Being an engineer and having watched a couple of videos on these engines, it seems you guys put a lot of faith (and your life) in the hands of a manufacturer who I wouldn’t trust to power my lawnmower.
Hi there! I just watched your clip about Rotec engine failures. In February this year, the Rotec engine in my Murphy Rebel suddenly seized in mid flight over Tiger Country in Australia. I was lucky to be able to stretch the glide to a swampy clearing to put the aircraft down. It flipped inverted on roll out, but my wife and I were unharmed. The Rotec engine had had three incidents ( including two emergency landings) in the last fifty hours and had previously been sent back to the manufacturers for inspection and repair. It was returned without any explanation for what had been done to it. When the insurance company required my aero technician to inspect the seized engine, he tried to put fresh oil in and start it. It would not start and when he drained the fresh oil out it was full of metal fragments... I was interested to learn that I was not the only person to experience these types of problems. I would be happy to send you a pic of my lovely aircraft to include with the others at the end of your clip. Perhaps fortunately my Rotec engine was damaged beyond repair in our roll-over, so like you I am replacing it with a more sensible Lycoming 320 Happy and safe flying! I love your aircraft
thanks for sharing , when I did put the first video about my first engine failure the only thing Rotec could do , was to make a video to insult me saying that I am a liar, that is why no I made this video with all my problems, at least next time Rotec will not be able to say to someone it his fault and it works perfectly with everybody else .........I wonder if there is anyone in the world with more than 300 hrs and no problem ?????
As an Australian I apologise for all the troubles you've had and I am ashamed that a company from here has treated you so badly and provided you with such terrible quality (and unsafe ) engines for your aircraft and has treated you so badly. I hope they get shut down so that no one else has to deal with the kind of problems you and so many others have had to endure.
Thank you for exposing the fraudulent claims & manufacturing practices of Rotec. May their business die before their engine failures lead to death for pilots unaware of their defective parts & workmanship.
Radial aircraft engines are the greatest marvel ever invented for aviation! Radial engines are beautiful to behold and their sound is breathtaking! I am 65 years old soon and have enjoyed being close to big Pratt & Whitney 450 and 600 radials not to mention Lycoming, Continental, Jacob (shaky jakes), Kenner and Warner Radial engines all my life! What could be more beautiful in looks and sound than a 450 Super Stearman! Those big Pratts vibrate the ground around you with their Thum-pa-da-de-thum-pa-da-de-thum-pa-da idle! Or maybe a Great Lakes Biplane powered by a 165 Warner Radial? And then let us not leave out the magnificent Bücker Bü 133C Jungmeister with it's marvelous Siemens Sh14A-4 radial engine. Have you ever seen these Jungmeister biplanes converted to a flat Lycoming 150 or 180? Looks and sounds like nothing by comparison. So I can easily see why this fellow was determined (yet ill advised) to continue with his Rotec radials. Designing, building and setting up an aircraft's engine mount for weight & balance then fitting a cowling not to mention the propellor, fuel and oil tanks, lines, fittings, valves, wiring, straps and clamps is no simple task. Making up one's mind to remove and completely re-engineer and remanufacture all this is mind blowing! That is why this took so long to undue and switch to a different powerplant. Anyone who has owned and worked on as many airplanes as I have knows this all too well. So everybody chill out before questioning this masterful builder's decisions and actions. He initially trusted Rotec but got taken. We should all take up a collection and send it to him with our heart felt condolences! Happy New Year everyone!
I must commend you on your perseverance in rebuilding after crashes and then finding a good engine solution. A lot of people would have given up. Well Done!
I am Australian and I am utterly ashamed that this dodgy, deadly engine has caused so much heartache and danger for it's unfortunate owners. Absolutely disgraceful and un-Australian. People's lives and livelihood are at stake here.
YEAH! I couldn't BELIEVE these are Made in Australia, you guys Build GOOD Shit. Who IS this Clown? He can't be Strine! Thierry, hope you been going to Church regular since all this, the Maker is Watching Over you, lol.
Well we could get A Current Affair onto it but she's only interested in exposing love rats, shonky car blokes, and shit canning alpha males in general.
Almost 2 years after this vide was postes, i came across it by chance. RU-vid suggested it for me an I`m glad I´ve seen it. I just can´t believe how irresponsible Rotec is... And I´m amazed by your work! You just got a new fan!
