turboplanner Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Before Major has a coronary, it should be pointed out that this Coroner's report related to a single engine, and that the main thrust related to the condition of that engine, not the design of the engine. The Coroner didn't provide substantiation for the "stop suddenly" comment, and the suggestion about the engine not being acceptable on General Aviation Aircraft is correct insomuch as the engine hasn't been certified, but of course it's not marketed to that market and it's reliability in the Recreational market is a different story altogether. There's no point in getting away from written statistics which are provable. If someone wants to go through the same number of months I did, we would then have a reasonable comparison if you want to drag Rotax into the argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 The 'stop suddenly' comment relates to warnings that Rotax provide in documentation to their two stroke engines and is incorrectly quoted by the Coroner in the case of the 912. She is also incorrect in that the 912uls is available as a certified engine and are installed in GA aircraft. The 912S is not certified. The certified versions come with a lot of extra expense and documentation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 We tend to take Coroner's reports as something uncontestible and to just accept. In the aviation game there are many examples of inadequate and not fully informed conclusions, from such persons. They mean well and have access to a lot of data but they cannot be intant experts across something speciallised like aviation. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petetheprinta Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 I pass this on for info only, I make no judgements (unlike some others I am sure ), On Saturday 2nd June, one of our club Jab 170's (factory built 2010) suffered a catastrophic engine failure whilst being flown by a student on his first solo navigation exercise from Gawler. Happily he was within gliding distance of Truro flats and managed to make a safe landing with no further damage other than a change of undies needed. This engine was a fully refurbished zero timed engine from Jabiru and had 15 hours on the clock, Aircraft TTIF approx. 1200 hrs. It would appear a conrod came adrift (reasons unknown yet) and shot out the side of the engine splitting the case wide open. Jabiru have agreed to replace engine (now fitted) with a brand new one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Must have been FW by someone from Victoria? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howard Hughes Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Jabiru are putting their profits first. I suspect it will take a expensive litigation to resolve the issue... A class action? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 SA in this case South Africa, not South Australia, here in ozie we all FW them equally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rankamateur Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 The certified versions come with a lot of extra expense and documentation. But are they actually any different in the flesh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 But are they actually any different in the flesh? Quite possibly not, but like all commercially produced certified aero engines, at least half the price tag is an insurance premium the manufacturer pays for product liability insurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne T Mathews Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 But are they actually any different in the flesh? Quite possibly not, but like all commercially produced certified aero engines, at least half the price tag is an insurance premium the manufacturer pays for product liability insurance. Sure they're different... They're heavier... The extra paperwork isn't light you know... And it costs heaps... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballpoint 246niner Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 The great thing about Rotax( certified or not) is they built their design weakness in their sprag clutch- this is great because when it fails the engine won't start so no EF and when its on the way out it groans real load to let you know in advance. Just the sort of weakness you want in an imperfect world I reckon..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirsty Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 The engine I my 160 has 100 hours on it and we have low compressions in 2 and 4. Rings it appears. We had both heads off today and have lapped all the valves and still low compressions. We run the engine at 2900 rpm and also use avgas exclusively on jabs recommendation. The engine though does run very well and uses bigger all oil so who knows! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Getting back to the Sting crash for a moment in respect to that 912 failure. Wasn't there some conjecture right after that incident, that the particular aircraft had been inproperly imported by a well known aircraft dealer, and that the aircraft and engine had been used in some high-altitude record attempt in Europe ??.....Appears that engine may have had it's operating limitations exceeded by a large degree ( per Rotaxes specs) which may have led to the premature failure once here in Australia ?...........................................................Maj... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Hadn't it also had a prop strike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballpoint 246niner Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Getting back to the Sting crash for a moment in respect to that 912 failure. Wasn't there some conjecture right after that incident, that the particular aircraft had been inproperly imported by a well known aircraft dealer, and that the aircraft and engine had been used in some high-altitude record attempt in Europe ??.....Appears that engine may have had it's operating limitations exceeded by a large degree ( per Rotaxes specs) which may have led to the premature failure once here in Australia ?...........................................................Maj... The full coroners report is quite a read, worth looking at and on public record for anyone interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barney181269 Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Quote :- I'm not condoning the engine state of reliability at all. Engine failures can always occur and because of the strain on the engine, is more likely to happen at take-off. I believe these bolt failures are a detonation issue and have always said so. It's certainly the most likely cause. Nev Take a look around, these Jab engines never make TBO, never same hours as airframe, just way too unreliable for flight for my liking. Don't get me wrong, it's a good starting point for an aircraft engine, just some development by proper engineering would finish this half arsed engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eightyknots Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Getting back to the Sting crash for a moment in respect to that 912 failure. Wasn't there some conjecture right after that incident, that the particular aircraft had been inproperly imported by a well known aircraft dealer, and that the aircraft and engine had been used in some high-altitude record attempt in Europe ??..... The "well-known importer" you spoke of was unceremoniously named and shamed in the (publicly