Camel

Firstly do you understand the experimental home build regulations ? Then why impose the limitations on them with Jabiru. Secondly if you walked away from Jabiru and RAA then why interfere with those who support RAA and fly Jabiru's as you are sounding like the enemy ! I have my money in a plane and my buisness and you go on about regulation and safety and it has no effect on you ! The main thing is that I want jabiru problems fixed and Jabiru are hard to deal with, CASA's regulations are flawed and seriously effecting owners and operators and not nessecaryily doing anything to make Jabiru more reliable. Jabiru reputation and buisness would be seriously hurt by CASA actions, I would have liked CASA to work with Jabiru but destroying them is crazy. I am very interested in safety and not saying ignor it but they have been going for many years, why do it like this now, CASA are really a piece of work and are not interested in safety, just wave a stick and saying "we are in charge" !

They pay attention when the media talk about them as tens of thousands listen. Bet they change their tone when it really blows up.

Thes CASA and political geniuses can't say they were not warned of the problems, there are other ways to high light problems. Standard answer to a letter is not addressing issues, just trying to Palm it off. ,

I received the exact same letter, I have since sent another letter calling him a LIAR and told him his letter did not address what I wrote to him. He is a disgrace and I have also written to the ombudsmen and the PM, seems to be falling on deaf ears but I won't stop as I believe CASA is out of order in everything it has dished out to RAA. The most important point is RAA is self regulated and does not need CASA to hound and destroy it constantly. It will not let up. I am outraged and disgusted by a government department in destroy mode !

1. I complied with JSB031-1 2. Does JSB031-3 solve the problems ? 3. Will CASA accept this as the fix ? 4. Why is it directed at flying school aircraft only ? 5. Why bother doing the SB unless this is a fix and satisfies CASA ? I'm happy to do through bolts and anything else, but not if it is still limited by CASA, If CASA are allowed to continue this circus they will pick on anything they want. I believe that Jabiru and CASA are being silly, if I do through bolts then what, what's going to finish this ? I will wait and see and use my plane for my own pleasure until the final approved fix is agreed on. Maj, what action do you support ? What is the the bigger problem Jabiru or CASA ? If CASA handled this in an intelligent manner it could and would have been solved years ago. Doing it the way they did is really strange !

But this won't get CASA off their back will it ? Another inconvenience foe flying schools. I am well and truly had enough of the BS involved with CASA and Jabiru.

As you are not a member of RAA you would not have read the December newsletter. Here is the relevant part. Note to members on Jabiru issues As most people are aware, CASA published a draft instrument on 13 November 2014 which would have the effect of restricting the operations of aircraft with a Jabiru powerplant. This would affect more than 1000 RA-Aus registered aircraft and have an adverse impact on some two thirds of our flight training facilities. Since the publication of this draft instrument RA-Aus has been working hard to understand the justification for these restrictions. We have, for some time, known that Jabiru engines have a higher tendency for failure than their Rotax counterpart and welcome any appropriate changes that would improve their reliability. We would also welcome any measures that result in improved reliability and safety of any aspect of our fleet. Having said this we are troubled by the process employed by CASA and especially the lack of transparency in terms of the implementation of these proposed measures. RA-Aus has repeatedly requested the information used to justify statements made by CASA that claim the failure rate is increasing. We have also requested the analysis of said data in order to assess the veracity of these claims. On 17 December 2014, almost five weeks after the draft instrument was published, RA-Aus received the data and was provided one, yes one, working day to respond. As one would expect we would have liked much more time to assess the data, understand the analysis and then form an opinion on the suitability of the proposed measures, however, regardless of taking some five weeks to provide the data, CASA allowed one day. In light of this our response was somewhat rushed. Despite this, RA-Aus was able to note that the data provided to CASA on Jabiru engine failures only covered one partial year. The only time series data made available to us (although not provided to us) was via the ATSB. That is, no engine failure data beyond the beginning of 2014 was used by CASA to justify their position and they left us to infer what data the ATSB had provided. With reference to the latter, RA-Aus has contested the validity of the ATSB data on the basis that it shows a decline in the hours flown by the RA-Aus fleet. This is in direct contrast to Government published figures which show a doubling in the number of hours flown since 2000. This led us to a simple conclusion – CASA has not undertaken robust analysis on reliable data to establish with any degree of accuracy that the failure rate of Jabiru engines is increasing over time. This is despite their statement that they have found statistically significant evidence in support of their claims. RA-Aus’ position is, as stated above, that the failure rate of Jabiru engines is greater than that of Rotax engines but that it is not worsening as per the unsubstantiated statement made by CASA. In light of this RA-Aus responded to CASA, within their incredibly tight and unrealistic timeframe, to state that we oppose their draft instrument and suggested an alternative approach to addressing the real concerns. While CASA acknowledged that our response had merit within 24 hours of receipt they proceeded with the restrictions without due consideration of our arguments. While the restrictions imposed on our members are less stringent than those originally proposed, our opinion is that they are still inappropriate. Furthermore, CASA has remained evasive in terms of providing information relating to what rate of failures would be deemed acceptable and so we remain uninformed as to what point the restrictions will be lifted other than the statement on the CASA website regarding a review by CASA early in the New Year and the six month validity of the proposed Instrument. We will continue to work with CASA and Jabiru in an attempt to address these issues, however, we can’t provide further information at this point. RA-Aus is extremely worried about these actions and what this may mean for private aviation in Australia. Being the fastest growing sector of aviation it concerns us that unilateral action has been taken by the regulator that is not backed up by robust evidence which suggests the action is justified. It worries us that this precedent has the potential for further restrictions that may not be warranted based on incomplete data, deficient analysis and/or misleading claims. We also have concerns about the implications of CASAs decision and what it means for all self-administered aviation organisations as Part 149 is implemented. RA-Aus will focus our efforts on improving safety in our sector by reviewing training methods and practices, improving our education programs, communicating safety findings (where permitted by law) and so forth. We will also remain very focussed on the outcomes of CASAs recent actions, the Governments recent announcements about the recommendations of the ASRR report and continue to hold CASA to the same high standards that they demand of the aviation industry.

