Nervous about Rotax

I spent a day and a half at Sebring looking at aircraft. As I expected,
there are only a few that fit what I'm looking for. Of those, only one (the
AMD Zodiac XLi) uses a Continental engine. Everyone else (and, indeed,
nearly everyone else building an LSA period) uses Rotax 912s.

I'm not fond of the idea of flying behind a Rotax. I know there are lots of
them out there (although I doubt what one guy told me, that there have been
more flight hours on Rotax engines than there have been on Lycomings and
Continentals put together), and I know that lots of folks like them, but I'm
not at all sure they're for me.

I live in Fairmont, Minnesota, a town of 11000 50 miles from anything. I'd
like the local A&P to be able to do maintenance on the engine, and fix it if
it breaks. I also need to feed it a steady diet of 100LL, as every gallon of
automobile gas sold in Minnesota must have at least 10% ethanol (and that's
supposed to go up to 20% in 2010).

I'm told the Rotax runs fast (red line on the Tecnam Sierra I sat in was
5500 RPM, and supposedly everyone recommends idling no lower than 2500), and
that it has very tight tolerances, and demands lots of special tools. Yeah,
it's just different, not necessarily worse - but there's a difference
between that and an O-200, where if I find myself at some random field with
a mechanic, I can be confident he can at least get it running.

The Zodiac's seating looks weird, although I'm reserving judgment until I
get to actually sit in one (the one they had at the show was being delivered
to a customer there today, so they didn't let anyone sit in it, and I didn't
get to go take a demo flight in the one they had there for that purpose).
I'd still like other options, but unless I'm convinced that the Rotax isn't
going to find itself at some point sitting in the hangar while the engine is
shipped off to another state for repair (or, worse, waiting on a replacement
cylinder that never comes because they're all being put on new engines),
there aren't any.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!)
Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390

"Jay Maynard" wrote in message
...
...

I live in Fairmont, Minnesota, a town of 11000 50 miles from anything. I'd
like the local A&P to be able to do maintenance on the engine, and fix it
if
it breaks.

Then ask him/her directly - ever work on one? whadaya think about them?

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

On Jan 20, 1:46�pm, Jay Maynard
wrote:
I spent a day and a half at Sebring looking at aircraft. As I expected,
there are only a few that fit what I'm looking for. Of those, only one (the
AMD Zodiac XLi) uses a Continental engine. Everyone else (and, indeed,
nearly everyone else building an LSA period) uses Rotax 912s.

I'm not fond of the idea of flying behind a Rotax. I know there are lots of
them out there (although I doubt what one guy told me, that there have been
more flight hours on Rotax engines than there have been on Lycomings and
Continentals put together), and I know that lots of folks like them, but I'm
not at all sure they're for me.

I live in Fairmont, Minnesota, a town of 11000 50 miles from anything. I'd
like the local A&P to be able to do maintenance on the engine, and fix it if
it breaks. I also need to feed it a steady diet of 100LL, as every gallon of
automobile gas sold in Minnesota must have at least 10% ethanol (and that's
supposed to go up to 20% in 2010).

I'm told the Rotax runs fast (red line on the Tecnam Sierra I sat in was
5500 RPM, and supposedly everyone recommends idling no lower than 2500), and
that it has very tight tolerances, and demands lots of special tools. Yeah,
it's just different, not necessarily worse - but there's a difference
between that and an O-200, where if I find myself at some random field with
a mechanic, I can be confident he can at least get it running.

The Zodiac's seating looks weird, although I'm reserving judgment until I
get to actually sit in one (the one they had at the show was being delivered
to a customer there today, so they didn't let anyone sit in it, and I didn't
get to go take a demo flight in the one they had there for that purpose).
I'd still like other options, but unless I'm convinced that the Rotax isn't
going to find itself at some point sitting in the hangar while the engine is
shipped off to another state for repair (or, worse, waiting on a replacement
cylinder that never comes because they're all being put on new engines),
there aren't any.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC � � � � � � � � �http://www.conmicro.comhttp://jmayna...journal.com� � �http://www.tronguy.nethttp://www.hercules-390.org� � � � � � � (Yes, that's me!)
Buy Hercules stuff athttp://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390

A flight school where I work has gotten rid of their Katanas because
Rotax only barely supports the engines anymore since they are
concentrating on the models used in homebuilts and LSAs. I guess that
it is only a problem if you have a Katana. Since Katana engines are
certificated to a different standard than the LSA and there has been
such an explosion in LSAs it makes sense for Rotax. I remember that
they had a couple of engines that always ran hot, troubleshooting
included removing them from one airplane and installing them in
another. Rotax couldn't figure out the problem either.

