skeptic36 Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 For Ftf's, there is also the unquantifiable cost of down time. If you took Motzart Merv's recent experience, that cost would be massive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Its the fuel saving plus not having to pull the engine every 500 hours to have the heads rebuild. FADEC also stops a lot of damage happening to the engine. It all adds up. For OEMs the 912is means offering a longer range or a higher payload. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-man Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Its the fuel saving plus not having to pull the engine every 500 hours to have the heads rebuild. FADEC also stops a lot of damage happening to the engine. It all adds up.For OEMs the 912is means offering a longer range or a higher payload. Add to that also that you don't have to change the oil every 25 hours if you use MoGas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff13 Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Aha - I certainly didn't know about the extra imposts, the table I found did not indicate either extra charge, but I should certainly have figured it was GST+ at least.However, even at an average of $0.60/litre dearer for the 100LL and rounding up a wee bit, let's say the Mogas savings for the Rotax comes to $600/year for 80 hours flying. that makes it a bit over 16 years to get to $10K of savings: 1280 hours total. Thank you. I just like to see accuracy in reporting which is not very common these days. Like you say, it won't change much in the big scheme of things. In fact as I see it the real problem for Rotax in Jabiru's apart from the factories reluctance to bend with the breeze, is the weight and balance issue, and that could prove to more problematic. In my case I simply took the conversion that came from the factory and fitted it up. It took into account the different w&b and moved the engine back appropriately. Even so it still moved the w&b and upped the BEW by a not insignificant amount. Still within factory requirements but a noticeable change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff13 Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Plenty of Jabs run mogas, with the lower price comes risk. . Jabiru quite clearly say not to last time I looked. Which admittedly was over 6 months ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Thank you. I just like to see accuracy in reporting which is not very common these days. Like you say, it won't change much in the big scheme of things.In fact as I see it the real problem for Rotax in Jabiru's apart from the factories reluctance to bend with the breeze, is the weight and balance issue, and that could prove to more problematic. In my case I simply took the conversion that came from the factory and fitted it up. It took into account the different w&b and moved the engine back appropriately. Even so it still moved the w&b and upped the BEW by a not insignificant amount. Still within factory requirements but a noticeable change. And that is something that needs to be recognised. Phil Ainsworth's article that I have quoted several times, goes through the effects that slotting in a heavier engine would have had on Jabiru's early development very clearly. The lift to 600 kgs for LSA aircraft was, realistically, a godsend for Rotax, because at the old 450 kgs, there just wasn't much aircraft left - as we saw when RAA registrations were audited and suddenly a considerable number of aircraft became, for all practical purposes, single seaters. There are plenty of reasons to choose Rotax over a Jabiru engine if the likely use is not within the 'Jabiru' parameters - which basically are for a useful touring aircraft that can handle Australian dirt strips pretty well. I would NOT choose a Jab/CAMit engine for a stol device nor for a pusher installation, nor for FTF use on a strip where long ground hold times were common, just for a start, any more than I would choose a VW Golf GTi for bush-bashing or towing a trailer. I would choose a 230/430 for comfortable long-distance cruising using just about any 'established' regional airstrips, and be happy to accpet that I have to use decent engine management and judgement about how to operate it. It is horses for courses - and in part, I believe that people do not fully appreciate that. I think that the recently released Jabiru 'maintenance assessment' document is something that every Jabiru owner, or prospective owner, should read and use as a guide if considering the purchase of a Jabiru/CAMit engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Oscar, you have to accept the possibility that without a distribution channel and OEM support the camit engine is just going to be a historical artifact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eightyknots Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Oscar, you have to accept the possibility that without a distribution channel and OEM support the camit engine is just going to be a historical artifact. I hope that you are not trying to single-handedly consign the CAMIT engine to the annals of history, FT. I believe, there is a real place for the CAMIT-improved Jab engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff13 Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I hope that you are not trying to single-handedly consign the CAMIT engine to the annals of history, FT.I believe, there is a real place for the CAMIT-improved Jab engine. So do I. What a pity that Jabiru can't see that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I hope that you are not trying to single-handedly consign the CAMIT engine to the annals of history, FT.I believe, there is a real place for the CAMIT-improved Jab engine. But does that Camit engine have all the right sorts of certifications and testing to allow it to be used in training or over built up areas? Would the CASA weasel approve? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Col, in the light of the present situation you're kinda drawing a long bow there with Jabiru? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 To build these engines economically both Jabiru and CAMIt need to take share from other manufacturers or grow the market for aircraft engines. I can't see that happening, CAMit only exists to take sales from Jabiru. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camel Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 The reality is With the Australian dollar weakening imported engines are going to get expensive to buy and repair, they already are and will get worse, I would prefer the Australian product especially if they get more bugs out of it. I would have preferred to own a Holden than a Toyota but they didn't have what I wanted. Holden will be gone soon and so will Jabiru if you don't watch out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Col, in the light of the present situation you're kinda drawing a long bow there with Jabiru? Jabiru has gone through all the testing and having been signed off by professional engineers, I am not sure that the weasels inside CASA can set aide the approvals and certifications that Jabiru has. CASA has declared the Camit engine to be different and as such Camit needs to go through its own certification and approval process. What certifications and approvals does the Camit engine have? Is there sufficient reliability data data around so that statistical inferences can be drawn to suggest that Camit engines are much better than Jabiru (or that Jabiru engines are much worse or something)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevek Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Jabiru do not recommend Mogas but they do not say to not use it. Quote from J160C manual 2.5.4 Fuel Grade • Avgas 100LL • Avgas 100/130 • MOGAS with minimum Octane Rating of 95 RON1 may be used. • Do not use fuel additives such as Octane Boosters. Jabiru Aircraft strongly recommend using AVGAS. Automotive fuels should only be used where AVGAS is not available, and if used, must have the highest anti-detonation rating practically available. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I think some would be happy if both Jabiru and CAE dissappear. CASA have just set aside their own certification process by limiting a certified engines usage Dont worry FT, qhen something is good value , it willtake market share You dont need to be BRP to be sucessful and they do have distribution channels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff13 Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Jabiru do not recommend Mogas but they do not say to not use it.Quote from J160C manual 2.5.4 Fuel Grade • Avgas 100LL • Avgas 100/130 • MOGAS with minimum Octane Rating of 95 RON1 may be used. • Do not use fuel additives such as Octane Boosters. Jabiru Aircraft strongly recommend using AVGAS. Automotive fuels should only be used where AVGAS is not available, and if used, must have the highest anti-detonation rating practically available. Yep can't get much simpler than that. (Automotive fuels should only be used where AVGAS is not available) You can read that how ever you like but if I still had a Jabiru engine I would be using AVGAS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Page Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Keith: - could the second failure be the same as the one reported in Post #22 of: http://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions/532232-jabiru-bad-experience-2.html ? No completely different issue. Regards, KP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Page Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 The Jab. engine has a lot of good points - simplicity being one of the major ones, as well as low weight allowing strength to be added to airframes within the mandated limits for MTOW and stall speed - both of which have, in reality, no direct link to real-world operating. They are both figures pulled out of a hat as a lazy (and frankly, a bloody stupid) way of attempting to generate a 'class' of aircraft, when a simple :' no more than 2 people / 150 kts cruise / piston engine with fixed-pitch prop and fixed gear' would have been completely sufficient. Maybe add 'Take-off and land on a 400-metre strip", to ensure they did not become ridiculously optimised to one type of operation.The Jab. engine's Achilles heel has always been detail design problems and an intransigent attitude from its designer to accepting improvements, and frankly, very rudimentary attention paid