Camel

I was referring to one at Y CAB obviously that is how the STC comes about from the way you have done it, an STC would be the cheaper way to go.

There has been other stuff before on this, the 160c is not an LSA but certified by CASA as already said so what is required is an STC which already exists as was done for this one, this one was from Warnervale I believe and converted at Cessnock by a well known L2. An LSA aircraft would need approval from manufacturer for any modifications.

Keep up the good work Maj, don't chase the cat, who knows what happens if you catch the pussy. Problem is I like the 230 fiberglass airframe, light, strong, 120knt, baggage space, lots of fuel and power. The engine has bad design and cooling issues, Jabiru is not addressing problems and Camit is, which I'm thankful for. If CASA or RAA forced Jabiru to fix or accept mods for reliable operation I would be flying an impressive aircraft. Jab bashers have to realize there is no other that compares to a 230 and if there was I would buy it, there definitely is room for serious improvements. Jab bashers can go for it as it helps get action, but I want to be part of a solution as there will be better aircraft for us all.

Maj, Jabiru need a kick up the arse to get things done ,Camit are doing something but you can't use it in factory built aircraft ! And reality is they are the original manufacturer in a sense. The tech manager duties statement section 2.1 part 2a seems to cover it or at least should recognise it and make recommendations. Other than highlight through forums like this what can you do ? As a board member and a person with an aviation mechanical background and aware of jabiru engine problems, what would, could or prepared to do or have you done ? In fairness to you other than submit a defect report there probably isn't much, obviously it is Jabirus problem which in turn becomes jabiru owner problems like Deadstick and what I would like to see is using upgraded parts, oils and modification as done by some, with approval from RAA and Casa . Waiting for Jabiru could be a long time if ever as the Chinese engine is coming and they can put their head back in the sand. If Camit are sticking with it I sure it is potentially a good engine, If I was Jabiru I would pat Camit on the back and say thanks and approve the modifications...... SO SIMPLE.

Dead stick, I believe you would do better holding CASA and RAA to account, Camit who build Jabiru engines recognise there are major weaknesses ( http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/major-weaknesses-addressed.110861/ ). If in the interest of safety if this is not recognized by the authorities then they are responsible. I would like the authorities to force Jabiru to accept Camit modifications to prevent engine failures and the possibility of lose of life of an aviator that RAA and CASA are supposed to watch out for. Once the Camit engine is certified and proves reliable you can bet that I will be pushing to have this recognised by the authorities and be using it in my J230. If reported as a defect and I have heard there has been then someone has failed their duty of care, I would like to see Jabiru do something positive instead of BS, as long as RAA receives sponsorship for NatFly they are unlikely to upset Jabiru. http://www.raa.asn.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Section-4.3-Defect-reporting-and-airworthiness-notices2.pdf. http://www.raa.asn.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Section-2.1-Technical-Managers-Duty-Statement.pdf. I have dealt with Jabiru and can define them as lacking any customer service.

Several years ago at Evans Head fly in I turned base with lots of traffic, once I turned final a broadcast from a large warbird about to line up caused me to consider a go around due to possible wake turbulence a radio call to him and he elected to allow me to land, it held him up very briefly as I landed short and cleared very quickly and he and I acknowledged brief appreciation of each other actions. Situational awareness is what it is all about and brief clear radio communication. Long radio calls are a danger to everyone as you may prevent an urgent transmission also some are afraid to use radio which is just as dangerous. There was time for the warbird to depart and me arrive and the wake turbulence he leaves behind is not his problem but mine.

Russ, what hours did your engine have on it ?

Russ, many people use different oil than jabiru recommend with great success, also Shell have done tests using other oils in Jabiru experimental engines which were positive, I can not tell you any more, you need to ask around but no one but Jabiru can recommend a product to use. Rings start gumming up between 150 and 200 hours with aero oils, after that theres no point using any other product. Remember you have to use what the manufacturer recommends in a factory built plane.

In the first video you see the police car drive up to the plane so the sand is firm enough so there no reason to be so close to the water.

Wow, lot of beach behind him, there is absolutely no blame to be put on aircraft here, the cause of this is fairly obvious and his comment about being experienced, he is a dill and an embarrassment.

