Guest rotor138 Posted August 31, 2010 Posted August 31, 2010 Hope this isn't anyone from here http://www.recreationalflying.com/forum/aviation-news/110552-lucky-escape-riverland-light-aircraft-pilot-adelaidenow.html
XP503 Posted August 31, 2010 Posted August 31, 2010 Wow another Jabiru has an engine failure, anyone else not surprised? They seem to do that fairly often, luckily no one has died yet. Now please, I am not a Jabiru knocker, I have done a fair amount of flying in many Jabs, and love that they are an Australian success story and offer affordable flying to so many in this country and I really think they are a great aircraft. But someone has to say it - what is wrong with their engines and WHY isn't more being done to make them a safer engine? I really hope Jabiru will put some effort into making their engines more reliable.
Tomo Posted August 31, 2010 Posted August 31, 2010 Fuel... or lack thereof? David I understand your concern, but the ratio of sudden stoppages between all the engine brands, are much of a muchness. Unless the engine suffered major structural damage, they 'generally' don't just stop. (though the continental the other day did for some poor 206 driver) I've even seen them run with a broken crank. Rough as heck, but they still can run in some fashion. They won't run long with no oil though.... I'll bet this particular stoppage was cause by fuel starvation of some sort - the pilot was embarrassed? Ring a bell? On the up side, great landing even if the stump did slow them up dramatically. I think the reason you just hear a lot about Jabiru is because every second person has one, so it's a fair chance if someone is going to crash, it'll be a Jab. It's either a Jab or Cessna!
turboplanner Posted August 31, 2010 Posted August 31, 2010 Just what exactly the relationship was with a Boeing 767 I'm not sure though
XP503 Posted August 31, 2010 Posted August 31, 2010 Hmmmm perhaps it is fuel Tomo, but it could just as likely be any other of the problems that make Jabiru engines stop quite regularly. I agree that PERHAPS because there are so many Jab's out there (and *cough* experts, doing their own maintenance, tinker this, tweak that) then that is why we hear of their troubles so often......But I disagree that all other engines suffer the same amount of problems and we just don't hear of them. Go to any airfield and it won't take you long to find someone who's having trouble with their Jab's engine, or has some other Jabiru horror story, guaranteed. (Again, I bloody love Jabiru's so I don't want anyone to get defensive, I know they are great, but lets not kid ourselves, they spoil a great product due to their engines bad reputation) I just hope they are improving it in every way they can, through R+D at the factory, until then, I just won't be surprised at all when I hear that another one has stopped, I just hope no one is hurt.....
eightyknots Posted September 1, 2010 Posted September 1, 2010 Has anyone ever done any kind of analysis of the ratio of Jabiru engine failures compared to other (e.g. Rotax) engines? It would really help prospective plane builders make up their minds with respect to a power plant for their bird. Just as well this embarrassed pilot wasn't over Bass Strait just at the halfway point between Victoria and Tasmania :-)
Jabiru Phil Posted September 1, 2010 Posted September 1, 2010 Wow another Jabiru has an engine failure, anyone else not surprised? Jab knockers will be upset to know that "pilot error" due to fuel starvation was the cause.
turboplanner Posted September 1, 2010 Posted September 1, 2010 Let's just cool off for the moment. Tomo may well be correct in which case the engine was not unreliable, and it it just as wrong to connect a fuel exhaustion with perceived maintenance issues as it is to compared a Jab with a 767. It shouldn't be long before the real cause comes to light, and if it is not fuel exhaustion then the discussion can take it's course. If you get the copies of RAA ads month my month you can pick the aircraft for sale with disparate airframe/engine hours and they are not all Jabs, so a bit of balance is handy.
Guest studentbiggles Posted September 1, 2010 Posted September 1, 2010 Wow another Jabiru has an engine failure, anyone else not surprised?Jab knockers will be upset to know that "pilot error" due to fuel starvation was the cause. Hey Phil....is that Jab that "Old Banger" that hangared in the Club hangar at Yren?:confused:........I couldn't quite make out the black "Gaffer" tape he uses to hold the wings on in the crash photo :ah_oh::ah_oh::ah_oh:......I wonder if it is????? Cheers Alley................I'd better not say anymore what I think or I might get one of these..:black_eye: :black_eye: :black_eye: or two or three
Jabiru Phil Posted September 1, 2010 Posted September 1, 2010 Hi Alley, Yes, I believe so. How was your trip to Tinti ?
