jetjr

Yep your opinion, start a thread and go for it

Theres lots of analysis here of the CASA - not ATSB - claims as to Jabiru reliability, have a read. ATSB actually claimed Rotax and Jabiru had "around the same" numbers of failures in their preliminary report. Promoting your engine choice here (which is much heavier and more costly than the 2200 which this thread is about) would appear to serves little purpose

No they just wear a great deal - early life high leak downs, low time overhauls....... Its supposably due to differing materials, pretty low grade alloy pistons inside steel barrels (which tend oval when fitted), wide ring gaps. New engine should have less of these troubles assuming Jabiru have their product development process together. For interest sake CAE went with round barrels (when fitted) and tighter rings, same pistons though, and they feel pretty much the same hot or cold. Theres a few ways to address the same problem Good to hear its going well.

Ive done a fair bit of this type of flying It has to be personal use or you may be breaching RAA/CASA view of the certificate. This is debatable but a fine line to walk. You cant clharge money for the flight, However ATO couldnt care less about CASA and costs are deductible just like expenses on vehicle or the accom you're avoiding. It works for me only if the flight is over around 1.5 hrs or 4 hrs drive in my experience. - See Planesmaker post above. OR you really enjoy it OR these a good reason like dangerous road etc. You WILL get stuffed around A LOT with weather, so work needs to be flexible with this and every so often you will commence drive at the planned take off time making you pretty late. Think about what this means when you get stuck at work end needing to drive home......no car. As far as costs go, its almost same $ per km as running a large 4x4 for the same trip (which many in these areas do anyway). Once you throw in a time rate $/hr and some overnight costs it stacks up very well.

Id suggest they dont want to broadcast location data from Ipads internal GPS for people to use for separation. Let alone the spurious or plain errors that could be in the data What percentage of Aircraft would have ADSB out fitted - Id have thought pretty small.

Bolly make a gravity pointer one too but the lone laser works better i reckon

Plenty would like to drive a more expensive car if someone else was paying for it If its their money they drive what they can afford

I also find it interesting the lack of recent Jab engine problems in the light of increased overall reporting. Also the fact that many are still the same old engines getting around during the big failure period, no changes. Maybe awareness has lifted service level or care, many less hrs flown or the engines fixed themselves. Either way its a good result

I indicated plenty of parts no longer available , not none. Depends what you needed. Its also been indicated prices are going up as new suppliers sought. Jabiru, i think, have said they will be supporting current and previous roller cam engines only. There are significant changes between CAE and Jabiru, main one being being solid lifter, cylinders and heads. There is also a heap of small differences. For sure some parts can be swapped out BUT they are different. Not sure you would want to swap out individually. Maybe a whole set might be different.

Cynically Id suggest that was Jabiru plan all along

Anything but the latest gen 4 Jabiru would have similar questions, plenty of parts no longer available

The wearher station at Narromine is a cheapy, gives some random data every so often. Single camera is great tool as there isnt any wx or radar west of here Wombat pic is displayed after dark, saves data

Seems to? sdsefi.com

Yes they did cancel paper magazine but due to all the complaining from those who cant access web based version, they continued it a a paid extra hoping to get enough paid subscribers to make it pay. So far not even close so now the whole membership is subsidizing the paper magazine to the tune of $80K per year I thought I heard. This is what management by popular vote brings. Fees go up AND we have no magazine I follow you but not sure about the simplicity you have it down to Nev, a say 600kg single place will do the same damage as a 600kg 2 place, Ive had just 3 hrs with a passenger in 700hrs flying, can I get a discount too?

Old surplus was a while ago, I think from numbers last year, if the paper magazine was cancelled deficit would pretty much disappear. It one of the largest single expenditures RAA has Possibly single seat flyers complain more. Seats and weight are two different risk issues. I think the insurance policy ONLY covers passengers not the pilot. If correct insurance could be less. Problem then is you have insurers looking individually at increasingly small groups and at some point not worth the effort.

Maybe some overestimate the level of choice we have to ignore CASA pushes for things like extra safety oversight and more detailed clean up of old Tech related issues Perhaps we got the tech manual RAA could afford. Millions and years can be spent getting a manual near perfected and still there will be gaps and problems. CASA has set the benchmark for indefinitely delaying updates to systems and frameworks then releasing documents totally unworkable. I sure as hell dont want CASA managing RAA safety system directly - its working great for small GA?? Maybe the setup we have is cheaper than not having it. Certainly isnt many solutions around other than pretty standard gripes about staff and executive. A certainty is their replacements will be more expensive. Isnt the whole point of the CTA and MTOW to increase membership? Without it we will see fees increase and membership drop - a steady spiral down. Sadly Id suggest other pathways or SAAO's will be forced into a similar squirrel grip with CASA ultimately at the reins.

Do you reckon the cost of an annual inspection didnt go up by $40 this year?

Members been sent email - extract "2017-2018 Financial Plan The Board approved the 2017-2018 financial plan. The Board agreed that it was critical that RAAus return to a balanced budget and as such took the very difficult decision to increase membership fees and two seat aircraft registration fees. For a number of years the Board, together with the management team, have worked to reduce the costs that RAAus faces when delivering services to members. This has resulted in significant savings but at the same time a priority of the Board has been to deliver the core functions of the organisation and continue to register aircraft and issue pilot certificates and this has resulted in the persistence of a budget deficit. A number of new initiatives, such as the return of members market, the introduction of a joining and reactivation fee, reducing the number of full time staff and other administrative cost cutting exercises, has aided in reducing our deficits. It is imperative that we return to a balanced budget. Membership fees will rise on 1 July from $215 to $235 and two seat aircraft registration fees will increase from $140 to $165. Single seat aircraft registration fees remain the same and members looking to join for more than one year will be able to take advantage of multi-year discounted rates." The concept that members should have been consulted on price increases is interesting - does anyone think any other result than no from anyone who responds is likely? Especially considering the number who even vote What then? do they ignore consultation or send the organization bankrupt. No one likes it and it will draw significant blowback from members but If they have done all they can to cut costs - and they have done a fair bit - then what options are there? Consulting members on a clear financial black hole like the paper magazine resulted in no choice on things like this. Managing businesses well isnt a popularity contest

If the membership want to keep things like printed magazine subsidy in place, then costs will remain high. Not sure what members expect RAA to do but keep incurring losses.

Maybe most NEW transponder installs are mode S, (in fact they have to be after feb 2013??) by far the bulk would be C i would guess. Plenty of vfr have portable gps only If or when they mandate adsb for everyone, the safety benefit may be significant, until then plenty of aircraft out there to run into Outside CTA only a portion of aircraft run transponder at all and IFR run around there too.

Good info Why would vfr spend money on adsb out? Many have just C transponder Are collisions a real risk? Very rare. Even a simple adsb is expensive into a $50 K or less aircraft

Correct And thats why ifr aircraft that had to fit it arent happy as they cant see other vfr aircraft any better than always. As well as those who bought early expensive systems now see deadline extended. They and the airlines have spent big to implement this and see little benefit

US only uses 1090 for aircraft at high levels, like FL180 Below this they using 978, i think Depends how its setup but AU wont have weather or WAAS gps and adsb needs cert source This was all basis for complaints implementing adsb before and differently to USA where most aviation tech comes from

I thought we were running a different frequency? Or protocol?

Id assume the ADSB isnt suited to Australian system. Certs for gps would need CASA approval wouldntt they.