Acensor Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 As mentioned in another post of mine.... ....Looking at buying a very nice 2006 CTSW... Moving up from a Skyranger ELSA... For something more modern better cross country. One we're looking at has 1000 hours, and we're likely to put on 500 hours in 3 years .... And be facing a mandatory total overhaul or sell used engine and buy new one on what is likely (based on its present condition, and many others 912 experiences on experimentals ) an engine unlikely to need a rebuild in reality before 3000 hours or even more. This CT's present mechanic .. A very conservative guy... Said if he were buying it and had not intention to use it for uses experimentals are barred from (rental , towing, any paid use such as paid aerial photography, flight school, etc) he'd convert/recertify it as Experimental LSA. He even verified with our FSDO that it's possible and exactly what firms to use. That all raises a couple of questions: # Rodger Lee who is, well known over here, confirmed over in Rotax-owner.com that it is sometimes possible to meet the TBO requirement with instead of an overhaul an on-condition inspection. So, has anyone here ever used the on-condition inspection or know of it bring so used? And if so what was involved in work, dollars, hoops? # I know there are definite pros and cons of owning the same aircraft under SLSA vs ELSA and am pretty familiar with those. Would not mind further thoughts on that but MAINLY would like to know is anyone here has done a SLSA or standard category conversion to experimental or knows of any... And has any feedback. Is there even one CT known to be registered in USA as ELSA... Or if we did that might we be the first? Alex {this message posted with 100% recycled electrons} Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Alex, Try the search function, using "Experimental" or "E-LSA" or "ELSA" in the search field. Lots of posts on this topic to be found that way. Anything not already covered I'd be happy to help out with, having gone through an E-LSA conversion several years ago, albeit not with a CT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandpiper Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 A neighbor of mine, who is a D.A.R. says he will do my CT for $200. Involves paperwork and placing an experimental sticker. Once you convert, you cannot go back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 IIRC, mine was $300. And I had to buy the two stickers - one for the outside and an additional passenger warning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 That all raises a couple of questions: # Rodger Lee who is, well known over here, confirmed over in Rotax-owner.com that it is sometimes possible to meet the TBO requirement with instead of an overhaul an on-condition inspection. So, has anyone here ever used the on-condition inspection or know of it bring so used? And if so what was involved in work, dollars, hoops? There is no legal requirement to force you to conform to TBO, by the FAA's own words: http://www.faa.gov/a...erpretation.pdf According to AFS610, there was some misunderstandings when it comes to the part of the regulation in part 91 that says the pilot must follow all manufacturer recommendations in LSA aircraft. The thing is, part 91 is flight operations. Part 43 dictates maintenance and mechanic's duties, and there is no regulation in part 43 that requires them to follow *all* manufacturer recommendations, as the interpretation above clearly states in the last paragraph, and even goes on to say TBO is not mandatory. Here is another interpretation which further reinforces this, and even states that a manufacturer's maintenance manual is OPTIONAL if you use alternative methods and practices acceptable to the FAA (strongly not recommended to go this route, this puts all the burden on YOU, and very little is considered acceptable alternatives to the FAA when it comes to LSA). http://www.faa.gov/a...erpretation.pdf Finally, the only MANDATORY part of any manual, if not made mandatory by a Federal Aviation Regulations, are those sections which are titled "Operating Limitation" or "Limitation" IN THOSE WORDS, and have an FAA Signature. NO DOCUMENT IS REGULATORY OR OFFICIAL WITHOUT AN FAA SIGNATURE AND/OR DOCKET NUMBER. You will find no FD manufacturer documents have FAA signatures in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 What Anti said. If you want to do experimental just because of the TBO issue, it's a non-issue and leave it the way it is. If you want to modify it and you'd like to do your own maintenance, change it to experimental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 Yes , you can go back. It will take time, paper work, all documentation and the manufactures approval. If mods have been made, youmay be required to re-install as original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug G. Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 Technically you can go back, but has anyone ever done this? You would have to get it signed off by FD, probably with FD Germany's blessing. My guess is it would cost more then it was worth, if it would ever actually happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 Going to ELSA has been done by several people in CT's and many more in the LSA world. Cost as some have pointed out run around the $200-$350 range. As far as the on condition inspection people have done this, but none I know of in the CT world, but there maybe some no one knows about. On condition is just that. You keep doing your inspections and so long as the engine meets its operating and maint. specs you just keep on going. You do not need to go to ELSA do do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acensor Posted January 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 There is no legal requirement to force you to conform to TBO, by the FAA's own words: http://www.faa.gov/a...erpretation.pdf ..... .........even goes on to say TBO is not mandatory. Here is another interpretation which further reinforces this, and even states that a manufacturer's maintenance manual is OPTIONAL if you use alternative methods and practices acceptable to the FAA (strongly not recommended to go this route, this puts all the burden on YOU, and very little is considered acceptable alternatives to the FAA when it comes to LSA). http://www.faa.gov/a...erpretation.pdf. ........ Thanks for clarifying some of that . Curious if anyone here knows of anyone using that so-to-speak "slack" while still under SLSA to go past Rotax or FD's recommended TBO? And if how many hours ? I've repeatedly heard credible A&Ps mention 912s going 4000+ ...but usually the report is third hand. Not that I doubt it's probable possible... Just would be curious to have a report that's first or at least close to second hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 Thanks for clarifying some of that . Curious if anyone here knows of anyone using that so-to-speak "slack" while still under SLSA to go past Rotax or FD's recommended TBO? And if how many hours ? I've repeatedly heard credible A&Ps mention 912s going 4000+ ...but usually the report is third hand. Not that I doubt it's probable possible... Just would be curious to have a report that's first or at least close to second hand. I would recommend this: if you fly over lots of flat land, then just stretch it out, but keep an eye on things closely as you get further along. If you fly through mountains which would be highly perilous to lose the engine, then I would most definitely stick closer to TBO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 It would be interesting to see a graph of the probability of an engine failure vs engine hours. I'm guessing it would be an exponential curve. The curves I've seen form a classic "bathtub" - high initial failure rate, then fairly stable, then the rise you allude to, though I think it's fairly linear rather than exponential. Anyway, good article linked below, albeit not ROTAX specific: http://www.avweb.com/news/savvyaviator/187037-1.html?redirected=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 It would be interesting to see a graph of the probability of an engine failure vs engine hours. I'm guessing it would be an exponential curve. My understanding is that it's more like an inverted, asymmetrical bell curve. Engines fail at low times due to improperly assembled components, bad heat treatment, manufacturing defects, etc. They also tend to fail at high times due to wear, but at lower rates than new engines. Engines that make TBO without signs of trouble tend to make 1.5 or even 2 times TBO. Something that is running well doesn't just suddenly explode because some arbitrary number of hours is hit. If your engine is running great and at TBO, you can actually increase the chances of failure by putting a new engine on, due to the relatively high infant mortality. There are very good reasons the military and commercial airlines do ALL maintenance based on condition, this is something GA is behind on, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 The data backs up Andy's comments and data should be on Rotax. Other engines are too different to compare especially ones that run 100LL all their life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredG Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 Roger and others, what "data" are available regarding Rotax engine survival? We have lots of anecdote, but who collects data, systematically, on Rotax longevity? Where are such data available for owners to review? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 To my knowledge there isn't any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug G. Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 Has anyone taken an LSA back from ELSA to SLSA, particularly any CTs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acensor Posted January 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 ......... Engines that make TBO without signs of trouble tend to make 1.5 or even 2 times TBO. Something that is running well doesn't just suddenly explode because some arbitrary number of hours is hit. If your engine is running great and at TBO, you can actually increase the chances of failure by putting a new engine on, due to the relatively high infant mortality. There are very good reasons the military and commercial airlines do ALL maintenance based on condition, this is something GA is behind on, IMO. IMO if at TBO and all the service hours before it the engine is not only subjectively running great but also objectively ... Great compression , same power (as, for example assessed by showing same airspeed at same RPM, same climb rates) as ever, virtually no detectable metal on filter dissection, smooth vibration free running thru full RPM range, same fuel efficiency as ever, not a hint of gearbox odd sounds,it makes little sense to either replace it or rip it open for an "overhaul" and hope it's put back together properly. One A&P said to me he had been at several Rotax overhauls where the engine was disassembled, micrometer checked inspected, found totally solidly in spec .. Other than gaskets nothing replaced, reassembled, and shipped back. Aircraft maintenance often has a tension or balancing act between "An once of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and better safe than sorry" on one hand, and on the other hand "if it ain't broke don't 'fix' it." The statements of arbitrary TBO, worded as if legal requirements (when as pointed out by others here they are not) rather than as recommended "check points", seems more designed to protect Rotax's and aircraft maker's from liability than to protect pilots. Of course I have no data to support this next statement, but it's possible that more harm than good has been done by forced unnecessary maintenance. Brian Carpenter, one of the few Rotax LSA guys in the USA who is FAA rated to train/certify LSA mechanics, told me he sees more engine problems from maintenance, including preventative maintenance, done improperly than from wear or other causes. Then there's the issue of where money spent adds MORE to safety (since very few owners have unlimited budgets): Is it adding more to some pilots safety to spend, as Rotax says to, $4000 on a TOTAL...not on-condition, rubber replacement on a five year 500 hour 912, or would that $4K do more for his/her, and your, safety spent on adding ADS-B traffic in and out, and/or some instrument rating training? Since I have neither data nor professional credentials nor decades of hands on