Mandatory Rotax compliance costs

[bauple58]

Looking to buy a plane with a 2008 Rotax 912UL, 780 hours TT. Rubbers have all just been replaced. It doesn't have the overload clutch, and hasn't been running avgas. As a newbie (to Rotax) I am wanting to determine  what mandatory costs, other than routine annual maintenance, I can look forward to. I am led to understand for example that the gearbox will have to be inspected at 1,000 hours. Is this correct and if so, what have others had to pay for this? Thanks

[Red]

The gearbox inspection is at 600 hour if no slipper clutch and 1000hr if you have the slipper. (I believe regular Avgas use will shorten the inspection period to 600hours even with the slipper fitted)

Cost is dependent on what condition its found to be in and work/parts it requires, could just be a belleville washer needed or new dogs..etc etc...variable

Just what work is actually mandatory is more down to your regulatory system than what rotax stipulates (UL Engines are not certified)

Edited October 17 by Red

[johnm]

what type of aircrfat rego is it ...................... a 19 - 0000 or a 24 - 0000

 

I'm hearing that if its a 24 - 0000 (factory built) and the motor is time expired - then it has to go to 19 - 0000 rego

 

that's my ruff understanding of it ?

[Red]

You'll get solid info on Rotax engines here... https://www.rotax-owner.com/en/forum

 

But what you actually have to adhere to is down to your regulatory regime

 

 

Edited October 17 by Red

[FlyingVizsla]

We've been going through this with our Lightwing.  It is a factory built, so available for training & hire.  However the engine, although low hours, is now years expired.  This means it is "on-condition" which requires annual inspections and the aircraft can't be used for training or hire, or fly over populated areas.  There are costs to have L2 inspections and I believe there is a RAAus annual fee. 

 

19 registered is amateur built, not just because the engine is "on condition"

 

We have someone who wants to buy it and do alterations - things that normally require Engineering certifications (as it is factory designed & built).  To get around this - and this isn't for everybody as it is a lot of work.  Transfer the plane to the new owner using the RAAus Tech Form 028 - Damaged/Unairworthy aircraft acquisition which takes the aircraft off the Register then do the work required making sure that it is equivalent to 51% built (dismantle, recover, engine work etc) and re-register it in the 19 category.  Once in 19 you can run the engine "on condition" provided you have a plan for monitoring and maintaining it.  Determining the 51% is up to RAAus, and 51% is a lot of hours and work, and expense.  Fortunately for us, and the plane, this is just what the buyer wants to do - a comprehensive inspection, renewal and rebuild.  Document and photograph as you go to prove the extent of the work.

 

The alternative is to have the engine overhauled to renew its life.  A quick call or email to Tech at RAAus will get you a better answer.  @bauple58  I am assuming it is a RAAus registered.

[johnm]

thanks FV - I'd like to see more on this requirment of aircraft registration - is there a printed RAA policy / protocol on this ?

 

(prior to say 2023 / 24 a 24 - 0000 aircraft could remain 24 - 0000 (with a time expired engine - as long as it was not hired or used for training) ................ but now things seem to have changed ?)

[Thruster88]

The differences between owning and operating a CASA or RAAus regulated aircraft appear to be converging. Make it to hard and people's will buy a motorbike instead. RAAus registered aircraft numbers are in a slow and steady decline over the last 4-5 years.

 

Would be a risky move putting a lot of work into an old aircraft and then trying to get a 51% approval from the regulator. 

[skippydiesel]

I strongly advise talking this over with the RAA technical staff - way too many slightly contradictory opinions from well meaning helpers.

 

• RAA will tell you exactly what is permitted & not and help you plan a way forward

 

As for the Rotax 912UL (80 hp).

 

• Contact Bert Flood Imports for definitive advice.

Edited October 17 by skippydiesel

[Neil_S]

4 hours ago, johnm said:

what type of aircrfat rego is it ...................... a 19 - 0000 or a 24 - 0000

 

I'm hearing that if its a 24 - 0000 (factory built) and the motor is time expired - then it has to go to 19 - 0000 rego

 

that's my ruff understanding of it ?

Hi John,

 

Doesn't go to 19 reg from 24 reg - you need to change it to E reg, ie E24-nnnn to put it into Experimental category. Then you can fly with engine "On Condition". 

 

Cheers,

Neil

[johnm]

E24 - nnnn .............. got it Neil_S

[F10]

Ok, this is my experience. In order to keep an eye on things, I understand RAAus wants you to apply for a MARAP, to fly an engine on condition. No problem with this. My problem with it....is they want you to re-new MARAP at every annual.....What with Rego fees, membership fees and now this.....yes.....anyone seen the new Royal Enfield Shotgun 650....? Looks like a great motorcycle!.....Running on condition should not be a drama, just means every annual, you need to check all engine temps and pressures are or have been normal, check the oil and oil filter element for metal and do an oil change.

 

You need to do a compression check and if you can borescope the cylinders for a look see, it's a good thing, to have a look at the valve faces and barrel walls condition, because this may show potential problems earlier...a good LAME should be able to see signs of heat stress on the valve faces and there is a clever rope trick to grind valve seats without taking the heads off. If you've lost compression, too late, the damage has been done.

