Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:50 AM - Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot limitations (Thom Riddle)
2. 05:47 AM - Re: Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot limitations (Bob Brennan)
3. 06:15 AM - Re: Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot limitations (Bob Comperini)
4. 06:47 AM - Re: Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot limitations (Bob Brennan)
5. 06:59 AM - Re: Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot limitations (Bob Comperini)
6. 07:23 AM - Re: Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot limitations (Bob Brennan)
7. 07:33 AM - Re: Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot limitations (Bob Comperini)
8. 12:19 PM - Re: water pump socket to head leak? (Kitfox George)
9. 04:25 PM - Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot limitations (Roger Lee)
10. 06:28 PM - Re: water pump socket to head leak? (ray atkinson)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot limitations |
Garey,
1) 912 series engine TBO is currently 1500 hours, unless they have raised it again since the last time I looked. This and most everything you ever wanted to know about these engines can be found at http://www.rotax-owner.com/
2) In my opinion the 912 engines are the best and most efficient in the business
when maintained properly. No weaknesses if maintained properly. I much prefer
the 912 over any other aircraft engine I've owned.
3) Without a current FAA medical a private pilot is restricted to the same privileges
as a Sport Pilot, so the answer is NO, you cannot legally fly at night
or IFR as PIC without a current FAA medical, no matter how well equipped the airplane.
4) An amateur-built Experimental can be modified or built for night and IFR flight.
An E-LSA (except for those heavy ULs transitioned before Jan 31,2008) must
be maintained to factory specs to keep its E-LSA airworthiness certificate.
If the factory specs include equipment for night and IFR flight then the airplane
is good to go for those flights, but a Sport Pilot or Private Pilot without
current FAA medical cannot be PIC. See #4 above.
http://riddletr.googlepages.com/a%26pmechanix
http://riddletr.googlepages.com/sportpilot-cfi
--------
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY
Kolb Slingshot SS-021
Jabiru 2200A #1574
Tennessee Prop 64x31
"Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools."
- Pablo Mason
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273263#273263
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot limitations |
Quick correction here Thom, from an owner of an ELSA certificated Kitfox:
Your point #4 is true for an SLSA aircraft, which is a factory manufactured
Light Sport Aircraft. These aircraft are subject to many of the same AD
requirements and type-approved limitations that GA aircraft are, and as you
say must be maintained within factory specs. An ELSA however is similar to
other Experimental aircraft with minor restrictions regarding MTOW, number
of passengers, and a few other things; but no restrictions on IFR or night
operation. Those restrictions, as you correctly stated, are imposed on the
pilot flying under Sport Pilot "privilages", or in this case "restrictions",
as a PPL without a valid medical. One more note - an SLSA can change
category to ELSA but not back - so Garey you can buy one of those factory
produced SLSAs and still enjoy the freedoms of the ELSA category if you
choose.
Bob Brennan - N717GB
ELSA Repairman, inspection rated
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox taildragger
Rotax 582 with 3 blade GSC prop
Wrightsville Pa
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rotaxengines-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rotaxengines-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Thom
Riddle
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 7:50 AM
Subject: RotaxEngines-List: Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot
limitations
Garey,
1) 912 series engine TBO is currently 1500 hours, unless they have raised it
again since the last time I looked. This and most everything you ever wanted
to know about these engines can be found at http://www.rotax-owner.com/
2) In my opinion the 912 engines are the best and most efficient in the
business when maintained properly. No weaknesses if maintained properly. I
much prefer the 912 over any other aircraft engine I've owned.
3) Without a current FAA medical a private pilot is restricted to the same
privileges as a Sport Pilot, so the answer is NO, you cannot legally fly at
night or IFR as PIC without a current FAA medical, no matter how well
equipped the airplane.
4) An amateur-built Experimental can be modified or built for night and IFR
flight. An E-LSA (except for those heavy ULs transitioned before Jan
31,2008) must be maintained to factory specs to keep its E-LSA airworthiness
certificate. If the factory specs include equipment for night and IFR flight
then the airplane is good to go for those flights, but a Sport Pilot or
Private Pilot without current FAA medical cannot be PIC. See #4 above.
http://riddletr.googlepages.com/a%26pmechanix
http://riddletr.googlepages.com/sportpilot-cfi
--------
Thom Riddle
Buffalo, NY
Kolb Slingshot SS-021
Jabiru 2200A #1574
Tennessee Prop 64x31
"Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of
fools."
- Pablo Mason
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273263#273263
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot |
limitations
On 05:33 AM 11/17/2009, Bob Brennan wrote:
>
>Quick correction here Thom, from an owner of an ELSA certificated Kitfox:
Correct. Thom, its not true that an E-LSA needs to be "maintained" to factory specs.
If the E-LSA was certificated under 21.191(i)(2), it only needs to be built
"in accordance with manufacturer's assembly instructions" Once the airworthiness
certificate has been issued, its no different than any other experimental.