John Dupre'

"John" wrote in message
...
On Jan 20, 1:46?pm, Jay Maynard
wrote:
I spent a day and a half at Sebring looking at aircraft. As I expected,
there are only a few that fit what I'm looking for. Of those, only one
(the
AMD Zodiac XLi) uses a Continental engine. Everyone else (and, indeed,
nearly everyone else building an LSA period) uses Rotax 912s.

I'm not fond of the idea of flying behind a Rotax. I know there are lots
of
them out there (although I doubt what one guy told me, that there have
been
more flight hours on Rotax engines than there have been on Lycomings and
Continentals put together), and I know that lots of folks like them, but
I'm
not at all sure they're for me.

I live in Fairmont, Minnesota, a town of 11000 50 miles from anything. I'd
like the local A&P to be able to do maintenance on the engine, and fix it
if
it breaks. I also need to feed it a steady diet of 100LL, as every gallon
of
automobile gas sold in Minnesota must have at least 10% ethanol (and
that's
supposed to go up to 20% in 2010).

I'm told the Rotax runs fast (red line on the Tecnam Sierra I sat in was
5500 RPM, and supposedly everyone recommends idling no lower than 2500),
and
that it has very tight tolerances, and demands lots of special tools.
Yeah,
it's just different, not necessarily worse - but there's a difference
between that and an O-200, where if I find myself at some random field
with
a mechanic, I can be confident he can at least get it running.

The Zodiac's seating looks weird, although I'm reserving judgment until I
get to actually sit in one (the one they had at the show was being
delivered
to a customer there today, so they didn't let anyone sit in it, and I
didn't
get to go take a demo flight in the one they had there for that purpose).
I'd still like other options, but unless I'm convinced that the Rotax
isn't
going to find itself at some point sitting in the hangar while the engine
is
shipped off to another state for repair (or, worse, waiting on a
replacement
cylinder that never comes because they're all being put on new engines),
there aren't any.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?http://www.conmicro.comhttp://jmaynard.livejournal.com? ?
?http://www.tronguy.nethttp://www.hercules-390.org? ? ? ? ? ? ? (Yes,
that's me!)
Buy Hercules stuff athttp://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390

A flight school where I work has gotten rid of their Katanas because
Rotax only barely supports the engines anymore since they are
concentrating on the models used in homebuilts and LSAs. I guess that
it is only a problem if you have a Katana. Since Katana engines are
certificated to a different standard than the LSA and there has been
such an explosion in LSAs it makes sense for Rotax. I remember that
they had a couple of engines that always ran hot, troubleshooting
included removing them from one airplane and installing them in
another. Rotax couldn't figure out the problem either.

John Dupre'

Rotax customer support has historically been horrible. Just because the LSA
manufacturere are using them does that mean rotax has improved their
customer support? I still can't see most maintenance facilities touching
them.

John,

A flight school where I work has gotten rid of their Katanas because
Rotax only barely supports the engines anymore since they are
concentrating on the models used in homebuilts and LSAs.


Sorry, but that's the same engine.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Jay Maynard" wrote in message
...
I spent a day and a half at Sebring looking at aircraft. As I expected,
there are only a few that fit what I'm looking for. Of those, only one (the
AMD Zodiac XLi) uses a Continental engine. Everyone else (and, indeed,
nearly everyone else building an LSA period) uses Rotax 912s.

I agree; in a perfect world I would much rather fly behind an O-200 than a
912, however...

Average the useful load of every O-200 powered LSA and compare it to the
average useful load of Rotax powered LSAs and you will see why 912s are winning
in the marketplace. Given the present state of LSA regulation and the engine
market, if you want an LSA that you can fill with two real-sized humans, fill
the tanks, and actually travel somewhere, you need the significantly lighter
912.

To make money with the Cessna LSA, flight schools will have to recruit the
lightest CFIs they can find. It will be a real lady's airplane.


Vaughn

On 2008-01-21, Vaughn Simon wrote:
Average the useful load of every O-200 powered LSA and compare it to
the average useful load of Rotax powered LSAs and you will see why 912s
are winning in the marketplace.

I'm not buying an average aircraft. I'm buying one for me. :-)

I do see your point, but I think the real difference in the marketplace is
not the 60 or so pounds difference, but rather the $8000 difference.

