Cessna Greenlights LSA

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 11:20:57 GMT, Nathan Young
wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:04:47 -0400, "Morgans"

Now, if they would put something in it other than a Rotax.

I have heard several pilots and my A&P express disdain for Rotax
engines. Why is this? They certainly seem to be popular with the
homebuilt and LSA crew. I have no experience with the aviation
versions.

One reason: They don't like 100LL. They're approved (and certified) to operate
on it, but the lead forms an abrasive sludge that means the oil has to be
changed more frequently.

Not that big of a deal with a private owner, but an FBO won't like having to
take a rental off the line twice as often to change the oil. The solution is to
run unleaded car gas, but the FBOs would have to add the infrastructure to
manage it as well as 100LL. It's for this reason I suspect the production
version of Cessna's LSA will have a Continental or Lycoming.

I believe Diamond's original Katana was the first certified Rotax-powered
aircraft sold in the US. However, FBOs had enough problems that the
Continental-powered version replaced it.

Keep in mind, though, not all LSAs are using Rotaxes. The ones that come from
Europe do (where they have more a tradition of running on car gas), but the
Cub-clones made in the US don't.

Ron Wanttaja