Jump to content

Light Aircraft down Near Bundaberg


Recommended Posts

According to the believers in at least one popular deity, it was an Apple that bought the very first man down... so there's history there...

No not an apple it was a woman and they're still doing it till this day lol

 

 

  • Agree 2
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

No not an apple it was a woman and they're still doing it till this day lol

There was a woman a tree who dropped the apple on newton's head ?

The application of his theories essential to aircraft flight and bringing threads back on topic

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
You could have been involved with the Cessna 162 and have little options too. Funny how I've never been particularly worried about crashing/dying when I'm in a jabiru. Nev

That's an interesting point. In the case of the 162, as I understand it, Cessna have 'scrapped-out' the parts from the unsold ones to use as spares and don't intend (also supposition on my part, based on a lack of other information from Cessna) to be manufacturing new replacement parts.

 

Common sense suggests two things:

 

a) the most in-demand parts will be those that regularly fail, so owners are likely to find themselves in need of parts in scarce supply; and

 

b) the very low number of 162s sold suggests that there is a very limited market for certified/certificated replacements which is unlikely to be an attractive proposition for any potential supplier.

 

The 162 was an expensive LSA by comparison with most on the market, and there are many candidates with equal or better performance/cost out there. Without wishing to beat a drum here, it's a fact that Jabiru have sold more than 15 times the number of 162s reported as sold. That provides Jabiru with a base market for spares that the 162 simply does not have.

 

IF you are a 162 owner and an OEM part becomes unobtainable, you'll need engineering work to design, have manufactured, and justify compliance to get the thing back in the air - and you may be reduced to e-LSA status. That, I would think, would cut the beejesus out of the aircraft's re-sale value.

 

I, for one, would not like to be in the position of a 162 owner.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
How do you know that parts are not available for older than Gen 4 engines. I was down in Bundy a week ago and they had the parts I needed for an old 2200 engine. In stock, no waiting.What is the great difference between Jab and Camit engines?

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.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
There's an off topic forum where you can go your hardest on subjects like that now.

Sorry Turbs, It didn't occur to me that you might think I was being serious. Apologies to all for introducing thread drift.

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Caution 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact remains most people I know would rather fly around with a 912 with 1500hrs on it than a Jab with 500 on it

 

 

  • Agree 3
  • Caution 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
The fact remains most people would rather fly around with a 912 with 1500hrs on it than a Jab with 500 on it

Gosh, I never realised that. How many 912-engined aircraft are on the RAA register vs Jabiru-engined aircraft?

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A 912 has a maximum life TIME since purchased That may catch some people.. It's a totally different concept Geared, fairly fast revving and liquid cooled dry sumped expensive parts reliable basically except for rubbers and a few tricky engine aspects Red gears/clutch and carb balancing vs engine speed prop aircooled wet sump lighter weight basic aero design with assembly critical aspects and needing more frequent top overhauls.. Worry about your Jab engine when the time comes for a replace/ repair. The worst thing that can happen is a replacement with the newer JABIRU engine. It was always nearly as cheap to replace the motor as fully repair it. Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Will have to give kudo's to Jab for that gear leg!

 

Landed in a plowed paddock and splintered, but still supporting the aircraft!

 

J430leg.jpg.4b8f0e5cb5e7b996272fd5be8b4550c3.jpg

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps I missed something, but what information supports the idea that it was a CAMit engine?However, in the case it WAS a CAMit engine, in response to the query about repairs, anybody with knowledge of CAMit engines as distinct from Jabiru engines should know that the CAMit engine was specifically and deliberately produced to be 'backwards-compatible' with Jabiru engines, so that spares back-up was available. This was a decision by Ian Bent, to provide a level of back-up for his customers just in case CAMit had future problems with maintaining its support. 'Backwards-compatibility' is not a silly concept: those who understand the development of Microsoft OS will know what it means. Owners of Apple products will also know what it means when 'backwards-compatibility' is ignored: throwing away your hardware.

 

That decision constrained CAMit from producing the engine it really wanted to make - and had already manufactured for test purposes - a far superior engine, in fact. Ian Bent's ethics are such that he would not put out on the market an engine that did not have: a) undergone a certified test regime, and b) for which he could not guarantee a level of manufacturer support commensurate with the investment that his customers would have to make. You might like to contrast that with the situation that the buyers of Diamond aircraft with the experimental diesel engine have had to face... grounded with no way forward in sight.

 

The demise of CAMit from the Australian aircraft manufacturing scene is a loss that only those with the full knowledge will understand. Snide and carping comments do not help this country to progress in its development of a Recreational aircraft manufacturing capability.

Hello Oscar,

 

elon #11 claims it is a Camit engine.

 

KP.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
There has been a 162 for sale recently at a high price, like +$120k. Dreaming.

I think they call that one a dream catcher

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't try to dissuade anyone from using a Rotax 912. At one stage they were the industry standard. The PT6 was the medium sized Turboprop equivalent, but neglect can change the situation and these great engines to having a very ordinary actual reliability . People THINK they never fail and don't do the necessary checks. Conversely some quite "ordinary" engines can operate well in the hands of sensitive people, who have gone to the trouble of understanding what they have and looking after it. Some engines need constant attention, like greasing the exposed rockers every few hours. Nev

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that Mike Bushe, who runs Savvy Aviator recently had an article in the US AOPA magazine, extolling the virtues of the Rotax 4 strokes. He is hoping for a bigger Rotax, so that he can put a couple of them in his Cessna 310. Reckons they would be better than the old continental 0-540s.

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
I see that Mike Bushe, who runs Savvy Aviator recently had an article in the US AOPA magazine, extolling the virtues of the Rotax 4 strokes. He is hoping for a bigger Rotax, so that he can put a couple of them in his Cessna 310. Reckons they would be better than the old continental 0-540s.

Someone reckons an engine which hasn't been designed yet but is based on one designed for low a/ hours for the recreational market would be better than an 0-540?

I've heard everything now! He does use the word "old" but you'd have to ask a few questions if someone had been doing rebuilds beyond the life cycle.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

People dream eh Turbo?

 

How could anyone think about it in the first place. I do think that what testing is all about, "never to be bypassed".

 

KP.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

and you may be reduced to e-LSA status. That, I would think, would cut the beejesus out of the aircraft's re-sale value.

 

I, for one, would not like to be in the position of a 162 owner.

 

If I had a 162 I'd be delighted if it went into e-LSA status. You'd be able to keep it flying much more easily.

 

In the real world the owner would probably get new parts made and quietly fit them. Nothing in the log book so it didn't happen. Another example of how excessive regulation causes more problems than it solves.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
You could have been involved with the Cessna 162 and have little options too. Funny how I've never been particularly worried about crashing/dying when I'm in a jabiru. Nev

We have just bought a J230D with the 4th generation engine and have done 150hrs in 5 weeks.

 

It purrs and so smooth.

 

We pick up a J170D tomorrow also with the 4th generation engine.

 

 

  • Like 7
  • Informative 1
  • Caution 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...