to cooling efficiency design and effective engine management reporting installation. Despite that, Jab. engines have served many, many careful and mechanically sympathetic owners and operators faithfully - and that includes FTFs that develop an intelligent approach to engine management. CAMit has spent years researching the 'detail design issues' and is (in my opinion) in the box seat to utilise that expertise to improve on the Jab. basic engine. Recent events in the commercial relationship between CAMit and Jabiru will, in all probability, see further changes by CAMit with further improvements on certain aspects of the basic Jabiru design, and work on cooling effectiveness design is also ongoing. CAE engines will, inevitably, trade off supreme light weight for reliability compared to Jab engines, but I believe even with that penalty, they will be highly competitive on price+performance+reliability for this class of aircraft. No. CAMit won't topple Rotax - no way. But the CAE engine has the potential to be a very serious contender in the U/L aircraft class market. Oscar, Have a little think.. Are there any Camit engines out there which have 1k hours on their clock? I am thinking hours of take off and landing those normal flying conditions. Leave those hours off -- where the engine just sits on a dyno day in day out hour after hour I want see true flight conditions replicated.. If that is not the case there is no bragging rights yet. There is another point Jabiru are doing a lot of engine research... Regards, KP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Jabiru has gone through all the testing and having been signed off by professional engineers, I am not sure that the weasels inside CASA can set aide the approvals and certifications that Jabiru has. CASA has declared the Camit engine to be different and as such Camit needs to go through its own certification and approval process. What certifications and approvals does the Camit engine have? Is there sufficient reliability data data around so that statistical inferences can be drawn to suggest that Camit engines are much better than Jabiru (or that Jabiru engines are much worse or something)? Col, my posting obviously wasn't clear as I wasn't casting aspersions at Jab engines to pump up Camit, I was alluding to the fact that (very unfairly I feel), despite their well-earned CASA certifications, due to this weasel-inspired curious situation, Jabiru-engined aircraft don't currently enjoy un-encumbered use in training or over built up areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Keith, why don't you ring CAMit and ask them. Ian Bent would certainly have the first hand information you're seeking, though whether he'd want to engage with this thread/forum could be another matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricky m Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Here is something i was not aware of..( I own a jabiriru and love it) was at work today (ypjt)and saw a lame working on a r22 so stoped for a chat and asked wot he was doing.. To my suprise he was checking for sticking valves as per manual (every 300hrs) as the oil/fuel sizzles on stem seals and causes deposits to form potentially causing a sticky valve... So dont mater how much ur engine costs,they all have similar pronlems,,( stick to the inspections and dont scrimp and i reckon u got the same chance of a faliure as any other engine else... Its a shame somthing so cheap and more than reasonbly reliable is bieng Pushed to potentially not existing anymore by the people who asked for cheap affordable avistion because the 2stroke was unreliable and thirsty (lmao)...On another note there is an aircraft at thar airport with a jab engine in ( vh experimental) and i was taliking to the guy the other day about jabs, he said he had not done most of the s/b on the engine as he thought not needed ( choose wot he thought was needed ....WTF.... I say most jabs later problems are poor maintainece of older not updated engines.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 KP, what research are Jabiu doing? Read up on what CAE engines are based and yes there are plenty with long hours Id have thought the original certification tests would have been done on solid lifter engines Once CAE see theres goong to be payback for the absurd costs onvolved in cert process im sure it will move ahead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Page Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Keith, why don't you ring CAMit and ask them. Ian Bent would certainly have the first hand information you're seeking, though whether he'd want to engage with this thread/forum could be another matter. You all are bragging how good the Camit engines are and none have done long hard hours yet, that is all what I was saying. I think I will wait till there are some big hard hours on the engines. Like school hours, then we can compare apples with apples. Regards, KP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Who's bragging? They wont be in any school aircrft intil certified and even then wont be in Jabiru LSA You do lnow they are an upgraded solid lifter Jab engine dont you? Thats the one without many of the problems seen recently 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