Another Jab bites the dust.

[damkia]

Hey, just an aside and to add a little lighthearted post, probably a little off topic, I had a mazda rotary one time that, due to a faulty radiator cap, did a water seal. Just for fun, a mate and I decided to get it going again and drive it till it stopped ,well we drove and drove and drove, ended up driving it back home, mind you is was not putting out much power and running real sick, but got us home. Where upon we decided to cool it down with the hose and I kid you not, it sizzled more than 10 minutes with the hose on it :-))) Surprised both of us that we could not kill it, we really tried hard!Jabiru make great aeroplanes, affordable and strong, now if they can get their engines more bullet proof, it would make us all happy. It may mean the price for engines may have to rise, let them get the engineering right and fully tested on the test bench or factory test plane before making it available to the public, Time to rise to the occasion Jabiru!

Further to that I had a Mazda rotary seize solid in the middle of Princess Hwy/Center Rd intesection in Melbourne.

 

Those of you who know the intersection will appreciate how long a push it is out of the intersection in 40 degree heat.

 

 

[alf jessup]

Andy's post 325 make some real good sence and i'll just add my 2 cents to it.

 

As long as we drive cars we will have accidents, as long as we fly we will have engine failures and sometimes accidents (and we don't need the engine to fail to have accidents either as there are many accidents without the failure).

 

The outcome is entirely up to the PIC and his decision making and ability to either force land or crash.

 

Just because an engine fails does not mean you have to die, it is what and how you handle the situation will govern the ultimate outcome.

 

The only reason the engine is there is to get it into the air and keep it there, if it stops the aircraft is perfectly controllable right up until it meets the ground, how it meets the ground is entirely in your hands.

 

I have said somewhere else on this forum about how many pilots out there still regulary practice what they were shown during their training days, my guess would be 70% probably never have done a stall or sim forced landing between their BFR's.

 

My belief is as much as i enjoy the view, I still make time regulary to practice what i was shown during my training as I believe if and when the day comes my rotax in the trike or the Jab engine in the 160 quits i will be able to handle the situation a lot more comfortable than if i didn't practice.

 

I have always been taught to fly the aircraft into the crash as you chance of survival is much better than a loss of control crash as then it is out of your hands entirely.

 

I will say though that I am far more comfortable sitting infront of the Rotax than I am sitting behind the Jab engine, but it doesn't stop me flying the Jab just because the failure rate seems more than a Rotax.

 

I am comfortable in my abilities that if it stops i will make good judgment and my skills will hopefully keep me alive.

 

The bottom line is engines of all sorts will fail, when ??who knows but prepare yourself by practicing plenty as the outcome will be entirely in your hands only.

 

Good training and good decision making by Cory made it a good outcome.

 

Cheers

 

Alf

 

 

[dazza 38]

Hi all, I am going to put up a link to a crash that happened about 10 years ago.The only reason why I am adding it.Is because fellow members here have been stone walled in the past when asking questions about why their engines have failed. Alot of you guys will have already seen this. www.jabirucrash.com

 

Please dont think that I have put this up as Jabiru Bashing.I have put it purely for members who may be interested. It shows how much the engines have changed over the years.

 

PS- If Jabiru went back to the solid lifter, with the new heads, the new through bolts and nuts.I would look at buying one myself.It may be a pain to check/adjust valves every 25 hours with the solid lifters.But it appears that they where very good.What do you guys think?

 

PS- there is a article on there called "Flying behind a Jabiru engine"He built a Kitfox. Where the owner loves his engine after engines mods where done in 2005. Never had CHT cooling issues after installing the bigger Carb and bigger heads.

 

Cheers

 

 

[RKW]

Probably the most amazing part of this story is that they both survived.

 

 

[jetjr]

You can right now purchase a rebuilt 3300 with new heads, solid lifters and "newest" longer through bolts, They keep them on the shelf, $10K exchange.