These are experimental aircraft and can run a variety of engines including automotive conversions some of which are quite good. Ya pays your money and takes your chances. Just try and not kill anyone...
The Rotec engine is not some converted VW engine ,home built. It is an expensive engine and is sold to a quality standard. If something as basic as a push rod is failing there is something seriously wrong. If Rotec failed to discover the same thing on a failed engine, sent back to them for inspection after an incident caused by their engines failure, that is beyond belief. They clearly did not strip that engine even though they charged for it and in the context of a potentially lethal accident are criminally negligent. Not to mention fucking stupid from a business point of view.They think this stuff doesn`t get out?
@@billycaspersghost7528 thanks Billy. Right on. Rotec need to wake up and take a more professional approach instead of worrying about the financial loss of having to fix a dud engine at their expense. If Rotec don't change it will be the end of the company.
This stuff makes me so mad. Living in a nation (UK) who`s once great companies committed industrial suicide by similar attitudes I find it baffling how it can happen on any scale.Engines failing cars rusting away then having to battle with manufacturer/retailer over it . Like they are doing me a favour. I find it hard to understand anyone getting nostalgic about old British motorcycles having owned a 1971 BSA Lightning back in the day. Presumably something made them want to make things so why make poor quality things. But with this... we are not talking about a car stranded at the side of the road ,aircraft do not coast safely to the kerb. I agree with your last line .Change or die . Or just stop before you kill someone .As they almost certainly will.
@@rogersmith9086 I've got a $100 bill that says that installation, cowling, airframe and firewall are preventing proper cooling airflow. The air has to FLOW SOMEWHERE AS QUICKLY AS IT COMES IN THE FRONT TO BE OF ANY USE COOLING. ALL OF THOSE DAMAGED PARTS ARE INDICATIVE OF OVERHEATING, OVEREXPANSION AND EVENTUALLY A LOSS OF ENGINE COMPRESSION AND/OR FUEL VAPORIZATION AND/OR VACUUM LEAKS. THAT INTAKE HOSE SHOWN AT FIRST DID NOT "BURST" WITHOUT MELTING FIRST AND IT WAS MORE LIKELY "IMPLODED" THAN "EXPLODED".
Thank you for sharing so much of your experience here! The repeated airframe repair you've had to do shows you're a master craftsman, sir! On the other side if the coin, you've personally experienced what those early mechanics and aviators did in their time. You sir, are worthy of wearing a genuine silk scarf. Lovely birds you have there! My grandfather flew the Sopwith Pup in Holland, when they were state of the art.
I've heard nothing good about Rotec engines unless you completely rebuild them and re-engineer some of the parts and them put it back together properly. Thanks for sharing. Best Wishes & Blessings. Keith Noneya
Thanks for sharing all of this. Sorry to see how much time, money & heart ache this has cost you. Rotec's blatant lie's in showing your aircraft under a false name for their advertising purposes is adding more fuel to the fire. Hopefully more people get to see your experience before they commit to going down the same hole.
The Rotax 912 series 4-strokes are very reliable. 80-100 HP, IIRC. I used to fly one in a plane I built across the Rocky Mountains, but I sold it years ago.
@@Darrylx444 In fairness, the comment was directed towards two-stroke Rotaxes. They are also generally reliable engines if the owner treats them like an aircraft engine rather than a snowmobile or a chainsaw. There are often mitigating circumstances in an engine failure but they take the rap for it.
I bought an alternator conversion from them and the alternator had to be rebuilt before I used it. They gave me a belt for electric motors which lasted 10 hrs before breaking. I bought it at Oshkosh . They had a special on. When I got home I was overcharged 250 US dollars which I never got back. I was promised an electronic ignition conversion instead but never received anything and haven't heard back from them.
The Rotec radial was the right engine concept for your wonderful planes. You sure gave the company more chance than they deserved, looking back. Great video!
I just watched a video with a new Rotec engine that had bad oil pressure. The engine had used parts from other engine returns. Company sends warrantied part and charged shipping both ways from Australia. Not just one problem, many. Rotec is now made in China and financially stretched. I expect a certain standard of quality in aviation and Rotec doesn't have it. I wouldn't use their engines I do not trust their internal qualities.
