JEM Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 See this Safety issue: AR-2013-107-SI-01 - Through-bolt failures in Jabiru engines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted June 9, 2016 Author Share Posted June 9, 2016 Anyone know of any updates on this restriction? It is due to expire in 3 weeks. All seems to have gone quiet. I was hoping that no-one would prod the beast. Now we will have the usual claquing anti Jabiru and the CASA crowd out creating the usual deafening, empty hot air 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 Has there been any advice of RPM's to avoid? If there are resonances involved some RPM's would be more critical than others. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 Ive asked a few times about this resonance data and rpm, no answer Still something here doesnt line up for me. Report talks about heat expansion AND resonance, yet basically focuses fix on new throughbolts - thats version 3 or 4 now. Kind of admits older engines didnt have problems, they ran smaller bolts and nuts, yet they are limited too. Id suggest factory rebuilds is exactly what will be required. Rod does have a big stack of old engines there ready to be rebuilt as exchanges. Id expect many will live with limitations or ignore them. The more pointless regs we have the more people tend to ignore the whole lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 Yes. They have fixated on the through bolts, it appears. Relieving the diameters is not a new way to spread the stress along the major length of the studs. Its been standard good engineering practice for ever. I get the impression they don't really know what they have gotten into so they will fiddle with a few things and not make many statements of a conclusive nature. A somewhat sorry affair and a manuscript of how NOT to do things. I doubt the Authority has the skills and resources to allocate to this to see it through. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 If you look at the differences with the CAMit 'core rebuild' engine, you will see that CAMit changed the entire system of crankcase joining, locating spigots (removed entirely, the through bolts do the locating), through bolts and nuts and cylinder bases subtly but very effectively, some years ago. The resonance issue was understood and addressed by CAMit with those changes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 And according to the report it wasnt a big issue in solid lifter engines anyway A CAE core isnt going to work in LSA or Certificated so wont solve issues with those in training - where the problems were seen. I hope whatever the claimed fix is, that it does actually fix the problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Can't see a coupla "O" rings changing something for very long. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 And according to the report it wasnt a big issue in solid lifter engines anywayA CAE core isnt going to work in LSA or Certificated so wont solve issues with those in training - where the problems were seen. I hope whatever the claimed fix is, that it does actually fix the problems. Actually, a CAE engine could be substituted for a certificated engine IF a Part 21M engineer is satisfied that AMOC exists. That would require a considerable amount of testing to JAR 22H - for which the planning and the infrastructure development was all in place, when CASA lowered the boom. If someone - such as Paul Phelan - ever gets hold of the whole story, it will come out that the CASA action has taken the most successful Australian aircraft manufacturer AND the only Australian manufacturer of certificated/certified aero engines to the very brink of extinction, for claimed but absolutely UNPROVEN 'safety outcomes'. Thanks only to the declaration of a DD election, a mooted Senate Inquiry into the whole affair will never happen - I strongly suspect - and CASA will yet again walk away from the searchlight of its modus operandi. Experienced CASA-watchers will see that once again, an organisation that has so far surpassed its current operational culture use-by date that it can't be seen with the Hubble telescope has been able, by obfuscation, procrastination and finely-calculated bastardy, to escape the censure it so mightily deserves. Can't see a coupla "O" rings changing something for very long. Nev They won't. Every component of an engine is part of a system and without an entirely systematic approach to analysis, design and manufacture, any 'weak link' approach to the rectification of problems only moves the weak link to another part of the system. HOWEVER - eventually, the removal of weak links to the point where the 'usual' operational condition is ameliorated, is a good start - but it's not going to be the best answer, just an acceptable one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OZJohn Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Back in the 1990's Limbach changed through bolts from 6mm to 8mm that were "wasted" to deal with harmonics. No more problems ! Just as facthunter refers to above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 Recived notice today Assett Insure wont continue covering Jabiru aircraft due to engine reliability problems........even if they dont have Jab engines They are pretty major company behind many brokers in aviation. Shows how deep this situation can bite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffreywh Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 What a coincidence, My friendly skilled machinist called this morning and " Would I please come and pick up the heads and cylinders that you left ". "We can't do any more work on your Jabiru's, the Insurance will not cover us".... Bloody thanks a lot mate........Anybody know of a engine reconditioner in the S.E. Melbourne area ( of impeccable repute) that will fit valve guides and machine pistons of an aircooled 4 ? And Please, Don't mention the name..