turboplanner Posted November 9, 2012 Posted November 9, 2012 Capt I can only put any inconsistency down to a reluctance to report it.
REastwood Posted November 9, 2012 Posted November 9, 2012 Jab engines are seen in the Air Safety magazine, one or two pops up every second or third issue (hard copy editions) haven't seen any since electronic versions though.
turboplanner Posted November 9, 2012 Posted November 9, 2012 Rick, in case the groan was a response to what might appear to be a vacuous comment: 1. I researched about half of three years RAA magazines (couldn't find the other half), and found 37 Jab forced landings. 2. Not scientific I know but if we double that it's 74 forced landings (I've since found the other magazines, so I'll get to it one day.) I'm not aware of anyone else on this site spending the hours required to get that result. If you then get the ratio of VH to RA and apply that, there should be about 5 reports (deduct a percentage for LAME maintenance, and using correct oil and fuel) in that three year period. Historically then we would expect a lot more than 5 VH reports, but as Captain says, he can't find them. I know of one case where the owner of a VH registered Jab reported engine work that could only have come from a failure, so at the extreme lower limit it should be on there, so hence my comment.
Powerin Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 CASA has Service Difficulties and Defect Reports (SDRs) downloadable as CSV files from their website. You can open these in a spreadsheet. From the last 5 years of reports in the piston engine SDRs the number of Jabiru engines faults/failures reported to CASA were: 2012 - 2 reports out of a total of 98 reports for all piston engines. 2011 - 18 reports out of 161. 2010 - 23 reports out of 130. 2009 - 7 reports out of 117. 2008 - 8 reports out of 121. As a percentage around 9% of all piston engine defects reported in the past 5 years were Jabiru. According to the notes in each report the majority of these were RAAus registered. The vast majority of faults were, unfortunately, the usual suspects: seizure, cylinder cracked, bolts and valve breakages. Only a very few were minor faults such as an incorrect dipstick. Looking closer at one year's reports, in 2010 there were 23 Jab, 34 Continental, 1 Franklin, 67 Lycoming, 1 Pratt and Whitney, and 4 Unknown. The major cause of Jabiru faults was broken through bolts - 10 out of the 23 reports. The major cause of Continental faults was cracked cylinders - 10 out of the 34 reports. I couldn't really see any major cause of faults in the Lycomings with a pretty wide spread of causes. At the risk of being labelled a Jab basher and Rotax fanboi....for whatever reason, there were no Rotax reports in the past 5 years. That doesn't mean there were none I guess, just none reported. For interest sake I also looked at the "Aircraft under 5700kg" category reports for 2011. These also showed a trend for Jabiru engine faults. The recreational aircraft reported were: 20 Jabiru - 16 of these were engine related. 1 Sonex - Jabiru engine - engine fault 2 Sportstars - airframe 1 Foxcon Terrier - airframe 5 Tecnams - 4 airframe and 1 throttle cable. 3
facthunter Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 There is a greater chance of the VH ones being reported. The average GA pilot is more aware of the LEGAL requirement to do so. There used to be a reluctance to do this sort of thing in RAAus and maybe we are growing out of it. Mention of having it LAME serviced or otherwise may not have the effect assumed, but I would feel that most LAME work MIGHT be done more carefully, though perhaps being simple and often regarded as inferior stuff might be done by the "apprentice", as are the oil changes on your BMW car. Not all LAME's are engine specialists. Most of the engine rebuilds would probably be done by camit/jabiru as their prices are probably competitive.. Some L2's do a good job on the Jabs, but generally, who knows? When motz talks of inlet manifolds falling off, my mind boggles. Diesel10 should know what he is doing and he has had a few disappointments. "My engine failed", doesn't say much...Perhaps there is a significant inconsistency in the assembly,. I have seen 230's where the oil temp will tend to get high but you should increase the climb airspeed. The aircraft has plenty of performance, to allow that and there is no need to climb at the low end of what you could use. Some school aircraft give good service. There are too many variables but a proper evaluation is warranted, by someone who knows what they are looking for. Nev
Powerin Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 The only bias I showed in the above post was choosing 2010 as the year to highlight. I chose it because it had the highest number of Jab reports so I could get more meaningful idea of the causes. As a comparison, in 2009 there were 2 through bolts and 2 exhaust valves out of 7 reports. In 2008 there were no through bolt incidents. I started the above research with the full intention of reporting all the Rotax faults as well. I was surprised to find that there were none. There is a greater chance of the VH ones being reported. The average GA pilot is more aware of the LEGAL requirement to do so. There used to be a reluctance to do this sort of thing in RAAus and maybe we are growing out of it. Nev, you would think that might be the case, however when I said above that the majority of Jabiru reports were from RAAus registered aircraft I meant over 90%. They are specifically described as such. For instance 21/23 in 2010 and 7/7 in 2009. The reason I made mention of that fact was in reply to Geoff's ponderings above as to whether VH registered Jabs were under-represented in engine failure numbers given the more rigorous maintenance regime. The facts may show this to be the case.
