Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Can a Rotax go beyond TBO?

From here

GA_Pete wrote:

Think of comparing a mission capability in 250k worth of Tecnam or 175k worth of Seneca.

You may have a good Seneca for about 80-90kEUR. I paid for mine less but it was good deal. FIKI and full IFR/PBN LNAV.
A lot of spare money for fuel comparing to 200kEUR Tecnam. And as I see – there is A LOT less maintenance on Contis comparing to Rotax. (and the sound of Rotax… )
And when you reach TBO – you may go “on condition”. On Rotax you can’t.
I’m a previous single Cessna owner. Would not go back to single.

Poland

Raven wrote:

there is A LOT less maintenance on Contis comparing to Rotax.

I must have missed something and be just lucky, that I merely do the annual /100 h maintenance on my Rotax for several years. What are you referring to? The 200 h carburettor-synchronization? Yes, the Rotax also has some disadvantages but it is very much a turn key and go engine if you adhere to the maintenance manual. Why would it be so popular in the Microlight scene or in training airplanes like the Aquila, Katana, AT03 etc. ? These manufacturers, who cannot affort long AOG-issues, could as well have chosen a Continental, if it would be superior over the Rotax. And btw, does your Continental use oil?

EDLE

Raven wrote:

And when you reach TBO – you may go “on condition”. On Rotax you can’t.

Where can I find the source for that claim?

Last Edited by europaxs at 07 Oct 05:28
EDLE
As the person who does all the maintenance on our two Rotax planes (A210), I’d also like to know where this comes from. As far as certification and associated issues go, the Rotax is just a normal piston aero engine.

A very hassle-free one, I’d like to add. You don’t have magento, starter, alternator or (in most cases) vacuum pump maintenance/overhauls in between the engine overhauls, just because they are designed to have the same TBO as the rest of the engine. Standard electronic ignition is also very nice to have.
As long as you use unleaded fuel, the only major thing you have to do is the 1000h gearbox inspection. If no damage is found, the price tag for this is below 1000€.

What the engine really doesn’t like is 100LL. The lead deposits clog everything, and you have additional maintenance checks associated with the use of leaded fuel (50h engine/ 600h gearbox).

EDXN, ETMN, Germany

europaxs wrote:

What are you referring to? The 200 h carburettor-synchronization? Yes, the Rotax also has some disadvantages but it is very much a turn key and go engine if you adhere to the maintenance manual.

I regularly observe 2 engines of my colleagues (bought as brand new from factory), one is 80HP, the other I think 145HP or something, the first one continuously having problem with carborators balancing, the other with electronic ignition being just one year old – never ending story with faults of one channel (ignition). Maybe it’s just bad luck.
They of course fly on car gasoline and I think it additionally increases the risk as the quality of mogas is a roulette. One LSA crashed some time ago at my airport due to fuel contamination. There is an excellent fuel alternative, perfect for Rotax – it’s Avgas UL-91. Lead free, completely safe for those engines, produced and distributed acc to aviation standards.
Personally I would use only that fuel if I had Rotax due to the fact that ALL car fuels in my country contain bio-components – and those are the big enemies of aviation safety.

Poland

europaxs wrote:

Where can I find the source for that claim?

As for Continental chapter 4 Main Manual (“Airworthiness Limitations”):
“the engines covered in this manual do not contain any components having mandatory replacement times required by type certification.”
“…the engine does not require specific intervals of inspection pursuant to type certification.”

Rotax however specifies that chapter 5 (Maintenance) is a part of chapter 4 (Airwothiness Limits.) and therefore all requirements including TBO must be followed to maintain airworthiness.

Poland

Raven wrote:

Rotax however specifies that chapter 5 (Maintenance) is a part of chapter 4 (Airwothiness Limits.) and therefore all requirements including TBO must be followed to maintain airworthiness.

AFAIK, e. g. in the US private non commercial use is not affected. Non certified, which is the majority of the Rotax users I believe, anyway. Rotax (of course) wants the TBO’s done more or less on time but the FAA still make the rules which also apply to the aircraft manufacturers. So the FAA allows on condition inspections beyond TBO. Rotaxes are well capable of going far beyond TBO in the bellpark of 4000 h without something major needing to be done.

EDLE

europaxs wrote:

in the US private non commercial use is not affected.

We are not in US. There are a lot more differences and it’s beyond the scope of this discussion.
In my country you may go for “on condition” provided it’s not forbidden in your manual. For Rotax it’s forbidden.

Poland

The US was just an example. I don’t know about Poland. I think it’s the same as with the different (national) interpretations of the Cessna-SID’s. Or the need to follow Propeller TBO in UK etc…..

My point is, that it is not generally illegal, to run Rotaxes beyond their TBO under privat, non commercial use.

EDLE

Can you go with Rotax “on condition” in Germany?

Poland
32 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top