582 overhaul

[Wirraway]

Just in simple terms, anyone have a rough cost estimate for a 300 hour overhaul on a 582, please?

 

[Thruster88]

3 hours ago, Wirraway said:

Just in simple terms, anyone have a rough cost estimate for a 300 hour overhaul on a 582, please?

 

Unless it is in a flying school aircraft I would not overhaul. The 582 will do 500 or more hours and then buy a new one. In 2015 I bought new with b box, radiators, carburetors and exhaust for $7.5k, the old grey head had done 800hours without failing with one overhaul at the 300hour mark. If it is a school aircraft buy new and sell the old one. 

Edited December 23, 2020 by Thruster88

[Wirraway]

Thanks for your response, but my reading of the Rotax data indicates the 582 has a 300 hour TBO.
Doesn't this mean an overhaul is mandated???
Tks.

[Thruster88]

Just now, Wirraway said:

Thanks for your response, but my reading of the Rotax data indicates the 582 has a 300 hour TBO.
Doesn't this mean an overhaul is mandated???
Tks.

There are many Rotax engines running on condition in planet RAAus(private ops), it is even allowed in planet CASA for VH aircraft, PA28 etc flying school aircraft.

[Cosmick]

my 503 is at 300 hrs, spoke to Tech Mngr was advised that needs TBO as per Rotax schedule being 300hrs or 5 years. Well Sh1t mine is 13 years old. My question  - how would the Insurance Co treat your personal liability claim if your engine is ou of hours/time.

[Cosmick]

16 hours ago, Wirraway said:

Just in simple terms, anyone have a rough cost estimate for a 300 hour overhaul on a 582, please?

 

Mate just had a 582 done at Dalby, cost over $3000

[M61A1]

Check section 12.6 of the Tech Manual

It tells you about what is required for engine maintenance

[Cosmick]

I read 12.6 re Piston Engines and Condition reports but have been advised by Manufacturer and RAA must comply Rotax Schedule. Is factory built but not Training aircraft. Advised still adhere Rotax Schedule. 

Is it different for experimental and Home built ? Many aircraft engine out there especially 2 stroke beyond years.

 

[Methusala]

There are many descriptions either in written form or video showing dissassembly, inspection and reassembly of 582's. If taken carefully it is not beyond the ability of the average bloke to manage. Engines are not required to comply with manufacturer's (often self-seeking)  guidelines. Being conservative doesn't mandate extremes of caution. WE manage our approach to risk.

[facthunter]

The only real way to check anti friction bearings like ball and roller bearings is to dismantle and inspect. Pressed up cranks are a specialised work. Often replace rather than repair is the way it's done these days . 300 hr's is probably conservative but it IS in an aeroplane. Measuring PLAY is NOT sufficient as the bearings don't wear out they fail when the hardened surface fatigues and hardened bits flake off  often  destroying the  bearing cages and the bores and this happens over a relatively short operating period once it starts to happen. Usually the engine totally fails without much warning. I know people who chuck or sell the motor at exactly 300 hours. I know of others to do over 1,000 hours but I would not regard that as common. Some put in a set of rings and carefully decarbonise the ring grooves and have a good look in there at 300 hours. I've done 3 like that. If you do that watch the circlips as they are too soft and will move in the grooves. and eventually ruin the grooves. The small ends are needle rollers with no cage and it's easy to dislodge one no matter how careful you are. These engines are nothing special and only the 582  is still made in the Rotax  range. You can (or could) buy the engine minus carbs and muffler. How you operate decides the reliability to a great extent. Ring groove carbon causes a problem if it occurs. It can cause ring breakage or seizure.  Nev

[M61A1]

1 hour ago, Cosmick said:

I read 12.6 re Piston Engines and Condition reports but have been advised by Manufacturer and RAA must comply Rotax Schedule. Is factory built but not Training aircraft. Advised still adhere Rotax Schedule. 

Is it different for experimental and Home built ? Many aircraft engine out there especially 2 stroke beyond years.

 

According the tech manual it is mandatory to follow the manufacturer's schedule if it is LSA (factory built) also mandatory if the aircraft is an older 25 or 55 rego AND being used for training. With homebuilt and experimental, the builder effectively writes the maintenance schedule.

In short, you can run your engine on condition (following the manufacturer's operating maintenance schedule at the correct intervals- oil, plugs, filters etc) unless it's being used for training or an LSA.

[Yenn]

Methusela have you ever done an engine overhaul on a Rotax.

{ have overhauled many engines but would not do a complete overhaul of a Rotax with a built up crank. Overhauling without splitting and re buildng the crank is only a partial overhaul as there is a centre bearing that you cannot check and failure of that bearing is not something you can live happily with.

[Methusala]

35 minutes ago, Yenn said:

Methusela have you ever done an engine overhaul on a Rotax.

G'day Yenn. Answer, yes. I bought a blue head and was told the big end was shot on one cylinder. Imported a new #99 crank from CPS THEN split the case. Found that the crank was in great shape but the needle rollers had deteriorated in one piston. Got new piston, pin and bearings from Floods and re-assembled it. That was 3 years and 120hrs ago. I fly in the Lake George area and never trust my engine over unlandeable country. The process to reassemble the engine was relatively easy. The previous grey-head had done over 750 hrs and was still pulling 6,300 with a Brolga 3-blade at 16deg pitch. To each his own in this form of aviation. I didn't touch the x-shaft/ water, rotary valve. Mix my own fuel/oil.

Edited December 24, 2020 by Methusala

[Cosmick]

On a LSA what level Lame has to conduct rebuild

 

[Yenn]

Those Rotax will run with shot bearings, but not safely.

