Jump to content

New Rotax NPRM


Doug Hereford

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Roger Lee said:

I believe you are correct because they usually take care of things up front and as quick as possible so an AD even for certified engines isn't usually necessary. They never have to be forced to take care of things.

Roger, an AD is not to force a manufacturer to take care of something. It is to make owners of the product fix a problem. In many  cases a manufacturer has already issued a service bulletin for corrective action, just like Rotax in this case. In the type certified world SB's do not legally require compliance. The AD makes compliance for the owner mandatory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have been many rotax ADs. 4 are recent. But there have been ADs long before that.

As Tom said, it's not meant to force a manufacturer to do anything.*

MIDOs would take care of manufacturer compliance and corrections. ADs are for owner compliance.

*A manufacturer cannot sell type certificated products if an AD is applicable. They must correct the condition before the product can be sold. However, that's not what ADs are for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Roger Lee said:

Hi Tom,

"Roger, an AD is not to force a manufacturer to take care of something. It is to make owners of the product fix a problem".

I know, but because Rotax stays on top of things you don't see many AD's issued for Rotax owners.

Roger, how Rotax reacts to a problem has no effect on whether the FAA issues a AD or not. The FAA will issue a AD if they think the problem is a safety of flight issue. In this case it seems if the engine has the affected part that an engine failure is eminent. Since Rotax can't force compliance of the SB on their own the FAA steps in to make the inspection, and repair if needed mandatory. The FAA doesn't want airplanes falling out of the sky. That is the reason for the AD. I don't know if Rotax did in this case, but sometimes the manufacturer will petition the FAA for a AD to make compliance with the SB mandatory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. Another example of how things are properly made MANDATORY. Since a TC'd Rotax engine (or other power-plant) could wind up on an SLSA, I thought it well to post the NPRM. Also, it might be illustrative of how us "regular joe's" can "get off the sidelines" as your put it Roger, and participate in the system by commenting. This particular NPRM allows comments to be given until January. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dick/Roger,

If you just search 912 on the FAA website, there are at least 13 AD's on the Rotax 912 back to 1998. There may be more, that was just a quick search. The FAA site is not the best place to go for AD research in my opinion.

There shouldn't be many before 98, as I believe the engine gained type certification then....................unless I am mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...