Nobody Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 I got an email ( with minutes of meeting ) from jabiru regarding the most recent meeting with CASA. Unfortunately it was a go nowhere meeting or at least set of minutes. Agreement to maintain good dialogue etc. No substance about whether the the instrument would be allowed to die or to be repeated etc.I guess you could read between the lines and say if it was going to be repeated they might let it be known earlier so that there might be less complaint when it does. If it is going to be let die then they might hope to just quietly let it fade away and hope no one starts talking to lawyers. But who knows. I think that I saw that email too. My reading was a little different to your reading in that it was likely that the Jabiru conditions would be extended. It seems that the Jabiru are saying that they have implemented fixes to address the issues and therefore there is no need for the restrictions. CASA are saying show us the evidence that the fixes have worked and not introduced other issues. is do a bench test. Some key quotes form the minutes: "CASA Engineering suggested that an appropriate bench test of a Jabiru engine on which all three of the modifications described by Jabiru had been made would be an acceptable way of determining conformance with the applicable ASTM standards." Jabiru expressed that they considered the incorporation of the proposed changes should be sufficient to allow the direction to expire, without renewal and without the introduction of any other limitations. There was a consensus amongst participants, however, that the limitations would necessarily be continued, and revised as appropriate on the basis of the test results. Unless the bench test could be successfully completed before 30 June 2015, Jabiru concurred that it would probably be necessary for the limitations to continue beyond 1 July 2015. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russ Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Oops.........was about to say, "it's rumours" then these email quotes popped up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Next issue is that "if" the upgrades (through bolts and roller followers) has in fact fixed the issue, what about all the older engines? Seems to say limitations will remain for them until rebuilt, and even them some will need major work to comply. Also the current engines went through cell testing originally, have to assume they passed, 4 cyl is certified and thats where much of the problems are occuring Is it possible all the improvements since then have caused the problems?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Also the current engines went through cell testing originally, have to assume they passed, 4 cyl is certified and thats where much of the problems are occuring Perhaps the 2 CASA people resigned on medical grounds with hernias from moving the goalposts? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keenaviator Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Perhaps the 2 CASA people resigned on medical grounds with hernias from moving the goalposts? Probably on work cover then for the next 2 years. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Next issue is that "if" the upgrades (through bolts and roller followers) has in fact fixed the issue, what about all the older engines?Seems to say limitations will remain for them until rebuilt, and even them some will need major work to comply. Also the current engines went through cell testing originally, have to assume they passed, 4 cyl is certified and thats where much of the problems are occuring Is it possible all the improvements since then have caused the problems?? The 2200J engine was certificated to JAR 22H by CASA: TCDS No. 160-2. If you read the TCDS, you will note that its rated max. HP is given as 55.5 @ 3100 rpm, and the minimum grade of petrol was 100LL / 100/130 AVIATION gasoline. It was a solid-lifter engine and at the time was the ONLY four-stroke aircraft-specific engine competitive with the Rotax 532 ( I think it was then, could have been an early 582, I don't know Rotax history). It was specifically developed for an aircraft that met the then current limitation of MTOW to 430 kgs , that incorporated a combination of low-cost, still world-beating standards of occupant safety, and an overall combination of aerodynamic performance that rates amongst the best there is. For those who may not have seen it before, the context for the development of the original Jab. 1600 engine has been expertly defined by Phil Ainsworth: http://web.aeromech.usyd.edu.au/AERO1400/Jabiru_Construction/jabiru.html It is worth a read. There are hundreds of LSA55 and derivative Jabs. out there, 20-years+ old, puttering around; the aeronautical equivalent of the Hilux ute: not flash, not pampered, sitting in hangars and sheds, or tied down in the open in their off-time and pretty reliably firing into life when required and doing the job their owners ask of them. They don't demand constant attention or careful inspection of the fabric, the airframe condition, the control systems: a good preflight inspection for an LSA55 that has been correctly maintained is usually sufficient to take-off with confidence. Pretty much: check the tyres, check the fuel, make sure the mud-wasps haven't blocked the pitot or static, go flying. For an afternoon of doing circuits, or a 1,000k trip to visit Auntie Sophie for her 75th birthday.. Keep up to the oil changes, keep the valves in adjustment (and note any unexpected changes) and fly with respect to good engine temp. management and safe flight paths in case of problems as per the instructions generally applicable to Recreational-class aircraft. The Jabiru 2200 engine has