fly_tornado Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 I've been a bit reluctant to mention this before ; having been a reader of this forum for a while now , I carn't help thinking that there is a correlation between what is read on this forum ( talking jab engines ) and what happens when a pilot has an inflight problem ( jab engine ) and immediately assumes , albeit wrongly , "Gees " must be that bloody jab engine .I guess what I'm saying is that it's almost an automated response due to the neg feedback we are all exposed to . I know this was the case with me . no no no no training kicks in without thinking, procedures are followed, problem solving analysis happens very quickly. Its not like a Jab is a A380 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bandit12 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Has RAA done any statistical analysis of the accident rate due to airworthiness causes, for RAA aircraft by type and number in the fleet? Unlikely - the data collection is lacking and the small sample size suggests that a decade or more of data would be needed to draw anything meaningful. Given that photographs for registration seem to go missing within a year, it seems too much to expect that accident data would also be there in its entirety after a decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Let's not turn the RAA into a make work project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Why? Er, because the sun moves north? Happens every year, I think... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Let's not turn the RAA into a make work project. So it's a better option to rely on hearsay and 'urban wisdom'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teckair Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Er, because the sun moves north? Happens every year, I think... Cold air cannot contain as much moisture as warm air, all you need for carburetor ice is moisture in the air the ambient temperature being cold is not an indicator of possible carburetor ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Gents because the papers reported that our new CEO said X don't assume that he said exactly X he more likely said A and B and C and the papers put it together to equal X. To me in the same way we should wait to find out what actually happened so to we should wait to see what was actually said before assuming the reporting is accurate. in this case I would be very surprised if X as reported is accurate, the guys new to the job doesn't have an aviation background as I understand it, I think I heard he has a law degree so IMHO is very unlikely on what little I know to have said what was reported....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 So it's a better option to rely on hearsay and 'urban wisdom'? Jab have sorted the problem, if you're unhappy with the response don't buy or fly a Jab. I know I'd never consider buying a Jab without a full rebuild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Generally speaking, carb ice range is -10c to +30c. Er, because the sun moves north? Happens every year, I think... Not really.. The earth moves around the sun which presents to the sun at an inclined angle. The earth centered universe went out of fashion many years ago :) All jokes aside, teckair is right, cold air is much drier than warm air. The poles are the driest places on earth:).. Ahhh, I love science... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 As is the case with a lot of what is reported in the press, people jump to conclusions way too early and get it way too wrong way too often.I am disappointed that our new RAAus CEO has dropped Jabiru in the deep end and held their head under water by bad mouthing them in the media after only a few weeks in the job. He has not done Jabiru or any Jabiru owner any good by trashing them in public rather than dealing with any possible problem with engine reliability in private. Personally I would like to see him sort out the administrative mess that is the aircraft registration system before running around saying things in the papers especially if as in this case it was factually incorrect to blame the aircraft. This is a bad look, on any inspection of it. The new CEO has - it seems - shot his mouth off and managed to simultaneously make himself look rather foolish, while also conveying to the readers of the article that one of the most populous aircraft in the RAA fleet has 'serious' safety issues. I have no idea of the depth of knowledge he may have of aviation in general and RAA operation specifically, but I do not recall that being highlighted in the commentary when he was appointed. Prima facie, that seems to be fairly well up there on the scale of two shots to the foot without pausing to re-load. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
01rmb Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Cold air cannot contain as much moisture as warm air, all you need for carburetor ice is moisture in the air the ambient temperature being cold is not an indicator of possible carburetor ice. I was being brief and just saying it was cold. A full analysis considering the dew point and humidity conditions as quoted by Oscar plus the fact he would have been on a decent from 1500' (another 3 degrees cooler) on a final approach descending with an idling engine (he was less than 4nm from the threshold) - he would have been in the serious carby icing conditions at all power settings according to the attached CASA carburettor icing chart. Yes - my original comment was too brief, I was just trying to communicate that Oscar's earlier point about the weather conditions was not being picked up on and that carby icing was not being considered a possibility in this discussion as opposed to the mantra that jabiru engines are always to blame. To make it worse our new CEO managed to make a hash of it in the press and went off half cocked by blaming the aircraft manufacturer without all the evidence being analysed. As I clarified later - it was not just the cold being considered but also the dew point and the humidity plus the likely throttle position that could lead one to believe that carby icing was a possibility especially since the engine ran smoothly later when tested. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Isn't carby heat the first thing you reach for when the engine starts running rough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Gents because the papers reported that our new CEO said X don't assume that he said exactly X he more likely said A and B and C and the papers put it together to equal X.To me in the same way we should wait to find out what actually happened so to we should wait to see what was actually said before assuming the reporting is accurate. in this case I would be very surprised if X as reported is accurate, the guys new to the job doesn't have an aviation background as I understand it, I think I heard he has a law degree so IMHO is very unlikely on what little I know to have said what was reported....... True but Jabiru's own facebook page says that the engine has been ran after the crash and ut ran fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Let's not turn the RAA into a make work project. Agreed FT, but when RAAus finally gets our registration records computerised it should be a doddle for someone to extract quite useful statistics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVOCET Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Isn't carby heat the first thing you reach for when the engine starts running rough? Unless you hear rattles ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
01rmb Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Gents because the papers reported that our new CEO said X don't assume that he said exactly X he more likely said A and B and C and the papers put it together to equal X.To me in the same way we should wait to find out what actually happened so to we should wait to see what was actually said before assuming the reporting is accurate. in this case I would be very surprised if X as reported is accurate, the guys new to the job doesn't have an aviation background as I understand it, I think I heard he has a law degree so IMHO is very unlikely on what little I know to have said what was reported....... Which is all why he should have just said "we are investigating the cause and will make comment following a full investigation". As a lawyer he should know better... For me - he needs to make a statement clarify his position because I am very unimpressed by his reported actions in publicly denigrating and devaluing my aircraft and I question his ability to do the job if this is how he operates. He represents the recreational aviation industry to the public, including pilots and manufacturers and he needs to get it right. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dafydd Llewellyn Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Let's not turn the RAA into a make work project. Well, if they don't have the data, then the CEO shouldn't open his mouth, n'est-ce pas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 To use a very simplistic example: let's say that 'X' died from heart failure, while consuming a meal of potted quail and artichokes.The facts that 'X' had a BMI of 38, had run up three flights of stairs immediately prior to dinner, was a 50-cigarettes-a-day person, had a cholesterol level of 15 and had just had a major, major row with his spouse prior to sitting down to dinner, goes unrecorded. Ban potted quail. It's pretty damn obvious, isn't it? NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! You'll take my potted quail from my cold dead hands. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaba-who Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Multiple comments about jabs not running rough but just stopping. This is absolutely NOT true. Depends on the cause. If you have the fuel tap down on the final common line turned off then yep. You get a short run then a sudden stop. But if you have clear flow from a depleting header tank you will get the fuel sloshing around a bit with fuel intermittently feeding and so get a run of missing. This happened to me and has been reported by two other pilots who had same thing happen. All reported same cause ( distraction during run up check list - failure to turn on the upstream wing tank switches -that were in older models) and symptoms. Took off on just the header tank - which gave about 15 minutes flying time then maybe a minute of missing which got worse. All 3 spotted the problem during trouble shooting turned on taps and problem resolved. I then installed a better checklist and low fuel warning system. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVOCET Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 In smooth air the engine ,it just stops ( from my experience ) and first reaction is to raise the nose ,which makes sure no residual fuel from the header tank. On the other hand , if the fuel filter gets blocked (?) again from ex. engine looses power and if the throttle is not retarded ,the engine stops ( in my case , the retarded throttle kept the engine running just above idle . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Distracted from turning the fuel on? You wont get to experience that too many times. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVOCET Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Distracted from turning the fuel on? You wont get to experience that too many times. I've done that , Lucky it was a lsa 55 jab and a long taxi . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 True but Jabiru's own facebook page says that the engine has been ran after the crash and ut ran fine. usually a very good indication it may have been carby/ induction icing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 This is a bad look, on any inspection of it. The new CEO has - it seems - shot his mouth off and managed to simultaneously make himself look rather foolish, while also conveying to the readers of the article that one of the most populous aircraft in the RAA fleet has 'serious' safety issues. I have no idea of the depth of knowledge he may have of aviation in general and RAA operation specifically, but I do not recall that being highlighted in the commentary when he was appointed. Prima facie, that seems to be fairly well up there on the scale of two shots to the foot without pausing to re-load. Can you tell us where he said this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RKW Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Try the Courier Mail. 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