 

You can even convert to solid lifters and as the original was also certified I doubt youd be breaking any rules. Why dont more do it?

 

Adjusting tappets is easy and hardly a chore.

 

 

[eightyknots]

You can right now purchase a rebuilt 3300 with new heads, solid lifters and "newest" longer through bolts, They keep them on the shelf, $10K exchange.You can even convert to solid lifters and as the original was also certified I doubt youd be breaking any rules. Why dont more do it?

Adjusting tappets is easy and hardly a chore.

jetjr, what is the time commitment to adjusting a full set of solid lifters every 25 hours?

 

 

[jetjr]

20 minutes max, less once you get a system going. They are scheduled every 50hrs

 

You have to open the valve covers anyway for lower head bolt

 

Worth it just for the diagnostics you can get from this process

 

 

[eightyknots]

20 minutes max, less once you get a system going. They are scheduled every 50hrsYou have to open the valve covers anyway for lower head bolt

Worth it just for the diagnostics you can get from this process

If a pilot/owner is prepared to do this regularly, it sounds like solid lifters are the way to go.

 

 

[Guest mboyd914]

I am retarded. i just registered to type this in here and typed in my email address wrong. duuur. Anywhoo now that i have that sotred.

 

Jabiru engines are not certified in particular the 3300 is not. the 2200 was ages ago but I dont believe it still is.

 

25 hours is a good time to perform tappet maintenance as they are frequently closed fully by 50 hours as the valves pull into the valve seats and eventually pull the valve heads thru thus why these engines often fail.

 

You can not get acceptance for a homebuilt aircraft to fly into controlled airspace in an a/c power by a jabiru 3300.

 

The solid lifter engine i understand is still a little bit more powerful than the new ones.

 

 

[biggles]

" You can not get acceptance for a homebuilt aircraft to fly into controlled airspace in an a/c power by a jabiru 3300."

 

Mboyd914 -Where on earth did you hear that !!

 

Bob

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Yea that entire post left me scratching my head.... he's new, lets not punch him just yet....hehehe

 

 

[facthunter]

It's his first day on the forum. Do you remember your's? ( to no-one in particular)....Nev

 

 

[cherk]

Yea that entire post left me scratching my head.... he's new, lets not punch him just yet....hehehe

 

well he did say he is retarded

 

 

[facthunter]

And there's plenty who are and don't admit it. Doesn't matter as long as you engine isn't. Nev

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

20 minutes max, less once you get a system going. They are scheduled every 50hrsYou have to open the valve covers anyway for lower head bolt

Worth it just for the diagnostics you can get from this process

Jetjr....now I know why you get the Jet username...... I dont do them in 20 minutes, there are 12 tappets to adjust at 20 mins that suggests approx 90 sec's per tappet....Man thats moving!!!!!!

 

To be honest, when I do mine I take my time, its not a race. I take all the cowling off and have a good look around. Just recording all the results and comparing against previous looking for trends or abnormalities takes me 10 minutes or so.

 

In fact I do oil changes at the same time, head retensions as you've already alluded to, and anything else that the schedule calls for. As a minimum I will take an hour, but more likely a couple. If I was being paid to do it I'd speed things up but......

 

Andy

 

 

[turboplanner]

A lot of people have the misunderstanding that aviation's prime directive is 'safety'. While safety is obviously very important, it is NOT the most important thing as far as the industry is concerned. If it was, then aircraft would never fly, because for 100% garuntee a flight will be "safe" the aeroplane would never leave the ground. Thats the only way you could garuntee a safe outcome.

I wish you and Alf luck with that outlook.

 

The days of simply telling people to "be careful", or accepting inevitability of accidents are long gone.

 

You'll recognise the "be careful" category in the above comments about training for forced landings, and whistling past the graveyard statements like "I'm always prepared" and these don't carry much water where duty of care is required. The duty of care requirement is to address a known problem.

