Steve Donald

One of our new club members just purchased a new jab second hand airframe but new 2.2 engineNow this engine is dam hard to start and as i run the same engine that is easy to start i will be doing some seroius invertergation to find the problem have some idears allready so will keep you informed

Plenty of spark plenty of spin good condition engine at this stage it is insufficent fuel on the choke side of cold starting when warm or hot no problems ????

 

the Bushman:DirtDOG::DirtDOG::DirtDOG::DirtDOG:L2

Hiya yo will probably find the idle is set to high, which will make the choke ineffective, or float level may have been disturbed, so just check that out first and you should be ok, i use the iridium plugs as well so good starts even in very cold conditions, they have one third of the resistance on your ignition circuit, and a omnidirectional spark pattern, you dont get a drop in rpm when mag checking thats how much better they are a complete burn occurs $20 bucks each but they last longer and less demanding on the ignition. hope this helps cheers Steve

 

 

hiya Slen how did you arrange the connection any chance of a diagram, that would have been a great trip mate great country up there and the people are fantastic, good on you, Steve

 

 

do we need to mandate radios

 

There has been many responces to this, however i believe we should move in this direction, sure lot's of what if's can occur like radio failure every thing can fail that is life, but you should st art out with the best of safety in mind as your benchmark.

 

i really dont think it is responsible or fair to enter buzy airfields or CTAFS without COMS. it is worrying when inbound or in circuit to suddenly observe an unannounced aircraft, in your vicinity and then you have to assume the intentions and then wonder if the other aircraft can see you, and what if the aircraft has diverted due to some problem a radio would solve all of this if needed including priority circuit position or a modified circuit most of the time, they are cheap and reliable, as a duty of care to all other flyer's including the many regional RPT that traverse our County, the radio is just a safety tool and in no way replaces a vigilant lookout or induces apathy all it does is to enable communication, i dont care about the quality of a radio call that i hear but i am gratefull for the information as i know that the safety of myself and passenger has just been improved, this can go on as there are many other valid reasons why a radio on board is very worthwhile, reporting fires or anouther aircraft that may be in trouble, wow i will stop as i cannot believe anyone would not want a radio, you can get a handheld for $350 hec you cant even fly more than 50 NM without a ELT they cost $600 or so and they are mandatory, i would pick a Radio over a ELT anyday. thats my 2 bob's worth Happy flying and stay safe

 

 

Low wing are normally considered safer in an accident, with the pilot sitting above the spar. There is more solid stuff in front of him to absorb the crash. Whatever you do avoid having the engine behind you.

Unfortunately, history has not reflected this as an outcome in air craft accidents, the high wing structure has proved to be a superior environment to be in, in most situations roll over occurs and escape from a high wing being much easier as well as the cabin structure being much stronger, we should reflect on the escape of the crew from the J230 AT Jamestown i doubt if survival would have been possible in any other construction type, a 100ft stall spin in, and the aircraft was back in the air after a short time, this says a lot and probably supports what is said everywhere if ya gona prang do it a Jab. a close look at accidents will show you better survivability in a high wing in general, this also takes into account precautionary landings.

 

a proven result in accidents has been ie mid wing sonerai breaks ya legs with the spar, as well as unability to exit the plane whilst inverted, which is why i sold mine and now stick to high wings. end of the day you should fly what suited you, i stick to historical evidence for best safety as well as personal experience for my choice of airplane, then luck of the day comes into play. your airplane should suite the conditions and country you fly ie ability for off field landing low stall short field none of which you can do safely with a high performance rocket , imagine trying to muster with a lightning wow ya would need some fast cow's :thumb_up:

 

 

Hi AllSince I have only ever flown high wing aircraft, was wondering what the pros and cons were of both? Do most pilots have a preference? Is it hard to transition from high wing to low wing and vice versa or is it not really an issue?

 

Cheers

Hiya, summer ops in a high wing is much more comfortable, as well as bush trips ie high wing taxi through gates on stations, which if you try it in a low wing can be embarrassing, out landing options are more favorable you clear white post on roads or low shrubs in the paddocks if you have to force land or do a precotionary landing. penalties for all these benifits are reduced visability in the circuit and gerneral handling visability is impaired so it is a must to look roll look roll clearing your turn path regularly, end of the day you cannot beat a low wing for visibility, but you can comprimise with operational habits so you do clear your blind spots, and get familiar to your aircraft and how you need to manage a good lookout, but the main thing is fly what floats your boat. AND HAVE FUN:thumb_up:

 

 

Yep I have no issue with subscribing to that view.... which part of it do you believe is wrong AND why

 

They are cheap simply because of supply and demand there is plenty of supply. I suggest that too costly is mostly founded in labour cost for professional people.