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 I don't, but it's pretty straightforward stuff. Anyone who works on aircooled Porsches should be suitable. I'd get them to check the insert fits as well at the same time. They use freezing with Liquid nitrogen for fitting. (cryogenic) Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 Insurance companies usually make rational decisions based on statistics, no room for emotion and politics as they would loose too much money. Their data is often better than CASA or the ATSB as if it is insured there will be a claim whereas it might not get reported to the authorities. If they have stopped offering coverage to Jabiru owners and to workshops repairing Jabiru engines then things are bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 ALL risks can be evaluated actuarily. It's easy just to take the simple way out if there is uncertainty. As I've said so many times there are worse engines out there than Jabiru. Considering the whole plane as a package it's still one of the safest (in general terms) out there. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaba-who Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 Insurance companies usually make rational decisions based on statistics, no room for emotion and politics as they would loose too much money. Their data is often better than CASA or the ATSB as if it is insured there will be a claim whereas it might not get reported to the authorities.If they have stopped offering coverage to Jabiru owners and to workshops repairing Jabiru engines then things are bad. Mmm. I used to think that about insurance companies but a number of events over the last few years have made me think otherwise. Weather events in south east Queensland in past few years have caused more than twice the cost to insurance companies as events in my neck of the woods ( far North Queensland). Most insurers will now not cover property in far north Queensland because of the weather risk. No problems getting insurance in Brisbane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 They maybe used to research but in small markets like aviation they will take advice from casa and atsb. Theres plenty here on accuracy and not of the data used for the limitations Insurance companies are about charging premiums and not payng out claims. Anything they can do to keep this ratio on their side is considered 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waraton Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 If this is correct and it it widespread among insurance companies generally - it will make the CASA intervention look like a product promotion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 Recived notice today Assett Insure wont continue covering Jabiru aircraft due to engine reliability problems........even if they dont have Jab enginesThey are pretty major company behind many brokers in aviation. Shows how deep this situation can bite This was always going to be the risk that Jabiru must have been aware of. If the aircraft become un-insurable, that will be the end of training in Jabiru Aircraft and that factor alone may bring about the demise of the brand. I do wonder how the risk assessment has been carried out by the insurers ... certainly CASA's action put the brand squarely under the spot light. This is all attributable to consequence; a consequence of a lack of action early enough on Jabiru's part. Something Mr. Stiff should have taken action on when the mechanical issues started years ago. Instead, sadly it appears the consequences have landed on all Jabiru owners. We can only hope the insurable risk factors can be reduced to insurer satisfaction real soon. The loss of the Jabiru brand does not serve any of us well. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 Australians are good at shooting themselves in the foot. Nev 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 David, your assuming the facts CASA acted on are true, they arent and this is why every one should be concerned. There equal evidence that rotax and other makes are worse depending on the analysis. Id have thought Jabiru would be good to insure, lots of them, easily and cheaply repaired and very tough. Despite engine problems they have an excellent record for safety. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planesmaker Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 Many of the imported aircraft are not a repair proposition for insurance, they just write them off, costs them a lot more in the long run. Have a look at the number of foxbats damaged in the last couple of years. I am disappointed if jabs become uninsurable as it will certainly end badly for all. Time for jabiru to offer a rotax option at least in their j230. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 ...Time for jabiru to offer a rotax option at least in their j230. Tom ...or start talking to Ian Bent! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planesmaker Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 I think jetjr has a camit engine? It was he who posted about insurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 David, your assuming the facts CASA acted on are true, they arent and this is why every one should be concerned.There equal evidence that rotax and other makes are worse depending on the analysis. Id have thought Jabiru would be good to insure, lots of them, easily and cheaply repaired and very tough. Despite engine problems they have an excellent record for safety. How do draw any conclusion on what I assume from what I posted? For the record I DO NOT accept that CASA acted on factual information, but I do know some Jabiru engines have known problems and that Stiff knew about it and in my opinion failed to act in a timely manner. What I did say was that because the CASA put the problem under the spot light, it would be almost inevitable that insurers would respond ... and they have. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now