Given the present state of LSA regulation and the engine market, if you
want an LSA that you can fill with two real-sized humans, fill the tanks,
and actually travel somewhere, you need the significantly lighter 912.

The Zodiac will have enough useful load for me, my roommate, and full fuel,
with enough stuff for a weekend. That's enough for me.

To make money with the Cessna LSA, flight schools will have to recruit the
lightest CFIs they can find. It will be a real lady's airplane.

Quite possibly. OTOH, as I understand it, they did a presentation early on
and said they'd be using the Rotax, and half their audience walked out.
Given their issues with negative PR over their decision to build in China,
and the insanely long lead times they're currently quoting (they told me
2011), they had to do something to limit the bleeding.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!)
Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390

Jay Maynard wrote:
I spent a day and a half at Sebring looking at aircraft. As I expected,
there are only a few that fit what I'm looking for. Of those, only one (the
AMD Zodiac XLi) uses a Continental engine. Everyone else (and, indeed,
nearly everyone else building an LSA period) uses Rotax 912s.

I'm not fond of the idea of flying behind a Rotax. I know there are lots of
them out there (although I doubt what one guy told me, that there have been
more flight hours on Rotax engines than there have been on Lycomings and
Continentals put together), and I know that lots of folks like them, but I'm
not at all sure they're for me.

I live in Fairmont, Minnesota, a town of 11000 50 miles from anything. I'd
like the local A&P to be able to do maintenance on the engine, and fix it if
it breaks. I also need to feed it a steady diet of 100LL, as every gallon of
automobile gas sold in Minnesota must have at least 10% ethanol (and that's
supposed to go up to 20% in 2010).

You will have more frequent plug and oil changes.
The 912 really wants to drink premium mogas. Out
here on the west coast, we've been running 5-10%
ethanol without any problems. Can't speak to your
situation though.

On the plus side, plugs cost $3/each and it only
takes an hour to do plugs and oil.

I'm told the Rotax runs fast (red line on the Tecnam Sierra I sat in was
5500 RPM, and supposedly everyone recommends idling no lower than 2500), and
that it has very tight tolerances, and demands lots of special tools. Yeah,
it's just different, not necessarily worse - but there's a difference
between that and an O-200, where if I find myself at some random field with
a mechanic, I can be confident he can at least get it running.

The top RPM will be limited by your prop pitch.
My plane never exceeds about 5100 rpm in cruise.
I still get 1000 fpm climb on a cold day and I'm
happy with the pitch.

2000 RPM idle is fine. 2500 is good for warmup.


The Zodiac's seating looks weird, although I'm reserving judgment until I
get to actually sit in one (the one they had at the show was being delivered
to a customer there today, so they didn't let anyone sit in it, and I didn't
get to go take a demo flight in the one they had there for that purpose).
I'd still like other options, but unless I'm convinced that the Rotax isn't
going to find itself at some point sitting in the hangar while the engine is
shipped off to another state for repair (or, worse, waiting on a replacement
cylinder that never comes because they're all being put on new engines),
there aren't any.

Can't speak to the Zodiac, but can talk all day
about the CTSW (:

Pluses for the Rotax are no thermal shock issues,
will allegedly run for 30 minutes at 50% power
with either oil or coolant gone, and 5 gallon/hr
cruise. The engine is also very smooth, especially
at an economical cruise setting. It starts very
easily. No mixture control. The engine just
behaves like a giant electric motor with a speed
control.

As for support, I've had no problems with my 912
so I don't have any direct experience. I know
that the west coast FlightDesign distributer has
worked closely with Rotax on some safety directive
issues and has gotten parts and support quickly.

On Jan 20, 2:46 pm, Jay Maynard
wrote:

I live in Fairmont, Minnesota, a town of 11000 50 miles from anything. I'd
like the local A&P to be able to do maintenance on the engine, and fix it if
it breaks. I also need to feed it a steady diet of 100LL, as every gallon of
automobile gas sold in Minnesota must have at least 10% ethanol (and that's
supposed to go up to 20% in 2010).

The O-200 also runs best on mogas. They have serious lead fouling
problems.

The cylinders on those small bore continentals aren't exactly known
for their durability either.

That said, I would probably prefer an 0-200 over a Rotax mainly for
the reason you cited -- the universality of its design, anyone can
work on it, etc Just don't think it'll need less work than a Rotax.

On Jan 21, 10:45 am, Jay Maynard
wrote:

I'm not buying an average aircraft. I'm buying one for me. :-)

True, but you do have to consider resale value. Or maybe you don't?