been lifted to 85 HP, had all that fiddly stuff about checking valve clearances removed ( a mistake, I believe) and is expected to run reliably on whatever petrol-based substance is poured into the tank(s) - because anything other than 100LL is at best a bit of a lottery, not because operators don't try to be careful - and often to put up with 6/8th of bugger-all expertise in engine flight load maintenance by the operators. The latest information I have been able to retrieve says that a new Jabiru 2200 costs around $14k. I can't find authoritative figures for a 912 but I believe it's around $24K at current exchange rates. You can get a fair bit of extra development and reliability for a 50% greater price, greater weight, and lesser economy - particularly when you have a customer base in the 50,000 plus engines area rather than 5,000 plus. Good on Rotax for what they have done - but don't forget there have been a few hiccups along the way even for 912s. Jab. engines are, obviously, NOT bullet-proof and I for one would never argue that their development has been as productive of better overall 'performance' as it should have been; indeed, if that were not the case, the increasing divergence between a 'Jabiru' engine and a CAMit (CAE) engine would not exist. If CASA had been genuinely concerned to improve the reliability of Jabiru-engined aircraft, it would have approached the issues in a tempered, constructive way: in effect, 'ok, we appear to have a problem, how can this be solved?'. Instead, it decided that there was a problem, on the basis of extremely dubious analysis that it is hell-bent on keeping secret, and basically decided that burying the problem was the answer. An approximate equivalent in motor vehicle terms, would be the authorities deciding that cars without ABS braking systems are over-represented in crashes, so all cars without ABS will be henceforth banned from use on wet roads, dirt roads, and indeed, roads anywhere near people - and all drivers and passengers have to sign a disclaimer before travelling in them that they accept the increased risk of an accident. The CASA Instrument limiting the use of Jabiru-engined aircraft expires in less than one week; does anybody believe that anything useful has resulted from that? Apart from a better-designed engine risk assessment and inspection/maintenance regime ( which is a good thing), I don't believe it has. 3 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarus Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 Gday Oscar. I spoke to Rod Stiff a couple hours ago ,about another matter [see South Africa MTOW thread]. I asked how his CASA buddies are doing , and he indicated he thinks the restrictions will be extended. He said he was working hard with CASA to get it all sorted. My opinion below They[ CASA] seem to do things in a haphazard manner , with good intentions? Did too many unhappy Jab engine owners scream loud enough that they could not ignore ? Bye Brendan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 CASA's 'good intentions' are basically to get CASA out from under any form of retribution - be that legally or politically. The Minister responsible for CASA - Warren Truss - is a complete waste of oxygen in terms of promoting aviation or aviation safety. CASA Legal rules the roost. Of course the restrictions are most likely to be extended: anything else would be an admission by CASA that the original Instrument was a complete and utter FU. As things stand, the ONLY satisfactory resolution from CASA's POV is the complete elimination of Jabiru engines. CASA has not identified any changes that it would consider remediates the (unidentified and undocumented) 'problems' that it based the application of the Instrument upon, therefore Jabiru cannot respond with specific modifications. The CASA Instrument has about as much specificity and validity as the charges of 'possession by the Devil' in the times of the Spanish Inquisition. By examination of the statistics, actual genuine Jabiru engine failures in flight in this country have caused (as far as we know) precisely zero fatalities/ serious injuries to occupants or the general public. Just ONE documented failure of a Rotax 912 (the Goulburn Sting crash) has killed as many occupants as remain unexplained in the history of Jabiru-engined aircraft in this country. Since the CASA Instrument has achieved precisely zero in terms of the safety history of Jabiru engines, it seems quite clear that lifting it would be a tacit admission that it was fundamentally wrong in application in the first place. The Legal ramifications of that are obvious to Blind Freddie. 3 3 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 When people leave themselves no face saving way out, you know you are going to have a problem. This looked bad from the beginning. The reasoning around not using the 912 is well covered. 6 Kgs of lead in the tail wouldn't have helped it's spin characteristics . It's a very light motor, the Jabiru. Nev 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 I wonder what Turbos means by "Optimistic" Is he optimistic that the restrictions will be extended? Or does he think Oscar's forecast that they will extended is optimistic? Unusually cryptic there Turbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarus Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 Ok . Cant CASA say that the instrument ends when they are satisfied with Jabirus hoop jumping? They could let the instrument end ,at the end of this month, and say they are happy with the audit /hoop jumps etc. then back away slowly. They could also state that they are trying to stop potential accidents that may injure/kill the public ,pilots,students , pax etc.