frank marriott Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Is that an underhanded attempt to push the current attempt at constitutional change.If it is then I call cheap shot. Nothing underhanded at all. It is an individual's choise, just think & not just ignor it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 i wona know who the snake/s were............i wona inflict misery on the barst*rd/s...........i wona drop a building block on their roof from 20k ft, i wona attend their funeral and tip 20 tonne concrete on their grave/s.............i just wona I think similar emotion were felt by those who pushed for action Unreasonable hate and a wish for blood. In most instances the regulator would see their biased approach and ignore it and go looking for data upon which to formulate opinion. If reliable info not exist, setup ways to get it ans wait. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
storchy neil Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 our rules and regulations were in no way black and white so many were able to be manipulated to what ever new windscreen new legs new rudder peddles new under carriage new engine frame new return fuel line as in rotax installation manual new fuel gasculator were required to make it safe or was the lame that inspected it to fussy had this plane killed some one turbs the magistraite would be in some country were he could not be found now laugh that off it aint bloody funny example take the rotax 912 installation manual and repair manual for storch s according to some you do not have to comply with it neil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 The Magistrate could also be a lot closer than you think, so better to cool off and put that behind you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Ref post#20... We haven't arrived at that point yet, and since there is no definition of what the end point is, when do we arrive there? The whole episode shows our collective stupidity. Time for someone to show some initiative? Logically it should come from CASA as no one else has the power. I've always said don't start something you may not be able to stop. The reason there's no face saving way out is CASA's modus operandi. Big stick with flawed basis for application. We'll show them. Just arc up and that will get them moving. Treated like criminals. Typical and not acceptable. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Nev, I don't know that we are being treated as criminals by CASA - but I am damn sure we are being treated as mugs. A huge part of that, is the underlying premise that 'safety' - written in large letters, and spoken loudly and repeatedly - is a major, major opiate of the masses. If one DARES to raise a counter-argument against a 'safety' initiative, no matter how inane, misguided or just plain wrong it is in concept, there is inevitably an upswelling of noise - and the loudest from the proponents of the initiative - that somehow, one is thereby condemning innocent people to danger or worse. Here's how stupid it can get. I was one of those who campaigned years ago for the adoption of 'advanced driver training'; I took that right up to Federal Parliament, appearing as a witness before a House Committee on Road Safety. We were looking for training in proper braking techniques, skid control techniques, emergency situation reaction techniques. We had some fairly reliable studies to support the arguments. This was, of course, in the days before ABS and t/c were even being thought about. Some years ago, that re-surfaced as an issue in NSW - and the NSW RTA argued against it because 'if you teach people how to skid, they'll go around trying to do it and people will be injured or killed.' I am being serious here! From memory, they even drummed up support for that position from that peanut from the 'Pedestrian's Council' who became a legend in his own lunchtime for commenting on ANYTHING to do with motor-vehicles... The NSW RTA made mutterings about banning 'Advanced Driving Schools' from teaching such techniques, but were howled down on that one because even vision-impaired Freddy could see that the proposition that one should NOT be taught essential skills because that might mean you might drive less safely, was a crock. So what we have, is the situation where anything that can be wrapped up in a parcel labelled 'safety', is supposed to be untouchable - no matter how badly the contents of that package may stink. If you re-watch the CASA/O'Sullivan exchange, you will note that CASA argued their case based purely on the 'number of in-flight engine shotdowns (or words like that, several times) by comparison to other engine makes'. There was a clear jump from that 'statistic', to the conclusion that this was a serious safety problem. At no time, did CASA produce any statistics of the actual results of the Jabiru shut-downs (or whatever') adverse safety implications: fatalities, injuries, danger to third-party lives or property. I think we could all be somewhat excused if we took the view that it is CASA's unspoken position that 'if the engine stops, everybody is going to die'. Frankly, by the same false logic, it would be quite easy to prove that there are other brands of aircraft out there where the end result of taking-off has been a 'safety incident' - and for some, the incidence of that would be far worse than for Jabirus. So perhaps here is one possible way to progress this situation: have a comparative study undertaken of the ACTUAL 'safety result' of Jabiru engine 'problems' in say the last five years prior to December 23rd 2015 and the period since then - and let's see if there is any quantifiable reduction due to the operation of the instrument. No hypotheses, no speculation on potential problems averted - just a straight-out examination of the facts. