FlyBoy1960

wow

Correct, we have been told we cant talk to avoid polluting other peoples statements who are yet to be interviewed by the Police.

We all got an email about this today as a reminder, i am happy to say hello but cant give anymore details, sorry.

The floats in Rotax engines have been subject to about 3 x SB in recent years. I am told they finally have them fixed however.

Hello Mike, all good information but this engine didnt have floats. It was the 912iS fuel injected engine, and i repeat the engine sounded fine for the take-off

Have the names of the occupants been released yet

Yes

Having seen the accident with my own eyes its terrible to see the comments, assumptions and descriptions of what you keyboard wannabe pilots are talking about.

Its absolute rubbish, you are so far from the facts that’s its hardly worth replying.

You might as well say the plane was returning from an orbit of Mars, did a flypast in front of 27 pregnant women and a maggot chewed the wing off. This is about as accurate as what diatribe is being hypothesised here.

Remember, other people, including family can read this and it screws with their heads when you have burns survival theories of adding this with that and that’s when you will die !

C’mon, be respectful and responsible, wait a few weeks until we can talk.

We can’t talk now because we will pollute other witnesses who have not recorded statements yet.

The video won't be made available publicly because it has been seized by the police who have requested at it does not get distributed.

The survivor has burns to 55% of his body, many of these are deep tissue burns which will require extensive work.

He was put into an induced coma immediately on arrival to hospital and they have basically taken as much good skin as they can and patched up the worst areas of the burns.

I have been told, they normally keep a burns victim of this type in a coma for between two weeks and four weeks. They have found that this is the best way to treat burns is to knock out the patient, do all of the surgery and not bring them out of the coma for several weeks at best, this way they miss out on a lot of the pain of repeated surgery, waking up, surgery again and so on.

At this stage he is expected to make a recovery and will spend at least eight weeks in hospital if everything goes well and then there will be much more work further down the track to try and bring his life back to as normal as possible.

This was public information as of yesterday.

The trees are at least 5-6 m higher above the top of the power lines.

The aircraft hit the power lines 1st, and then crashed into the trees. They only hit the pwer lines first because the power lines were 10 m in front of the trees in the direction of travel.

If the power lines had not been there then the aircraft would have smashed into the trees anyway.

If anything the power lines probably slowed the arrival into the trees which was calculated on time and distance using sound as 62 knots.

Based on the video footage available this was going to be an accident seconds after rotation, the opportunity to land on the rest of the runway, or in a field, or on the road was missed by both pilots in the aircraft

Well your all guessing and all wrong (mostly), engine was running till impact and making power. No right turn, actually turning left (for some reason)

The parachute failed to open because it was not deployed.

The aircraft is carbon fibre which was burnt but it is no more dangerous than burnt fibreglass. The area was wet down with water to stop any dust and then it was sprayed with Bond Crete which basically binds everything together, it ends up setting like a layer of varnish over all of the areas. The fire brigade where the full reading system because that is what they are required to do but the police just used normal PPE equipment which included the blue overalls and a facemask and gloves.

Investigations continue today and the airspace above Jacobs Well is shut down from 10 AM to 12 AM so they can use drones to take high-resolution images. All of the wreckage was recovered last night and removed off-site to police storage.

Yes you are correct John, unfortunately at this time, one confirmed fatality and one serious and taken to hospital. The aircraft just didn't make power on takeoff and it was like it was only slightly revving not producing full power. They crashed into trees about 1 km from the runway and never gained enough height to clear the tree line. There were so many other options available including three roads right where they crashed which could have been used very happily for landing. I know they say don't turn back but one of these roads is only about 30° off the runway heading and is clear 20 m either side so it is about five times wider than the runway they just came off. None of it makes much sense at the moment, rescuers were on-site within minutes because they witnessed the takeoff. There was also a small fire. RA-Aus are investigating

Hello again, I took the photo a while ago because I thought it was such a great idea. It is just a normal pipe clamp with a bolt 6 mm diameter going through and the part which hangs the headset is just a piece of plastic which has been machined down and then a thread put in the backend. You don't need to use plastic, I guess you could use wood or aluminium or anything else. It is just a good simple lightweight headset holder that impressed me with its simplicity

I really enjoyed that ! Great piloting skills !

There you go

You may not need to worry about anything because the RA-Aus have decided to start their own forums. You may be able to migrate what you have here over to the new RA-Aus forums and get them to look after it and cover the costs. Then you don't have to about anything

Digital Member Forums

With the COVID-19 developments across the country and uncertainty surrounding domestic travel in the coming months, RAAus are looking to replace face-to-face member forums with digital forums.