biggles5128 Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 I second the comments made in relation to training for an engine out. I have experienced a catastrophic engine failure in a twin, it does not matter what aircraft you are in your reaction to this event MUST be instinctive, weather that be phase 1 actions in multi engine or "looking for a paddock" in a single engine, the mindset and response must be so rehersed that it is second nature. On the Jab engine, I own a J230 and so far am very pleased with the aircraft. I have not had any issues with the engine or airframe (to be fair it only has 130 hrs on it). I was speaking with a L2 the other day who had been given the job to replace the through bolts on a Jabiru which had been maintained by a LAME in the past. It was found that a number of things on the aircraft had not been attended to probably since new, the oil filter used was not the type approved by Jabiru , this filter allowed oil to drain away when the engine was stopped, this meant that on start up vital components were running relatively dry until the oil pump could do its job. I am certainly not knocking maintainers here, however, when a LAME for example does his/her trade, they become very good at maintaining cessnas and pipers and the like, Jabirus are unique in a number of respects as are most sport aircraft. I believe that before anyone is permitted to maintain an aircraft that they should at least have completed a course or undertaken some form of study relative to that particular aircraft. Like being endorsed on a particular aircraft. My personal view is that if you own a Jabiru, you should pull the heads off at 500 hrs and inspect the valves, guides and springs. This should not be necessary I know. Like all things there is good and bad points, if you need a part for a Jabiru you don't need a second mortgage, other popular engines in use, a different story. To have a balanced view I would like to see figures of the number of jabirus compared to other aircraft and obtain a comparison in regard to engine failures. Some J bashers will make comments that the company is not taking responsibility for a known problem, I think that if this were the case, the RAA, CASA, or certainly Fair Trading would be all over it, wouldn't they?? Just my 2 bobs worth..... 2
turboplanner Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 Biggles, rather than regurgitate what many of us spent hours writing, my advice is for you to spend a little time reading through the several hundred posts on Jab engines, because some of your conclusions are not consistent with information in those threads, and early alertness and prevention is better than a nasty surprise simply because you weren't aware of all the little pieces of the jigsaw, many of which could extend the life of your engine.