A friend landed with a group of us on an Island beach and when we came to leave he couldn't start his Rotax 447 I think it was.

We managed to get him started and he flew home to the next door island. Next time I saw him he showed me what had caused his problem. The caged little end bearing had given way, although we could not hear it. When he tore down the engine the head looked as if someone had taken a pick axe to it. He put in new bearings and a new piston and rings and flew it again. The stopping point is that splitting the crank is not something you do in youre shed.

[Methusala]

49 minutes ago, Yenn said:

The caged little end bearing had given way, although we could not hear it.

Caged bearings are a big no-no! As someone said, "Cageless means more bearing material and no plastic." Splitting the case is not a big deal but requires special tools to service the x-shaft. Can't inspect the main bearings or the big ends without splitting the case. With the new seals in the bluehead coolant leaks from the seals are rare. I used the exhaust manifold to align the 2 barrels. So far, no exhaust leaks unlike before re-build.

[jetboy]

Rotax stopped the caged little end bearings about 30 yrs ago. I was flying my new-to-me 503 machine and with 5.5 hrs experience  needles went thru the muffler etc.When I ordered parts the replacements had all needles no cage. But I replaced the engine with a new one anyway. Later on replaced the bearings and piston and flew this for 30+ hrs before selling. It went on for a few 100 hrs only lost a coil - then the owner put in a 582.

That was all way back when there was no 300hr throwaway life and the most popular competition was another snowmobile motor - Cyuna.

Probably the 582 had cageless bearings when introduced.

Was really tempted to use a 582 for my 701 and just replace at TBO it comes down to how many hrs per yr and perception of reliability.

Sometimes you have more DIY rights with a car or chainsaw motor - the problem seems to be with the TC version of the engine maintenance manual being applied to the non certified versions run in rec. aircraft (non - LSA which is a totally different category of risk and oversight)

In NZ microlights arn't yet allowed to run on condition, but certified GA can. LSA must be LAME maintained.

My Bantam with 503 was run under CASO.19 rules Memories of better times...

Edited December 25, 2020 by jetboy
context

[slb]

Just replying to another thread I read with interest the advert for a Trike on Australian classifieds.

It says The Australian Government is set to Legislate in 2021, that Rotax 582 Aircraft Engines have their TBO hours extended out to 500 hours! At 20 hours flying a year, this means you could fly this Trike for 19 More Years before even Thinking about an overhaul.

No idea what that means but I can’t see our government overriding Rotax 5 years TBO to over 19 years. 

[facthunter]

Me either. A good sales pitch.? You still must pull the motor through  and if you notice the compression soft on one or more cylinders, you must attend to it. To be aware of a fault and not act on it doesn't go down well with anyone looking into incidents.  Nev

[Wirraway]

1 hour ago, slb said:

Just replying to another thread I read with interest the advert for a Trike on Australian classifieds.

It says The Australian Government is set to Legislate in 2021, that Rotax 582 Aircraft Engines have their TBO hours extended out to 500 hours! At 20 hours flying a year, this means you could fly this Trike for 19 More Years before even Thinking about an overhaul.

No idea what that means but I can’t see our government overriding Rotax 5 years TBO to over 19 years. 

I had not read that ad before, as I was not looking for a trike, but am I wrong in saying that this is none of the Government’s business?

 

What I’m saying is that the Govt, can mandate more checks than the manufacturer recommends, thinking ADs and the like, here, but if the manufacturer says 300 hours, no Government in their right mind, surely, would say,

 

“Hey Rotax, you are being too conservative here, let’s stretch it out.”

 

Imagine the lawsuits!!!!

Edited January 1, 2021 by Wirraway

[Methusala]

Requirements for operating piston engines in aircraft engaged in private operations are detailed in - AD/ENG/4 Amdt 11 - Piston Engine Continuing Airworthiness Requirements.

There is no mention of requirement to observe manufacturer's time expiry limits.

[Thruster88]

AD/ENG/4 Amdt 11 spells it out very clearly, private and aerial work(flying school, agricultural etc) aircraft in Australia do not need to comply with the manufacturers recommended TBO, TTIS or years. Presumably RAAus aircraft would be covered by this legislation.  

[Wirraway]

Learn something everyday.

 

Although, this quote from AD/ENG/4 Amdt 11, seems to give priority to the manufacturer's "published time between overhaul"

 

Quote

Compliance:

1.    From the effective date of this AD, as detailed in the Appendix A. 2.    a.     From the effective date of this AD, as detailed in the Appendix A. 2.    b.    At intervals in accordance with the engine manufacturer’s published time between overhaul (TBO) periods for the engine. 2.    c.     At intervals specified for that component, in the following order of priority: i)        Aircraft manufacturer’s published TBO for that component. ii)       If the aircraft manufacturer does not provide the schedule, then at intervals listed in the engine manufacturer’s published TBO for that component. iii)     If the engine manufacturer does not provide the schedule, then at intervals listed in the component manufacturers published TBO for that component.

 

Edited January 1, 2021 by Wirraway

[Cosmick]

9 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

AD/ENG/4 Amdt 11 spells it out very clearly, private and aerial work(flying school, agricultural etc) aircraft in Australia do not need to comply with the manufacturers recommended TBO, TTIS or years. Presumably RAAus aircraft would be covered by this legislation.  

post a link please

[Wirraway]

I just googled and got this

 

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2008L04568

 

and 

 

http://services.casa.gov.au/airworth/airwd/ADfiles/enggen/eng/ENG-004.pdf