I suggest go to Airservices website and go to the ERSA listings then photograph the pages you want with IPhone, you do this by pushing the home button and the on button at the same time.

Local council rule on my rural land is you can build two sheds without approval as long as they are more than 20 meters from the boundary and less than 140 sq meters. As far as short field I Have a 420 strip and 720 strip, I have not landed there yet as still finishing off, can land at grass at airport with 60 litres, one up and slight headwind at sea level in a J230 able to take off and land in approx 140 meters, as Maj said Jabiru are not short fielders as you have to nail the speed and approach.

Kgwilson "The run the Jabiru engine hard " was direct from Jabiru and they say operate at 2850 rpm and do not baby it. This is not BS but fact. You say complete ignorance, is very harsh having owned two J 230's am a motor mechanic, L2 and not deaf and was told by Rod Stif and Don at Jabiru. I have been very interested in Jabiru engines for a long time and have a keen interest in them. I am supportive of Camit upgrading the engine the concept of the engine is good but Jabiru have refused to listen to good advice and practices. If Jabiru had taken notice of recommendation from such things as below their product may be without knockers. I believe Camit with do well as long as Jabiru don't make the decisions. http://nvsr.com.au/articles/article10.html Jabiru Ultralight Aircraft - Oops! Jabiru produce a range of Ultralight and Light Sports aircraft right here in Australia. They're popular with enthusiasts and flying schools alike because they are easy to handle and fairly robust - with one exception. The dummies have installed the pistons backwards! The offset pistons used were designed for clockwise rotation whereas the Jabiru rotates anticlockwise. A quick lesson in 4 stroke engine operation 1. Induction Stroke With the exhaust valve closed and the inlet valve open the piston is pulled down drawing air & fuel into the combustion chamber. 2. Compression Stroke Both valves are closed and the piston is pushed up to compress the air and fuel to a fraction of its original size. 3. Ignition Stroke The excitement starts on the third stroke when the sparkplug fires causing the fuel and air mixture to explode! The rapidly expanding gases push the piston back down again. 4. Exhaust Stroke The fourth and final stroke completes the cycle by moving upwards pushing the exhaust gas out via the now open exhaust valve. My late father, an Aeronautical Engineer with the Royal Australian Navy for 35 years, simplified this process by referring to it as "Suck Squeeze Bang Blow". That term pretty well sums up the 4 Stroke engine! The amount of force exerted on pistons as they travel up and down is enormous, and like any "up and down" motion there has to be a “Top and Bottom”! By that I mean the piston must stop at the top before it can travel to the bottom and visa versa. Pistons with a 90 mm stroke at 3000 RPM travel at 9 meters (29 feet) per second and have to come to a dead-stop in an instant at the top and bottom of the stroke. This stopping and starting causes a hammering affect and creates stress on gudgeon pins, con-rods, big-ends, and more. The hammering is particularly horrific during the Ignition Stroke when the explosive force of the burning fuel literally "blows" the piston down. Easing the strain Traditionally pistons were connected to con-rods right in the middle but to ease the strain when the piston stops and comes back down they are offset in the direction of engine rotation, the connection between con-rod and piston is off centre. The crown of each piston is marked with an arrow indicating which direction the piston should be installed. By offsetting in this way you are giving the piston a bit of a headstart on its journey. Engines with offset pistons run better! They're more durable, reliable and quieter but ONLY if you've put them in the right way. Jabiru have it wrong For some reason, as yet unexplained logically, Jabiru have chosen to put their pistons in reverse. They were made for General Motors motor vehicles, all of which run clockwise, which is correct based on the offset, but Jabiru engines rotate anticlockwise meaning they are all installed wrong. Any mechanical engineer will tell you what happens when you don't install your offset pistons correctly - you get problems, you shorten the life of your