Jump to content

CASA - Draft Proposal for Jabiru Aircraft


slb

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

12 forced landings is rather different to 40, which is how the statistics seemed to be presented.

No, it's "40 engine incidents", not 40 forced landings, I never read it as anything else. Good news that the other 28 incidents didn't cause forced landings though.

 

It sounds as though Garry Morgan has had good success ( see bad experience with Jab thread) with Jab engine cooling. I hope that the factory have asked him for his input, since overheating is a engine killer.

Would be interesting to know if the information has been passed on from Morgans and if/how it was received.

 

Who actually supports the CASA draft ? I think if we did a poll you would find very few people support it ..

You would have to include a vote of if something needed to be done or not, I think 'yes' to that would outpoll the actual CASA course of action.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you read this, (39% of accidents reported), you'll understand my scepticism of manufacturers running surveys. happy days,

Hello Pot, thanks for sharing. Can you rescan with higher resolution. It is currently 420x599 and a bit hard to read. Cheers

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anecdotal evidence only, but South Africa and North America don't seem to be having many problems. There is plenty of hot weather in those places. Many variables to consider, but maybe they get better fuel than we get in Australia.

Training school factor?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let me get this straight, Jabiru themselves have admitted to CASA that there are still three modes of engine failure that they can't explain.

Have they, Deadstick, or are you just paraphrasing? I don't recall seeing any admissions of that kind in any of the communications from Jabiru. Can you provide a link please?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it's "40 engine incidents", not 40 forced landings, I never read it as anything else. Good news that the other 28 incidents didn't cause forced landings though.

What is an "engine incident"? One of the difficulties is that people are more likely to report if there has been publicity already, so vocal people complaining of problems are likely to increase the number of reports. This needs to be take into account when comparing numbers with other engine types. Forced landings would be relatively easy to compare. Other items less easy. Is a sunk float in a Rotax required to be reported, for example? Would it be considered an engine incident?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is an "engine incident"?

Of any that would stop you flying in complete safety.

 

Yes, I would consider a sunken float that would put a Rotax onto 2 cylinders or worse, risk a broken conrod, an engine incident.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I'm sure we are both very happy that you're not! insane.gif.b56be3c4390e84bce5e5e6bf4f69a458.gifHowever you response to a polite and genuine question was neither friendly or helpful. Mate, I am disappointed that you are either unwilling or unable to help out a fellow aviator, or did I unwittingly touch a nerve?

Perhaps I misread the tone of your request, in which case I do apologise bit tired tonight and up to my ears in bullshit faults on a dash 8 Q400. To read the statement you will have to go back to the beginning and read the one of the early press release's can't remember which one and am on night shift ATM so don't have time to look for ya. Along the lines of jabiru have identified three common modes of failure-thru bolts, flywheels and valve train.

 

 

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds as though Garry Morgan has had good success ( see bad experience with Jab thread) with Jab engine cooling. I hope that the factory have asked him for his input, since overheating is a engine killer.

Good if Garry has sorted out the cooling problems of jab engines and I think jabiru could learn something from him, however Morgans are not used in flight schools, so are not subject to the cyclic loadings that seem to go with the failures.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good if Garry has sorted out the cooling problems of jab engines and I think jabiru could learn something from him, however Morgans are not used in flight schools, so are not subject to the cyclic loadings that seem to go with the failures.

True but Jab cannot have it both ways, they are producing ex amount of horse power with a aircooled engine that has a smaller cubic compacity than a equivalent Lycoming or Continental. Hence IMO with tighter engine tolerances, they are suffering from over heating in the training environment when climbing out during circuit training.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the overheating is causing through bolt failures or flywheel bolt failures.

 

50 years ago 1200 cc VW was rated at 40hp I believe, so I don't think 80hp is a lot for 2200cc. About the same hp/ cc as some ride on mowers! Tom

 

 

  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

True but Jab cannot have it both ways, they are producing ex amount of horse power with a aircooled engine that has a smaller cubic compacity than a equivalent Lycoming or Continental. Hence IMO with tighter engine tolerances, they are suffering from over heating in the training environment when climbing out during circuit training.

Hi dazza, Jab runs higher rev's

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Deb- fascinating thought it may be to know who can or cannot urinate where , or meaningless comparisons to the automotive industry are of absolutely no help to this thread .I posted a while ago- and got no sensible responses at all- to the effect that the raw figures promulgated so far comparing Jab with Rotax failures are just that- raw data. They are not 'statistics' as been suggested. The "0.03%" failure rate figure being thrown around is a data figure not,a statistically relevant analytical figure.