All certified aircraft motors use plated AN style bolts. I noticed in the photos their bolts and studs look like off the shelf true value hardware store coarse thread stuff. That speaks volumes about the way their company thinks. Don’t care if experimental, there should be an attempt to use proper engineering and build methods.
Those rotec mechanics wouldn`t pass the probationary period if they tried to hire on at an auto junk yard. Glad I don`t have anything rotec. After seeing this they should be shut down.
Wow. You’re a brave aviator in the spirit of our finest. I think you’d have better luck with a LeRhone 80 horse rotary than that horrible, piece of junk, Rotec. Their QC doesn’t seem fit for a lawn mower company, and for them to not tear down a failed engine is simply criminal negligence. Thanks for sharing.
For the best in backyard engine builders check out Allen Millyard. Not aviation engines,but his 5Litre vee twin using 2 Wright cylinders/ pistons is impressive
a notam needs to be submitted to all aviation authorities to not certify these engines for flight ops in every country. rather go for Rotax or lycoming or continental motors. and rotac needs to be liquidated into oblivion for crappy engines that put peoples lives at risk
Merci d'avoir partagé cette histoire. Visiblement ils ont failli sur les 2 critères les plus importants pour un moteur d'avion : la fiabilité et le support client ...
I sure appreciate this report and warning. I am getting ready to build the 28. I had no idea the rotax radials were so awfull. We had one for our sopwith camel build in Lawrenceville. Aviation school of maint. And it had a bad rocker as well. I think i will follow your lead here with the o 320. Thank you for this info. Greatly appreciated!!
Lovely looking engines, shame they apparently aren't even close to being reliable enough for manned flight. After seeing this I wouldn't even sit in an aircraft equipped with one. Man that cost you a lot of time and money.
I grew up with machinists around a machine shop(step dad owned one). There is no part of a factory Rotec engine I would trust. In fact if you must have one for the looks of it I would suggest buying one in parts and have a trusted machinist who builds engines put it together. Good machinists are like wizards. As they build the motor they can find its weaknesses and take steps to insure the best outcome. Your planes are wonderful!
NTSB should investigate these accidents - from the evidence presented here and at other places, these engines should not be allowed in the US. Nuff said.
Here-here, very much so. I have seen and heard of nothing but grief from these "Rotec" engines. How did they ever achieve an air worthiness certificate? Is this why they are made in Australia because of some obscure loop-hole that allows for the sale of defective engines without any FAA/NTSB certification? If this were built here in the US, I'm sure the NTSB would have closed their doors long ago.
I can't believe you trusted the third engine. Even if rotac said it was new I would have completely torn that thing down and checked everything myself.
You could lift a car engine off any japanese production line and it would statistically be more reliable than the general aviation engines typified here. And if you threw them away at 1000 hours it would still be cheaper.
that's not the point. this engine is even worse than the lycosaurs. however, having designed components for auto-engines, our design criteria were, maximum life time of 2000hrs, catastrophic failures are OK. the customer can stop at the side of the road. not so much when flying. that is why aero engines have to wear out before they fail.
@@daszieher Maximum life time of 2000 hours? My car has 210,000 miles on it! The fastest it ever goes is 70 mph. I estimate it's current engine hours at 6000 hours. This is a Toyota, and hardly unusual.
@@daszieher Is English your first language? Minimum life span of 2000 hours might be more understandable. By that do you mean all aspects of the engine, perhaps with the exception of a timing belt?
@@jiroyamamoto2878 no. "Minimum" is not the requirement. I used to design parts for engines. Literally: "Das muss nur 2.000 Stunden halten.", while "minimum" would have translated to "Das muss mindestens 2.000 Stunden halten." Over-engineering was a "fail". What makes the parts last longer are the safety factors and generally still conservative calculations. English, though not my first language, is my third (of six fluent) next to my native German and Spanish, followed by French, Flemish and Portuguese. My Italian is very rudimentary. Although I wouldn't list it, I will get by quite OK in Italy. How about your language skills? 😉
+thierryroussel1 I'm always amassed when I see this sort of thing. The most important thing about an aircraft engine is it should be reliable but these clowns seem to think the most important thing is to cheap out on both design (inadequate plastic gears in the distributor) and assembly (a push rod not even in the cup of the rocker, or did that fall out when the engine was running ?) plus a socket headed cylinder bolt that was either too long or had oil at the bottom of the blind hole in the crankcase so that it pushed metal proud of a machined face. The failure of the rubber induction tube coupling after such a short time of use seems really odd, were these made of some material that was not meant to be exposed to gasoline vapour ? Glad to see you survived these 'engine died' accidents, shame a couple of your aircraft did not. The Rotec installation looks more the part but I think you gave them enough chances, one more could have proved fatal. Thank you for the video, a cautionary tale if ever there was one.
