Leaderboard

RV-12 school builds are well-established in the US. Some in NZ as well that I'm aware of. I was one of about 15 or more mentors on the SAAA's build a few years ago that involved about 5 schools across Australia. In Perth, they ran two build sessions per week. I only helped out once a fortnight but one or two dedicated mentors were there for virtually every session and really made the project happen. The students were 15/16 year old's divided into about half a dozen teams. Our build started half way though the year and went into the next year with a new lot of students so they had to start from scratch to learn the basic skills. I was surprised by how awkward and uncoordinated some of the boys were in handling basic tools. They could barely use a screwdriver and we had a pretty high attrition rate as they soon realised that building a plane was essentially a slow and boring process with lots of repetitive tasks. A few were interested enough to see it though, and one young kid in particular was very keen and capable and was still there at the end. In the first year we had two girls in the group and they ran rings around most of the boys. They listened, read the plans, followed instructions and were careful and precise in their workmanship. The same could not be said for some of the boys who were careless and disinterested and didn't take it seriously, but they didn't last long. We built the main fuselage and firewall forward while other schools did the tail cone, empennage, and wings. Some SAAA Chpt 24 members at Jandakot jumped in at the end to finish off the engine, avionics and fibreglass work. The students weren't allowed to do fibreglassing or priming due to the hazardous materials issues. Overall I'd say the quality of workmanship was probably no better or worse than many other homebuilt aircraft. It was obviously assessed as being airworthy anyway. These were just my observations and I don't know how the other schools went. It eventually all came together thanks to the hard work of a small core group of mentors. The plane was/is called `Miss Tori". I don't know who owns it now but it was a very well equipped aircraft with dual Garmin G3 screens, autopilot, lights etc.

Below is an extract from Laurent-LV's video comment, he obviously has good engineering skills and has done his research and examination of the Rotec design. QUOTE: " The development of the ROTEC engines initially relied on the plans of a model engine, plans that were available for purchase at the time for hobbyists. The two ROTEC enthusiasts thought they could turn it into a business by making engines in sizes compatible with amateur-built aircraft. The issues begin at this stage because neither of the two brothers had any knowledge of mechanical engineering, let alone precision engineering. The technical solutions chosen for these engines are pure heresy, both in terms of engine architecture, materials used, and the complete absence of tolerance chains, etc. The problems with these engines are as follows: - Selection of materials for the various components - Lack of tolerance chains for assemblies - Absurd technical options regarding the reduction unit - Huge risks of breakage in the reduction unit - Cylinder-head connections not properly managed by the manufacturer, leading to leaks after a few hours - Incorrect materials and sizing of cylinders, resulting in deformations and corrosion attacks both externally and internally - Cylinder mounting on the engine block done through studs and nuts of incompatible quality, allowing the cylinders to potentially separate from the engine block - Apocalyptic combustion cycles, leading to rapid valve fouling, overheating, and seizing - The piston pivot point is incompatible with the crankshaft amplitude, causing piston skirts to rub against cylinder walls - Due to the lack of tolerancing, piston mounting on their bushings can sometimes feel stiff (seized) or loose, leading to rapid wear and the development of hot spots - Longitudinal guidance of the crankshaft within the engine case and the connection of the connecting rods to the master rod is completely uncontrolled. This results in uncontrollable friction depending on engine speed and load, causing overheating and premature wear of certain parts. - The angle formed by the rocker arm push rods and the rocker receptacle is too wide, allowing the push rods to disengage, thus rendering the valve operation ineffective - The connection of the valve covers to the cylinder heads is done using two screws located at the center of the covers. Tightening the screws causes deformation of the covers, creating a "banana" shape that allows leaks to appear around the engine - Overall lubrication system and circuit are catastrophic - Ignition management relies on technical solutions unworthy even for a lawnmower - The alternator drive system is a makeshift bush repair installation There are dozens of critical issues with these engines, concerning both the 7- and 9-cylinder models. As they are, these engines should NOT under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES be used in manned flying vehicles. Even on the ground, they present significant dangers to people staying in the vicinity. As for the manufacturer's arrogance, their audacity in selling engines assembled from worn-out parts, even those from engines that have crashed, should be enough to deter anyone who takes the time to inquire before purchasing these decorative objects that should remain static." That's got to be a large enough analysis, and seemingly professional opinion, to make anyone understand, that the Rotec engine falls far short of what is required for a reliable aircraft engine.

He hit the Bulls eye with same issues described in the video above and the other video about the engine specifically.

It is almost certainly there somewhere but it is a very big and very deep area. While I understand the strong emotion pushing for the search to continue there seems very little logical point in spending more millions of dollars for what, at best, will be partial body recovery.

In the latest round of information gradually seeping out about the MH370 search, it has been revealed that the Ocean Infinity, carying out further searching under its latest contract with the Malaysian Govt, has carried out two more searches, over 28 days, ending Jan 23, 2026 - and has still found nothing. Ocean Infinity's latest search contract started in March 2025 and ends in June 2026. It seems unlikely that Ocean Infinity will carry out further searches in the chosen area, before its contract ends. The families of the lost pax have joined up in a group called Voice370 and are pleading with the Malaysian Govt to extend the search limit time - and to extend the search contract to other interested parties. It's currently unknown as to whether the Malaysian Govt will agree to this. There must be a limit on the amount of money and effort expended in this constantly fruitless search. Families of flight MH370 victims push for wider search WWW.PERTHNOW.COM.AU Malaysia is being urged to extend the search for a flight carrying 227 passengers that disappeared en route from ‌Kuala Lumpur to Beijing 12 years ago.

I'd feel quite confident after seeing the quality control an supervision. Nothing would be hidden, every difficulty along the way would have a solution worked out by a group of experienced aviators. It's great to see this sort of initiative. Programs such as this should have full government support in a wide range of industries.

It was an outbound aircraft not inbound !

Sort of. Really it is shuffling the deckchairs and I do not see it making much difference.

To many "emotive " words to take as a worthy engineering analysis. Engineers don't talk like that. Obviously intending to Imply the worst about the Engine. and the builders abilities.. Nev

https://www.australianflying.com.au/latest/casa-seeks-feedback-on-the-oaks-visual-approach-point-relocation Is this an outcome from an investigation into the mid-air, or unrelated ?

Bloody hell. Not ad for rotecs. What happened to the 3 cylinder radial that was being developed in south Australia. I know they had a demo driving around in a vw beetle.

Finding it might answer the question of what happened to it, but not why it happened.

Trouble is a lot of customers have had a bad experience and been ignored or abused if they contact them. Hopefully they have the radials sorted out by now.

It's a big and sometimes deep, Ocean. There has to be a limit on what amount of effort is expended. Nev

British Fighters of WW1 - episode 50 Royal Aircraft Factory S.E.4

They are Not crooks and are trying hard to build a special type of Motor. . Nev

Completely off topic by the third post! New record?

The build quality is all down to the quality and level of supervision. A lot of factory aircraft come with build errors. In WW2, the Australian-built Beauforts and Beaufighters were notorious for major construction faults, with things like hammers being left inside wing structures. I guess that's what you get, when speed of build is pursued over QC checks, when railway workers are utilised to build aircraft, and when you have a workforce with minimal previous aircraft construction experience.

Negative If the Rego on the tail is any Indication. Nev