Herm

If you make a mod. like that to a certificated engine in a certificated aircraft, without going through a formal approval process, it's a criminal offence in GA (CASR 21.183 and S20AA.3 of the Civil Aviation Act) carrying a 2 - year gaol sentence. So not exactly a laughing matter. I don't know what the situation is for an RAA registered aircraft, but I suspect S 20AA would still apply. The engine has to have its crankshaft torsional oscillatory stress investigated during the type certification process; so if you change something that would make the original test invalid, the approval process requires a re-run of the test. Altering the ignition advance will affect the crankshaft torsional oscillatory stress.

I do thank all those that offered advice in my problem. I was wanting some simple advice from those that had had these problems. This is why I don't post very often... they always end up in some sort of mess.

 

I also did post in my original post the following: Looking for information from those with knowledge in this area rather than opinions.! Seems I may have got more than I asked for LOL.

 

Just to add to this matter of adding a cold start kit. Did you know Dafydd that this kit is sold by the Jabiru Factory.. The people that make the aircraft... I will contact them about this option..

 

Thanks again

 

Over And Out

 

 

HermDid you have problems with the Odyssey (spelling?)

Factory uses Odyssey. I got 6 years /600hrs problem free out of my first one. Changed it because of age, was still working fine but didn't want to risk a possible low battery out in the bush.

 

Another 11 Jabs in my immediate area are also still using the Odyssey - initial purchase a bit on the pricy side (around ($250 although advertised cheaper in Adelaide) but after 6 plus years works out cheaper then what it costs me to keep a reliable lead acid in my car.

 

I am a believer in 'if it's not broken don't try to fix it'

 

The SBs on the starter earth lead and larger choke jet fixed "cold" weather starting for me.

 

P.S. There is also an approved cold start kit available replacing one mag with an electronic module (from the factory) if for some reason the above mentioned SBs don't address your issues.

Thanks Frank. I will look that batt up today. I will also look at the cold start kit. Mick who replied to my post also has had lots of experience in this area and has offered to assist. I will go and have a chat with him also to get his ideas. I have always been aware of this problem with the 2.2 Jab and also my Brother In Laws Morgan. He has had some smaller issues on very cold mornings.... Just saw that site that I have posted a link to on my original post, about these so called super dooper special LiPo style batts that are supposed to be able to charge from normal charging systems.. Have a look at the link... Would be good if they did work with the Jab charging system as they are High Current and very light weight... Its seems that this may not be the case for using them in the Jab, So the other options might be the way I need to go... The tried and tested.

 

Thanks Guys

 

 

Thanks Mick

 

 

Having the usual starting troubles with my Jab. Purchased an ave battery for it and it is clear it is not good enough. I have been looking at these lipo style bats that can be charged using the existing charge system. Can even be used in cars. http://www.superstart.com.au/tabid/108/bid/15/Products/SSBPowerSportLithium.aspx

 

These batts seem to be more stable than normal lipo's... I am guessing they are along the lines of LiFe which I have used in other applications with great results and high AMPS .

 

Not sure if others have tried these or what others have used to get better starting results in their Jabs. My current batt is an AusLec... And I find if the aircraft does not start in the first few cranks I will need to jump start it. Once it has been started it fine. Guess not much more could be expected from a low price batt.

 

Looking for information from those with knowledge in this area rather than opinions. I do understand about Lipo's, but not seen them used in this application.

 

 

Spoke with one of the local boys today as I fly in that area. Wanted to find out who may have been involved, and was concerned it may have been one of our local club members. This information I have not been able to find out. Very Very sad to think that two people today lost their lives doing what we all love to do, and have left family members in a very sad way..

 

I can help with information that was passed on to me that indicates that one wing was found a large distance away from the impact site. The weather this morning was very still and calm, but with very low cloud and fog. Being that this location is in the Barossa Valley and have flow around it many many times, I am aware that the fog collects in valley in small pockets and often re-builds as moisture falls from the hills. The airfield as Andy mentioned is Very Very close to the hills and often take-off is directly towards them. Often a tight turn is required as soon as a safe hight is had. Often a challenge with a leeward wind.. This airfield is not close to Truro Airfield at all, and is a private strip call Rowland Flat... Nothing was mentioned to me as to what airfield was used so this information may have no bearing on the flight at all. I just wanted to mention it as it has been ref to in this post and wanted to clear that up.