engine, it makes more noise, and they just become crappy in general. One of the symptoms, and it is common to all Jabiru engines, is that when you shut-down there is a distinctive clunk-clunk before it stops completely. This clunk-clunk is caused by the engine trying to run itself in reverse as a result of the offset pistons. By installing pistons in accordance with the Jabiru manual the offset is working against the flow and actually creating durability issues and potentially safety problems. Interestingly, a number of people have chosen to install their pistons in the opposite direction and claim their engines perform better and are significantly quieter. Who knows about this The Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) were advised by various Jabiru owners and maintenance staff, but both organisations have chosen to do nothing. The engines were certified to fly and deemed appropriate for the aircraft type. I've been informed that engines are tested at idle and cruise RPM only! They did not test them through the full rev range, which was a mistake that should be rectified. Jabiru have been made aware of this issue on multiple occasions and have cleverly devised a cover story “The pistons are installed in reverse due to the forces applied by the Prop”. What a load of cods-wallop. Every engineer I've spoken to about this issue has given me multiple reasons why these pistons should be turned around. My late father was very interested in discovering why Jabiru believe that an opposite offset could be beneficial. With 35 years of experience behind him working with various aircraft engines he could find no reason why Jabiru would pursue the opposite of what, from an engineering point of view, seems to be ridiculous. Safety The definition of a good pilot is “One whom has the same number of take-offs as they have landings” and most people when they go flying want to make certain they land in one piece. The secret to keeping yourself alive when flying light aircraft is more than just your own skills! Maintenance of your aircraft is vital to safe flying and going up in an aircraft that has such a design floor, in my mind, is madness. How many accidents have occurred as a result of the offset issue. Just last week a good friend of mine was flying a Jabiru when a thru-bolt broke and he had to land with a faulty engine. It could have been much worse, the engine could have failed completely. These bolts are known to fail in Jabiru aircraft and in my mind this is a direct result of excessive stress placed on them by the ridiculous offset issue. Certification Jabiru are popular with flying schools because they offer easy shared access to controls via a v-shaped stick between the left and right seat. When an aircraft is used for training purposes it is considered "Certified" which means that under no circumstances can the aircraft be modified from manufacturer specifications. So even if they wanted to turn their pistons around to improve reliability and reduce maintenance costs they cannot by law. Private owners that rent their aircraft to flying schools are in the same boat. Owners that do not rent their aircraft are free to do whatever they like and some have already turned their pistons in the opposite direction with amazing results. Despite these results Jabiru continue to maintain that their manual is correct. What should happen now CASA should ground every Jabiru airplane! It's that simple. The ATSB needs to review any previous accident reports involving Jabiru, particularly when engine failure was considered a possible cause. Jabiru should look carefully at their engines and if necessary swallow their pride and turn the pistons in right direction. They would probably find that maintenance costs would fall, performance would rise, and their customers would be very happy. On a more personal note I have spoken with a number of Jabiru owners whom tell me it's rare for an engine to go more than 250 hours before it requires serious and expensive repairs. I've seen evidence of excessive wear on cylinder walls and pistons. I've seen first hand the damage done to big-end shells as a result of excessive belting when the piston is trying to go in the opposite direction to engine rotation. Jabiru are unlikely to accept responsibility because they would then be liable for fixing the problem – that could be expensive! Published 5 June 2013 Read a review of the Jabiru 160 on Aviator: Click Here.