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff13 Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 The instrument has almost certainly been effective in reducing incidents. I know of 3 Jabiru powered aircraft that were used for training prior to the instrument, that ceased being used on the day the instrument came into force. Thats 3 out of the 3 that I knew of at the time. That since that period would be a reduction of approx 1500 hours flying time. So it goes without saying that would reduce the number of incidents. One other thing to come out of this would be the improved sales of Foxbats, Tecnams and the likes. As with most things, there are winners along with the losers. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Any valuable statistics would be per flight hour so shouldnt make much difference. Id suggest the limitations could go 2 ways, either be lifted or implemented to all aircraft not meeting FAA standard CASA have hung their hat upon Read the numbers and thats all of RAA and plenty of GA. Not even separated by engine model just manufacturer Be interested if they try to act upon all Lycoming engines, they appear no good either 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted March 25, 2016 Author Share Posted March 25, 2016 snip snip snipAt no time, did CASA produce any statistics of the actual results of the Jabiru shut-downs (or whatever') adverse safety implications: fatalities, injuries, danger to third-party lives or property. I think we could all be somewhat excused if we took the view that it is CASA's unspoken position that 'if the engine stops, everybody is going to die'. snip snip snip How we get over the results bit. if you look at motor vehicles, particularly trucks, they have become much safer for the occupants but they continue to run over kids, crash into the middle of houses, clean up lines of pushbikes and when they fall over, pour litres of fuel over innocent bystanders. Death lurks around every corner and it is not always the perp who collects the reward. My big problem with the stats is that I don't believe that RAA has a clue about hours and movements. It is my understanding that the records in the office were a dog's breakfast and despite many offers from members in Canberra to help out checking the records during THE CRISIS none, or very little was accepted. It proved a herculean task just to get the paperwork assembled let alone analysed. I am not sure how fictitious the numbers were but to use them as the basis of the RATE/hour of failure would appear to be fanciful. I am far from being a Jab hater. I actually like them, they do what I want them to do. It is probably because the maintenance men in charge do a very good job on them. There are some maintainers out there that you wouldn't let loose on a house brick and they are usually the ones who scream the loudest when they break something or do (or not do) something which causes an engine to "grenade". I will be back in the Jab next week - I might even fly the C152 and PA28 as well (now where can I find a C140 near Sydney?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 The instrument has almost certainly been effective in reducing incidents. I know of 3 Jabiru powered aircraft that were used for training prior to the instrument, that ceased being used on the day the instrument came into force.Thats 3 out of the 3 that I knew of at the time. That since that period would be a reduction of approx 1500 hours flying time. So it goes without saying that would reduce the number of incidents. One other thing to come out of this would be the improved sales of Foxbats, Tecnams and the likes. As with most things, there are winners along with the losers. Well, that information at least supports one part of the debate - that FTF's using Jabs. were heavily affected. But let's look at the other side: how many of those three you mentioned, had had engine-related incidents /accidents in the previous 1500 total flying hours? What was the safety result of those? It's that level of comparison that we need to get to, to understand what actual safety improvement there has been as a result of the imposition of the Instrument. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 (now where can I find a C140 near Sydney?) If it's a tail-dragger Cessna you are looking for, I saw a spectacularly beautiful C190 in Dave Dent's hangar at Camden a couple of weeks ago, though if I were the owner I'd be wanting a security deposit of at the least a block of flats AND Tasmania, and probably tender parts on one's anatomy, to let someone jump in the LH seat... (Also saw forum member Dutchroll's Pitts S12 there on Thursday and it's also stunningly beautiful, but jeez, that's a lot of engine in front of not much aircraft!) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Lycomings are not crappy engines. The stats were due to ONE engine having magneto troubles. (someone doesn't know how to fix magnetos).The data has to be analysed properly. If you are not of honourable intention you can make stats prove anything. One engine I flew had 6 failures in just under 8,000 hours of engine time. Had P&W on it and four of them but worse record than Jabiru by far. This was back in the 60's and the maintenance was Airline standard. The R-2000 would be one of the better engines of the time..Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Oh Oscar! Someone must've told you by now. Size isn't important! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Strange - never had that comment made to me... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russ Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 they probably didn't want to prick your balloon......... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russ Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Oh Oscar! Someone must've told you by now. Size isn't important! yes it bloody is............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Thats the point Nev, writing off an entire brand because of a small samle of suspect data is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 RAA are right in the mix here, from day one. Really? Got some evidence for that have you Russ? That is a scurrilous unsupported assertion. Seems you are falling for CASA's pathetic attempt to tie in the ATSB and RAAus to CASA's unjustified action. What I can tell you from my sources is that the only involvement from RAAus was to provide the raw data that CASA demanded and have the legal right to demand and RAAus is legally obliged to provide on demand. My sources, incidentally, was not from any personal involvement as I was not on the Board at the time the data was provided nor when CASA took their ill-considered action. My sources are all published statements from RAAus. The action taken by CASA came as a shock not only to RAAus but to virtually everyone except the few people responsible for it at CASA. The previous leadership group at CASA did this on their very last day on the job and left the mess for the new CEO/DAS Mark Skidmore to live with. RAAus at the highest levels made immediate, in-person representations to the Director of Aviation Safety and his senior staff objecting vehemently to the action taken against Jabiru. These representations involved demanding the safety case used by CASA to justify their actions. No analysis has ever been provided that justifies CASA's actions. At no time ever has RAAus condoned the action taken by CASA. To this point, they have been trying to recage the tiger that they helped unleash. Without evidence to back up such an utterly outlandish claim you lower the tone of this discussion. The "data" they passed on, was poorly analysed, poorly set out, and one or 2 within RAA, were hell bent on causing pain. I would think, RAA, did not expect the severity of the casa action, and in the manner it was implimented. That the data provided by RAAus and the ATSB was, as you put it "poorly analysed" is hardly the fault of RAAus. And what on earth are you implying by putting inverted commas around the word data. Are you trying to suggest that RAAus and the ATSB falsified the raw data supplied to CASA? I've said it before......."out" those names, the ones cowering in the shadows, that ignited this matter. To my knowledge the Board of RAAus was unanimous in strenuously objecting to the action taken by CASA. Do any on the Board prefer to fly with Rotax than Jabiru? Yes of course and having personally outlaid a heap of cash for a 912iS I'm obviously one. But, like many and perhaps a majority of Recreational Pilots, I learned to fly in a Jabiru and value the experience very highly. Regardless of what I prefer to fly, I am absolutely committed to the fact that the CASA action was never justified by sound analysis of the available data. I have never heard one Board member express the slightest support for CASA's instrument only the opposite. Clearly I resent your post Russ as it lowers the tone of RecFlying. This sort of ill-considered post turns reasonable people away from the Forum and at best it spreads mis-information. Not happy, Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 i wona know who the snake/s were............i wona inflict misery on the barst*rd/s...........i wona drop a building block on their roof from 20k ft, i wona attend their funeral and tip 20 tonne concrete on their grave/s.............i just wona The suggestion here I'm guessing refers to a deceased former Board Member that I counted as a personal friend and a bloody good bloke. I have never heard it suggested from any Board Member that that person was involved in any way in the action CASA took. In any case, there is no way one person is going to be able to sway 12 others to support an unjustified action that would cripple the company that that made Recreational Aviation in Australia. Even the most ardent Rotax supporters recognise that Jabiru goes a long way towards keeping Rotax prices down. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Don, Russ - put down the pistols and send the seconds back from the duelling ground. This is a very, very vexed issue and both of you have strong feelings - and as is often the case, I am quite sure that there is considerable basis for having those opinions. Don: at one stage, in early 2014 from memory, it is correct that at least one Member of the Board was openly stating on this forum that 'RAA was 'going to do something' (that is not a verbatim quote, but pretty damn close) and adding commentary that the RAA Board was not going to fail to protect the safety of its members (again, not verbatim, but close enough). The CEO's statement immediately following the Runcorn incident - and I accept that he considers he was misquoted- most certainly gave the clear impression that this was the last straw and some sort of 'action' by the RAA was imminent. Those are checkable facts, and while it is a very long bow indeed to suggest that they were an accurate summary of the Board's position at ANY time, it is extremely unfortunate that they were ever uttered. I completely accept that - by the time that CASA actually started obvious action - the Board position was unanimous. I also know that some Board members at least, were concerned at the earlier commentary and I would assume that that concern was expressed as required, since that line of commentary ceased soon