experience in these areas, I'll add this is just my two-cents. ;-) Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runtoeat Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 Alex, in your first entry, you state that the 2006 CT you're considering buying has "1000 hours, and we're likely to put on 500 hours in 3 years .... And be facing a mandatory total overhaul". My engine in my 2006 has a 2,000 TBO and, depending on the serial number of the engine in the 2006 you might buy, this too might have a 2,000 TBO and not the older 1,500 TBO. Having an additional 500 hours might be a moot point ILO the overhaul not being "mandatory" but still thought it might be relevant. One thing to consider that hasn't been mentioned - when trying to decide whether to go ELSA it is best to know if you have a mechanic that will service an experimental aircraft? I'm not a A&P but if I were, I would be hesitant to be the latest mechanic to sign off an aircraft that isn't factory built and that I don't know the history of it's maintenance. If you currently have a mechanic who knows the history of this 2006 and is willing to service it after you go experimental, you're home free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 I'm with Dick on the TBO time and year. What month in 2006 was this aircraft MFG? If you tell me the first 4 numbers in the serial number that will tell me. Right around March - April of 2006 it was the option for the 2000 TBO. If you are close to April you will need the serial number of the engine to verify it against the Rotax SB. March or sooner is 1500 hrs. and may and later is 2000 hrs. provided you did the SB upgrade to the oil pressure regulator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WmInce Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 I'm with Dick on the TBO time and year. What month in 2006 was this aircraft MFG? If you tell me the first 4 numbers in the serial number that will tell me. Right around March - April of 2006 it was the option for the 2000 TBO. If you are close to April you will need the serial number of the engine to verify it against the Rotax SB. March or sooner is 1500 hrs. and may and later is 2000 hrs. provided you did the SB upgrade to the oil pressure regulator. Roger, How about serial number 06-06-03? From what I can tell, the oil pressure regulator was not upgraded. I will have to double check if it was required on the aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acensor Posted January 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 Alex, in your first entry, you state that the 2006 CT you're considering buying has "1000 hours, and we're likely to put on 500 hours in 3 years .... And be facing a mandatory total overhaul". My engine in my 2006 has a 2,000 TBO and, depending on the serial number of the engine in the 2006 you might buy, this too might have a 2,000 TBO and not the older 1,500 TBO. Having an additional 500 hours might be a moot point ILO the overhaul not being "mandatory" but still thought it might be relevant...... One thing to consider that hasn't been mentioned - when trying to decide whether to go ELSA it is best to know if you have a mechanic that will service an experimental aircraft? ..... Thanks for that heads up. Checked on that last week. Unfortunately this particular CT definitaly is NOT eligable to up its recommended TBO to 2000... According to its present A&P guy, who seems to be up on that issue it just misses that. I have an experienced very respected Rotax/LSA and ELSA guy a one hour flight from here. In addition I'm FAA certified to do my own annuals on any ELSA I own..... two years ago I took a 16-hour FAA course that qualified me for that. See http://www.rainbowav..._hr__course.htm if interested. IIRR this location that has been giving that course longest... and indeed originated it. I believe there are about three other locations offering that course. Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Lee Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 If your engine serial number falls after 5646559 (912ULS engines) you are eligible for the 2000 TBO provided you do the oil pressure reg. upgrade. Anything before that and you would have to replace the engine case which is cost prohibitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 You should do the regulator update anyway...it makes oil pressure indications much more steady and consistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acensor Posted January 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Alex, in your first entry, you state that the 2006 CT you're considering buying has "1000 hours, and we're likely to put on 500 hours in 3 years .... And be facing a mandatory total overhaul". ...... ....... when trying to decide whether to go ELSA it is best to know if you have a mechanic that will service an experimental aircraft? I'm not a A&P but if I were, I would be hesitant to be the latest mechanic to sign off an aircraft that isn't factory built and that I don't know the history of it's maintenance. If you currently have a mechanic who knows the history of this 2006 and is willing to service it after you go experimental, you're home free. Apologies if this is a duplicate of an earlier reply I posted. I know I composed a reply a few days ago.... But don't see it. Could've disappeared between composing and posting. :-( This particular 2006 CTSW just misses the eligibility for upgrade from 1500 to 2000 TBO. There IS a A&P who has done all the service from day one and willing to sign it off on the SLSA to ELSA conversion form. One hour flight from me have a great mechanic LSA, Rotax, and CT experienced, for anything I can't, won't , or shouldn't, do myself. I'm FAA certified to do my own annuals on any ELSA I own . Took the 16 hour Light sport mechanic-inspector course two years ago. http://www.rainbowaviation.com/16_hr__course.htm IMO well worth considering taking even if you do any work on an aircraft even if you neither are permitted to nor want to do your own annuals (this rating does not permit doing own annuals in any aircraft other than your own ELSA.) Course I took was in Corning California but this school and a couple if others offer it at about a dozen locations in the USA . Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.