 

Now lets look at "Old Bob" please tell me why DIY for a 150/152 is harder that say a technam.... As a former RAAF Aircarft tech I struggle to identify sufficient difference between the 2 aircraft to understand why DIY for one is DISASTER yet DIY for the other is the best thing since sliced bread. Please identify why one is OK and the other not?

 

So if there is a difference between maintaining a 30yr old Cessna and a Technam (again only as an example) please tell me what it is because they truely arent that different, Ok, motors come from a different manufacturer, arguably the Rotax is more complicated and modern than the beast fitted to the cessna, but after that any differences you can identify I can probably find similar differences just within the RAA fleet.

 

The bottom line is this:-

 

If the aircraft is maintained to CASA requirements and manufacturers guidlines and operating event limitations (hrs / cycles etc) then there is no reason, other than cost, for it not to stay within GA. And staying within GA means it has a current CoA and therefore by your definition a certified airworthy bucket!

 

If it comes across to RAA then if you spend the same $ you can achieve exactly the same outcome. As you choose to cut the $ spent you move further and further away from that position. Both of those statements equally apply to any aircraft within the RAA register its that simple.

 

Using MM's concept 2yrs of nothing undoes 30yrs of careful maintenance. That concept does not apply soley to 30 yr old cessnas its as equally applicable to any aircraft in the RAA fleet today.

 

Now, the reality is, like cars, a 30yr old car if not maintained is more likely to bite you than a new car that isnt maintained. The issue isnt the age its simply the "not maintained bit" and if we are really worried about the "not Maintained" bit what are you doing with RAA to have this aspect addressed? Even if we are successful at keeping the buckets out its probably only a few more years before we have our own "buckets" and Id suggest well before 30years if the "not maintained" aspect is the issue?

 

I cant help but think we are treating a symptom by reacting to these older aircraft rather than an underlying cause of shoddy maintenance on cost or simply "couldntbef#kd" grounds. After all thats what I read in your post you suspect that required maintenance wont be done...

 

Andy

You are quite right with what you say, but unfortunately ther are LAME AND LAME'S and old planes and old planes that are :still:like new some were corrosion protected others not, some were well inspected by those who knew where to look. But unfortunately there is a lot of rubbish sitting in various locations just waiting for a market, there is some who are sitting on cheap purchases to make a quid and the inexperienced will end up with a lemon at the least. with the current cost of fuel a 150 at 23 lrs hr for 85 kts is not a cheap option as far as running cost, then all the above comes into play, i had a 150 10 years ago and it cost a mint to maintain because it was old

 

But you can find good deals but make sure you get it well inspected better to chuck a grand at a good LAME and get a major inspection done, before you loose a lot more. do ya home work first.

 

 

the 760kg would be nice but and it is a big but, there are heaps of old 150"s and others that just don't cut it for GA reg anymore and will end up being coffins for those that choose to continue to fly them, also CASA will be looking hard at the prospect of administrating all of the 2 seat categories now under the RAA, HENCE THE DELAY AT THE MOMENT, it is under consideration, if we are not careful we will loose the freedoms that have been worked for since 1982 the 300 ft rule dont cross roads ect.

 

i think we have a great system as is and if we push we might just push ourselves right out of the cockpit.

 

 

hiya Geoffrey, yep those VG'S are great and work so well you will notice improvements all the way through your performance figures, i tried some and flew a flight test schedule for the obvious safety issues, but i had to remove em due to the LSA rules. going experimental was not an option for me, but it was such a shame to lose the performance gain and a much safer flight envelope, i attempted to get approval to permanant fit them but i was confronted with a negative responce, oh well you can only try i was Don'ded, anyway bud you will love em it will really help your plane perform extra good, all the best.

 

 

health

 

So those of use who do not qualify for a Class 2 medical will have to continue to "risk flying over unsuitable terrain in the unfortunate event of something going wrong......."Interesting..................:confused:

Oh Boy, i guess they may think those who may not meet a class 2 medical wont matter so what if they go down in tiger land, their health was not real good anyway.

 

 

Would be great as long as you had a really long runway (2000m) and didn't want to fly jabirus. 40 plus degrees every day except winter when it's -5 at night.Gibbo

hey Gibbo, what is this statement suggesting sounds just like a Jab Stab to me, Read the reviews and speak to the manufacturer about these issues, which are not a problem at all, but i think it is unfair to defame products especially Aus made one's, or maybe your just trying to wind me up who know's.