 

A piston engine will always show signs of pending trouble I think, as long as you listen and look. Sudden failures are rare in my opinion. My Rotax is on condition. I do of course 50 Hr oil/filter changes and the compression test usinga compressor, 80 PSI and the double gauge tester, is showing values pretty much as good as a new engine. Running the engine for at least 5 minutes before a compression check is important. I think the 80Hp is the jewel in Rotax's crown, because they go for ever and I think that's because they are relatively unstressed. "Some say".....that they have opened them up well past 1500 Hrs and you can still see the cross hatch honing marks on the cylinder bores...old wives tale?

[Red]

16 hours ago, F10 said:

Ok, this is my experience. In order to keep an eye on things, I understand RAAus wants you to apply for a MARAP, to fly an engine on condition. No problem with this. My problem with it....is they want you to re-new MARAP at every annual.....What with Rego fees, membership fees and now this.....yes.....anyone seen the new Royal Enfield Shotgun 650....? Looks like a great motorcycle!.....Running on condition should not be a drama, just means every annual, you need to check all engine temps and pressures are or have been normal, check the oil and oil filter element for metal and do an oil change.

 

You need to do a compression check and if you can borescope the cylinders for a look see, it's a good thing, to have a look at the valve faces and barrel walls condition, because this may show potential problems earlier...a good LAME should be able to see signs of heat stress on the valve faces and there is a clever rope trick to grind valve seats without taking the heads off. If you've lost compression, too late, the damage has been done.

 

A piston engine will always show signs of pending trouble I think, as long as you listen and look. Sudden failures are rare in my opinion. My Rotax is on condition. I do of course 50 Hr oil/filter changes and the compression test usinga compressor, 80 PSI and the double gauge tester, is showing values pretty much as good as a new engine. Running the engine for at least 5 minutes before a compression check is important. I think the 80Hp is the jewel in Rotax's crown, because they go for ever and I think that's because they are relatively unstressed. "Some say".....that they have opened them up well past 1500 Hrs and you can still see the cross hatch honing marks on the cylinder bores...old wives tale?

I don't doubt the story of honing still being visible at 1500 hours, the plating on 912 Bores is very hard

Something I dont think many people notice is the name cast on the cylinders, a very well regarded Italian cylinder manufacturer ...they aint made by Rotax

Edited October 18 by Red

[facthunter]

"Nikasil" is fused to the surface rather than plated in the normal sense It's very durable and doesn't corrode either. Unless something Unusual "happpens" the bores last like, forever. You can still get rust pits on valve springs which will cause failure if not noticed. Also on older motor the seals go hard.  Nev

[onetrack]

There's too much emphasis placed on bore condition. You can have all kinds of patterns, wear, gouges, scores and problems with the bore - and the engine will still run reasonably well. But the major weakness of IC engines is poppet valves.

95% of your engines problems will come back to valve sealing and seating and valve head condition. Valves are the most heavily worked part of any IC engine.

 

Sleeve valves and porting really are a much more durable arrangement, but the drive mechanism and clearances are critical areas, and they can't handle high RPM's. In tests of the early sleeve valve car engines in the late 1920's, the sleeve valve engines were still reliable, and still producing 99% of their power output after 80,000-100,000 miles - unlike their poppet valve cousins, which were suffering serious power losses and valve sealing problems, in as little as 40,000 miles.

 

I would have liked to have seen the rotary valve head become more developed and widespread, but inertia and lack of funding, often stopped many good ideas. The Deane Rotary Valve, an extremely promising Australian invention by three Aussie engineers, was proven to work, and be exceptionally efficient and reliable, when tested on a motorcycle engine - but it failed to gain financial backing, and fell by the wayside, as with many good design ideas.

 

Rotary-Valve Internal Combustion Engines.

WWW.DOUGLAS-SELF.COM

---

Douglas Self, rotary valve engines, Minerva, Aspin valve, Cross valve, Froede valve, Wankel valve, Mellors Rotary Valve

 

Edited October 19 by onetrack

[facthunter]

The way gas flowing has developed poppet valves are superior.. Heads warp unevenly though and a seated valve cold may not seal as well when hot. Valve inserts in alloy heads can loosen or hammer further in..   Nev

[BrendAn]

On 18/10/2024 at 8:47 AM, FlyingVizsla said:

We've been going through this with our Lightwing.  It is a factory built, so available for training & hire.  However the engine, although low hours, is now years expired.  This means it is "on-condition" which requires annual inspections and the aircraft can't be used for training or hire, or fly over populated areas.  There are costs to have L2 inspections and I believe there is a RAAus annual fee. 

 

19 registered is amateur built, not just because the engine is "on condition"

 

We have someone who wants to buy it and do alterations - things that normally require Engineering certifications (as it is factory designed & built).  To get around this - and this isn't for everybody as it is a lot of work.  Transfer the plane to the new owner using the RAAus Tech Form 028 - Damaged/Unairworthy aircraft acquisition which takes the aircraft off the Register then do the work required making sure that it is equivalent to 51% built (dismantle, recover, engine work etc) and re-register it in the 19 category.  Once in 19 you can run the engine "on condition" provided you have a plan for monitoring and maintaining it.  Determining the 51% is up to RAAus, and 51% is a lot of hours and work, and expense.  Fortunately for us, and the plane, this is just what the buyer wants to do - a comprehensive inspection, renewal and rebuild.  Document and photograph as you go to prove the extent of the work.

