others dont. It could be very bad for 582 / 503 engines in service....isnt there a crank inspection every 300 hrs?

 

The Microlight organisations here (at least 2 of the 3) are in discussions about it 

 

RAANZ info posted here

 

http://raanz.org.nz/wiki/pmwiki.php?n=Main.Whatsnew

 

Dont know what SAC are doing exactly

 

BTW the flight permit document also specifies a new permit must be raised whenever an engine or propeller is different to the one listed. Seems they use the same form that was written for multi engine / CSU prop certified aircraft. Costs about $300. Not fun if you want to swap to climb prop for a weekend of bush flying..