Light Plane Crash Parkinson

[Teckair]

Wow I wonder where this will go?

 

 

[Gnarly Gnu]

Read it on the internet, must be true.

 

 

[rankamateur]

Read it on the internet, must be true.

I didn't say that exactly...

 

 

[gareth lacey]

To Dazza

 

I live in Logan, and very good friends of mine live in Inala, and you who live in GG have a lot to say ,crime is rampant ,drugs galore ,and dont leave your vehicle unattended ,might not be there when you get back, for all you say about Jabs , what about the Rotax powered Tecnam Of Airsports Boonah that GAVE up not to much from you on that one ,pull your head in good people live in all sorts of areas (as do the bad people)

 

cheers gareth

 

 

[dazza 38]

http://nvsr.com.au/articles/article10.html this is the most interesting article I have seen about improving Jabiru reliabilty for a long time. If it is true, they are readily improved, but designed to fail straight from the factory.

No one can deny that the engines are fragile. Maybe this is the reason ?

 

To DazzaI live in Logan, and very good friends of mine live in Inala, and you who live in GG have a lot to say ,crime is rampant ,drugs galore ,and dont leave your vehicle unattended ,might not be there when you get back, for all you say about Jabs , what about the Rotax powered Tecnam Of Airsports Boonah that GAVE up not to much from you on that one ,pull your head in good people live in all sorts of ares (as do the bad people

cheers gareth

Hi Gareth, you must have missed the bit where I said, all jokes aside. Anyway you are right about the Gold Coast, I live at Robina, and I shop at Robina Town centre. Wow after the bikie shooting there and being ex military and ex cash in transit security guard . I am always on the look out for cover, just in case some pleb decides to let rip with a gun.LOL

 

IRT the 912 Rotax engine that "gave " up in flight. Engine ran post "failure"- No fault found, ran perfectly.

 

 

[Tomo]

Problem is... every person has a different opinion on what is wrong with the Jab engine?

 

So, what can we/they do to fix that? Start again?

 

 

[biggles]

[ATTACH]23382[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]23383[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]23384[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]23385[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]23374[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]23375[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]23376[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]23378[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]23379[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]23380[/ATTACH] 1) We are concerned about what others fly and use as powerplants simply because our friends and fellow aviators operate these powerplants which have an unacceptable safety record and I personally feel that something should be done to improve the situation before more people are injured or WORSE. If it is wrong to have concern for the safety of fellow aviators and a desire to improve the safety of an engine then please forgive me......

 

2)You mention that you flew your 2 stroke machine with the notion that the engine will fail at all times, as I do, and good on you. The problem I have is that somewhere along the line this fundamental lesson is not being taught. As I said, pilots just seem to be flying blissfully along over trees and rocks and mountains.....

 

3)Your argument that you need to go and fly GA to be blessed with better standards and reliability is the most ignorant thing I've heard in a while, I know the regulations regarding maintenance are more stringent as is the training but there is no reason whatsoever that a a rec pilot cannot enjoy flying that is just as safe or safer than any other machine in the sky. It comes down to TRAINING and knowing your aircraft.

 

4) A Jabiru goes down almost once a month, and yet you are telling me that I might risk being able to not fly my Drifter because of the public's perception on how it looks???.....my mind is boggling trying to grasp your logic.....So should we ban hang gliders and paragliders and bungee jumping because the public thinks they look a bit weird??? If I was Joe Public I would sooner ground the little white aeroplanes with the engines that tend to stop...........

 

5)Let me point out - I LOVE JABIRU'S - and I honestly mean that. I have flown them extensively, my Grandpa has a J400 which he flew around Australia with not one hiccup. I WANT jabiru to become an even greater success story. They have such a good product, and it is ruined by the dead weight at the front.

 

6) I'm just sick of hearing about them failing and injuring people. As members of the ultralight fraternity we should be banding together to demand a higher quality engine.

 

7) I'm afraid I disagree that this banter puts our freedoms at risk. I have no desire to destroy the privileges gained by our pioneers in fact my intentions are the complete opposite!!!!! I am pushing for a safer engine and more accountability from the manufacturer, as well as improved training by FTF's with regards to engine failures, wouldn't you agree this would result in a safer organization?

 

8) I am not a Jab-Basher so don't waste your breath calling me that, you can call me a Jab-Lover though hahaha.