 

You could argue that if someone pulls out a carton of yoghurt and it drops on a supermarket floor, and someone comes along, slips and breaks their leg in the mess, that's it's the fault of the person who pulled the carton. They would certainly be a co-defendent, but the Cases quickly zeroed in on the supermarket owner's duty of care responsibility to provide safety, and just as quickly overrode reliance on 'slippery floor signs". Now it's unusual for a spill to be left for more than a couple of minutes before cleanup.

 

I used to stand on top of the hay as we loaded trucks and trailers and two people in the paddock would pitch the hay up to me for stacking up to 4 metres high.

 

A steady flow of farmers were killed in falls and we used to used virtually your words, and Alf's.

 

Try employing people to do the same thing today and if someone falls and is injured or killed you'll do prison time.

 

In fact the small square hay bale is virtually extinct.

 

Similarly, ever noticed how you see very few semi trailers with tarps any more? Same thing "safety wasn't the most important thing, if it was people couldn't get trucks loaded quickly, the main thing was to make sure drivers were careful" Well the Courts didn't buy that story, and quickly found that owners had a duty of care to make the driver's operation safe.

 

So those comments are very dangerous to put up on a public forum.

 

I'm pretty sure that only a few weeks ago I commented that most pilots don't seem to have a clue about their Public Liability obligations, and once again it sank like a stone without trace. It would be a pity for someone to be locked away from his family for six years because he couldn't be stuffed spending a hundred dollars or so to find out what his obligations were......and that particularly applies to the commentators who foiled discussions on the RAA subscription increase on the grounds that it is small change.

 

It's up to you whether you want to drift off and crack jokes about Mazda Rotaries or whatever; I'm as bad at drifting as anyone, but the start of this thread raised a very serious issue which has not been addressed.

 

 

[planesmaker]

It is up to Jabiru to address the serious issue, we can talk all we want but if the manufacturer has deaf ears, then we are a little limited as to what we can actually change to improve the engine particularly in a school invironment! Jabiru if you read these forums, time to act! Tom

 

 

[turboplanner]

It is up to Jabiru to address the serious issue, we can talk all we want but if the manufacturer has deaf ears, then we are a little limited as to what we can actually change to improve the engine particularly in a school invironment! Jabiru if you read these forums, time to act! Tom

The steps are:

 

What is the manufacturer's duty of care to the owner and operator?

 

What is the instructor's duty of care to the student?

 

What is the pilot's duty of care to the passenger?

 

 

[David Isaac]

It goes a little beyond JUST Jabiru's responsibility and the ultimate test of that would be the legal action following any coronal enquiry.

 

J are not getting away with this in the USA where there have been deaths from engine failures (and it is only a matter of time here). My information is that there is already a pending class action law suit against J in the US.

 

Regards,

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Turbo. While I understand and agree with much of what you say, people have to accept that risk is part of life. The only way to be 100% safe is by not partaking in life. Sit inside wearing a faraday suit hoping that a jumbo doesn't land in your lounge room. The threat of litigation is everywhere. Can you point us to any documented evidence where a raa pilot has served 6 years or one day due to a post accident litigation? I'm not saying it's not been done just I'm not aware of it. There's a bloke flying around in a a new r44 in this area, a little over 1 year since he made grave errors in judgment and had an accident which killed his wife.

 

My cooments related to minimizing both sides of the risk equation. If pilots don't accept the risk and do all they can to minimize it, then they should not fly.I've re read all my posts and can't find where I said " be careful" or " I'm always prepared". If your going to quote a statement please be sure the 'statement' was made. Litigation plays no part in the thinking when people's live are at stake, if someone gets killed financial or libertarian consequences are secondary. IMHO.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Turbo. While I understand and agree with much of what you say, people have to accept that risk is part of life.

Not these days. There is certainly risk management, for example I was involved in setting the heights of safety and catch fences, but these were set above the known history of cars flying through the air; we didn't say "well motor racing is dangerous so we can let the odd one fly over the top because its too expensive to cover everything. When people do knowingly allow a risk level, what usually happens is that a mate accepts that risk, but when he's living with permanent injuries he's talked into a lawsuit and you're gone.

