RFguy

OMG. I'll put the opinion straight for everyone LOL: (ROtax/Lyco) Rotax , I think is an engineering marvel. What lets it down is the variability of installation, probably because it is in so many experimental aircraft category, and thus variability in maintenance , and a lack of adherence to the ICA . Installation issues : - variation of installed cooling methods of radiator and cooler. Many installations I have seen are deficient in oil or water or both and would not meet the Rotax IM requirements. - variation of airflow over the cylinder bores The 914 and above - the IM specifies a baffle/ air flow guide over the cylinder bores to cool them. This is rarely fitted and I would expect is a non-zero importance for the 912ULS - IE it is required for some conditions and cowls even on a 100hp engine.. . - Inadequately plumbed oil system- I would be highly surprised if many installations, especially those on owner-build would meet the hose vaccuum test combo of the oil cooler/oil hose/oil tank system per the Rotax IM. - non adherence to rotax instructions to use a return line for fuel - incorrect prop loading (pitch too coarse) Leaving 'accepted' deficiencies of - lack of oil thermostat, use of car plug leads and crappy ignition modules, tendency for 912 to foul front plugs at low idle, lack of user understanding of RPM regions not to run the engine in, lack of fuel pressure readout, variation of carb heat implementation, The Lyco has no such issues primarily because certified airplanes have to meet the part91 requirements. I am sure that if Lycos were extensively used in lower end experimental aircraft, you'd find failure rates not dissimilar. But Lycos are usualyl not used in lower end of the aircraft , IE they are less likely to be in a light touch maintenance environment, -glen

my radio goes on just after engine start and oil pressure established... squelch test button pulled/pushed to verify I can hear the radio open squelch noise in the headset. (IE verify audio path). this should give me about 10 miles of inbound approach aircraft traffic or at least 7 minutes of traffic listening (IE situational awareness). ADSB (in+out) + tablet goes on about the same time . Set to 4 kts minimum (ADSB broadcast velocity threshold) so that equipped aircraft can see me taxiing.

Mike, this may be applicable to you : CASA EX88/23 — Overseas Training and Assessment, and Instrument Proficiency Check, Exemption 2023 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.AU

Some segments will want a high hp/lbs ratio - certainly in the LSA, that's prime. IE where the engine is an appreciable percentage of the AUW . And that's a place for the geared engine. Rotax has been successfull, because mostly, they are very reliable. I am surprised of any manufacturers targeting the low end / LSA market being not geared. Except for reaplcements- since airframes are usually built around some nose weight.

this thread has lost its way

well, I like to get off site because I can eat real food. There are excellent places to eat in town (walking from the uni) , and a good healthy supermarket also same. There is a big RV park for the show. You at can least cook your own food. Yeah an RV trip would be cool. try and get to the Dayton air museum. Allow two full days dawn to dusk. Or three if you like reading the plates in front of the exhibits,

I do like that idea, avoids west coast. but you are definetly overnighting at Chicago, Although , SFO is pretty nice, that'd probably be my other choice. SYD-SFO or BNE-SFO. but I'd go the route that gets you on a 787. We did this time. great aircraft. I wonder is ANZ can book SYD_ORD via AKL ? I always fly United when I have an in-country domestic flight- because the codeshare with QF or VG is BS- they cant do anything for you to the desk. If you are on an american airline internally and international, they can pull all sorts of strings for you. AMercian airlines that codeshares with Qantas internally, they cant do anything with your tickets, moving you to a different earlier flight, etc, finding your bags- they dont have the IT integration like a all end to end airline. However, if one flies AKL-ORD, the poin tof entry is ORD, so that's not such an issue. You'll find appleton prices are in the stratosphere pretty quickly.

I used to ride the ski-doo every morning in skiing years. ROtax powered- Get on the ski-doo, -5deg C- straight to 100% UP the hill out of the valley for 3 minutes 100% from cold. oh boy. never blew up.

We got an Uber for USD$196 from o-hare. By the time you get to o-hare, you are pretty toast. that was OK split between two. couldnt have flown to Appleton for that. If I'd been better organised, I might have got a car for 2 weeks from a small outfit near o-hare (not the airport that charges $$$) , but driving the car after 28 hours to that point of travel is a very time limited thing- I think I am good for about 90 miles max. (and I have lived there and am comfortable with driving on the 'wrong side of the road') . but then you got to pay $10/day to store it once you are there, because you wont use a car while you are there guarenteed.- just the bus to get to and from the event, and your bus ticket also works for all- you-can eat buses around Oshkosh town. and you can walk into town in the evening to eat and you ofr course can drink and dinner and drive so.... so it is a bit borderline unless you are going to travel around afterwards like we did up into minnesota, and then down the Dayton Air force museum. interstaes are fast. next time, dunno yet whether fly to appleton, or get a car, or do the same. The buses that leave o-hare arrived too late at Madison or Milwaukee to get the next bus to Oshkosh. you are stuck unless u overnight at O hare. One you you could do is overnight at Madison. That's a nice spot. bus leaves in the morning. next time I might get there a couple of days early and then hire some sh1tbox cherokee for $150/hour wet and fly that around and see my friends around the place. (I used to live there for a time) .

that was 5 nights - and 'later' meaning January !

that's right, it's an IF.