 

http://www.jabirucrash.com/

 

http://www.aircentre.com.au/aircraft/efato.htm

David ,

 

I respect your right to post whatever you wish on this site however submit , with respect , that the above photo's are emotive , inconclusive and worthless . Essentially the photo's tell us nothing more than if they were Cessna's or , heaven forbid , Drifters . For any intelligent discussion to proceed ,the incidents must have , as a minimum , been investigated by and reported on , by a recognised aviation investigator .

 

Bob

 

 

[dazza 38]

Problem is... every person has a different opinion on what is wrong with the Jab engine? So, what can we/they do to fix that? Start again?

They have been playing around with the engine since its inception which was around 15 odd years ago. I would have thought that it would have been pretty bullet proof by now.

 

 

[Herm]

You could all band together (those that want to save our lives) and have all those Jabirus grounded. Won't matter about the Jab owners that are happy with thier choice objecting. After all we will all understand that you are just trying to do what's best for us ( thank you!).. We could donate our aircraft to all the Mac Donald's stores for the kids to play in. Then you could help find a locally built cost effective trainer to help teach all those new young people wanting to learn.. Something like a ... Ah....hmmmm can't think of one. Then we could rename the site wreck reational flyers and all moan about how we destroyed all the greatness we currently have.. I am sure thier are jab owners that may not be happy, and it is for them to make tier voices heard with whomever they need. Not so sure about others banding together to get things done when they may not even own one.. I am not suggesting that thier may not be issues with some jab engines but bashing and suggestions of grounding I find a bit full on.

 

 

[jakej]

Problem is... every person has a different opinion on what is wrong with the Jab engine? So, what can we/they do to fix that? Start again?

I personally know of a certified lycoming engine that had an issue that Casa didn't want to know about, owner 'modified' it & is still running quite well after 1800 + hrs - point is the owner had to sort it out however it was fixed properly, no continuing problems.

 

In GA any serious airworthiness issues HAD to be reported & could result in an AD therefore requiring a fix - does this happen in RA Aus aircraft ? if not, why not ?

 

I'm really confused here re what has to be reported whether owner built or factory built, it seems to be 'muddy'.

 

 

[dazza 38]

This probably not the best thread to ask this question as it has already been noted that the particular aircraft in this thread had its engine fail due to having too much air in the carbie. I am wondering though, exactly how many different model Jabiru engines are there out there? By that I mean, we have had Solid lifters, Hydraulic lifters, thin finned heads, thick finned heads. Different Carbie set ups (rich/lean).

 

I know a bloke that has a "experimental Jab" with a solid lifter engine. He knows them inside and out and has NEVER had a problem with them. He really does know how to keep them bullet proof. We all know that there are guys like him out there. Also for clarity, the reason I used the term fragile in a above post- I was alluding to things like- Bore corrosion if not frequently used and keeping a eye on cylinder head temps etc. Not fragile as in- a cylinder is about to part company from the block.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Your dammed i you do and dammed if you dont. labelled a Jab Basher if you dare speak out about them, called names if you stick up for them.

 

I dont think we are going about any of this the right way.

 

Its obvious that jab engines are still having issues. You dont have to own one to know that. I cant see how slaying them relentlessly will help make them safer though. I know Ive been guilty in the past of expressing ' diss satisfaction" with the engines, but I have good reason for that. And I dont agree that the aeroplane is some how providing the RAA with all its freedoms as someone stated. I think the same thinking applied logically would find that its in fact the opposite. It is the thorn in the side of the RAA at the moment, the standard of this engine brings us ALL into a bad light and worst case could see us LOSE freedoms (IMHO).

 

However, like ive said before, education and reporting is the key to fixing this problem. The more data we have (and jab and the raa and casa have) the better informed everyone can be. That includes JAB!!

 

 

[XP503]

My sentiments exactly Motzartmerv. I'd never want to see Jabs grounded however I'd love to see the engine reliability improved. I fail to see how anyone could justify disagreeing with this......?

 

 

[jetjr]

Your forgetting, regulators way of fixing a problem (perceived or real) is to regulate!

 

And they will, removing the freedom to maintain our own aircraft. All of them.

 

Do you really think they will bring in rules for just one manufacturer?

 

Maybe just the types of aircraft who run out of fuel, which appears to be the cause of this prang.

 

If you think having Lame or L2 service them will fix it dream on.

 

I am all for pressuring Jabiru to work on engine problems but through Raa and Casa?

