kevinfrost Posted March 12, 2011 Author Share Posted March 12, 2011 It's interesting to see all the conclusions jump forth with little information. Most Jab worries are motor orientated. This case according to a reliable sorurce was not engine related. It was not the pilots 1st solo but his first in this a/c a 230D. Let's wait for the facts. I missed the winglet in the far left of the photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nong Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Hmm... The pilot allowed the unruly Jabiru to fly into a wire and it crashed. Bad Jabiru. Then the engine stopped. The pilot stalled the Jabiru at low level. The pilot didn't recover the situation so the bad Jabiru crashed. Then the engine stopped. A bad Jabiru was seen to swerve on take-off and crash into a remarkably solid large object. This is unacceptable. To top it off.... Then the engine stopped. Well, I guess that proves it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsor68 Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Hmm...The pilot allowed the unruly Jabiru to fly into a wire and it crashed. Bad Jabiru. Then the engine stopped. The pilot stalled the Jabiru at low level. The pilot didn't recover the situation so the bad Jabiru crashed. Then the engine stopped. A bad Jabiru was seen to swerve on take-off and crash into a remarkably solid large object. This is unacceptable. To top it off.... Then the engine stopped. Well, I guess that proves it. Proves what Nong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest burbles1 Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Nong ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkennard Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 I guess speculation doesn't beat fact but my first thoughts about the photo was maybe they did a touch and go and didn't retract the flaps from full and maybe stalled. Look how much flap there is. I know there has been a discussion about flaps on take-off. I have a J230 and I'm very conscious of this as the 230 has incredible lift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 To my eye, the flap on the good wing is retracted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest basscheffers Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Proves what Nong? Proves that Jabirus have all the same pilot-error accidents as other aircraft, where the engine is not to blame. As well as all the disproportionate amount of extra ones where the engine was at fault? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggles Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Once the wing is removed and , there is nothing to hold the flap in position and , it will completely lower. The starboard - ' in position ' wing flaps , appear to be retracted . Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggles Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 1. Yes, you can get instruction in your own home built. Build the plane, get someone to test fly it, get instruction.Bass Could you elaborate on this please ? Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poteroo Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Build - test - register - maintain by L2 or higher - insure to cover instruction and early solo, or as the FTF requires - start. happy days, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkennard Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Thanks, didn't see that until I zoomed in on the photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest basscheffers Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 maintain by L2 or higher Is the reason for the L2 that until you are a pilot, you are not an L1 maintenance person and can not do maintenance on the aircraft? (even if you built the thing yourself?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest basscheffers Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 To quote Steve Bell from the Feb mag, " . . . all (FTF) maintenance must be done by a FULL L2 . . . " But if it is your aircraft, it is not part of the FTF fleet. You only need to find an instructor crazy enough to teach you in your aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 ........can not do maintenance on the aircraft? (even if you built the thing yourself?) Hmmm I dont know about you but I'm thinking that building is just maintenance on a larger scale, albeit one that is checked by an independant authority before flight is allowed. However there is no way that those checks can even come close to being as effective as 100% checking of everything being done. So perhaps a bit of a black hole as to what you can and cant do. Ultimately the FI is the one that as to be satisfied, if he isnt he's not putting his butt in the seat!! Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Yes Steve was in error in some of his comments in the FEB mag. He stated that only an L2 can sign out a daily inspection, this is of course not the case. I contacted the RAA re this line in the article and was put through to the boss as steve has been unwell. He assured me that steve made a booboo and would be correcting in the next mag. This acft looks like a 170 to me. Hope the pilot is ok. And yes, you can be trained in an acft that you build. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggles Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 " But if it is your aircraft, it is not part of the FTF fleet. You only need to find an instructor crazy enough to teach you in your aircraft ".