 

The only way to be 100% safe is by not partaking in life. Sit inside wearing a faraday suit hoping that a jumbo doesn't land in your lounge room. The threat of litigation is everywhere.

What usually happens is that the PL Insurance premiums where regular injuries occur usually force an end to that activity - fund raising BBQ's for example.

 

Can you point us to any documented evidence where a raa pilot has served 6 years or one day due to a post accident litigation? I'm not saying it's not been done just I'm not aware of it. There's a bloke flying around in a a new r44 in this area, a little over 1 year since he made grave errors in judgment and had an accident which killed his wife.

The documented evidence usually comes in the form of a newspaper report with details of the multi million dollar payout and/or sentence (for the media challenged, the facts can then be researched)

 

I haven't seen one relating to a pilot or aircraft/components supplier yet, however after being asked the same question in the Transport Industry, I kept track of newspaper reports and after a period of about three years I was able to quote five names - so a bit over one a year.

 

One, some of you may remember, occurred during construction of a major Melbourne road where a driver reported a piece of road making equipment had defective brakes. The owner of the Company told him to drive the machine but be careful. He rolled down a slope, the machine rolled on top of him and from memory the owner got five years.

 

Many people, including myself would have argued that it was safe to drive a tractor without brakes because all you had to do was leave it in gear and change gear/park it on level ground.

 

One I remember very clearly was two young guys who failed to ensure that a tow rope capacity exceeded the weight of a towed vehicle - they each got 6 1/2 years for their technical decision.

 

Re the R44 a year ago, firstly someone has to decide to sue, or lay criminal charges. Many potential cases are never activated, but when they do is usually takes about 7 years to get to Court, so I would be expecting today's newspapers to be reporting on incidents which occurred around 2005.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

So if this guy augers in again and kills someone else, who's breached their duty of care? Surely the administration or governing body would have a case to answer?? I'm sure Casa are as aware of litigation as you and I. He's still flying, still has a licence. How does that work??? I was in shock when I heard his voice on the radio.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Not these days. There is certainly risk management, for example I was involved in setting the heights of safety and catch fences, but these were set above the known history of cars flying through the air; we didn't say "well motor racing is dangerous so we can let the odd one fly over the top because its too expensive to cover everything.

A safety catch...designed to stop colateral damage to onlookers..You still couldn't prevent the accident could you. And every driver in that race would accept the risk of crashing and understand its part of the sport.

 

 

[David Isaac]

So if this guy augers in again and kills someone else, who's breached their duty of care? Surely the administration or governing body would have a case to answer?? I'm sure Casa are as aware of litigation as you and I. He's still flying, still has a licence. How does that work??? I was in shock when I heard his voice on the radio.

You have to first prove culpability Andy, and since he killed his wife, he is unlikely to sue himself and his kids are unlikely to sue him. In Australia you have to prove loss or damage in order to make a claim. Having an accident in which you kill someone doesn't automatically ground you even in the case of a drivers license. The penalty comes later.

 

 

[turboplanner]

So if this guy augers in again and kills someone else, who's breached their duty of care? Surely the administration or governing body would have a case to answer?? I'm sure Casa are as aware of litigation as you and I. He's still flying, still has a licence. How does that work??? I was in shock when I heard his voice on the radio.

This one's a little clouded - you said he made grave errors of judgement, so it could have been accidental, but let's look at a different scenario where a pilot deliberately opts not to keep up with his recency/skills and exhibits a standard well below acceptable at a BFR, but the Instructor gives him the benefit of the doubt, then I'd suggest the Instructor has breached his Duty of Care. The key here is that public liability is all about go/no go decisions - you have to take the emotion out of it. Even in a tough financial environment you have to take the emotion out of it because the alternative is the scenario you pointed to.