 

By the way the reversed piston thing has been done to death elsewhere. Doesnt put fuel in the the carb or much else from what I can read.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Your dammed i you do and dammed if you dont. labelled a Jab Basher if you dare speak out about them, called names if you stick up for them.I dont think we are going about any of this the right way.

Its obvious that jab engines are still having issues. You dont have to own one to know that. I cant see how slaying them relentlessly will help make them safer though. I know Ive been guilty in the past of expressing ' diss satisfaction" with the engines, but I have good reason for that. And I dont agree that the aeroplane is some how providing the RAA with all its freedoms as someone stated. I think the same thinking applied logically would find that its in fact the opposite. It is the thorn in the side of the RAA at the moment, the standard of this engine brings us ALL into a bad light and worst case could see us LOSE freedoms (IMHO).

 

However, like ive said before, education and reporting is the key to fixing this problem. The more data we have (and jab and the raa and casa have) the better informed everyone can be. That includes JAB!!

Sometimes you have to have the guts to call a spade a spade, and take appropriate action to have a manufacture fix the problem.

 

It's the problem that poses the biggest threat to this aircraft, not people talking about it.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Sometimes you have to have the guts to call a spade a spade, and take appropriate action to have a manufacture fix the problem.It's the problem that poses the biggest threat to this aircraft, not people talking about it.

Turbo, I initially started to 'call a spade a spade' some years ago now, with the sole intention of trying to get the manufacturer to pick up its game. All I got called was a Jab basher. They weren't listening then, and they aren't listening now, so it's really a mute point anyway.

 

I've basically lost interest now, but it is a shame that the many unplanned mechanical failures each year suffered by Jabs and resulting in forced landings, continues to unnecessarily impact on the RAAus safety figures, which is a problem that will impact us all one day................Maj...

 

 

[Herm]

To some level Maj I agree with your statement. However it's also a numbers game... Lot and Lots of Jabs flying so it's fair to assume that they will be involved in more accidents.. That being said I am not in anyway suggesting that there are no problems as in all my last posts. Impact on others is somewhat difficult to access really. It would be fair to assume that any other brand of aircraft flow in the same numbers may or may not have the same rate of problems. However they would have more problems overall than the lesser numbers of other aircraft flying... If me were to measure impact, it may be fair to say that the introduction of the Jabiru was one of the greatest advances that impacted the class of aviation we operate in. Raised the bar in so many ways that we may not be flying the types of machines that we currently can. As one other member suggested, Jabiru's can have a prang and this forum goes into a pack mentality. We seem to suffer with the tall poppy syndrome when it comes to our local product, and I think overall Australia has made an great impact on light aviation Worldwide. And yes I also would like to see an improvement in reliability and safety in all areas of concern relating to all aircraft and engine types.. The problem is we may just end up with the regulation we asked for, and that may be more than we thought about.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Sorry Herm, We must agree to disagree, ...I would not view the J engine anywhere close to being a 'tall poppy'......and I would further suggest that the introduction of the 912 range of engines was the real factor that 'raised the bar' for our category of aircraft worldwide, and continues to do so.......................Maj...

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Herm, mate. Many people having the same concern is not considered a 'pack mentallity" until it involves the J word.

 

I would argue that there are FAR more connie and lycoming engines in far more aircraft types, operating in far more countries over many many more years.

 

The argument that the "numbers' of them getting around will cause more incidents is not supported by fact.

 

Nobody disagrees that Jabirus have changed the RAA in this country, but tall poppy syndrome? Seriously? I think you should just accept that fact that the engines do have issues, and people have a right to expect BETTER from a certified engine manufacturer. I would disagree strongly that its some form of tall poppy syndrome, remember, its mainly people who own/fly/ or operate these craft that have the problems and form the bulk of the "pack" you speak of.

 

All this type of "stop bashing jabs" comment does is take away from the FACT that there are still problems. Ive said it before and ill say it again, report all your defects, thats how we will fix the issues. By doing this you will be making the industry safer!!!

 

 

[facthunter]

There is a proper way to install an offset piston but to say doing it wrong will cause all the consequences listed is unscientific. The main purpose is to tilt the piston, under pressure, because the pin is not in the centre. This makes the engine run a bit quieter. It also makes the load on the skirt altered in such a way as to even the load on both sides of it so there is a slight reduction on the power stroke of the side load. I am not aware of any piston skirt or thrust face scuffing that would be traced to this.

 

OFFSET PISTONS SHOULD BE INSTALLED WITH THE CENTER DISPOSED TO REDUCE THE SIDELOAD ON THE POWER STROKE

 

Some reciprocating engines were built with the bore centres offset for the same purpose. This was called the DE SAXXE principal. I don't know any engines that do it today.