Absolutely. And thierryroussel1 has taken it all in his stride. Qudos to the incredibly patient chap. The destruction of two aircraft and the expense of rebuilding them and surviving the forced landings all thanks to the one common denominator of failure. Rotec. Personally? Had this happened to me and I'd managed to live through it more or less intact, I'd be looking to bill or sue Rotec.
A few years ago Paul Chernikeef made a small 5 cylinder model Radial and showed it at Shepparton Victoria Australia Mammoth Model Plane Fly-in. As far as legend goes someone said “I want a bigger one for my Ultra Light”, and the rest is history. Model motor appeared to have the rocker boxes simply press fitted onto the cylinder heads, where both heads and rocker boxes were separate machined pieces, not cast en bloc parts.
Mechanical and moral integrity both come down to levels of education and experience. The former is proper design, metallurgy, and manufacturing, tools and workmanship skills. The latter is a function of corporate goals and leadership, accountability and economics.
Wow ! Where to start !!! My hat is off to you, great workmanship, great flying, great determination, I really admire your efforts. Thank God you are OK and wish many trouble free and happy safe flying with the Lycoming. You deserve it. NOTICE wheel axle flexing on landing. Don't know much about the design but suggest you consider a stronger axle. THANKS FOR THE VIDEO... As an EAA Kit Plane Builder the lessons you share apply to all of us.
Wow, thanks for posting that warning. I just saw they had engines "on sale - next 5 only" on the website. I hope they solved ALL those problems in the last year.
I had a Rotec in my jet ski ... 120HP two stroke ... and it ran reliably the whole time. Of course, there was no valve train in it, but it did have an oil pump to pressure lubricate the output shaft with two stroke oil from the tank. It was circulated through the bearings and back to the tank. Another oil pump injected that two stroke oil into the crankcase to burn with the fuel/air mix. Had variable-dimension manifolds for the three exhaust plenums, sort of adjustable length guillotine slides that altered the length of the expansion chambers according to intake vacuum. I was very surprised to read of this slack quality control for these radials. Perhaps the company has grown too quickly.
Hey just for the record....I am a HUGE radial fan... Love em...Turbines are whiney and smokey and noisey......Radials are Music..Like Bach to my ears. Fair winds and clear skies sir.
A real eye opener! You may of saved my life ,i most definitely will nit go with a powerplant from them considering all the chances you gave them .Your lucky your alive, i wont take that chance.
The story looks real. Zooming out, I wonder how big the engineering team of Rotec is. With engineering team I mean real experienced stress-specialists, fatigue-specialist and vibration-specialist such as Airbus has a lot of. Having some milling machines does mean you can make and engine, but does not mean you can design an engine. B.T.W. Designing is creating a system that meats, and sometimes superseedes it specification!!! B.T.W. Not all CAD drawers can actually design!!! They all can draw... Most Limbachs, at least all the smaller ones, reach their 1200 hrs, most Grob 2500 engines reach their 1600 hrs. Louis van Rijn, Lead stress/vibration engineer.
At a guess, Rotec is not your favorite company in the whole world. Right?? Seriously, you showed a lot more good will to Rotec than I would have, so sue the dickheads for a bucket load of cash, at least enough to pay for replacement power plants.
suing is an american thing, here you never get a lot of money, but you have to pay expensive lawyers, flying in business from Europe to Australia many times , and Rotec , is not a big company it is just an assembly hangar full of other stuff in a small Australian airfield ......I have lost way too much money and time , but I am still alive , and now both of my planes are flying every weeks .....
@@thierryroussel1 .Well, you should pay some mercenarys to blow that POS plant to smitherings...and take the owner to a "Dark Site" for some attitude adjustements.....
the blown intake boot may have been the result of a back fire, The push rod out of the cup may have held valve open causing the back fire. Was the 1st push rod out cup on an intake valve? if so was it the one that blew a coupler? even if the blown coupler was on a different runner it may have just been the weak leak during a back fire event.
