deadstick

Turn base your right the first failure was on the runway at RAAF Pearce, solo female student advanced the PCL to max for takeoff, at 40 knots the turbine tried to come through the exhaust stubs.

Standard operating proceedures, and Sqn orders prolly give them a mandatory eject and good airmanship dictates you throw the aircraft away in a direction that precludes collateral damage. If it was the same failure as the last then it would be very catastrophic with flames out the exhaust stubs, so it would have been zoom, trim, pcl off, adopt the position then exit straight up.

No one should be allowed to make a potential fatal mistake to illistarate a point in training, Airmanship dictates we learn from others mistakes and that is where our rules have come from, others mistakes, in this day and age we don't need to demonstrate that weather is dangerous and I shudder to think how many pilots have died through a factor generated by it or deliberate violation of the rules. With many hours on the clocks both in high performance and low I will still avoid it like the plague, it limits your options for safe flight and opens you up to extra potential problems should something go wrong. Regardless how safe you feel, without an appropriate rating don't do it 1. it will get you eventually and 2. it makes us look unprofessional and dangerous. The only time an unrated pilot should consider flight into IMC is when all other avenues have been exhausted and the life of yourself and any passenger is already in danger. If you find yourself in a situation where your life depends on descent or climbing through, trim and balance are your best friend.

Does anyone know much about these aircraft? http://www.shark.aero/

Heon, I do agree with you my friend just wasn't sure what you were saying forms? or forums? our network here helps to spread the word on what is happening and also avail us all of the experience gained by all. quote ...I will not own a Jab one until Forms such as this stop BECAUSE THERE IS NO NEED ANYMORE!!! this was not clear to me perhaps you meant I will not own a Jab engine until forums such as this stop reporting failures and problems. sorry but didn't make gramatical sence to me.

OME, you have hit the nail on the head and I am thinking of sticking with them for the long haul, all the probs they recognise can be fixed and I think to a small degree they have done so. (almost there) With a couple of small design inclusions and tighter quality control I think they will have a final outcome that is both cheap and reliable. I would like to see some support maybe in the form of a cost price on replacement parts for those affected to date. I think they will save a dwindling customer base and allow those of us that Like to buy Australian a product worthy of our hard earned $'s. HEON, what do you mean by this: ...I will not own a Jab one until Forms such as this stop BECAUSE THERE IS NO NEED ANYMORE!!! and I agree its not a holden v's ford thing its unbiased and constructive feedback/ critiscism, enabling a constant improvement loop and also information to others as thats what these forums are about. Rotax and Jab are both chaseing the same thing reliability and cost effectiveness, where as rotax adapted the automotive style high RPM driving the prop through a reduction gerabox, Jab went for the high TQ low rpm direct drive in an effort to keep it simple with less moving parts. Cant wait for it to get sorted! DK

Has anyone seen the new 3300 manifold? I am chasing an image to see what has changed, as during a discussion the Jab rep at Avalon he stated that Rod was seeing even EGT spreads across the board and CHT's within a b's DK of each other so whats different?

I am a little perplexed at the approach as well, spreading the load over more threads does nothing to stop the through bolt failing and implying it gives more clamping force is just plain silly. If I read that correct then they are telling me they beleive the engines coming out of the factory are under torqued, dont get me wrong I am trying to like them, but with engines failing more often than they will admit and advice that goes against main stream aviation practices it bloody hard. beleive it or not I have just installed one of the latest build 2200's that is weeping around the cylinder bases due the new shim arangement (less than 200 hrs) and no fix, with this latest admission I have advised the owner to seek warranty on the repair. I am now seriously concidering selling my jab 230 before no one wants anything to do with them and I can't get a resale price. Prior to xmas I was advised that I would receive a replacement intake manifold (once available) due to the problems I was having with mixture distribution, now they want to charge me and after it has cost me a rebuild at 230 hrs. Give me a break! did they design this engine for australia? cause it is not up to the task me thinks! I have not seen one jab engine that does not require constant tinkering/ adjustment and I havent seen one make TBO yet! over.,... end rant!!!!

Hey Greg, do it all whilst you have it apart, have the head serviced and the lip removed it is standard for these cylinders to pull into the head a little, I have had much the same problem at 230 hrs I had number 2 comp rings stick allowing a lot of blowby into the sump (carboned up). Never let anyone torque the head bolts when its hot and yes there is always one cyl that is significantly hotter than the rest and I suspect on mine one head went very close to elastic given the way the cylinder pulled into it.

Thought had crossed my mind. lol

Yours has a 2 channel unit, my 230 came with 1 channel (ripped):thumb_down: Next I will be fitting a lamda guage.