You are 100% correct in your statement! I thought CASA would not be game to hurt Jabiru, so they have everything in their sights, " just destroy everything" is the CASA moto. In a sense Jabiru have been the most successful in LSA production. Piper, Cessna and others have failed ! CASA's limitations are hurting operators not solving the problems. Things are just getting warmed up as I think something is going to hit the fan soon !

Looks like one on cover of Sport Pilot April 2013.

If your got a spare $38 US you can read the ATSM for LSA engines, but engines that meet FAA FAR 33. And I'm sure there are other certified codes that meet standards. http://www.astm.org/Standards/F2339.htm Kley - what's that got to do with anything !

Andy, in 2007 I went to the Foxcon factory and met Helmut, we discussed the fact it didn't have dual plugs and he said the dual redundant ignition on the Terrier meet the standards for LSA, I don't know if anywhere it say two spark plugs per cylinder but it did have dual a ignition system. The belt drive is up to the manufacturer to state it meets the standards, Helmut said he had done the LSA course. I flew with Helmut and enjoyed the plane, I have a friend who has one and since it became 19 rego he has made some refinements and is a nice plane. Regardless if Helmut was right or wrong I think that CASA and RAA should have helped and work with Australian manufacturers, The CEO of RAA at the time was not good for our organisation and we are suffering for this still. The current CASA tactics are not helping, they seem to be absorbed in their power to destroy, if their tactics fix jabiru problems I would be surprised, (and happy ! ) A few years ago an experienced L2 was doing repairs on a crashed European LSA and his comment were that it was a Bunnings plane as everything for it could come from bunnings including bolts. I'm arguing the point of CASA's ways because it seems to destroy our manufacturers ! http://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/newspics/0508-ATSM-LSA-ENGINE-STANDARDS.pdf

Given that you are correct ! Do you remember who was running RAA ? Same thing isn't it ?

I understand what you are thinking but you need to understand a few serious point. CASA set this up and made the requirements and approved or CASA delegates approved, the Jabiru 2200 engine was CERTIFIED by CASA and if they saw a problem what have they being doing for 20 years. CASA in regard to LSA should and MUST work with industry, their current antics are in breach in my opinion ! I have a document Light Sport Aircraft, airworthiness requirements, SAAA authorised person familiarisation training, Southport Qld. 23rd Sept 2006. It has a picture of a Foxcon Terrier on it. It is an Australian Government Civil Aviation Safety Authority document. If you saw this document you would laugh at what CASA has done. The document I have is the real deal. It say CASA responsible for- Approving LSA standards. -Participate with industry in periodically reviewing LSA standards. -overseeing authorised persons who issue certificates of airworthiness. - registration of aircraft if CASA registered. -impose conditions or directions, if necessary, in the interest of safety. ASTM standards, where is the committee of manufacturers, aviation sport bodies and regulators ? They were meant to be represented internationally ! It says! CASA may impose additional operating limitations in the interest of safety. - CASA must give this to each registered operator of the aircraft. HAVE NOT BEEN NOTIFIED BY CASA, The first LSA had an Adjustable prop in front of CASA who inspected it ! Then they decide it not ok ! The document makes no mention of ATSM on props as there is non on tyres or other accessories ! The Foxcon was deregistered LSA as per a letter to an owner from RAA A recent audit and associated follow up action revealed that the Foxcon Terrier aircraft fitted with an auto engine and belt reduction propeller drive, does not comply with LSA standards and therefore, the aircraft does not qualify for LSA (24----) registration. Regretfully, from today ------ 2012 the special certificate of airworthiness originally issued for the aircraft is invalid therefore. Etc. The Terrier was a 2006 model, so 6 years later they change their mind ! Suddenly discovered an auto engine in it ! CASA created this mess and I'm not falling for their ridiculous games ! They will undo the damage they have done at their expense, if you think I'm wrong see what plane is available to buy or hire when our dollar is 50c US. Before you tag this funny be sure to understand what is going on, our right to fly with minimum regulation is threatened. I own a J230 , I have flown foxcon Terriers and I have many hours in Morgan Siera's. I am not for one minute saying these aircraft have no faults, but tell me what is perfect ! CASA did not help or liaise, it waved its big stick and crushed them !