- Basscheffers . I took up flying at the ripe old age of 62 years . Some time later I decided to build an aircraft from a kit . I was around 65 when the a/c was completed , inspected by an Amateur Built Inspector and test flown by the local CFI . At this stage I had flown very little since qualifying as a pilot - with pax and x-country endorsements. Being a new mature age pilot and having minimum hours and experience , I approached a CFI about accompanying me in the passengers seat for a few hours ,until I became familiar with the a/c. I was advised that this was not allowed , and I had to fly off the initial 25 hours alone . I raised this anomaly with Mick Poole who confirmed the regulations , but agreed that there was a safety issue involved , and raised the issue with CASA . In summary , my options were - (a) Have somebody else fly off the initial 25 hours ( by him/herself ) - not an option many would take up. Or (b) Fly off the initial 25 hours myself and hope for the best . I consider that this restriction is an 'accident about to happen' , and may have contributed to some of the recent accident reports on this forum - that is if some of the press reports are in fact correct . The Draconian regulation also encourages pilots of new home built a/c to disobey the rules , in the interest of common sense , particularly when applied to low hour , mature age pilots like myself . Even though Mick was sympathetic to my plight , and did raise the issue with CASA , I am not aware of any changes to the rules Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 that's the downside of the experimental plane. so what did yu end up doing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Are my eyes lying, or is the elevator missing from behind the hor stab? Biggles, the issue of test flying is a good point. I recently did some test flying in a homebuilt zenith. The owner is quite keen to get the 25 hours flown off, but I am a little stretched for time as its not at our airfield. He got impatient and decided to try a lap on his own, while he landed it ok he was a little perturbed by the experience. I would like to be able to do some dual with him in it, but as you mentioned the rules don't allow it. I have to say, I am not a huge fan of guys test flying acft they have built. I think the emotion of the event could be a major human factor, and quite often the pilot is not overly experienced. For example, during the first flight I did in the zodiac, just after liftoff it became apparent that the stick forces (nose down) were far too strong. As the acft accelerated the forces became very very strong indeed, to the point where I needed a knee behind the stick to prevent me from flying 'down'. The more I attempted nose up trim the worse it got. The acft levelled off and there wasnt much I could do about it..(needed more weet bix) It dawned on me that the (very strong) electric trim may be either running away or ass about. I tried nose down trim and the nose immediately popped up. After that the plane flew beautifully. But all this took place in a matter seconds. Im sure the sound of cheeks clenching together was heard from the hangar..lol It turned out that a simple wiring problem had meant the trim was indeed upside down. Now, this was no-ones fault but mine. I did do a thorough check over the acft before the flight, checked the trim was working, but not correct sence. And i should have, no excuses. My point is, with the thrill of the moment for the builder having the thing in the air, combined with inexperience Im not sure the outcome would have been the same. On the subsequent flights the engine stopped twice. This was found to be a strange anomaly with the throttle settings. On the ground the engine could not be stopped by full retardation of the throttle. But in the air, the idle stop was enough to stop the engine. Both instances equired a glide appch back to the runway as we hadn't identified the problem. My 2 cents is that the 25 hour rule is an issue that needs some attention. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Just found a rego..19-7527, J230 D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggles Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 fly_tornado Since i had asked , and had the ruling confirmed by our peak body, I could hardly plead ignorance . Had I disobeyed the rules and taken someone , things might not have been good for me from the liability point of view , had something gone wrong . - Moral of the story - don't ask too many questions Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 So can you go the other way and fly with instructor as PIC and owner as student? Is ignorance of the law ever a defence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggles Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 fly_tornado No - the rules state " no passengers until first 25 hours flown off " but you are correct , ignorance of the law is not a defence . Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 It turned out that a simple wiring problem had meant the trim was indeed upside down. Now, this was no-ones fault but mine. I did do a thorough check over the acft before the flight, checked the trim was working, but not correct sence. And i should have, no excuses. Cheers I can remember a debate where a lot of people thought Human Factors was a load of crap, but this is a very good example of it (not to mention me turning the fuel tap off on start up after the last guy forgot to do it on shut down). There's always something out there to bite you, and only one in ten would have been able to adapt as quickly as you did Motz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Every article where the subject of test flying new aircraft is discussed, as far as I can recall, doesn't recommend anyone who has limited experience flying their own aircraft initially. It is always suggested that a properly qualified person does it. There is just so much that can go wrong. That is the thinking behind not having more than ONE on board. Even aircraft that are not new but have had extensive maintenance can be prone to problems. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Agreed Nev. I should have been more clear, I didn't build the Zodiac, I can't even build a coffee table from Kmart without it wobbling and having bits left over...lol..theres no way id fly anything i'd built.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now