Points noted Andy, and yes you can sustain error through extending the T-couple lead, this particular instrument states that it has an advance algorithm to combat this issue and I would never change the length of the lead (constant) and I have looped it under the dash. The extension required is in mine 20 CM and given that it is high quality wire I dont see too much of a potential loss. As The constant (T-couple) and extension are the same length for all any error would be the same across the board, Yeah? I check calibrated the CHT T-couples before fitment and they were right on, in fact the ambient temp this morning was 25c and all chanells displayed this. Remembering that Jabiru use a fairly rudimentary CHT T-couple and no it does not wire all the way to the guage its 25cm long and extends with ordinary cable. I have used my Laser temp gun to confirm what I am seeing on the ground. Heres what MGL have to say:- Thermocouple leads as used with the EGT and CHT probes can be extended either with ordinary copper cable or with special K-Type extension cable. The choice of either depends on your desired accuracy. If it is possible in your installation to ensure that both ends of a copper extension cable will be at the same temperature (or very close), then it is quite possible to use the copper cable. In most open-air installations this will be the case. Should this not be possible or you require best possible accuracy at all times, you can obtain a special K-type extension cable. This cable is made from the same metals as your probes cable and uses ordinary plastic sleeving as insulation. In either case, ensure that the cable is not routed close to sources of electromagnetic interference of any kind. The voltages present in this cable are very small and are subject to changes applied by external fields. This can lead to false temperature indications. You can check your installation by using a hand-held transmitter, such as an air band radio. If you transmit a signal, no change in temperature reading should occur. I think the most important thing is to make sure the instrument is earthed the same as the engine. And further more the engine has displayed signs that what the guage is saying is right with #2 running hot.

Thanks Wags, I suspected this to be the case and was not one bit surprised, I ordered the jets from Jab today so it should be sorted this week, I would hate to see what the old economy tuning gave! DK

Gday John, I finally got around to flight testing my unit today well things are very interesting. I used a 25pin extension cable for a computer to wire it in the engine bay and once heat shrunk pulled it into the cockpit and tied it up. Now down to temps I am seeing 70 degrees between hottest and coldest CHT hot- #2 Cold #5 and the egt from number 2 reached 726c momentarily, I have no choice but to richen this beat up it has the latest jets in the carb and no vacumn leak that I can find to explain #2 hotness. I cooled it down considerably by applying carb heat, I will fit a lamda guage soon to see what the A/F ratio is like but hell why such a massive split in egt and CHT? Manifold runner lengths unequal?

My own LSALT calcs are mainly for inadvertant IMC, I use the last step of terrain + 500ft as you know that last gradient mark could go up 500, then add on height of a transmission tower. If IMC this is now my lowest safe altitude before I could CFIT. Also Mandatory for night VFR you must know how low you can go before CFIT, I mainly use it in VFR flight for a warm and fuzzy should it all go pear shaped and I end up in the soup I will be safe from terrain above this height. The biggest mistake people make is not factoring in the height of a mast which could end your day quick smart and in a hurry!

LSALT or lowest safe altitude for VFR flight is one of those things that is great to have for a warm and fuzzy, I run a quick check for all VFR nav purely for those one offs (if I go inadvertant IMC) and also the unknown transmission towers that may pop up I take a scan of the topography 5 miles either side of track and add 1300ft just in case someone put a new tower up and didn't tell anyone. So if flying along and suddenly I am in cloud a quick scan of my knee pad/ map gives me my LSALT and straight into the climb I go. Have only needed it at night so far but its one of those things for VFR if I dont plan it I will need it.... LOL Also the proceedure for calculating LSALT, navaid to navaid, navaid to AD, and no Navaid is in AIP...

So tell me, how do you feel about that statement Rob? LOL;)

Well I use 10 mile markers purely cause thats what I was taught, in the military we use 10 mile markers for high nav with the elapsed time for the leg in the rocket box, also we use 1 minute markers for low level Nav, the problem if I remember correctly is to do with having an accurate base and ground speed (210kts for the PC9)using the temp and wind for the day/time. Though our goal is to hit a target in +/- 12 seconds, The base speed allows us to adjust for wind i.e. if we hit the first waypoint behind time we have a reserve of power to catch up alternatively cut the corner on the next turn point, if your fast track left or right 60 deg for 1 minute then reverse 60 deg for one minute and you lose 1 minute track time. I cant see a problem using 6 min markers after all normal NAV is all about situational awareness rather than timing so whatever works for you. In my Jab I plan for 110kts (1.8nm/ min) fast cruise and 100kts (1.6 nm /min) for 75% cruise and then adjust for the winds on the day noting I havent encountered any wind thats been strong enough to stop me reaching my base speeds yet, (motor is strong after rebuild). Hope the Jabiru demon's didn't hear that! LOL:laugh:

["jabiru in the cct, are you making any calls or just flying around the place?" I replied. Well you should have replied:- the only things flying round the place will be my fists and my call is you'll be bleedin before you leave the Tarmac! lol. Gotta love arrogance and self importance from no time professionals hey? sounds like we may read about this gent in flight safety one day me thinks!

Yep, pretty cool and does rely on the type of head used in the helo, whilst on exchange with the Royal Navy I saw a german linx roll on its back from the hover and roll through and accelerate away, but have never been in a helo whilst doing aeros , some mates have. The RAN used to allow barrel roles in the squirrells but it was causing too much fatigue induced maintenance, the ARH (tiger) is fully Aerobatic, but I dont think there is any tactical advantage in aero's as it would bleed off to much energy and leave you a sitting duck.

Whats the aircraft in pic 11?

Well, was told at work yesterday that in the interests of closer military ties the Blue Angels will be putting on a display at Wings over Illawarra 2011 (26-27 Feb 11). Usually I treat such talk as false until confirmed well at a dinner last night one of the organisers of the event confirmed that they had accepted an invitation but the details are still being sorted. Fingers crossed they bring Fat Albert, as a Herc firing JATO rockets on takeoff makes some serious noise.

Work mate sent me a link to the sale of the retired RAAF Caribou's and 707's today, any takers? https://www.tenders.gov.au/?event=public.advert.show&AdvertUUID=F04C0A61-D88C-9B51-55219979E2915458