Aircraft missing, Lake Eyre

5000 square km may sound an awful lot, but it is the area enclosed in a 40nm. square so on a 3 hour flight it would be easy to get lost in that area.

Perhaps closer to a 70NM square?

 

That's quite a big slice of country but it would probably stand out against the background ok.

 

They might have to wait for things to dry out a bit before recovery can occur but they wouldn't want to leave it for two long.

 

Kaz

 

 

Yes, it is entirely possible that a 'botched' 100-hourly could cause engine failure ( in any brand of engine). Hopefully, there will be a proper forensic analysis of the cause of failure and we will get the results.Proper forensic analysis (or, more accurately, the almost total lack thereof) of the causes of engine failures is a major problem in accepting the CASA justification for its determination on Jabiru engines. I don't wish to re-ignite this debate, but when, eventually, the actual CASA 'DATA' compilation that it has pinned it action upon is publicly revealed (as sometime it must), even the most die-hard antagonist against Jabiru engines will be forced to admit that the CASA 'DATA' is seriously suspect. The RAA has already stated as much.

 

Based on 'conventional wisdom' - always a dodgy measure - of Rotax engine failure analysis, the most likely cause of con-rods exiting the block is crankshaft failure. I refer you to : https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwibmOzKuJnKAhWi3aYKHYAVAsQQFgggMAE&url=http://www.recreationalflying.com/images/Smith%20and%20Guthrie%20Finding%20-%20Final.doc&usg=AFQjCNGM2DoUc4oFTxfiyw141_kLZuo3DA&cad=rja

 

Those who have followed engine failure sagas will be aware of the major Rotax SB on replacement of crankshafts.

 

Since the crankshaft and rods on a Rotax 912 are a 'one-piece' assembly, it is impossible for a 100-hourly to have any adverse effect on that assembly. As Nev has said above, inadequate lubrication would cause the mains to fail, which could have the cumulative effect of a broken shaft.

 

Given the circumstances of this particular forced landing, a tear-down of the engine SHOULD produce conclusive evidence of the root cause of the failure. For the sake of the safety of all Rotax 912 engine owners, hopefully this will happen and if any remedial action is required, it will be undertaken.

Go and have a cry Oscar, most of us are well aware of the spiders web of public statements at the times vs the routine reports compiled by RAA and none of all that relates to this forced landing

 

 

Oscar, I am afraid the deafening sounds of silence are not limited to jabiru engine problems. I am starting to get the impression we are all mushrooms ....

 

 

Go and have a cry Oscar,........

A bit snipey & tetchy even for you TP. Bad day at the office?

 

 

motz we are fed bull when it is pointed out that something is wrong put it behind you and fly had a gut full off the bull and lies have look at my post neil

 

 

Hey Neil, which post mate?

 

 

no change post re rotax in accidents

 

 

Would seem like lube oil lack of. I wouldn't rush to conclusions. Quite a few things can fail and cause that, but it's not common. Nev

Hi Nev or maybe over speed

 

 

Oscar, I am afraid the deafening sounds of silence are not limited to jabiru engine problems. I am starting to get the impression we are all mushrooms ....

Merv - I completely agree. Not even the most rabid Jab. 'fan' would seriously argue that they are near as good as we would like them to be, but the causes of failures have not, realistically been properly investigated, almost ever. I believe that I am correctly regarded as a strong 'supporter' of Jab. engines in general BUT I have also, I think, been pretty consistent in stating that I consider Rotax 912X series as being considerably more tolerant of hard use. That is, I am sure, partly a factor of the design approach (water-cooled heads in particular) and also of the very, very considerable resources that Rotax has to throw at problems and get them sorted by comparison with Jabiru. Those who personally know both Rod Stiff and Ian Bent will have opinions regarding the 'development' approach of each party - though in part one has to allow for the seriously expensive cost of changing anything on a certified / certificated engine. There are NO 'silver bullet'-type answers.

 

Something that is common to ALL aircraft engines, is the necessity for 'proper' installation: fuel supply, cooling, engine management information reporting. A bad installation - one that does not meet the engine manufacturer's use parameters - will kill any engine - just some may survive longer than others. Lycoming will not guarantee its engines unless the installation has been approved by them.

 

It's the same old song from me: we rarely have a report on the causes of an engine failure in RAA-class aircraft. What we get, mostly, is a summary of the result of a sequence of conditions that ended in a failure. While Jabiru engines are, statistically, more represented per whatever baseline is established than Rotax 912x engines, that statistic is not hugely valuable for establishing the actual causes of the failures.

 

Rather than stoke the 'pro' and 'anti' group for any particular engine debate, I believe that what we truly need to seek is reliable information.

 

 

Don't think we have the solid expertise to do that in our management , and neither does CASA it would appear. Running a lycoming for any length of time, with the top cowl off will cook it too.Nev

 

 

Trevor Wright on radio today said that the pilot was from Maitland SA.

Passenger would not comment on Elt until he made some phone calls?

 

Phil

Mabey because they still didn’t know what the hell was wrong with the ELT. Why would they say something if it may not be true. 

 

 

Where did i you guys hear about this story first?

 

 

A Technam Eaglet according to ABC Local radio report this morning

Yep a Tecnam p92 eaglet

 

 

Where did i you guys hear about this story first?

News report; see post #1 

 

 

Yeah, three years ago.