The issue of pushrods dropping out of their cups due to momentarily hung valves or overspeed valve bounce can be solved by design. It may be a confined opening in the castwork near the rocker arm or an added lightweight steel fitting so that the pushrod does not completely dislocate.
I'm surprised that Rotec isn't de-certified for aircraft use in Europe after this incident alone. You obviously are very well funded in your hobby. I have a suggestion: Buy a medium quality oscilliscope and a lower end set of motion sensors. Attach and test the sensors to the oscilliscope (the models I have connect directly to my computer) and then mount them directly to your airframe somewhere far from the engine - in 3 axes. Run the engine at various speeds until you get a good match between the harmonics of your detection and the engine. You should be able, with some practice, see the firing of each cylinder as well as intermittent noise between firings. Establish a base data set and after that it seems you should be able to connect to the airframe and detect anything unusual developing (such as wearing plastic gears -really?) or a push rod that's beginning to rattle loosely in it's socket or a spring that's askew or a push rod developing play, etc. The detection system likely wont work at first - you'll have to work at damping the connection and playing with the harmonics of the connection until the detection system and signals from the engine come into harmony - then be prepared to "see" your engine run, literally. Do the test out on the tarmac away from everything else because I'd expect the airframe to become a large microphone for other noises/sounds/vibrations in the immediate area, you dont want those to interfere with what you're doing. If you use the computer and oscilliscope, you should be able to isolate and study each vibration and possibly identify the part causing it. The equipment cost with computer AND oscilliscope should be less than $5k.
What a shame! You are quite the craftsman/artist. Building your own airplane and flying it must feel great! What an accomplishment! Rotec should be ashamed of their lack of ability to produce a dependable engine but apparently they are not because they keep sending you duds. You have great skills. Thank you for sharing this. I will show it to my friend who is waiting for his Rotec engine for a scale Mustang.
Actually not, for the first engine the warranty was 12 month and 50 hrs after leaving the factory, then I had to pay more than 10.000$ for them to not fix the engine , for the second one I got a new engine, and I sold it for less than 1/2 the price , 3 years later I was still paying the Bank for that engine, But the good news is , it is just because I put the first video of the crash on You Tube That Rotec is giving a bigger Warranty for everybody else .....
After two such incidents, I would have got new engines from some where else! Pay attention Rotec! Fix your engine issues or go out of business! I think I would have sued them for what it cost to repair the aircraft.
Do you have a engine test stand that you can ground run the engines for many hours before you fly them. Long break in on the ground should find any issues.
I know that Nestor Slepcev tried a couple of those engines many years ago on his Storch and both failed. He gave up on them after that. Seems they haven't gotten any better in all these years. What a waste of all that time and effort building those beautiful planes and then nearly completely destroying them and even maybe yourself due to such a crappy engine. Safe flying in the future.
When you look at the level of meticulous engineering and cutting edge metallurgical skills that went into building the original radial's back in the day, it makes this copy look like a poor stage prop. The push rod probably disconnected when a valve stem nipped, holding the valve open momentarily, the piston contacts the valve and it belts it back with the assistance of the spring, the now floating pushrod punches a dent into the rocker (soft billet...!) and the shock load causes that tip failure of the pushrod. Just my guess from building race engines many years back. They probably sourced valves and guides designed for liquid cooled engines, and the higher temp of an air cooled head initiated the failure. The plastic gear would be an attempt to reduce cost over using precision ground, hardened alloy steel gears with fully profiled teeth. Shame on them..
FAA Inspector Point is, this example of straight cut gears showed clear early failure. Straight cut non involute tooth profile introduces parasitic vibration in the transfer of torque, that is why helix profiles are amongst other things, longer lasting. Why risk plastic for any reason that out qualifies reliability? Dont bendix use resin impregnated fibre gears?
@@alasdair4161 huh maybe they are resin, dont know myself but I remember in A&P -american airplane mechanic - school being surprised when i opened the mag, both brands, the first time and the gears felt like cheap plastic lol, i doubt it is cost saving since there is no such thing in aviation (when it's all done legally lolol) - maybe some sort of static charge or friction purpose for not using metal