We know that members still have questions for RAAus and topics they would like to discuss with the Chair and CEO.

Please post your questions in the comments below and we will soon deliver our first digital member forum.

Yes its all stopping, i can hardly see a plane in the sky 2.15 QLD time today 23/03/2020

I am thinking Facebook might be the way to go, everyone else has gone their

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2020/03/loss-of-control-in-flight-brm-aero.html

Dont dream about the engines, give hours operating for your comments to be valid please

Great idea but the fact is, this was a licensed raffle and has to comply with state rules and regulations put in by the lotteries commission or somebody else.

They are in breach of the regulations by not giving away the prize as specified on the day that the raffle closed.

If we had a stronger state government then they would be pursuing the people behind the event for compliance to everything they signed up for when registering the raffle/giveaway.

Me, I would not be buying anything because there could be some chance that it is not even legal to sell while of goods exist. If you purchase the goods (aeroplane) it may be a remote possibility that sometime in the future some sheriff comes knocking at your door saying you have purchased something illegally.

Do you want to run that risk by purchasing an aircraft that should be part of the raffle/competition before all legal recourse has been exhausted by those who entered the competition ?

You are not allowed to mark the instruments on the glass face. There are reported fatalities where the glass face has rotated because of vibration. I was having a look on the Internet last night to get more information. All markings must be permanently mounted on the face of the instrument not on the glass

This was doing the rounds of our club members. They reckon its a Bristell footage

Soneone has to ask.

Is it LEGAL to go and put other markings on an airspeed indicator in a certified aircraft ? I suspect without manufacturers approvals and listing the changes in the aircraft POH I think you would invalidate the airworthiness certificate. Having said all of this however the information in the video was quite good

Rotax engines do fail but I DO remember correctly that it was not apples versus apples in the comparison because the Rotax engine statistics also included two-stroke engines which as you know are far less reliable in operation and endurance. This artificially made Rotax engine is worse than they are (the 4 stroke series). Anyway, natural selection will eventually prove who is correct in the long-term. It is really a shame because I would like to see an Australian product succeed but when they claim there are no problems and never have been any fatal accidents because of the Jabiru engine it becomes very difficult to believe.

I just had a look at the Jabiru australia website and this 'sample' is typical of many of the advertisements of used aircraft for sale. Sure, there are some there that have the same airframe hours as engine hours but they are usually under 500 hours operation.

• This J160 is in top condition for its age – 2006 Factory Built Total of 1460 airframe hours and 470 engine hours
  
• 2097 airframe hrs, 742 engine hrs on engine since full rebuild
  
• Engine No. 22J725 Engine Hours 156 Airframe Hours 1872.1
  
• Total airframe hrs 733, Engine hrs 482
  
• 2003 Level 2 built, 612hrs, top end overhaul @ 500hrs
  
• Total airframe hours 1010, New factory engine fitted by Jabiru in 2014 139 engine hours
  

why are so many people passionate about an underperforming product when it comes to endurance and reliability ?

I think it is just human nature, we all like to think we are pretty smart people and make informed decisions. Nobody likes to look stupid in front of others when it comes to their own actions or experiences and I think this goes in line with a lot of Jabiru engine owners. They know that if they wanted to buy the Rolls-Royce of engines and they should probably go for a Rotax but for other reasons unknown, they could be on a budget, it could be the engine supplied by the manufacturer they have to choose what is an engine of lesser reliability. Because they made this decision they need to defend their actions and get quite defensive when people point out otherwise. It is a little bit like which football team is better or which car manufacturer is better, there are good and bad in everything but the point I am saying is that there is no way a comparison can be made between Jabiru engine and the Rotax engine for reliability. Sure, the Jabiru engine is cheaper, and that could be acceptable to some people for having reduced reliability. Let's say you only fly 50 hours every year and it looks like you are going to get 10 years worth of flying before you have a problem based on what I see on the different forums so for many people this could be enough time for them to enjoy flying later in life and that is sufficient for their requirements.

Nobody is ever going to win this argument because there are so many opinions (mine included as an example) but it is not really fair to scream from the top of the hill that you own the best aircraft engine in the world when statistically you don't if you own a Jabiru

Then why dont the Rotax engines fail ? There are thousands more in service than Jabiru in Australia, run by the same dumb pilot people and you just dont see anywhere near the failure rates.

One day the Jabite's will face extinction !