 

I am just putting my opinion on the fact that these factors (weather) may have played a role in this event... We will in time find out what did happen and hope that some good may come out of such a tragic even..

 

My thoughts go out to all those effected..

 

Mardy

 

 

Wormhole... Chat to Morgan Freeman, He knows all about them

 

 

Thanks for you point of view Turbs.. Be assured if nothing else, I am we'll aware of what I said or at least what I was trying to impart. Not that I am not seeing your point of view, but I still have trouble piling all the problems into one box and then some suggesting that all jab motors are rubber band dead weights. That's where the numbers game come into play really. More jab issues the more it becomes all jabs etc etc.. Could spin this for hours. It seems that some points of my comments are latched onto and others that are descriptive to the comment are ignored? Anyway as a rocket scientist that's the way I see it.

 

 

My sentiments exactly Motzartmerv. I'd never want to see Jabs grounded however I'd love to see the engine reliability improved. I fail to see how anyone could justify disagreeing with this......?

Sorry David.. I did not dissagree with improving saftey on the Jab motors either as this post seems to ref my earlyer comments.. I just get frustrated with the way people seem to go about it.. and these sorts of comments just fire people up: problems surrounding the rubber band powered dead weight AKA Jab engine - and was told by a senior RAAus exec - 'nothing because if we ground them...

 

thanks also Merv for your take on this.. I somtimes think that I must write in another language and the the convertor is messing up my message. I simply agree that some of the Jabiru engines have had issues with reliability as stated in all of my posts. My issue is with the approach that some members seem to take on the issue that others often find offensive. Having concerns is a good thing and being worried about how people go about dealing with these concerns is a concern.

 

Without going back on what I have already posted I find that some of my opinions have been taken or precieved very differntly than my intention. I fully understand that GA has a greater reliability and that argument could have been used even before the introduction of the Jab. I still feel in my opinion that the Jabiru has made a huge impact on our flying as has very well been the tall poppy if you want to put in that perspective. Yes the 912 has also had a massive impact in raising the bar, but the history of Jab and the totality of my comment excludes that. And yes I own one of those Jabs and don't at this stage find myself in that pack. I still have as an owner voiced my concerns at these motors in the past and fly my aircraft like I was flying a 2 stroke... All my posts are really about comments like the one above and the chest bashing approach to solving the problem for all us Jabiru owners. Then others band together an;d do the same (Pack Mentality). Not sure about the numbers thing in respect to RaAus aircraft only, but thier you go..

 

 

To some level Maj I agree with your statement. However it's also a numbers game... Lot and Lots of Jabs flying so it's fair to assume that they will be involved in more accidents.. That being said I am not in anyway suggesting that there are no problems as in all my last posts. Impact on others is somewhat difficult to access really. It would be fair to assume that any other brand of aircraft flow in the same numbers may or may not have the same rate of problems. However they would have more problems overall than the lesser numbers of other aircraft flying... If me were to measure impact, it may be fair to say that the introduction of the Jabiru was one of the greatest advances that impacted the class of aviation we operate in. Raised the bar in so many ways that we may not be flying the types of machines that we currently can. As one other member suggested, Jabiru's can have a prang and this forum goes into a pack mentality. We seem to suffer with the tall poppy syndrome when it comes to our local product, and I think overall Australia has made an great impact on light aviation Worldwide. And yes I also would like to see an improvement in reliability and safety in all areas of concern relating to all aircraft and engine types.. The problem is we may just end up with the regulation we asked for, and that may be more than we thought about.

 

 

You could all band together (those that want to save our lives) and have all those Jabirus grounded. Won't matter about the Jab owners that are happy with thier choice objecting. After all we will all understand that you are just trying to do what's best for us ( thank you!).. We could donate our aircraft to all the Mac Donald's stores for the kids to play in. Then you could help find a locally built cost effective trainer to help teach all those new young people wanting to learn.. Something like a ... Ah....hmmmm can't think of one. Then we could rename the site wreck reational flyers and all moan about how we destroyed all the greatness we currently have.. I am sure thier are jab owners that may not be happy, and it is for them to make tier voices heard with whomever they need. Not so sure about others banding together to get things done when they may not even own one.. I am not suggesting that thier may not be issues with some jab engines but bashing and suggestions of grounding I find a bit full on.