available) Coroner's report. Some of the sentences the Coroner put in her report about this importer were: His record keeping was so appalling, and to the extent it existed at all, inaccurate, that we will never know. Very little if any of his two days of oral evidence could be accepted other than his own admission as to his deceptive or fraudulent dealings with RA Aus in relation to the registration of aircraf t... He compounded the litany of dishonesty by having prepared the Condition Report in August 2004 required for the sale ... There is a strong likelihood that records which he did produce to the court were prepared for court production and also that his 'Logs' were not contemporaneous but may have been fictionally backdated to ensure a sale. He admitted that much of that was written by him in his Sting newsletters stretched the truth ... There was a lot more but I am not into 'dissing' people, nor am I prepared to name the importer. I hope that the importer has since lifted his game as a result of this court finding, which would be really good for Australasian recreational aviation. It's just that the owner who tragically lost his life along with his mate diligently maintained the aircraft for 2-1/2 years and kept all the records only to find out that prior to this, while it was a demonstrator aircraft, maintenance records were very poor. The lesson we can all draw from this is that you'd have to be very careful checking records of any second hand or demonstrator plane that you maybefore such purchase ...even if it is from a well know importer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Never means NEVER. Perhaps you mean rarely. Half arsed is not really a technical term. I don't consider mysef a Jab supporter or a Jab knocker. Would we want them "not on the scene"? Nearly half the planes out there that are regularly flown are Jabiru's. Perhaps the TBO figure is too high. Normally an engine that has a lot of failures below the TBO figure would cause it to be reduced. Would reducing the stipulated TBO help? I personally don't think so , but the figure is misleading by being so high. It may cause an expectation that the motor should go for that time virtually untouched. Some engines DO go to the figure but not many It would be nice to know what has to be done to enable this to happen. Some engines do not do many hours at all but there could be various reasons for that. It's not a control situation. Because your engine does not use oil doesn't mean the rings are ok. You could have a lot of blowby still .Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 The "well-known importer" you spoke of was unceremoniously named and shamed in the (publicly available) Coroner's report. Isn't there another Coronial Inquiry in Tasmania started/in progress/concluded? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eightyknots Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 We make sure they are fully competent on forced landings from anywhere in the circuit, but Cory really had to do some fancy flying to pull this one off. Mozart, I am really happy that, predominantly through excellent training, we didn't read a report in the paper of a seriously injured, badly burned or dead pilot. I'm so pleased it didn't end badly. I've pretty much had a gutfull of jabiru. We are all taking bets at the moment as to what blame jabiru are going to put on us for the failure. Good luck, my engineer is a navy mechanic and does evrything by the book. Strictly by the manual. He doesn't know any other way.Anyone got any rota powered acft they want to put online with a good school? We keep reading about the through-bolt problems with increasing regularity. Does anyone know anyone who works for Jabiru (or closely with them) who can shed some light on this whole issue. I want to know, for one: what is being done for the consumer? The various State laws (e.g. Sale of Goods Act) all say pretty much that any goods sold must be "fit for the purpose". If this had been a vacuum cleaner, microwave or motor mower, the manufacturer would have instituted a nation-wide recall; if they didn't the consumer affairs department would have stepped in. If this had been a safety related issue, such as a motor car engine failure, in most cases these issues would be repaired at no cost to the consumer even it is beyond the stated manufacturer's guarantee period. Why can't Jabiru do something to the aggrieved consumers whose wealth it as risk (let's face it, by now Jabiru-powered planes must be worth less due to the engine problems depressing resale values), as well as the consumers whose lives are at risk. Surely they must be working on a good 'fix' by now. You can only sweep the problem under the carpet (or simply ignore the problem) for so long time before it MUST be dealt with. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RKW Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Surely they must be working on a good 'fix' by now. You can only sweep the problem under the carpet (or simply ignore the problem) for so long time before it MUST be dealt with. They have come up with a revised thru-bolt, 7/16 thread diameter instead of 3/8", however time will tell if this solves the problem as there are presently so few engines with this upgrade. Bob 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eightyknots Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 They have come up with a revised thru-bolt, 7/16 thread diameter instead of 3/8", however time will tell if this solves the problem as there are presently so few engines with this upgrade. Bob for providing Jabiru engine users with the revised through bolt. Jabiru would score the additional:score 009: if they instituted a voluntary recall of all Jabiru engines which have the old through-bolts and replaced them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RKW Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 for providing Jabiru engine users with the revised through bolt.Jabiru would score the additional:score 009: if they instituted a voluntary recall of all Jabiru engines which have the old through-bolt and replaced them. So I suppose it comes down to who is responsible for your safety. I doubt that Jabiru will institute a voluntary recall because of the sheer magnitude of the task and the cost involved. So where does that leave us? If you think the new thru bolts will make your engine more reliable (and I do) then the only option is to fork out for it yourself. Not the sweetest option, but what price for safety? Regards, Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eightyknots Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 So I suppose it comes down to who is responsible for your safety. I doubt that Jabiru will institute a voluntary recall because of the sheer magnitude of the task and the cost involved. So where does that leave us? If you think the new thru bolts will make your engine more reliable (and I do) then the only option is to fork out for it yourself. Not the sweetest option, but what price for safety? Regards, Bob A fantastic gesture of good-will, and a demonstration that they care about the consumers (scoring ), would be to give a complete set of through-bolts to every Jabiru owner and a cash allowance towards the labour to have them installed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted June 20, 2012 Author Share Posted June 20, 2012 2 of the new model engines have failed in the last 3 weeks. Both low time engines.. Back to the drawing board.. 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