End of LSA

[Roger Lee]

The 912is has the same gearbox as the 912ULS. The clutch torque was torqued a tad higher for the increase in engine torque to the gearbox.

 

Here is a comment direct from Rotax:

 

The clutch is exactly the same.  In a prop strike it will slip, it never
disengages completely.  A better way to express this is it may save the
engine.  Damage is always dependent on the power at the time of the strike
and the type of prop used.  As an example if using a ³soft² prop like say
a foam core Airplast from France the blades will explode and little or no
energy is transmitted into the prop flange (engine)  On the other had a
Warp drive (carbon fiber resin filled) will send massive shock into the
prop shaft and could well transfer enough to break the shaft, bend or twist
the crank, despite having an overload clutch inside.  The requirements for
inspection after a prop strike reflect this and should always be followed.

[ralarcon]

You are changing the goal posts.  You first claim the CT(LSi) is the Ferrari of airplanes, then when I point out the error you claim it's actually the Ferrari of S-LSA.  If you back up one more step and claim the CTLSi is the Ferrari of CTs, then I can see your point.

 

The only advantage a Ferrari has over many other cars is in speed as well.  But it's a pretty important advantage that costs a lot.

I'm into Porsche myself. 

 

Cheers 

[gbigs]

The 912is has the same gearbox as the 912ULS. The clutch torque was torqued a tad higher for the increase in engine torque to the gearbox.

 

Here is a comment direct from Rotax:

 

The clutch is exactly the same.  In a prop strike it will slip, it never

disengages completely.  A better way to express this is it may save the

engine.  Damage is always dependent on the power at the time of the strike

and the type of prop used.  As an example if using a ³soft² prop like say

a foam core Airplast from France the blades will explode and little or no

energy is transmitted into the prop flange (engine)  On the other had a

Warp drive (carbon fiber resin filled) will send massive shock into the

prop shaft and could well transfer enough to break the shaft, bend or twist

the crank, despite having an overload clutch inside.  The requirements for

inspection after a prop strike reflect this and should always be followed.

 

They can't say it will save the engine entirely, that would imply a warranty and an exposure.  As I pointed out, this is a neat feature of the Rotax engines not offered in the larger more expensive old tech engines powering the certified piston market. 

 

The 912iS is also a full FADEC & fuel injected German precision piece of elegant engine making.  Continental and Lycoming and their clones are crude and ancient designs compared to Rotax. 

 

In Europe they allow constant speed props on the FD.  And the 120kts cruise limit does not exist for them.  The Rotax engine is capable of even more - thank-you FAA.  Too bad Rotax doesn't go for higher horsepower Mogas engines (that can use Ethanol like the 912 can).  They would dominate the market because the 100LL beasts are so expensive to run.   And the 100LL replacement will no doubt be even more expensive.

 

The Diesel designs are horribly heavy, short lived (some have a TBR, replacement life of 1200 hours, others a measly 1500 hours TBO).  The diesels are also twice or more the price for the same horsepower in a 100LL engine. 

 

Europe is hot after diesel to get to Jet-A because 100LL is over $10 a gallon there.  The USA ignores these things until late in the game then everyone whines because the price of fuel skyrockets thus grounding their toy.  That's whats happened to the old twin engine designs.  They are rotting on airfield because they can't afford the 100LL to power them, even in the cheaper US fuel market. 

[FlyingMonkey]

I'm into Porsche myself. 

 

Cheers 

 

I almost used the Boxster as an example instead of the Miata.    

[FredG]

Roger, what is the source for the Rotax comment on prop strikes and the overload clutch you posted above?

Thanks,

Fred

[Roger Lee]

Kodiak Research in the Bahamas.

[Ian]

I wish you would learn the difference between Germany and Austria. Rotax, now owned by Bombardier was originally an Austrian company not German!

[S3flyer]

I wish you would learn the difference between Germany and Austria. Rotax, now owned by Bombardier was originally an Austrian company not German!

And, of course, Rotax is now part of BRP which is 50% owned by Bain Capital (US), 35% Bombardier family (Canada) and 15% a Canadian pension fund.  Might be one of the few US owned company making aviation products :-)

[Al Downs]

Well Chapter 838 newsletter is out and you guessed it they did not publish my rebuttal on the end of LSA. Not a big surprise but very disappointing that and EAA Chapter would be so negative about aviation and not even entertain other views. Maybe a barge of comments from people around the country would open their minds. I wonder what EAA in Oshkosh would think about their stance?

[Al Downs]

What a difference a few hours make. I have no idea what happened but I just received an email and the monthly newsletter has been amended and resent to everyone. My rebuttal article is included in the new edition.