[ which the instrument illudes to] The fact nobody has died in a jab powered AC cant be used to defend engine failures can it? I suspect CASA felt they had to do something . If a Jab fell on to a house /school etc , then how much face would CASA be trying to save.[ surely they knew of the issues and did nothing?] At least with an Australian manufacturer they can help? go to the factory and suggest things etc. If it was an overseas manufacturer what could they do? Put restrictions on the engine use and that's it?! I don't know if the aviation legislation requires CASA to have hard numbers before taking actions of this nature. Or if they have to wait till the numbers start to accumulate before they take action? In my view taking action before something catastrophic happens is better than waiting till after the event. Should they have done nothing? or gone about it differently? Anyway , Rod seems like a nice bloke, hope they come out the other end stronger and wiser for it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 They could let it lapse and stop talking about it. Its on a dangerous path now as with Jabirus hardheadednes vs CASA pride and no goalposts for Jabiru to aim for, how can it be resolved? As said the real losers are Jabiru engine owners. Any fix, upgrade os approval from Jabiru will need to be done. LSA owners are stuck with whatever Jabiru are forced to implement. Experimentals could be forced along same track simply to remove limitations or fit other, maybe even less reliable engine options The problem with your peemptive approach is that if that is acceptable without data, anyone can act on any rumoir, political or personal hunch. I have heard there is significant personal problem Jabiru behind current action. They are public servants and are morally (or legally?) responsible for impacts their actions cause. THIS is why this action is such a big deal, could happen to anyone. There are plenty of engines and aircraft with much worse safety records than Jab. Next is that the heavily impacting action is supposably to reduce a near non existant risk, injury to bystanders and passengers. However frightening the idea, aircraft very rarely crash into people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarus Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 So CASA should use fatalities as engine failure data. CASA should trust RAA data on engine failures [12 I believe not related to fuel ,maintenance etc] Jab engines have no problem and CASA should leave them alone CASA should not try to protect the people flying the things. somebody should die due to a jab engine failure before CASA should act Ok I think Ive got it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaba-who Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 Icarus - you need to extend your thoughts. This is a political and face saving action that does not need to make sense. Let's change the label to continental or lycoming. They have had as many failures ( if you use the " real" stats as real as we can get ) and had many actual deaths. But no restrictions from CASA. But there is no grumbling or "tall poppy" murmurings from the industry or from uninformed forums on the Internet - so CASA doesn't feel obliged to act. If you restrict every brand of engine pre- emptively because there have been "some" ( but no benchmark number) failures you immediately close down the entire industry but with huge potential legal ramifications to CASA. But do it to a small local player ( whose engines cover nearly a half of the troublesome recreational and sport fleet) you kill two birds with one stone. You are seen to be doing something. And you start controlling those pesky recreational mob. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 They moved on shaky grounds, and now they(and us) are stuck with it, unless they find a fall guy or implement some actual specified engine alterations. Well good luck to them on the last one. IF CAMit OR Jabiru come up with mods. HOW do they prove they are good and how good is GOOD? You only really get that after many years of experience in service, and I would expect the manufacturers would want to limit their products being exposed to "uncontrolled" maintenance by limiting who can work on their engines. Is that a good result? for the movement. I sure don't think so..Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 No but fatalities are linked to airframes too and Jab scores well there. On balance a out landing in Jabiru appears safer than others They should use some solid data or at least get it before making decisions which could sink a manufacturer, several schools and 1000+ owners This data should be available and public, at this point the data we have shows several fuel and other problems used to claim engine reliability problems If RAA data is all that exists then yes thats all they can act upon. They surely cant react to noisy complaints from disgruntled owners. Thats a path to close every supplier down. However unpalatable, regulating against something which hasnt happened simply is not sound basis for action as wide as this. Limitations do nothing for those flying except alarm them Remember that have limited even fully certified aircraft ......they already tested and approved them. No way experimental aircraft should be included, they can run whatever they like. Reinforced by the recently CASA approved MARAP and 19 modification rules. They surely need to bounce Jabiru and others for having crap records and reporting. Work towards rectifying this system so good data can be developed. There is a problem, but as has been said, this wasnt the way to go about fixing it. It has achieved nothing but damage those who could fix it. Jabiru claim there wasnt a problem and if there was its been fixed already, CASA wont say how to prove it and have limitations released. Unknowingly by handling it poorly they have given Jabiru enough room to move and largely only owners have been affected with no solutions in sight for many. Firstly identify the problem, find out EXACTLY what engines it effects and then act on finding solutions, not limit a whole brand. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 If CASA identified a problem (and there are some ) there would be a procedure shown by Jabiru that would have covered it IF da da da. had been done properly . and in a way they Jabiru) will be right SOME operators do get it right so (up till now) they had the best of both worlds. Worlds easiest airframe to look after an safest to hard land AND A good cheap to buy and repair lightweight motor.. Some operators have had a bad run and I don't put the blame entirely on them. Today most people are not really engine savvy. There are a lot of variables in the installation and use of the motor also. It doesn't like being over propped (that's like running a vehicle in top gear , where it should be run in a lower one) and I'm sure some of the engine damage is fuel related, because it is sensitive to poor fuel . Also in there somewhere would have been some engines not set up right..Nev 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Received this afternoon from Jabiru. "Hello Jabiru Fleet, Firstly we would like to say Thank You to our owners and operators for the continued support we have been shown over the last six months. Already this year there has been a significant decrease in Jabiru engine incidents. It would appear the incident rate is now equal to or less than the Rotax incidents by which we were judged last year and were given as the justification of the operational limitations. We sincerely appreciate all your efforts so please keep up the good work. Your attention to maintenance and operation and adherence to service bulletins will continue to assist greatly. Likewise we are committed to the growth and continued health of the Jabiru Fleet and communicating with you all. As you are all aware the instrument placing operational limitations is due to expire on the 30th of June. We recently attended a meeting with CASA where Jabiru proposed that all restrictions to Jabiru powered aircraft should be lifted for aircraft that have complied with all the Jabiru service bulletins and letters, operate the aircraft in accordance with the manuals, have performed the maintenance in accordance with the manuals and use trained technicians and where the aircraft do not have unapproved modifications. For those owners and operators of Jabiru powered aircraft that do not wish to comply with the Jabiru requirements, the limitations can apply except for the signing of the waiver in its current form. For Jabiru powered aircraft in the Experimental categories of RAA and SAAA, these organisations can assess the risk of owner modifications and apply limitations if required. Over the past 7 months Jabiru has given CASA an insight into the depth of engineering knowledge and research and development that goes on behind the scenes on a day to day basis at Jabiru. Jabiru has also provided all the engineering documents that were used for the last certifications of modifications through a CASA authorised person; engine reports for ASTM compliance; reports for engines achieving 1000 hours and numerous tear down reports of engines from reported incidents. Jabiru has complied with the standards of certification approved by CASA and continues to monitor airworthiness issues for Jabiru aircraft and engines and issue the appropriate service notifications. Jabiru Aircraft acknowledges CASA’s primary safety related obligations however the overwhelming body of evidence shows Jabiru Aircraft to be one of the safest aircraft in this category of aircraft on the Australian register based on statistics. Student pilots, passengers and persons on the ground are at no greater risk of injury from a Jabiru Aircraft than any other aircraft. However, indications are that CASA will re-impose the restrictions again with some slight relaxation to the signed waiver requirement. Indications have also been given from CASA that perhaps complete relief from the limitations will soon be settled. As more information comes to hand we will keep you updated. As always.......Happy Landings JABIRU AIRCRAFT PTY LTD PO Box 5792 Bundaberg West Qld 4670 Ph: 07 41551778 Fax: 07 41552669 Email: [email protected] [/url]www.jabiru.net.au [/url]www.facebook.com/JabiruAircraft " 3 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 The minutes of the meeting mentioned by Gandalph are at the link below: https://filetea.me/t1s91Zy8ExASaq68PuOfitf4Q 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Thanks Nobody. Very helpful and informative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Couldn't open it. Nev 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgwilson Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 So the bullying continues. CASA continue to fail in the provision of evidence to support their actions. Meeting minutes are just a blank page. Maybe they pulled them down when they realised someone may actually read them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgwilson Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 FileTea = Anonymous Volatile file sharing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Someone must be able to repost it. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Sorry Nev, it seems that the previous link I posted was a one time thing. I have converted to images and uploaded so that it can be seen below. Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 1 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