CASA are indeed frightening in that they seem to have the ability to propose unilateral impositions on almost anyone at will, with potentially devastating results , and yet have no accountability . I own a Cessna Cardinal, purchased with the specific intention of getting my instrument rating and staring to fly missions for Angel Flight.

 

CASA have decided that my aircraft age demands a SIDS inspection ($25.000 plus) which I do not have. Without the SIDS my plane is only worth scrap aluminium and like a Jabiru owner I now own a worthless aircraft, despite not one single incident that suggested the age of the A/C was a problem .

 

Angel Flight are now under the pump- despite over 16,000 'missions' without one single incident CASA are attacking Angel Flight for no obvious reason except they can - what is happening to us? Why have we allowed this to occur?

 

Lee Ungermann was a dyed in the wool Rec Aviation pilot from round here. He taught my neighbour to fly, and many others in the localty.

There have been Angel Flight fatalities. Please explain to this forum why you claim otherwise.

Jabirus are not and will not be rendered worthless.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a Mate of mine ...

 

We had our @@@@ mtg tonight - front and centre was the discussion

 

on the unprecedented restrictions placed on Jabiru powered aircraft by CASA.

 

We have at least 4 members with Jab motors, including @@@@.

 

Apparently, CASA has logged 40 reportable incidents with Jab motors in the

 

last year ( just in Australian airspace ) - obviously something had to

 

be done.

 

One guy is a very experienced pilot, he has a GA plane as well as his home-build, he says that the Jab

 

is a great motor to fly behind and he's happy to stick with it - even though he

 

has had to strip it down after only 100 hrs already! @@@@ is

 

looking to "re-power" his - he's had enough of his Jab.

 

One VERY INTERESTING thing that came up in the Jab discussion was the

 

reliability of Rotax engines. OK, - the engine "core" will do 2,000

 

TBO, but private pilots or schools doing big hours have to rebuild their PSRU

 

(gearbox) every 350-400 hours. The gears are fine, its the torque damper that

 

flogs out - you apparently get a tell-tale vibration in certain rpm ranges. Rotax are

 

very coy about this - particularly given the $3,000 odd bill owners face

 

each time.

 

So the 2,000 hr TBO for Rotax is only 1/2 true - it's not like a 2,000

 

TBO on a Lycoming - although in reality a Lyc will only achieve this in a "high use"

 

scenario ( charter / flying school etc ).

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Informative 1
  • Winner 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those that feel it is CASA's duty to uphold safety, no matter the consequences, on the basis that CASA's actions relate to saving lives - Will the same people that support these current actions to restrict aircraft operations take the same position if next week, CASA determines that the current RA-Aus medical requirements are too lax and that everyone that flies needs to complete the CASA Recreational Aviation Medical Practitioner’s Certificate or Class 2 medical before their next flight to eliminate the threat of old unhealthy people with dodgy tickers flying around with passengers over populated areas? Probably just as much or more evidence against letting people fly who can't satisfy the Class 2 medical requirements as there is against the failure rate of Jabiru engines...

In a minute.

 

However, there's no evidence supporting excessive incidents or fatalities in this category, and never has been throughout the history of aviation, so this is just a red herring.

 

If a trend did develop, then CASA would be bound to act, and would probably do what they did with Angel Flight and Jabiru engines - suggest a path to reduce the risk, invite commentary,

 

and then make a decision to reduce the potential injuries and loss of life.

 

CASA, and the Politicians are likely to have received many colourful hypotheticals like this, but all they serve to do is get people asking questions about whether RA operations are safe, and ensure some close attention for a while. This probably won't do any harm, flushing out people flying for commercial use, aerobatics, beat ups, fuel exhaustions etc.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, apart from those worried about their pockets, who thinks CASA is "the fly in the ointment"?

 

If "the worst happens", it's not the end of the world. Where regulations allow for the operations, buy a CAMit CAE, or a core and build it up with your existing sump, exhaust system, starter motor, backplate and bits. I'm not sure about the sufficiency of cooling at the exhaust port but I believe Ian Bent is addressing the same issues I had with the Jabiru 3300 as best he can with what he started with - in a rational way. No bluster, no bull.

 

The fact of the matter it my J200 kit was sold to me without warning me I would be doing Jabiru's testing and development. At my expense and risk. And what did I get in return? The blame.

 

None so blind as those who will not see.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All written off to experience. Thousands of hours and thousands of dollars. I learned a lot I wouldn't otherwise have learnt. Deadstick landing included.

 

I should thank Rod, really. ;)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...