 

 

On an aside, I heard from a pilot friend today who rang RAAus to see what action they were going to take about solving the problems surrounding the rubber band powered dead weight AKA Jab engine - and was told by a senior RAAus exec - 'nothing because if we ground them then instructors will be out of work and no one will be able to learn to fly'What a crock. I am going to call them on Monday and get more info but if that is true then they are better watch out.....

Why do you and your friend seemed so concerned about what others choose to fly or use as powerplants? Not that I don't have my concerns with some Jab motors, but really! Your going to tell the RaAus? The way I see it is that I fly a recreational aircraft and I started flying in what seems to be what you are currently flying. When I started I understood that I flew in an unreliable 2stroke motor and flew in a manner with that in mind. We were very limited in what we could do. Just keep pushing your opinions in this manner and you might find in time that your open air cloth and tube 2 stroke ultralight might loose it current privileges. Lets face it ,, right or wrong the public will see a Drifter as a death trap and a Jabiru as a plans. I had that problem when I owned a Trike that had better certification than my Jab. I agree we all want safer flying, but this has always been to me as seat of the pants recreational flying. Want better standards and reliability the one will need to spend more money than that of something like a Drifter, go for a twin GA aircraft. I can see that in time that this kind of banter will do everything to destroy the freedoms than many older pilots gained for us, including the builders, developers and risk takers.

 

Anyway a bit off topic (sorry for that)

 

 

Well in my case my SK Jabiru was set to its original design weight at 344KG. This is far too light and with two ave passengers and a full tank of fuel puts me over weight. I first reg my aircraft last year and contacted Jabiru about the design limits of the aircraft. As long as your weight does not place the aircrafts stall limits above that allowed and the airframe is designed to take it, you can apply for a weight increase. I had to change the aircraft manual to reflect the changes and submit the weight and balance formulas to Jabiru and the RAUS. I Also had to have my cockpit placards changed to the new approved weight limit. This was also checked by a level 4 LAME and now my aircraft is registered to a higher weight limit that allows me to be legal and carry more items within the aircraft. In fact I would never be able to exceed the weight limit before exceeding CG limits. This change will always remain with the aircraft even if it is sold to a new owner. Bit of messing around, but better to be legal with all the ramp checks etc. You also need to be sure that you are safe loading up your aircraft also..

 

Mardy

 

 

GPS hasn't worked for me, I've been lost most of my life. Need a trip to India.

 

 

This subject has been covered well before on this forum. It seems the rules are not always as clear as one might expect. How many times have you spoken to one CASA rep about something only to bbe told different by another? Then interpretation steps in. I think thier was a change to the CAO on this matter in 2011 due to interpretation problems that seem to have achieved little. Here is a past post that is somewhat interesting and gives another's interpretation on the subject...

 

The requirements for entry into controlled airspace are clearly defined in CAO 95.55. A copy of which is enclosed in your RA-Aus technical manual that you should have received when you paid your membership.

 

- You don't need a "certified" engine. Only probably 5%? (if that -near impossible to easily find out)of RA-Aus aircraft have certified engines. You need an "approved" engine, meaning a 4 stroke and twin ignition model. Most new RA-Aus aircraft don't have certified engines these days.

 

- A Certified airframe is not a requirement. Once the aircraft has flown off it's initial 25 hours, it meets the requirements for entry into controlled airspace. 95.55 does not differentiate between homebuilt and certified aircraft. The same goes for home-built GA experimental aircraft, such as a Jabiru for example. Don't get 95.55 confused with your aircraft's registration as it applies to 24 rego's as well. The Skyfox Gazelle is also a certified factory built aircraft with a rego starting with 24-. This is because the Gazelle is / was in a higher weight category than the LSA55 Jabiru's as it was 520 kg's. The Skyfox taildragger has a 55- rego because it is some 70kg's lighter than the Gazelle sistership and is in the same weight category as the LSA55 Jabiru.