>One more note - an SLSA can change category to ELSA but not back
Actually, I don't think you'll find anything in the regulations that prohibit an
E-LSA "going back" into S-LSA status. However, I don't think too many manufacturer's
will be very willing to issue another statement of compliance for a plane
that has been flying as an experimental.
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot |
limitations
Thanks Bob for those clarifications. But I feel the need for a few more to
your statements here... <g>
> Once the airworthiness certificate has been issued, its no different than
any other experimental.
An ELSA Airworthiness Certificate, as with any AC, is issued with a list of
Type restrictions which must be carried in the aircraft at all times. That
document is different than those issued to an E-AB aircraft, specifically
that any modification must not exceed the weight and passenger limitations,
that an in-flight adjustable prop cannot be used, and a few others. So there
are differences.
SLSA conversion to ELSA - I'm too lazy to look up specific documentation but
that fact was part of the knowledge requirements when I took my ELSA
Repairman's course, and the instructor was *very* specific that it was a
one-way choice and an exception to the normal ban on switching an aircraft's
airworthiness type. I specifically had to jump through hoops to prove that
my UK built Kitfox had never been issued an Certificate of Airworthiness of
any type prior to my application for ELSA. The FAA had apparently had too
many applications to switch type and rejected mine off hand without
extensive (and expensive!) proof.
Bob Brennan - N717GB
ELSA Repairman, inspection rated
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox taildragger
Rotax 582 with 3 blade GSC prop
Wrightsville Pa
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rotaxengines-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rotaxengines-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob
Comperini
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 9:13 AM
Subject: RE: RotaxEngines-List: Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot
limitations
On 05:33 AM 11/17/2009, Bob Brennan wrote:
<matronics@bob.brennan.name>
>
>Quick correction here Thom, from an owner of an ELSA certificated Kitfox:
Correct. Thom, its not true that an E-LSA needs to be "maintained" to
factory specs. If the E-LSA was certificated under 21.191(i)(2), it only
needs to be built "in accordance with manufacturer's assembly instructions"
Once the airworthiness certificate has been issued, its no different than
any other experimental.
>One more note - an SLSA can change category to ELSA but not back
Actually, I don't think you'll find anything in the regulations that
prohibit an E-LSA "going back" into S-LSA status. However, I don't think too
many manufacturer's will be very willing to issue another statement of
compliance for a plane that has been flying as an experimental.
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot |
limitations
>
>SLSA conversion to ELSA - I'm too lazy to look up specific documentation but
>that fact was part of the knowledge requirements when I took my ELSA
>Repairman's course, and the instructor was *very* specific that it was a
>one-way choice and an exception to the normal ban on switching an aircraft's
>airworthiness type. I specifically had to jump through hoops to prove that
>my UK built Kitfox had never been issued an Certificate of Airworthiness of
>any type prior to my application for ELSA. The FAA had apparently had too
>many applications to switch type and rejected mine off hand without
>extensive (and expensive!) proof.
21.191(i)(3) doesn't address the "E-LSA can't go back to S-LSA" question. One of
the disqualifying factors is: "The aircraft must not have been previously issued
a standard, primary, restricted, limited, or provisional airworthiness certificate,
or an equivalent airworthiness certificate issued by a foreign civil
aviation authority."
--
Bob Comperini
e-mail: bob@fly-ul.com
WWW: http://www.fly-ul.com
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot |
limitations
Thank you for finding that rule Bob, SLSA conversion to ELSA is the *only*
(to my knowledge) exception to that rule. ELSA to SLSA is prohibited by the
rule, as is any other type conversion like E-AB to ELSA.
Bob Brennan - N717GB
ELSA Repairman, inspection rated
1991 UK Model 2 ELSA Kitfox taildragger
Rotax 582 with 3 blade GSC prop
Wrightsville Pa
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rotaxengines-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rotaxengines-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob
Comperini
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 9:59 AM
Subject: RE: RotaxEngines-List: Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot
limitations
>
>SLSA conversion to ELSA - I'm too lazy to look up specific documentation
but
>that fact was part of the knowledge requirements when I took my ELSA
>Repairman's course, and the instructor was *very* specific that it was a
>one-way choice and an exception to the normal ban on switching an
aircraft's
>airworthiness type. I specifically had to jump through hoops to prove that
>my UK built Kitfox had never been issued an Certificate of Airworthiness of
>any type prior to my application for ELSA. The FAA had apparently had too
>many applications to switch type and rejected mine off hand without
>extensive (and expensive!) proof.
21.191(i)(3) doesn't address the "E-LSA can't go back to S-LSA" question.
One of the disqualifying factors is: "The aircraft must not have been
previously issued a standard, primary, restricted, limited, or provisional
airworthiness certificate, or an equivalent airworthiness certificate issued
by a foreign civil aviation authority."
--
Bob Comperini
e-mail: bob@fly-ul.com
WWW: http://www.fly-ul.com
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot |
limitations
On 07:23 AM 11/17/2009, Bob Brennan wrote:
>
>ELSA to SLSA is prohibited by the rule, as is any other type conversion like E-AB
to ELSA.