Powerin Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 To have a balanced view I would like to see figures of the number of jabirus compared to other aircraft and obtain a comparison in regard to engine failures. Biggles, the following numbers are not always accurate figures but based on reasonable assumptions I have made based on several hours research of aircraft registers: On the VH register there are 28 Jabiru aircraft and a probable total of 142 Jab engines. I assume some of these are certified engines. There is a probable total of 235 Rotax engines. Again, some of these Rotaxes would be certified...for instance there are 12 Tecnams on the register that would be certified....3 of these are twin engine. Many of both engine types would be installed in experimental airframes and therefore are not necessarily LAME maintained. The above engine numbers are based on a simple keyword search of the CASA register, and looking at 50 or so records confirms they are aircraft which you would expect to have Jab or Rotax engines. On the RAAus register there are 755 Jabiru aircraft and possibly another 100-200 engines in other airframes. I have counted 690 aircraft which I could reasonably assume would have 4-stroke Rotaxes in them and there are perhaps another 100 more than that. The RAAus register does not show engine types, but obviously nearly all the Jab airframes have Jab engines and there a plenty of types you know will have a 4s Rotax. Most of the rest on the register would be 2 stroke Rotaxes. As far as I know there are no (publicly available) records kept on RAA engine failures other than the research Turbo has done in the RAAus magazine Pilot Notes shown above and the figures I posted here. I try hard to present accurate figures and not to be a Jab basher. When I sit down and do the research, I just can't escape the fact that Jab engines are over-represented in faults/failures. On the other hand you don't find many faults for the Jab airframe. When you search the web for Rotax faults, especially the 4 strokes, it's hard to find many. The prominent one I can think of is the crank failure in the fatal Sting accident that is the subject of recent legal action.
biggles5128 Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 Biggles, rather than regurgitate what many of us spent hours writing, my advice is for you to spend a little time reading through the several hundred posts on Jab engines, because some of your conclusions are not consistent with information in those threads, and early alertness and prevention is better than a nasty surprise simply because you weren't aware of all the little pieces of the jigsaw, many of which could extend the life of your engine. Turboplanner, "Regurgitate", the bulk of my post was based on my own experience, clearly not regurgitated from anywhere, so you chose to criticise me on one paragraph which may be a view shared by others..... I may have this wrong but I thought that this site was to share information and experiences, I may not have the time to read each and every post like you and I apologise for being the first to repeat a topic. I won't get into a p ing competition with you however I thought that my 30 years flying experience might entitle me to have an opinion on flight safety. Now read my previous post again and digest the guts of what I was saying. Clearly you have a self righteous claim to this site in the manner in which you reply to other members. 7
dazza 38 Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 engine failure at 9500'....and have trouble getting it on the ground..........? No need to be a smart arrsse Phil. Just sayin. Life isnt cheap.Poor bastard was probably shitting himself.He walked away good on him.
rick-p Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 No Rick, in case the groan was a response to what might appear to be a vacuous comment:1. I researched about half of three years RAA magazines (couldn't find the other half), and found 37 Jab forced landings. 2. Not scientific I know but if we double that it's 74 forced landings (I've since found the other magazines, so I'll get to it one day.) I'm not aware of anyone else on this site spending the hours required to get that result. If you then get the ratio of VH to RA and apply that, there should be about 5 reports (deduct a percentage for LAME maintenance, and using correct oil and fuel) in that three year period. Historically then we would expect a lot more than 5 VH reports, but as Captain says, he can't find them. I know of one case where the owner of a VH registered Jab reported engine work that could only have come from a failure, so at the extreme lower limit it should be on there, so hence my comment. 'No the groan was just a general groan basically because I hear what everyone is saying but something is just not adding up. I would like to be able to put together a graph on these incidents as the majority appear to be happening down south and in Jabirus, not too many other aircraft in which they are installed. In the 10 they have had in the Philippines, all aircraft other than Jabirus, not one failure, to the best of my knowledge. In and around my area of all the Jabiru owners I know not of one failure. I know that Yen's has stopped in circuit, I think that it was on final, but that as I understand it was due to the idle only or maybe a fuel problem. If one wants to get half smart about it how many deaths have resulted from a Jabiru 2200 engine failure in a Jabiru and even in any other aircraft fitted with them. Do the same comparison with Rotax maybe the result will be a suprise, I don't know the answer but it may be interesting. Maybe Jabiru drivers are more conscious that the engine will stop one day so they are better prepared than the rotax driver who the majority of think that they are bullet proof motors when they are not, considering my own experiences one 912 and 3 2 strokes or was it 4. Please don't shoot me I'm only the messenger ! 2
turboplanner Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 Biggles, it was rather than ME regurgitate what many have spent hours writing, not you.