But one thing we should all keep in mind is that via the years of efforts Jabiru have put into recreational aircraft, in developing a great aircraft atually paved the way for all of the imported high performance aircraft in this catorgory, including some composite types, so with that i believe that Jabiru deserve respect and appreciation for where we are today, they are certainly held in high regard by CASA as a certified aircraft builder, who are proactive in an ongoing project development program, and provide customer service that is second to none, next day parts ect, .

 

These forums are world wide read and Jabs are sold world wide, in Africa they are a primary trainer and are also used by National Parks there, Jabs have proven themselves some old LSA's are still in service one i heard about has 22k hours it was born about 1985, not a bad record at all.

 

At the end of the day the poor old Jab has had to contend with an onslaught of critique and negative propergander, this was mostly done by people with an interest in selling their imported aircraft for which they were a dealer agent, which is a poor way to market and leaves a lot to the imagination as to the level of integrity these people have. it is not the Ausie way or in the interest of our products and benchmarks. well that is my say cheers and safe flying

 

 

Sometimes, I think common sense goes out the window.Let me see if I have this right.

All Jabiru aircraft, apart from the J120, state a Max OAT at 38-40C (whatever it says!)

 

They're all made from the same material.

 

So, why would the J120 be any different?

 

When I bought my Xair, the manuals (including both operating AND assembly manuals) had a few....errors. Quite a few, in fact.

 

I had since found 3 different flight manuals, for the same aircraft, with slightly different information. One of these (the one included with my aircraft) included the stall speeds being listed in an incorrect order.

 

So, would this mean, because of a typo, that the stall speed is lower for 2 steps of flaps and not 3? Should I fly it this way?

 

Common sense!

 

At the very least, given it's a relatively new aircraft, if I noted, or was susequently made aware of, such an omission in the J120 manual, the first thing that would scream to me would be "Manual malfunction". I'd be interested to see whether the information is then included in future editions of the manual.

 

As far as not being able to "prove" what the outside air temp was at a crash site, I'd be pretty sure an insurance company, or the RAA, would not have any particular problem getting some fairly hard facts from the BOM, as to the expected OAT in the area. Good luck to anyone proving otherwise, to an insurance company.

 

I keep wondering why we so often see these discussions move to ways to justify how we can fly outside the allowed envelope, rather than just accepting the facts for what they are. The temps state 38-40C. Flying outside it is illegal. Do so at your own (and your Px) peril! Wasting breath justifying it is like trying to justify driving at 120KPH in a 100 zone. Sure, your car will handle it. Sure, you can probably do it safely. However, that doesn't make it legal. Nor does it make it all that "bright". So, why try and justify it?:hittinghead:

Hello Rocko, after the initial raised topic i contacted the Manufacturer as did the administrator, there are no omissions from the flight manual as it is LSA and no the wing is different from the others as well being solid foam core.

As to the other models they are tested to 54deg c at 9g's for certification, the manufacturer stated this is where the resin starts to soften, but after about 3 years this temp raises to about 70 deg the structure actually becomes stronger,this was explained to other parties who also spoke to the Manufacturer, any concerns should really be made to the manufacturer so a detailed explanation can be offered and answer any question accurately, apparently the certification process of the other models dictates the 38deg limit on those particular aircraft and the composite aircraft has to exceed the limitations of structural integrity than does a metal aircraft, under the current certification process and are proven statically and physically to destruction including being placed in a propane furnace and load tested in the presence of a CASA Official. So you can see the structures meet a very high standard of compliance, yet aircraft from overseas are omitted from this and accepted with the certification from their place of origin using whatever certification process that may occur in that country.

 

i also have an OAT probe fitted but have never seen temps outside in cruise that come anywhere near problematic or breaching of rule's. I do recomend any concerns anyone has to speak to Jabiru direct about their Aircraft, they are very happy to do so and are completely transparent with all information re their products.

 

 

hey admin just stick your site wherever it fits mate, don't tell me about disrespect or whatever you XXXXcan planes without all the facts scare some people in the process ,don't talk disrespect to me shove it you are a menace to the sport with that attitude, or an advocate of metal construction anycase i don't care like i said and others the 120 makes no menton of 38 or 40 as you claimed anyway i will leave you guy's with it give this website a wide berth i thinkthumb_down

 

 

hey guys i fly with my family and grand children so if i find out my new Jabiru is unsafe to fly at 40c which is the local temp regularly here i will be seeking a refund and not fly it. any one like to provide some evidence for me please, so i can pursue this further i fly in the bush Aussie plane and climate end of story.