No, I'm sorry.. I disagree. I still maintain that it is legal to take an S-LSA
that was converted into E-LSA under 21.191(i)(3), and convert it back to an SLSA,
but its unlikely that manufacturers will be willing to go along with it (they
will likely not re-issue a statement of compliance for that plane).
--
Bob Comperini
e-mail: bob@fly-ul.com
WWW: http://www.fly-ul.com
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: water pump socket to head leak? |
Ray!!! Thanks for the excellent advice. I am waiting for Loctite 680 to set
up and then reinstall the pump on the motor.=0A-George=0ASport Model(7+)
- Rotax 914- almost, but not yet!=0Ado not archive =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A_________
_______________________=0AFrom: ray atkinson <raybot@comcast.net>=0ATo: rot
axengines-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Mon, November 16, 2009 1:50:38 PM=0ASu
bject: Re: RotaxEngines-List: water pump socket to head leak?=0A=0A=0ABe ca
utous here this is a delicate part.Its threaded in with a very fine thread.
The tap for this is very hard to find.I went through this with my plane. Wh
en I removed the fitting and tried to screw the replacement in it seized an
d would not screw in or out.After soaking it heating it etc. I finally unsc
rewed it and stripped the threads off of the tube part.I then tapped the pu
np outlet and succesfully replaced the tube.These are beautiful engines but
too much like jewelry in some ways. Ray=0A----- Original Message ----- =0A
>From: Kitfox George =0A>To: rotaxengines-list@matronics.com =0A>Sent: Sund
ay, November 15, 2009 5:14 PM=0A>Subject: RotaxEngines-List: water pump soc
ket to head leak?=0A>=0A>=0A>Used engine!- I have a leak from the water p
ump-at the fitting that-then attaches to the-hose that goes to the-
head. I resolved all the little issues of installation but found this littl
e moisture at that fitting. After playing-with it for awhile it-began t
o-freely move-and leaked even more. I understand it is epoxied in place
.. But,-I am unable to remove it from the water pump..-I have a lot of i
deas but I sure I will pay for them in the end.-Note; the pump-has not
been removed yet.=0A>-George=0A>Sport Model - 914- almost, but not yet!
=0A>do not archive =0A> href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroele
ctric.com href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com hre
f="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com href="http://ww
w.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.
matronics.com/Navigator?RotaxEngines-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigat
or?RotaxEngines-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matr
onics.com =0A________________________________=0A- Release Date: 11/16/09
==========
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rotax engines - Basic Info / Sport Pilot limitations |
I agree with Bob on taking an SLSA to ELSA and back to SLSA. I talked to Edsel
Ford (top man for LSA for the FAA) 3 weeks ago about this very subject. He said
you can do it legally, but no MFG would sign off on it again because that would
put them in a liable position to sign off on any thing that was done while
it was an ELSA.
By the way new and revamped rules coming out for LSA's Dec. 13th. Good stuff.
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Light Sport Repairman - Maintenance Rated
Rotax Service Center
520-574-1080
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273356#273356
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: water pump socket to head leak? |
Hi George I did not even know if my message got through.I,m always
amazed at how well these engines perform given there light and seemingly
delicate construction. I have that tap around somewhere and when I find
it I will try to share it with a rotax repair person. Good luck and good
flying Ray
----- Original Message -----
From: Kitfox George
To: rotaxengines-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: RotaxEngines-List: water pump socket to head leak?
Ray!!! Thanks for the excellent advice. I am waiting for Loctite 680
to set up and then reinstall the pump on the motor.
George
Sport Model(7+)- Rotax 914- almost, but not yet!
do not archive
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: ray atkinson <raybot@comcast.net>
To: rotaxengines-list@matronics.com
Sent: Mon, November 16, 2009 1:50:38 PM
Subject: Re: RotaxEngines-List: water pump socket to head leak?
Be cautous here this is a delicate part.Its threaded in with a very
fine thread..The tap for this is very hard to find.I went through this
with my plane. When I removed the fitting and tried to screw the
replacement in it seized and would not screw in or out.After soaking it
heating it etc. I finally unscrewed it and stripped the threads off of
the tube part.I then tapped the punp outlet and succesfully replaced the
tube.These are beautiful engines but too much like jewelry in some ways.
Ray
----- Original Message -----
From: Kitfox George
To: rotaxengines-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 5:14 PM
Subject: RotaxEngines-List: water pump socket to head leak?
Used engine! I have a leak from the water pump at the fitting that
then attaches to the hose that goes to the head. I resolved all the
little issues of installation but found this little moisture at that
fitting. After playing with it for awhile it began to freely move and
leaked even more. I understand it is epoxied in place. But, I am unable
to remove it from the water pump... I have a lot of ideas but I sure I
will pay for them in the end. Note; the pump has not been removed yet.
George
Sport Model - 914- almost, but not yet!
do not archive
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RotaxEngines-List">http://www.
.matronics.com/Navigator?RotaxEngines-Listhref="http://forums.matronics
.com">http://forums.matronics.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
- Release Date: 11/16/09 07:43:00
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RotaxEngines-List
===========
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
11/17/09 07:40:00
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|