afterwards. Russ: I know from first-hand experience, that when CASA demanded the data from RAA, a number of members of the Board were working feverishly to assemble what CASA had requested; I was personally in touch with one member at after 1.30 a.m. tying to clarify certain information during that period. I have every reason to believe that he was just one of a group relying on caffeine and adrenalin to meet the ridiculous deadline imposed by CASA. I also draw your attention to the fact that the Michael Moncke, speaking absolutely FOR RAA, was out of the blocks extremely strongly and immediately with trenchant criticism of CASA's utilisation of the data without any obvious analysis (which statement has been shown to be lamentably true). I believe that I am known to be an obvious combatant against the CASA action. AFAIK, the RAA Board has throughout this business acted responsibly and as strongly against what transpired as I believe it could have done. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russ Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Don........i have, 2 mails ( poss 3 ) from ex board member, one was he was "pushing" that another jab had had an incidence near me, he told me it "spewed all its oil"..that incident was actually a camit engine...........but.....the oil cooler hosing was supplied by another source, owners source, it was chinese hosing, it split under pressure. When i corrected his "jab biased" statement, and alerted him to " the real cause" all went quiet. Same guy openly bashed jabs here (forum) and local strips, here there and everywhere. He HATED jabs. Same guy stated "the sooner jabs were grounded the better"..........this was a "board member"........so get that into ya. Now i wont forward the mails, but if your heading my way, you can read them....2nd mail, in part, alluded to "others" are also holding grave concerns re jabs. ( by "others" i considered RAA was his meaning ) Lastly........i was not inferencing in any way in my previous post ( Ross ) .......the "grave" word was not directed at him, i can now see, how you could "tie" it together. i opologise for that. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 The reference to "criminals" was to the manufacturers of the Jabiru engine.. Somehow just pressure them and they will miraculously produce a worlds best engine for the same price, and light weight. The schools and owners are just collateral damage. (in their mind) and will appreciate the need, and welcome the intervention when the final outcome happens. (We all live happily ever after). Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank marriott Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 We all live happily ever after No likely Nev. The dog acts by some, should never be forgotten & and won't by most I suggest, they deserve their "crown" and can wear it forever. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Don, an ongoing issue is that once someone is voted onto the board, even personal comments, emails or reports carry weight. There were reports sent, not on behalf or RAA no doubt, but with board members signature. There were some in CASA seeking this information to furnish old predudices I have chased this rabbit at the time -well before your time or many of the current board members and upon investigation and some similar adamant claims it hadnt happened, there was silence. Id have thought other members had NOT approved RAA action and hence why personal action taken. Few are saying RAA had involvement but over years some influential members and board members did. When you consider the leaders at SASO currently, the personal view of these people becomes very important. Thereis problems with incident reporting down to the lack of facts behind accident reporting. Often done well after the event and by those looking for retribution and shirking blame. Self maintenence and reporting is unlikely to see unbiased reports. Many are most concerned about insurance outcomes and personal ego bruising at that point rather than accurate reports for product development. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 The reference to "criminals" was to the manufacturers of the Jabiru engine.. Somehow just pressure them and they will miraculously produce a worlds best engine for the same price, and light weight. The schools and owners are just collateral damage. (in their mind) and will appreciate the need, and welcome the intervention when the final outcome happens. (We all live happily ever after). Nev Nev - I see what you were driving at there, but I think we should all avoid the use of any reference to 'criminals' (even though the CASA action smacks of Napoleonic justice, where the accused is deemed to be guilty until proven innocent). There have been some comments - directed against in particular, Rod Stiff - that have been so libelous as to beggar legal action. One of those was fairly immediately deleted from the site, it was a vicious tirade. Another suggested that Rod Stiff was taking action to remove himself from any liability in regard to the company future, and that was immediately taken up by our resident legal expert and the illegality of such a move was made abundantly clear. In both cases, criminality was directly either stated or imputed. While I certainly agree with the thrust of your comments - that CASA's treatment and lack of consideration for all sides of the situation (a significant comment in the Forsyth Review that was recommended for a complete overhaul) amounts to de facto treatment of everybody affected with far less than acceptable justice - I suspect this is one area where angels will not blithely be strolling along. 3 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