Sideslip aviation was a good start. we'll see what else turns up, I will advise if I find further info , thanks for input - glen.

What factory alternative options are there for rings for 912 engines? Rotax have ONE set of rings for ONE cylinder at $275 !!!! all I can say to the factory is F.O. I am not going to pay that (they want you to buy new engines) I have a 912 with 1900 hours that might want a set of rings. -glen.

Tyabb - Cowra - Moree - Caboolture ?

Not sure how that all happened at BRM. Seems a rookie mistake having a airplane get into production and then to need to add that mass....

skip, you said : "taking into account the afromention effect on spin characteristics.." and just how are you going to "take into account the effort on spin characteristics" ? Going to go off and do this with a airframe parachute etc ? Start sweating when she doesnt recover from a developed spin when you are down to 3000' ? I'm not being flippant, just being real about effects and consequences ....

I've now read the rest of this thread I would STRONGLY advise not adding weight to the tail ! (to get CG in right place) . no way. You will affect spin recovery / stall behaviour. Do what you need to do to maintain the original CG location. add or subract or move weight within a meter of the CG location ...... This may require the result to be that the outcome is heavier than original. IE sure you can put 1kg in the tail instead of 4kg behind the pilot. BUT you will change the dynamic stability of the airplane, and affect stall/spin recovery, things your aircraft was tested to . IE you are making a different aircraft and it in my mind would no longer meet the specifications of the certificate it holds.

I'd think that you'd want it as fixed equipment.

updated my post

For easy weighing for LSA, during rotax install, I bought three of these floor industrial scales. (not RAAus approved but accurate) https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/285144918758 A fairly inexpensive investment for one wanting to engage in modifications that affect the CG location.. For a 912ULS in a J160, I'd expect something would need to be moved to the baggage..... Ideally any mods should result in a CG that is in the same location and little change to the moment of inertia around the CG location . in order to satisfy the pub test.... Beware though that adding ballast to the rear , for example, I would not recommend as it may change spin recovery behaviour (because it increases the moment of inertia). If the rotax whole kit weighs more (likely for the 2200) , I would expect it likely you'd need to add weight in the baggage- and the likely best way to do that is move the lead-acid battery to the bags. I have seen some Oil cans moved to the rear and I would be careful with that because it will require UPSIZING of the suction side hose for the long length. (which was not done in one I saw) ....

In the US , it is not 'imperial'. it is "US or British " units (but then there is the british gallon and US gallon) . As for sportpilot- they should use what is recnognized by our regulator for aviation, which is non metric units, except for visibility and RWY length . (which is wierd ) . Glen. (am also a US citizen) .

Let's see here. specs. empty 985lbs(447kg) with Titan340 . mmmm I'd want a 140 hp engine for that plane with those numbers and role. So a 915 is an excellent choice I think, Mark. But 914 too small. 916 is unnecessary. The weight (447kg empty ) would be only 400 kg empty with a rotax, so even 130hp would be good. Mike, according to the datasheet, the conty in MOGAS compatible format (you'd surely want that) is 8:1 and 174 hp. I am sure any issues with the CG / aft load etc could be solved with the 915 by moving sh1t around. ....-glen.

yeah I was in suboptimal shoes also (Volleys) . my feet killed at the end of each 14 hour day on my feet even with silicone insoles.

I'd reckon rotax would dot their i z and cross their t z, I'd have no concern with buying a 916 if I could spend that sort of money. (But then I'd buy an IO-360 instead of a 916) Remember- Maximum continuous power is 137hp for a 916. 160hp is takeoff power, and short term climb power. 200hp IO360 can do 200 hp all day if you keep the CHTs down...... and does not have any complex electronics nor water At altitude, the Lycoming will still make good. I reckon usual story for turbo if you consistently operate hot and high, then the turbo engine is for you (or buy a slightly larger Lycoming an IO-390 ) 8.5:1 IO360 can run MOGAS. not sure about 8.7:1 version (check) . dont think 8.9:1 '390 can. I like having the extra HP in my bird so that I can still put out good speed/power even when leaned extreme (65-70%) . Gearbox is nice on the rotax though- low speed prop- more efficient slightly, AND not same issue if you have a prop strike.... Might have to think about weight though.... not having the boat anchor up front will change things. Wonder if the 916 will have a oil thermostat as standard- they SHOULD have IMO. (for fast warmup and stabilized, correct oil temp)