Are you aware that Cessna 162 is made in China, Cirrus is now made in China. I'm sure there will be more, I am certain that Camit are taking the opportunity and I'm am glad they have . You are right about one thing, they will have to prove reliability or I think this could be a disaster for them.

Jabiru recomend to run their engines hard, that is cruise at 2850rpm, they say do not baby the engine. I tend to run my engine at lower revs and tend to baby it. Can't really see why the engine should be run hard and the gumming rings thing is not a good reason or using Avgas to burn lead off plugs. As using a different oil and Mogas cancel these problems. Using fuel to cool the engine does not seem to be the case either. I know someone who has run several engines to TBO, doesn't run them hard and uses non aviation oil. Any thoughts ?

You have a few planes under your avatar, if you wash a metal plane be sure to use acid neutral detergent as not to cause corrosion, mcguires have a car wash that is acid neutral (not the wash and wax one). To clean under the belly I just use Avgas or petrol on rag then wash, but others may have better ideas.

I say again the statistics don't mean a lot without a lot of facts about individual cases, there are problems with many engines, Lycoming 0-320 H2AD was a lemon with serious faults and many were produced and still in service, with the T mod and the correct oil or additive and correct maintenance with roller rocker modification later introduced, Other Lycomings broke crankshafts. I've seen plenty of poor designs usually caused by being cheap. Jabiru are looking at China, will this improve things ? I would like to see Camit succeed and like what their doing. Grounding is not the answer but recognition of a problem, looking for remedy and allowing modifications that improve reliability to be done without effecting certification. Certification is the load of crap here and stops sensible modification to ensure safe operation. I have a Rotax and 3300, if you don't have a Jab engine then why are you writing or interested here, this is not a Holden Ford thing, it is about improving a good thing. If you think flying is dangerous then don't fly, if you like Rotax then buy one, if you like Jabiru then buy it, this is not about what's better it's about improving products and this is bound up by regulations and BS let alone people who are in denial and people that want all grounded, do not be blind and foolish this is a case if you want aviation to be enjoyed by average humans then we need to work together and stop regulators dictating and work with them, encourage them to improve things not shut down things as implied by someone. Remember some cars need repairs more often than others eg brakes and clutches, these are operator problems, a Jabiru has to climb at a speed sufficient to allow cooling, a serious problem with Jabiru and the start of problems, my belief one of the most important problems, the other is lubrication and there are a lot of facts around this and the rest can be put down to maintenance or design and of course anything else that counts as operator error.

Maj, as you have the same intention as I have which is to improve the reliability of Jabiru engines then this is the golden opportunity, if Raa is aware and have an obligation, Camit obviously want to stay in business, they obviously believe the engine problems can be solved and it is essentially a good engine, they have been building the engine for a long time and would know better than anyone the faults, weaknesses and necessary improvements.

The solid facts are that the original engine manufacturer ( not designer ) has said that there are major weaknesses and they are going to fix them, so what I would like is Jabiru to recognise this and allow the changes to be made at rebuild to factory built aircraft.

I accept these problems as reality, what I would like is Jabiru to accept this and with Camit now doing something about it on their own, I hope that Jabiru will approve these design modification to be used in factory built aircraft and see an end to unreliable engines. I want to see the Jabiru engines improved and reliable. I'm not arguing the facts merely trying to put pressure on Jabiru to improve their product which many individual people have done modifications and now Camit have done the best thing, but Jabiru should be supporting this and seem to still have their head in the sand. I hope I have enlighten you, it is in the RAA ops manual to foster and encourage the construction and safe operation of recreational aircraft, Section 1.01 organisation and administration. Also section 2.01 technical manager duty statement. Item 2 clearly states, technical matters include matters relating to aeronautical engineering, aircraft manufacture, aircraft maintenance, related legislation and quality control. Maybe RAA can bring change. Also I stated in the beginning that Casa should encourage modification to increase reliability in the interest of safety.

These are not my words only cut and paste from the link provided, I do not doubt what you say as that was to point out that fact and figures can't pinpoint the reasons and you clearly indicate the wrong oil is more of the problem than design. I am interested in design improvements we can't do much about bad practices without serious education. This is also cut and paste below and also clearly states the facts and figure dilemma. Cut and paste below. http://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/airplane/LSA-Engine-Safety.html A review of NTSB accident records indicated 159 accidents between 1982 and 2007 involving aircraft powered by Rotax. And as you'd expect, a fair number of those involved much of the same-old-same-old causes you'd find examining general aviation accidents—fuel starvation, VFR into IFR conditions, loss of control, carb icing, runway loss of control. SUBSCRIBE TO AVIATION SAFETY TODAY AND RECEIVE IMMEDIATE UNLIMITED WEB ACCESS NOW! But reports also cited engine problems, some with no discernable explanation. Gearbox issues have occurred and reoccurred with the Rotax models, and recently the company issued a mandatory service bulletin regarding checking the magnetic plug for metal chips and for proper lubricant. Accidents involving the other engines were far fewer—only three, for example, involving Jabiru-power; none cited the engine as a causal factor. The higher number involving Rotax-powered aircraft is understandable since Rotax has thousands more engines in service than the other manufacturers combined. The great problem in identifying engine-specific problems is that in the majority of installations, the engines power experimental/amateur-built category aircraft, where differences in mounting, accessory placement, cooling and vibration variations can instill issues that vary from one installation to another. And accidents involving Continental O-200-powered craft were as numerous as you'd expect for the length and depth of its presence in general aviation aircraft. Here again, many occurred through no fault of the engine. Still, numerous reports involved engine stoppages, heat-related power loss and other engine problems. Fuel starvation, poor maintenance, failure to observe operating limitations and some power losses lacking explanation populate the reports for both the conventional and unconventional engines. To paraphrase the words of one long-time Rotax service-center operator, the main problems involving the engines stem from many of the same types of problems—poor judgment, misuse, mismanagement and poor maintenance—befalling all aircraft.