Powerin Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 NoPlease don't shoot me I'm only the messenger ! There's a lot of maybe's and what if's in your post rick. I've always tried to stick to facts and figures as I don't have much real life experience. At my airport, to my small personal knowledge, there has been one recent Rotax forced landing from coolant loss and a recent Jabiru forced landing where the engine seized so hard that the prop bolts nearly sheared...or so I heard. So it's 50/50 in my limited experience. But you only have to read though this forum to get the impression that Jabiru engines have had real and endemic problems. The research some of us have done with the limited facts available seem to bear this out. As shown above...over 50 Jabiru faults were reported to CASA in the last 5 years as compared to none from Rotax. In both GA and RAAus registers I have found there are not that many more Jab engines than Rotax...about 4 to 3 if you only count 4 strokes. Why say all this? Because I want Jabiru to fix the problems. I want Jabiru to succeed. They have a potentially great cost effective product. We have lost too many manufacturing companies and engineering expertise in Oz. Jabiru is the biggest competition for Rotax. They keep Rotax on their toes (as do the likes of ULpower and others). It would be worse for all of us if Rotax became the monopoly light aviation engine manufacturer. Jabiru isn't going to succeed by sweeping problems under the carpet....and blindly defending them out of pure brand loyalty isn't going to help either. Perhaps they are busy producing a beautiful new fuel injected engine that will take the world by storm as we speak! 5
rick-p Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 There's a lot of maybe's and what if's in your post rick. I've always tried to stick to facts and figures as I don't have much real life experience. At my airport, to my small personal knowledge, there has been one recent Rotax forced landing from coolant loss and a recent Jabiru forced landing where the engine seized so hard that the prop bolts nearly sheared...or so I heard. So it's 50/50 in my limited experience.But you only have to read though this forum to get the impression that Jabiru engines have had real and endemic problems. The research some of us have done with the limited facts available seem to bear this out. As shown above...over 50 Jabiru faults were reported to CASA in the last 5 years as compared to none from Rotax. In both GA and RAAus registers I have found there are not that many more Jab engines than Rotax...about 4 to 3 if you only count 4 strokes. Why say all this? Because I want Jabiru to fix the problems. I want Jabiru to succeed. They have a potentially great cost effective product. We have lost too many manufacturing companies and engineering expertise in Oz. Jabiru is the biggest competition for Rotax. They keep Rotax on their toes (as do the likes of ULpower and others). It would be worse for all of us if Rotax became the monopoly light aviation engine manufacturer. Jabiru isn't going to succeed by sweeping problems under the carpet....and blindly defending them out of pure brand loyalty isn't going to help either. Perhaps they are busy producing a beautiful new fuel injected engine that will take the world by storm as we speak! I agree with you 100% but I also say that there is something in where the engine is operated and also there may be some reference to the mounting configuration in the Jabiru aircraft. I know for a fact that when 912's were initially installed in a few Jabirus by some to get away from the woes of the 1600's there were severe cooling issues. Also it would be interesting to know how many 1600's still remain in service as they were a problem in the initial stages but in the end turned out ok except for a power increase needed to level peg with the 912's power output.. Both motors have their applications and it would be a shame if Jabiru can't fix the real problems some are experiencing as I would much rather see an Australian motor leading the way as opposed to an import. Anyway we can only live in hope. Rick-p
Captain Posted November 10, 2012 Posted November 10, 2012 CASA has Service Difficulties and Defect Reports (SDRs) downloadable as CSV files from their website. You can open these in a spreadsheet.From the last 5 years of reports in the piston engine SDRs the number of Jabiru engines faults/failures reported to CASA were: 2012 - 2 reports out of a total of 98 reports for all piston engines. 2011 - 18 reports out of 161. 2010 - 23 reports out of 130. 2009 - 7 reports out of 117. 