 

The alternative is to have the engine overhauled to renew its life.  A quick call or email to Tech at RAAus will get you a better answer.  @bauple58  I am assuming it is a RAAus registered.

how do you get on training in a lightwing. i was looking at one but advised not to get it for training because they weigh nearly 300 kg and mtow is 480 . 180kg for 2 people and fuel ?

[FlyingVizsla]

This 1993 55-registered Lightwing is limited with weight.  I worked out, with full fuel, the two on board had to weigh 52kg each to stay within MTOW.

[Moneybox]

I still haven't got to the point of presenting my plane for inspection for registration. It's 20yrs old 711hrs on a Rotax 912 ULS and 24- registration. I've had advice from all the experts (an ex is a has-been and a spurt is a drip under pressure) and every one has a different opinion.

 

I believe a factory built LSA cannot be converted to run on condition, it must remain running on the manufacturers service schedule. Upon inspection of the relevant documents for my plane, an early Evektor Sportstar, is not an LSA but a Type-Certified aircraft so I dodge that rule. It's not done yet but after RAAus looked into it they sent me the paper work to convert my 24- rego plane to run on condition.

 

We will see what happens over the coming weeks.... There has been no mention of E- registration as it cannot apply.

[johnm]

Unusual how there is no printed protocol from RAA on this subject

 

It always seems to be a phone discussion with RAA .................. why not some clarity - with options (if any)

 

Same with 'on conditon' - what does that mean .............. plus intitial documents .............. & initial and annual rego costs

 

Is this a new modus operandi for RAA ???????????  (new being say the last few years)

 

a lot of 24 registered planes are - or will be - in this boat 

[skippydiesel]

"I believe a factory built LSA cannot be converted to run on condition, it must remain running on the manufacturers service schedule. Upon inspection of the relevant documents for my plane, an early Evektor Sportstar, is not an LSA but a Type-Certified aircraft so I dodge that rule. It's not done yet but after RAAus looked into it they sent me the paper work to convert my 24- rego plane to run on condition."

 

It would seem from the above statement, that your belief "factory built LSA cannot be converted to run on condition" is not supported by RAA - "RAAus looked into it they sent me the paper work to convert my 24- rego plane to run on condition."

 

It seems to me that you will be able to fly your Sportstar "on condition" .

 

The only other option, is to replace the engine, with one still within TBO (new?) and sell the old engine (which is probably worth a pretty penny) so that the aircraft can meet the factory approved standard.

[RossK]

Our Sportstar is regitered as a Factory built LSA, which get 23 rego.

When converting it from VH to RAA we were told that as an LSA, it could not be run on condition, as it must be maintained as per the manufacturers book.

Only way around it would be to convert to E23 rego.

[FlyingVizsla]

1 hour ago, johnm said:

Unusual how there is no printed protocol from RAA on this subject

I have suggested to RAAus that they could do an article for RAAPS, or the Knowledge Base (which I can't find now...?)   The RAAPS are useful - eg what to expect with a BFR, Test flying your aircraft.  I guess, between being busy and having to update something like that with Tech Manual changes, Service Bulletins, Manufacturer's etc, it has become all too hard and it is easier to handle it one case at a time.

[facthunter]

THAT gives no certainty or consistent path. All rules should be based on a proven path to improved safety at a justified cost. There are always people who will skimp inspections, fake engine log books and abuse aircraft. (over load and overstress).. The variation of compliance is large and some repairs would not pass muster. That's even happened with the big stuff. Look at Boeing lately.. An acceptance of what IS PRACTICALLY ACHIEVABLE should be in the back of ones mind while we still try to improve the situation 100% is never going to be achieved.

   Some clarification needs to be done for sure but it needs wisdom and effort and good organising. It's a potentially thankless task, as whatever is done will be criticized by somebody or other who thinks they are hard done by and want's everything for nothing..

    The only way anything on a plane can be zero timed is from NEW. Everything is built as Light as is safely possible. It all has a LIFE.  Nev

[Blueadventures]

41 minutes ago, FlyingVizsla said:

I have suggested to RAAus that they could do an article for RAAPS, or the Knowledge Base (which I can't find now...?)   The RAAPS are useful - eg what to expect with a BFR, Test flying your aircraft.  I guess, between being busy and having to update something like that with Tech Manual changes, Service Bulletins, Manufacturer's etc, it has become all too hard and it is easier to handle it one case at a time.

Agree, could give an email with the details to the editor of the mag and such would make a worthwhile read for some.  Cheers.

[FlyingVizsla]

The article would have to come from the Tech Manager as the Editor isn't sufficiently knowledgeable or qualified to do it.  The Rules exist, but people are always trying to find a way around them.  In some cases, the Rules developed in a haphazard way, leaving a great gaping hole, where the plane no longer fits in any category.