Rotax engine courses and aircraft maintenance engineers

 Recently I received interesting communications from AME, Keith Horsburgh, who has a broad range of experience in Canadian aviation maintenance. 

It reinforces and expands on an article I wrote in the fall with observations about the need for technicians to obtain specific training on the Rotax engines as they are quite different from the other horizontally opposed aircraft engines that appear similar. 

Keith discusses some of the difficulties involved in bringing AME's up to speed on the Austrian built engines - a manufacturing facility that is owned by our Canadian company, Bombardier Recreational Products.

KEITH’S OBSERVATIONS

I was perusing the old COPA articles and came upon your article about obtaining expertise on four stroke engines. I applaud your attempt to motivate Approved Maintenance Organizations (AMO) to train their technicians on the Rotax 900 series of engines.

I have been an AME for the last 17 years working from Inuvik to Frobisher Bay (Iqualuit), from Windsor to Africa and on everything from C172s -185s -310s - 401s -208s, Navajos, Beach 90-99-100-200, Pilatus Porters, Twin Otters, Turbo Otters, Beavers, Falcon-20, Metros and Boeing 727-100.

 Currently, I work on Boeing 737-200,600,700,800 and I have yet to meet a great number of operators who willingly send their AME's on any type of courses - never mind a Rotax course.

General Aviation still heavily relies on the standard Lycoming and Continental power plants which are the bread and butter for the average AME.

Add to this the fact that even though Rotax has produced five million engines the amount of 900 series engines that are here in Canada is still a drop in the bucket relatively speaking. This might be due to the fact that a non certified version of the 912 exceeds $18,000.00/engine and the certified version is priced at $28,000.

We as mechanics have had to beg and grovel to have an AMO send us on course.

Even then most have either had to sign a contract for service or pay for it from their own pocket whilst young pilots get endorsements generally without strings attached and then tend to move on once they have gained invaluable experience without being penalized for not completing their contracts. 

I would suggest next time on your travels take a number of different AME's aside and ask him what his boss would say if he suggested they sent him to Rotech Aviation for a week.  Yes, I certainly agree that this 900 is a good engine as I currently fly with one in a Merlin EZ from Blue Yonder Aviation. However, I feel the only way to promote a new learning curve is to get involved in the system in order to promote change amongst the previous generation of flyers.

I believe they still make manuals for these engines and as long as they do the AMO's are going to do what they have done since the Wright Brothers and that is tell the mechanic to get his nose into a manual and then pick up the phone and try to get more help from Rotax.

I myself have had to buy my way into courses in order to advance and they were well into the $12,000 range.

The only way these AMO's who operate the 900 series of engines will gladly send their technicians on course is when it is made mandatory from Transport Canada. People forget that the average AME would have to part with a significant portion of his earnings in order to get endorsements on their own and in this day and age a little incentive or help would go a long way to keep on top of all the changes in the industry.

Recent crashes in British Columbia should be and indication of how poorly equipped a lot of companies are at training technicians and ensuring they have the parts to fix them.  When a pilot fears for his life every day because of maintenance issues it tells me not a hell of a lot has changed since my days up north.

It is simply being hushed up and swept aside under a mountain of paperwork.

There is no greater compliment an AME can receive than a good pilot telling him, "Thanks man for the work you are doing." It tells me we are doing it right and they respect us for that.

I would ask that my comments to you not to be taken to heart as I am essentially in agreement with your observations. Please keep up your articles, they are great and promote further discussions.

Keith Horsburgh. AME M1,M2.

Medicine Hat AB

KEN'S OBSERVATIONS

Thank you for taking the time to pass on your comments Keith.  It's reinforcing for our readership to hear the arguments from the other side of the aviation team and realize we are in step with attempts to resolve the issues.

While Rotax engines have some very detailed overhaul and repair manuals available, I am sure you will agree that some AME's commonly do not often have available or rely on data in these publications and often forge ahead on repairs using "common sense" and their knowledge gained from experience on "similar" power plants.

Of course, my issue is that these engines look like Lycoming and Continental opposed engines but have very significant differences. Incidentally, I also published a similar article written for the AME readership in the Canadian Aviation Maintenance Council magazine AviNation in the most recent edition to ensure the broad spectrum of Canadian AME's are appraised of these significant differences. 

Safety is a team effort.

Ken Armstrong, Formerly from Kirkland Lake ON (But don't tell his friends on the west coast).

Ken is a former COPA director who lives in Victoria, BC. He provides services internationally in advanced training, expert witness, flight test and aircraft sales. He has logged 15,000 hours on 375 types of fixed wing and rotary aircraft. Soaring his Diamond Xtreme is what he does for pleasure.