XP503 Posted September 1, 2010 Posted September 1, 2010 Well I wouldn't call myself a Jab - Knocker at all, quite the opposite. I'm just saying that it is no secret that Jabiru engines have an unfavorable reputation and that I hope things are being done to improve the safety of these great aircraft. I hope I am not opening up a can of worms that will get you all upset if I include this link....JabiruCrash.com - the story of my flight (and plane crash) in a Jabiru aircraft with Ron Bertram (deceased) - jabiru engine failure, Jabiru piston failure, ultralight
motzartmerv Posted September 1, 2010 Posted September 1, 2010 I like that, lets assume it was fuel starvation, and wait for a report to confirm weather it was or wasn't. Fuel or engine issues, hhmmm, i know where i'd have my money. Anyway, glad the guy is ok.
ahlocks Posted September 2, 2010 Posted September 2, 2010 Yeah, but a fuel issue is so boring :sleep:when there's a chance to get a conspiracy story going. :ne_nau:
facthunter Posted September 2, 2010 Posted September 2, 2010 Cause. I think it's got something to do with the bermuda triangle. Seriously though, I waded through all that stuff from the link above. Mostly about the brakes on the J400. The early brakes are most likely not up to it on a J 400 and would have to be treated cautiously,and used fairly gently, but let's be realistic, probably no brake in a wheel that small could be capable of severe stops from 65 knots for very long. I couldn't find much on engines. The gudgeon pin moving to one side is not going to help things and a jammed exhaust valve smacking the piston, likewise. BCAR (or whatever it is called in england) did a thorough investigation of a failed exhaust valve that had stretched due to being overheated . Think this was due to the lean mixture jet and needle kit that surely no-one runs anymore. Cooling ,and that relates to mixture and airspeed seems to be an issue. If you have the engine installed on a slow draggy aircraft, you could expect more problems setting it up. Many aircraft engines will overheat if the cowl and baffles are not set up properly. If the compressions are not good it will run hotter ( and not give the power either). I would not take any small aircraft into the sky without pulling the prop through and getting a feel of the compressions especially if the plane has been sitting for a while. If the valves are not seating properly, they will not fix themselves, (unless it is a piece of carbon temporarily getting caught under one valve). The engine should get the required servicing and inspection to keep it reliable. Nev.
ahlocks Posted September 2, 2010 Posted September 2, 2010 Not sure about the termites Cam. And aliens pinching the spark plug leads hasn't been fully ruled out yet either....
BigPete Posted September 2, 2010 Posted September 2, 2010 Highly unlikely - most of the aliens I know use diesel...... regards :big_grin::big_grin:
sseeker Posted September 2, 2010 Posted September 2, 2010 I could bring up a whole tonne of Rotax failures all around the world with the earlier motors. Rotax was found in 1920, although Rotax wasn't making aircraft engines then as far as I'm aware. Jabiru was found in 1988. Rotax has a 68 year advantage over Jabiru. All I can say is give Jabriu a break, everyone has problems with their early creations and I'm sure Lycoming and Continental had problems as well. -Andrew
Derby Posted September 2, 2010 Posted September 2, 2010 Re Lycoming, Continental: They still do just look at the crash comics all the engine ad's.