 

 

yep i agree to a point but the aircraft are well proven Nationally, and have accounted for many thousands of hours of training in high temps, no issues, yet this sort of condemnation occurs time and time again, even the administrator of this site said this was verging abuse what the truth? if that is the case i will be happy not to be part of this website, we need to express ourselves and it is not so much as what is said , but how it is received, we have no control of that do we so the thought police win

 

 

oh mike you just need to fly mate , the facts are there the plane is safe at those temps if you say otherwise do so , but the manufacturer can claim loss against an invalid claim that it considers damaging, in what your claiming that a jab owner is grounded if the temp is over 40c that is crap. polycrap

 

 

yep i do see what you say but most active days of composite flyying occurs on 40 + days and in the case of Jabiru are stressed at 53 c what would you consider as a average temp on a stinker i have flown in Marble bar on 52 c in the air dropping dog baits 42 deg at 1500ft, if you were just overflying prob 6500 maybe 33c well away from an issue here, apart from maybe an attempt to comprimise composite construction but then we know how well crash victims have walked from these as well so there goes that argument well in jabs anyway.

 

 

stress ratings were performed to meet the numbers at 53c look at the Jabiru site and the millons it cost to meet certification, then the facts i pull my plane out of a 50c hangar warm up and take off at about 42c cruise at 33c land at 40c whats the problem as for engine temps hey if it set up right no issue eithter i don't have a temp issue or many others, the j120 can climb full power until lift is non existant and still be in the green even on a 40c day, so dont let that could your judgement, the 160 can to when set up correctly some of us know what is required for this but it is not a case of Iicerouse meets his maker.or however his bloody name is spelt

 

 

nothing about 40c in my flight manual what you talking about/ not fair laying this sort of rubbish on the uninformed flyer

 

 

you haven't read the the Manuel, do you think the insurance company would cover you if this was the casw 40c common get with reality and stop trying to scare new aviators use facts and real facts. you fly a jab learn the facts

 

 

the stress ratings are done at 53 c and you mention 40c then you have altitude temp reduction common guy's get with it, there is no issue here, go to Wakerie SA the worlds best gliding centre all composite and they get exited when it is 40c and no structual failures here recorded due to heat, don't get paranoid due to poor information being supplied to you look at the flight manual in the aircraft, not the remarks of the uninformed or ignorant , enjoy cheers Steve

 

 

good on ya Ryan you now have a lifetime of wonder ahead of you , i wish i had started at your age i was was 23 but what the hec mate you go for it fly safe remember the stay alive stuff and enjoy whatever it brings you all the best Steve

 

 

it/s chalk and cheese learn both and combine your experience as an advantage will save ya bum at some stage.

 

 

HI does anyone know if there is any temporary hangar space at GATTON AIR PARK QLD, i have some work there for a contract job and would prefer to fly my J120 over from SA.

 

I would appreciate any info or alternative ideas anyone has, this should occur within the month thank you Steve.

 

 

Hello Rob, The C150 was a great little plane in it's day, i owned one a few years ago oh about 10 years ago an F model 1966, 85 kts 90 on a good day, very poor climb in the heat, so much so that 2 people on board and the tanks full mine was 4 hrs, you can get into real strife, even flying on your own with full fuel in the heat requires a fair amount of runway, mind you you can put em down on a footy oval, next thing is they will spin very easy if you get near the right conditions for a spin, and your fuel use will be around 20/ 25 ltrs an hour, it would be a good idea to do an hr or so in an aerobat just to get a feel of the entry and recovery of various unusual attitudes with an aero instructor, because they will bite as will the Tommahawk most would remember the Canarvan accident and that fellow was quite experienced, these aircraft are max weight min power just look at the wing loadings and power loadings it tells you the reality of the expected perfomance, you can purchase stoll kits but they are very expensive and overall they cost heaps to maintain, i fly a jab now and it does it all faster cheaper and safer IE it's not 30 years old, use caution as if the weight increase occurs there will be a flood of alsorts on the market, some will be rubbish there are plenty of planes sitting in hangars all over the place waiting for the moment, so get it well checked out if you go this way better to spend 500 or what ever to check it out than throw 30/or 40000 in the bin, or the ultimate nightmare occuring, don't get me wrong there will be good planes as well which are in good condition, but check the storage locations ie environment humidity moisture, this is why the Yanks store there planes in the Nevarda desert, lower corrosion ect, just keep all these things in mind and enjoy your shopping for the right Aircraft for your needs. all the best Steve:thumb_up:

 

 

Great stuff Jack pleased to hear you had good results as well, a cheap effective low weight improvement and rest assured your underbonnet temp will be lower as well, which can only help your ignition system and battery, Happy Flying bud