 

Short conrod length will produce more sideload thrust effect than the offset will. Nev

 

 

[jakej]

IF there was more reporting of SDR' s ( service difficulty reports) or defects then we could all be better informed & see any trends that develop. Anecdotally there are a huge numbers of problems with aircraft defects that go unreported IMO - years ago a Lame told me he wouldn't report a problem with my plane because his opinion was that they wouldn't do anything about it.

 

Again, IMO, this culture of not reporting issues has to change otherwise we'll continue to have the status quo. We need to know of potential problems so that we & the manufacturers can fix them, not find out through word of mouth.

 

It beggars belief that the aviation industry will put up with problems but the same people won't accept defects in their cars, at least there are consumer laws involved there. I believe manufacturers, of all sorts of things, will protest their innocence & try to escape the need to make good defects to save money - look at the apparent recent history where a car manufacturer denied strenuously that certain models only had problems overseas, then they got found out & surprise, surprise the problem is also in Oz too.

 

IMO it's all about money, how much they can make.

 

 

[Herm]

My sentiments exactly Motzartmerv. I'd never want to see Jabs grounded however I'd love to see the engine reliability improved. I fail to see how anyone could justify disagreeing with this......?

Sorry David.. I did not dissagree with improving saftey on the Jab motors either as this post seems to ref my earlyer comments.. I just get frustrated with the way people seem to go about it.. and these sorts of comments just fire people up: problems surrounding the rubber band powered dead weight AKA Jab engine - and was told by a senior RAAus exec - 'nothing because if we ground them...

 

thanks also Merv for your take on this.. I somtimes think that I must write in another language and the the convertor is messing up my message. I simply agree that some of the Jabiru engines have had issues with reliability as stated in all of my posts. My issue is with the approach that some members seem to take on the issue that others often find offensive. Having concerns is a good thing and being worried about how people go about dealing with these concerns is a concern.

 

Without going back on what I have already posted I find that some of my opinions have been taken or precieved very differntly than my intention. I fully understand that GA has a greater reliability and that argument could have been used even before the introduction of the Jab. I still feel in my opinion that the Jabiru has made a huge impact on our flying as has very well been the tall poppy if you want to put in that perspective. Yes the 912 has also had a massive impact in raising the bar, but the history of Jab and the totality of my comment excludes that. And yes I own one of those Jabs and don't at this stage find myself in that pack. I still have as an owner voiced my concerns at these motors in the past and fly my aircraft like I was flying a 2 stroke... All my posts are really about comments like the one above and the chest bashing approach to solving the problem for all us Jabiru owners. Then others band together an;d do the same (Pack Mentality). Not sure about the numbers thing in respect to RaAus aircraft only, but thier you go..

 

 

[turboplanner]

Well that's not exactly what you were saying Herm, you were suggesting that because Jabiru had the greatest volume it follows that they should have the most problems.

 

In terms of general problems that is correct, logical, and will show up in statistics. However when a product has a specific issue, such as through bolt failures, and the statistics clearly show that competitive products do not have that issue, the argument doesn't work and it's time to buckle down and get the issue fixed.

 

You can make a similar argument that because RA allows self maintenance, and many owners couldn't find a dipstick then this could be causing many of the failures, but the statistics show that with an even number of amateurs maintaining their aircraft on both Jabiru and Rotax, the Rotax engines don't have the same specific problems.

 

With my design and manufacturing background I have no axe to grind with a particular manufacturer because design faults and service failures are not something which might or might not occur, they WILL occur, and solving them is part of the job specification.

 

The automotive industry has learnt (with the recent exception of a European manufacturer) that there are no sales losses when they issue a recall to fix a fault; my Nissan had five new mag wheels, a new tow bar and a chassis modification because something has happened on one or two vehicles and MIGHT happen on mine.

 

We need to be objective rather than like barrackers for football teams.

 

 

[jetjr]

I think theres an echo here...... Didnt this one run out of fuel?

 

How does this become a discussion on engine brand reliability. Also we see again talk of rotax being a great engine (which it is) being raised vs a 3300 jabiru, unless your talking 914 it aint a comparison.

 

Surely this should be a wake up to all pilots to take better care of fuel management or at least fuel quality and system maintenance.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

The 170 had a cylinder head part company. The 230 had fuel starvation (allegedly).