 

- Any registration or RA-Aus (less obvious exceptions such as 32- weight shift) qualifies as long as the other requirements are met, such as radio, transponder, PPL and approved engine. Remember 55 series are not the only "certified" aircraft, as 24 are too for example.

 

- Transponders are only required for operation in Class "C" airspace. GAAP airports do not require a transponder to be in use so you could fly your Jabiru from Point Cook into Moorabbin without a transponder. For the purposes of this discussion, GAAP is controlled airspace, however a transponder is not a requirement.

 

Don't upset the CT, Sportstar and Tecnam owners out there who fly into CTA in their 24 registered machines!

 

Oh and one almost last thing! If you fly GA and you do your review in a Jab it doesn't necessarily count for an AFR! A GA AFR (aeroplane flight review) must go for a minimum of one hour and include controlled airspace if the reviewee' has an unrestricted PPL(A). You can do your AFR in the aircraft (either rego) in which you have done the most flying in, in the previous 90 day period. (I'm not 100% sure on the 90 days, but that's close enough). If you have an unrestricted PPL(A), you'll need to transit and possibly land in class C to successfully complete your AFR in your RA-Aus registered aircraft.

 

Finally, for the record for anyone that asks, Jabiru / RA-Aus time DOES count towards an ATPL (Air Transport Pilot's Licence) however only to a maximum of 750 hours. The remaining hours must be flown in a recognised "registered" aircraft, such as a GA one or even a glider!

 

I hope this clarifies things. Clarification on this is important as this topic always seems to come up in forums of this type. Take this post back to Kris next time you see him and see what he says!

 

Clem.

 

ClemBrown

 

 

Yep I guess my wording was not the best .. This is more what I was attempting to suggest:

 

Various requirements are applied to the flight of recreational aeroplanes in controlled airspace. One such requirement relates to the engine which must have either a Type Certificate, a Type Approval Certificate or is of a type that has been approved by the CASA as being appropriate for use in controlled airspace. The latter is usually applied to non-Type Certificated engines that display a proven history of reliability; it is the most common Australian means of meeting the engine approval requirement for non-certified engines. CAO 101.55 section 6.1 is referred to in the CAO 95-series exemption orders.

 

Also some aircraft that are not factory built can have exceptions I believe under certain situations to still operate in controlled airspace. Lets face it we seem to all fly under exceptions to the normal rules within our class anyway..

 

CASA or an authorised person may authorise a particular aircraft to be operated over the built-up area of a city or town subject to the conditions and limitations.

 

and I guess we could all find a bucket load of variations to these statments as we often do on many of the subjects covered on this forum.

 

All interesting stuff

 

Just dipping my toe

 

 

I think this document may assist. http://www.flyingonline.biz/RAAusCTAendorsement.pdf

 

Aircraft does not need to be factory built, but must conform to certain requirements. One being a certified motor and a LAME fittest and calibrated Transponder. Anyway you should be able to find what you are ol

 

Looking for in this document or on the RAaus Website

 

 

I

 

Thanks PatrickGood to know what intercom it is - it works perfectly

My passengers headset stopped working and pretty sure it's the mic - he could hear me, but I couldn't hear him

 

I'll pull it apart and look for the loose wire

 

Cheers

 

Mark

f you want to be sure if its the mic or not try a simple test. Swap the headsets and see if you have the same problem. This way you will be able to make sure the problem follows the headset and is not a problem in the intercom. Mic inserts are very cheap and you can buy them at Jaycar electrical for a few dollars. When you remove the wind sock foam you may find number details on the mic that a pats supplier will understand.

 

 

So the one in my Bata Scout Shoe should be fine then?

 

 

I have a question. What happened to the monthly accident/incident reports that used to be in the RAA magazine a fair while ago ?

They must of missed it by Accident

 

 

Agreed. Ozrunways on mini works really well.

 

Up goes the punch bag!

 

 

Just to add some more detail on the wing situation. It was one of my friends that attended the site to lift the aircraft from its resting position. My friend owns a lifting and towing service for large vehicles and was called to this job. He phoned me whilst he was at the site, and I can clearly advise that their was no visible signs of wing failure at all. Wings were in pretty good shape as well as the tail section. I do understand that my friend is not a pilot, it does seem based on conversation at the site that the stall turn event is likely to be the most plausible evaluation of the cause.