2008 - 8 reports out of 121. As a percentage around 9% of all piston engine defects reported in the past 5 years were Jabiru. According to the notes in each report the majority of these were RAAus registered. The vast majority of faults were, unfortunately, the usual suspects: seizure, cylinder cracked, bolts and valve breakages. Only a very few were minor faults such as an incorrect dipstick. Looking closer at one year's reports, in 2010 there were 23 Jab, 34 Continental, 1 Franklin, 67 Lycoming, 1 Pratt and Whitney, and 4 Unknown. The major cause of Jabiru faults was broken through bolts - 10 out of the 23 reports. The major cause of Continental faults was cracked cylinders - 10 out of the 34 reports. I couldn't really see any major cause of faults in the Lycomings with a pretty wide spread of causes. At the risk of being labelled a Jab basher and Rotax fanboi....for whatever reason, there were no Rotax reports in the past 5 years. That doesn't mean there were none I guess, just none reported. For interest sake I also looked at the "Aircraft under 5700kg" category reports for 2011. These also showed a trend for Jabiru engine faults. The recreational aircraft reported were: 20 Jabiru - 16 of these were engine related. 1 Sonex - Jabiru engine - engine fault 2 Sportstars - airframe 1 Foxcon Terrier - airframe 5 Tecnams - 4 airframe and 1 throttle cable. Powerin, Thanks for the effort you went to in order to present this set of figures. Very worthwhile. Regards Geoff
sain Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 Motz, I know you want to move away from the Jab's, but the following information from QLD fair trading may be of use when negotiating with Jabiru for them to repair/replace the engine: 1. Acceptable quality A business guarantees that goods will be of acceptable quality. This means that they must be: fit for all the purposes for which goods of that kind are commonly supplied - for example, a toaster must be able to toast bread acceptable in appearance and finish - for example, a new toaster should be free from scratches free from defects - for example, the toaster's timer should not fall off when used for the first time safe - for example, sparks should not fly out of the toaster durable - for example, the toaster must function for a reasonable time after purchase, without breaking down. This acceptable quality test takes into account: the nature of the goods - for example, a major appliance such as a fridge is expected to last longer than a toaster the price paid for the goods - for example, a cheap toaster is not expected to last as long as a top-of-the-range one any statements about the goods on any packaging or label on the goods - for example, the toaster box shows a special defrost function any representation made about the goods by the business or salesperson - for example, the supplier said the crumb tray was easy to detach and clean. The guarantee of acceptable quality does not apply when: the business or salesperson alerts you to any hidden defects before the sale you examine the goods before the sale and did not find defects that you should have noticed you use the goods in an abnormal way. I'd recommend talking to fair trading about the issues your having. They may be able to help you work with Jabiru to sort out these problems.
pilotdave69 Posted November 15, 2012 Posted November 15, 2012 I happened to see this Jab in at Orange on Tuesday, front end worse for wear i will say, try turning prop, no way! Inside cock pit looked fine, front nosewheel and parts of engine hanging underneath after flipping over in rough paddock, 100 points given to pilot ! He walked away!
rankamateur Posted November 15, 2012 Posted November 15, 2012 Motz, I know you want to move away from the Jab's, but the following information from QLD fair trading may be of use when negotiating with Jabiru for them to repair/replace the engine:1. Acceptable quality A business guarantees that goods will be of acceptable quality. This means that they must be: fit for all the purposes for which goods of that kind are commonly supplied - for example, a toaster must be able to toast bread acceptable in appearance and finish - for example, a new toaster should be free from scratches free from defects - for example, the toaster's timer should not fall off when used for the first time safe - for example, sparks should not fly out of the toaster durable - for example, the toaster must function for a reasonable time after purchase, without breaking down. This acceptable quality test takes into account: the nature of the goods - for example, a major appliance such as a fridge is expected to last longer than a toaster the price paid for the goods - for example, a cheap toaster is not expected to last as long as a top-of-the-range one any statements about the goods on any packaging or label on the goods - for example, the toaster box shows a special defrost function any representation made about the goods by the business or salesperson - for example, the supplier said the crumb tray was easy to detach and clean. The guarantee of acceptable quality does not apply when: the business or salesperson alerts you to any hidden defects before the sale you examine the goods before the sale and did not find defects that you should have noticed you use the goods in an abnormal way. I'd recommend talking to fair trading about the issues your having. They may be able to help you work with Jabiru to sort out these problems. But Motz isn't having trouble with his toaster!!!