facthunter Posted September 3, 2010 Posted September 3, 2010 Lycoming/Continental reliability. C'mon let's get real here. Lycoming had a metallurgical problem with the crankshafts in some of their larger motors. (All shafts removed and replaced). Lots of these engines are very old now also and haven't been maintained, and some sit idle for too long, so we should compare apples with apples. I would put a Continental 0-200 in good order, up against anything with pistons in it, for reliability. The gypsy major 1-c's etc were extremely reliable way back but they aren't as reliable now. Why? Because they are older now and some of the expertise at building them and maintaining them has been lost. ANY engine not serviced properly cannot be expected to be reliable. You can get away with not having the head off your 30 year old holden/falcon but those engines are loafing, they never work hard. An aero engine in that condition would not get off the ground. Johansenn's flown his RV around the world twice with a lycoming up the front. No doubt it is serviced properly. Race car/ bike engines are normally rebuilt between races. They wouldn't be WORN out but they are checked and parts that are stressed are replaced frequently. A race driver thay I knew of replaced the crank of his volkswagen every four (4) racing hours. Rolls Royce merlins had a service life of a couple of a hundred hours and they have some nicely engineered parts in them. Engines always fail for a reason. The name on the box is part of it but if it is operated/ assembled incorrectly, it won't carry the day. Nev
bones Posted September 3, 2010 Posted September 3, 2010 A serious question here, can you order a new Jab with say a 914, or does it have to be their engine? I would have thought the best thing to do would be to build a beautiful plane and use a known engine UNTIL they could have done their R&D on their engines, maybe offer the plane a bit cheaper with the jab engine, but they are still getting them out the door, money still rolling, so the R&D can continue? Or have i got my head up my own butt ?? because i dont get to sit around talking with alot of people, but i can tell you the jab engine is not a good topic to bring up.
turboplanner Posted September 3, 2010 Posted September 3, 2010 Bones, some of these people are leading you astray. (a) The highest volume product will usually produce the highest statsitics, given a competitive specification (b) Some haven't told you they put non recommended oil in their engines, with predictable results © Some haven't told you they put non recommended fuel in their engines, with predictable results (d) Some haven't told you they service their aircraft, when their qualifications to do this may have been putting together some IKEA shelves Of course the same people do the same things on the less popular products, but the nett total failures are lower, because less are sold. One person has said this aircraft went down due to fuel exhaustion, and although no one else has confirmed this it might be more productive to discuss how many people abide by the requirement for any flight to have a fixed reserve of 45 minutes fuel, and, related to the Jabiru models with wing tanks, the difficulty of measuring the tanks. Time and time again I read of people using the fuel gauge like a car, or happily planning for a 10 minute reserve. http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/download/caaps/ops/234_1.pdf
Powerin Posted September 3, 2010 Posted September 3, 2010 A serious question here, can you order a new Jab with say a 914, or does it have to be their engine?I would have thought the best thing to do would be to build a beautiful plane and use a known engine UNTIL they could have done their R&D on their engines, maybe offer the plane a bit cheaper with the jab engine, but they are still getting them out the door, money still rolling, so the R&D can continue? Or have i got my head up my own butt ?? because i dont get to sit around talking with alot of people, but i can tell you the jab engine is not a good topic to bring up. If I remember correctly...Jab sort of did that back at the beginning. They built the plane and put an Italian (?) engine in them. Then the company stopped making the engine so Jab were left with a plane without a suitable engine. They decided to start from scratch and manufacture their own.
Guest ozzie Posted September 4, 2010 Posted September 4, 2010 Originally had the larger KFM engine. Then they were discontinued and Jab decided to make their own version. I'll make one suggestion that WILL make an improvement on reliability and that is high pressure injection moulding for the heads and cyls.
bones Posted September 4, 2010 Posted September 4, 2010 If I remember correctly...Jab sort of did that back at the beginning. They built the plane and put an Italian (?) engine in them. Then the company stopped making the engine so Jab were left with a plane without a suitable engine. They decided to start from scratch and manufacture their own. Thats fine then i knew nothing of the history, when you look at it that way i guess it is good that they got as far as they have. Turbo, yes i agree, like i said i know basically nothing about the jab, but they are a great looking LOCAL made AC, just a pity they have these troubles. But yes i agree its a lot easier to blame some one else, than to man(or woman) up and admit you made a mistake. Been eating a bit of humble pie lately and it not nice either but it was my balls up.
facthunter Posted September 4, 2010 Posted September 4, 2010 Obesity. Humble pie is not fattening. Nev
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