I have a very good understanding as a owner and FTF. I get insulted by comedians who tag posts as funny. The facts are real, CASA has already put Morgan Sierras, Foxcon Terriers and Pacific Ibis out of factory built 24 catorgory, I take this very serious and only write here hoping others will take it serious but seems a lost cause.

Well I have a Jabiru and other things that are affected by CASA's actions. Jabiru latest email below. Hello Jabiru Fleet, Firstly, Happy New Year!! Jabiru has started 2015, its 27th year with a positive and constructive approach. We are focusing our efforts on improvements, education and training programs and communicating with our fleet. The focus at this point in time is, of course the outcomes of CASA’s recent actions.

Write to the minister and to head of CASA and tell them they are incompetent.

http://flightdesign.com/files/Media/The Aviation Consumer - LSA Accidents.pdf This is the article that will cause some headaches for CASA.

Your point is well taken but regulating things like this usually cause problems, when people are dishonest no regulations will change this, I would simply say do not buy a plane without a log book or history records, and when I buy a plane I find out about the owner and how he flew the plane, apart from accidents, over stressing a plane could be something that can sneak up and hurt you, if someone constantly heavy lands, overloads or overstresses a plane it becomes a time bomb. If you buy a plane inspect the log books, but investigate the owners flying habits. A plane that has been on line is an unknown and would need thorough inspection and research of the pilots habits.

Regard your comment Geoff 13 1. Refuse to look at the issues ? 2. Continually attack the man, which one ? 3. Both sides, what sides ? 4. No wonder CASA had to do something, AFTER 20 YEARS !!!! And not even fix the problem just get CASA out of any blame for not acting !!!! What ATTITUDE ? Do you really understand the issues ? Other engines have had unreliability issues, lycoming and Rotax included. The Jabiru engine has issues, but exactly on what model ? They have been in production over 20 years. Experimental engines included! This is a breach of the freedoms in this category, as you can put in any engine regardless of its reliability. This is a major flaw in CASA's attack and the reason which will cause major problems ! For the engines that have failed, has CASA identified the year of manufacture or equipment fitted fine fin heads , solid lifter, fly cut pistons, roller followers etc. they just picked on all ! I have been led to believe that the engine manufactured since 2012 have had problems reduced. Why did CASA not act sooner ? This one has been around a long time http://www.jabirucrash.com Jabiru are difficult in their behaviour especially with Camit who are trying to do some thing. I'm told Jabiru do stuff in some room no one has seen until recently when the drama started ! Also ATSB is currently running an investigation into LSA engine reliability, CASA facts came from RAA, RAA dispute how they have used statistics, read RAA December newsletter.

When CASA finish their festive season they are going to have to run for cover because there is going to be some unhappy people to greet them. The monkeys are smarter than CASA. It is widely known that CASA are trying to destroy aviation in this country. GET RID OF CASA IN RECREATIONAL AVIATION !!!!!

Can you please give an example ? RAA operate to a few exemptions, they are pretty much what I mentioned other than the medical, If you want to go over 600kg, fly at night, aerobatics and fly control airspace then you will need a CASA licence. Raa obey all air laws, there is one I know of that is different and that is aircraft separation distance. If you read the visual flight guide, you will find it easy to understand, if you knew the contents of the booklet you would pass the PPL exam no worries.

I get a little disturbed by your remarks as it infers RAA do not understand anything, your RAA pilot certificate allows you to fly a plane up to 600kg MTOW and 2 POB, day VFR and no aerobatics, and remain in class G airspace, very simple now everything else can be found here, this makes it easy, enjoy. http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/pilots/download/vfr/vfrg-whole.pdf.

As useless as an ashtray on a motor bike.

The European Sportstar equivilant is the Eurostar and is only 450 MTOW, the Australian and US has different empty weight and MTOW, the early Sportstar with fuse tank is 550 MTOW, the wing tank model was 575 MTOW when released but was increased to 600 MTOW.

CASA know more about nothing than most people !