 

Very Sad Outcome and I feel for all the family members and those who witnessed the even.

 

Mardy

 

 

Wow thier was an opening for the Jab Bashers... ANOTHER JABIRU DOWN

 

 

Hello Marty,i run an sk in the uk and would like to know what MTOW tour sk was signed off at. We seem to be stuck at 430kg here as there are reservations on wing holds on fuselage. Any info that may help getKung uk sk's up rated would be welcome.

 

regards

 

dean

 

ps: I love mine. Following a couple of hours familiarisation, I was away. Great flying and performance at a very reasonable price.

Hello Dean. My SK is signed off at 540kg. I am sure I will never load the aircraft to this weight, but can do so if needed. It sure allows for me to now carry two passengers, fuel and lunch without being overweight.

 

To get the balance I have needed to fit a 3kg lead balast in the tail that is removable. When I need to I can remove the weight when additional weight is needed rear of the COG. I also need to point out that I have the heavy undercarrage and bigfoot wheels fitted to my aircraft. When we did the weights and measures we had several datum points that allowed us to calculate weights at different positions so that a simple program could be written to make it easy when calculating the load. Its really like the diagram that is in your operating manual that allows for fuel burn etc. I have an Exel spredsheet that is on my ipad and iphone that allows me to calculate this anytime at the aircraft.

 

This was all done and the Operations Manual was re-written to allow for these changes. It is important so that if the aircraft changes hands the new owner understands the aircraft weights and limits. I then had to contact Jabiru Australia and supply them all the calculations and excel sheet for them to look over to make sure that the Airframe was able to handle the loads as well as keeping the aircraft within the legal stall requirements. Once that was done I was supplied with a letter from the factory that I could submit with my Aircraft registration. It did take a bit of back and forth with Jabiru to ensure that we had all the calculations correct. They were very helpfull with the process and were happy to give advice and assistance. I know of a few SK's that have been weight increase and I also lent on these people when I needed to do mine. I think also if you do a search on this forum you will also find more information on this. I found a letter written to RaAus a few years ago with an approval for the weight increase.

 

If you want to send me a private message with your E-mail I am happy to send you a copy of the spreadsheet. It shows my weights and datums and the green areas are the only parts that you can edit. That is where you add you passenger weights, luggage at tank etc etc.

 

Regards

 

Mardy

 

 

Delighted to do so MM -Section 5, para (g) of http://www.raa.asn.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Section-2.07-Flight-Crew-Certificate-Pilot-Certificate.pdf

Cheers

 

J

Thanks for the link John. Section 5 states what has already been confirmed in the phone calls to RaAus. That is you don't have to do a BFR on all groups at one BFR period, but rotate them at each BFR. so as mentioned in previouse postings the RaAus suggested to a couple of us when asking to do say your 3 axis at one BFR, and the next BFR you would do your weight shift etc.

 

when you think of it it's still pretty loose. If you held a nose wheel endorsement as well as a tail dragged etc you could do 6 or mor BFRS on nose wheel an never do one on tail dragged. That would suggest you may not have flown a tail trigger in 6 years and still be legal to fly one (I think anyway).

 

Good topic as I am sure many pilots would not have known this, so thanks for the post and link

 

 

Regardless of any "suggestion" by the office staff it is actually mandated in the Operations Manual !Cheers

 

John

So if the RaAus, the body we pay to regulate our sport is telling us one thing and other people that may have nothing to do with the RaAus are saying other things! What would you suggest we do John?

 

I am not sure if you have faced this situation yourself or not, but thier are a few pilots at my airfield that fall into this situation. We all do the same thing of doing a BFR for our different class each time it comes up. IE swapping them about.. In my case if I have not flow a trike for a while I would go for a quick buzz around with my local instructor anyway just to make sure I had not lost my already limited skills

 

I am always more likley to follow the instructions that are given by the RaAus as I feel this is what they are thier for and I have always found them helpfull in all my dealings to date.

 

Mardy