Facts and figures will prove there is a problem, most already know that there is a problem., but it relates to other things too including the way it is used and maintained. I have a Rotax 912 and a Jabiru 3300, I have had no problems. I have had a rotax 582, a Lycoming o-320. They all have some problems so I'm not interested in past problems as much as I'm interested in fixes and improvements. Jabiru is not the only engine that has any faults or room for improvement. I am a Motor Mechanic by trade so I believe I am well qualified to share my opinion . Try this read, http://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/airplane/LSA-Engine-Safety.html Or this read copy and paste from http://www.trikepilot.com/forum/topic/736 My Rotax 912 sprag clutch just demolished itself. Engine has only 487 hours on it. looking it up on many message boards, one can see that this happens often. Questions: Has this happened to anyone else here? Why would an $17000 engine have such a faulty component? Why does Rotax not repair this obvious design error at their expense? At 487 hours with such a major problem, this aviation engine can hardly be considered "reliable". In researching it, I heard several cases of it having to be replaced earlier than this. This is a problem Rotax! Get it together. Copy and paste reply.... Todd you know the answers. Rotax doesn't do that because sprag clutches they would have to replace would number in the thousands. Same with Rotax 912 fuel pump the last 4 years. They quietly changed them now to a new design because the failure and malfunction rate on the 912 fuel pumps made in the last 3 years is something like 25% but you won't see them telling to send yours in for free replacement. In aviation the numbers are so small, the volume so low that doing these things would put a manufacturer out of business. You can also see this with Lycoming and Cessna as well. You can buy some brand spanking new Cessna 172 right off the Cessna Sales Centers and as soon as you step it out of their hanger, you have a $7000 costing crankshaft replacement AD on it. Yes a brand spanking new airplane costomg $260000.00 and right out the door immediately you have to change the crankshaft of the Lycoming engine because the Brazilians didn't do the right job on them as Americans were doing. How's that and its perfectly legal and FAA allows it.

The problem is Jabiru has faults and Jabiru are very slow at addressing them, certification may be part of the problem. Rotec have produced liquid cooled heads, TBI, 45amp alternator and electronic ignition many private owners have improved reliabity by various modifications. Now Camit for whatever reason have shown a huge initiative to improve the engine and as original manufacturer are well qualified for the job. This is a huge leap forward and I would like to see the engine reliable and be able to be used and approved by Jabiru for factory built aircraft. There are not a lot of choices for aircraft engines and the 3300 is in a class of its own being direct drive, 120hp, light and compact. Those people that don't want a light, reliable 120hp motor then your comments won't help those who want it. True Australian pioneers like Jabiru, Rotec and Camit in the world aviation market are doing a great job, they do not deserved to be knocked by people who have not owned, used or seen their product or understand the problems. I do want improvements and hope comments here may encourage it as there is a wealth of experience here, the fact that Jabiru are looking at China to produce engines now means that company's like Camit need our loyalty as an Australian manufacturer. Think about what you want, be part of the solution not part of the problem.

What do you want me to do, drive to Bundy, break in, change the settings and run before the cops come, I don't have any connection with Jabiru or Camit, nor have I ever seen a CNC machine except in pictures, maybe you might have contacts at Casa and could force Jabiru to make the changes to their engines to be more reliable that Camit are doing. Old lycoming took a long time to go with roller rockers for some of their engines e.g o-320 H2AD modification. As much as I realize Jabiru have problems there are others with problems too and you take a chance with any engine and the new UL and D motors may or may not be any better. I do believe the 3300 Jab motor with mods could be a good engine, I have one without mods that I fly and believe that if it is not overheated that I may have a trouble free run with it, fingers crossed. It's 24 rego so if I modify it goes experimental, not an option at the moment but could be safer !