Gentreau Posted November 15, 2012 Posted November 15, 2012 No, but if he was then maybe he could use the working cylinder(s) on his engine to toast his bread 1
rick-p Posted November 17, 2012 Posted November 17, 2012 CASA has Service Difficulties and Defect Reports (SDRs) downloadable as CSV files from their website. You can open these in a spreadsheet.From the last 5 years of reports in the piston engine SDRs the number of Jabiru engines faults/failures reported to CASA were: 2012 - 2 reports out of a total of 98 reports for all piston engines. 2011 - 18 reports out of 161. 2010 - 23 reports out of 130. 2009 - 7 reports out of 117. 2008 - 8 reports out of 121. As a percentage around 9% of all piston engine defects reported in the past 5 years were Jabiru. According to the notes in each report the majority of these were RAAus registered. The vast majority of faults were, unfortunately, the usual suspects: seizure, cylinder cracked, bolts and valve breakages. Only a very few were minor faults such as an incorrect dipstick. Looking closer at one year's reports, in 2010 there were 23 Jab, 34 Continental, 1 Franklin, 67 Lycoming, 1 Pratt and Whitney, and 4 Unknown. The major cause of Jabiru faults was broken through bolts - 10 out of the 23 reports. The major cause of Continental faults was cracked cylinders - 10 out of the 34 reports. I couldn't really see any major cause of faults in the Lycomings with a pretty wide spread of causes. At the risk of being labelled a Jab basher and Rotax fanboi....for whatever reason, there were no Rotax reports in the past 5 years. That doesn't mean there were none I guess, just none reported. For interest sake I also looked at the "Aircraft under 5700kg" category reports for 2011. These also showed a trend for Jabiru engine faults. The recreational aircraft reported were: 20 Jabiru - 16 of these were engine related. 1 Sonex - Jabiru engine - engine fault 2 Sportstars - airframe 1 Foxcon Terrier - airframe 5 Tecnams - 4 airframe and 1 throttle cable. No Rotax reports why is someone being paid under the table not to report Rotax engine issues! (tongue in cheek). I seem to recall the following incidents:- .912 engine problems Dee Why Sydney, 1 fatality Previous, 2 older gentlemen dead 912 failure, down into a paddock. I think that there have been a number of others but I will have to go and check in the magazines. Also I know of 2 overseas. If I can recall these incidents then how many others can recall different incidents involving 912's As I have previously said reliability is relative to cost and if you don't wish to spend the bucks and obtain the gold leaf item then be happy with what you have got or get out of it don't make it uncomfortable for everyone else because I believe that if you don't have a Jabiru motor in your aircraft you haven't earn't the right to complain because you haven't paid for it and that also goes for those who don't own or have ever owned a 912 or any other Rotax motor. If it is man made (engineered) it will never be bullet proof and price will always determine reliability. A lot of us, if they are like me, are prepared to take the risk so why make it uncomfortable for us who don't really give a rat's ass and will deal with it when a problem arises, not if! I apologize for nothing. That's my two bob's worth. Rick-p
turboplanner Posted November 17, 2012 Posted November 17, 2012 Rick, in the Pilot Notes (minor or no injury) from May 07 to Mar 12 (about half the magazines) there were 8 Rotax 912 engine failures which required forced landings. These were: 1 Carbs overflowing 1 Vapour lock 1 engine failure, no cause specified 1 oil leakage around filter 1 spark plug fell out 1 circlips 1 oil pressure 1 tailpipe separated late final You could probably put down all but three of these to obvious maintenance issues, I'm yet to do the other half of the magazines, but if we were to double the figures, then the Pilot Notes forced landings for a month under five years would sum up as: Jabiru: approx 70, mostly mechanical failure Rotax 912: approx 16, mostly poor maintenance That's a rough guide, but I'm working through the spread sheeting and will eventually have exact numbers and exact causes on the published reports. 2
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