Guest Maj Millard Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 We need more info than that Maj and then a full analysis of the cause and including on the ground failures, maintenance processes and that list doesn't show that, it doesn't show what is not reported and is only for the last 2 years. It needs an audit of the engines produced over at least 5 years and say an anon questionnaire to current and past (5 years) jab engine owners if you are to do it properly. It would need an independent investigation with the powers to seize documentation and perform an analysis of both engines...otherwise you just have Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics. We don't want RAAus to be known for that but rather being proactive in getting to the bottom, and in what ever it takes, of it all in the context of being concerned for the safety of its members not to mention putting it to rest once and for all or acting on it. Generally in my experience Ian it is not lies, Damned lies and statistics that put aircraft and people into cane fields after their engine has failed them at 250 hrs. Way past time that the manufacturer of those engines spent time looking at the known weaknesses and improving the reliability of the engine....not putting their heads in the sand and hoping it will all go away sometime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggles Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Yea Bob, do all of that.......it's the unannounced major that nags away.....at times.Looking across at my beautiful wife, when "that moment" arises, is not a nice feeling. She.....is totally unaware of " dangers within" . I've purposely not raised the matter with her, as she would still bug me for us to fly, but that would then make 2 of us uneasy. Call me stupid, call me wrong, no offence taken. Nice words Russ . I know where you're coming from . I also often look across to my partner of more than 50 years , as we fly those long lonely legs to the Gulf and beyond , she blissfully unaware of the thoughts going through my mind , listening to every revolution of the little J 2200 for those early warning signs of an impending fault . I guess we will all know when it's time to take up bowls , but in the mean time we are both fortunate to have partners that share our passion . As I have previously said on this forum , these days I avoid tiger country at all times where possible , preferring the safe and landable , opposed to the shortest or direct track option . At least if the noise stops there is a fair chance you will both walk away . Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Casa already has resevations about self maintenence and how we handle L1 and L2, IN THEIR EYES the LAME system is the backbone of safety system for little aircraft. I totally agree that an experinced owner will do a better job than a large LAME run workshop thinking they know Jab engines or Rotax for that matter BUT putting reality ahead of public perception isnt what CASA is reknown for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zodiac Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 No argument here Motz - Ipad fat finger error strikes again. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 There is nothing wrong with the current L1 system, it is the basic design of one particular engine that is at fault. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I totally agree that an experienced owner will do a better job than a large LAME run workshop thinking they know Jab engines or Rotax for that matter....... Woah....... LAMEs, by virtue of being human, are not perfect. But holy bat-logic Batman! You seriously reckon owners are? Seriously? LAMEs (and no, I am not a LAME, I am merely a pilot who has a couple of flying hours here and there over a couple of years aviation experience) undergo a bucketload of training, both theoretical and on-the-job, specifically applicable to aircraft and engine maintenance. Not a 2 week or 2 weekend, course, but years. I have heard of maintainer-owners do things which would see a LAME sacked in the blink of an eye. I have even heard of owners doing things which would have a LAME charged with a criminal offence. Like I said, you can get good LAMEs and bad LAMEs just like you can get good pilots and bad pilots. But gosh, the rather arbitrary statement that an owner will always do a better job than someone with 10 or 20 years aircraft maintenance experience - well that just can't be taken seriously! 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camel Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I use to fly two strokes and many here still do, no problem but they do fail and you need to keep up the maintenance and fly accordingly, jabs fail as well as other engines. Flying is dangerous, but with anything dangerous you need to minimise the risks, don't fly long distance over tiger country or don't fly over what you can't glide clear of, take nothing for granted make sure, guessing is taking a risk. I am well aware of Jabiru design problems and have no doubts about what Maj says and what Camit are trying to solve but engines that are not overheated used regularly and well maintained and inspected will run reliability ( with a bit of luck) Rotax 912 seem to be able to handle abuse. Tips that may help. Do not climb steep in a Jab, level off every 500ft to let it cool, keep power on during decent or as much as possible, slowly apply and reduce power, do not let it idle at low RPM or let the engine get hot on the ground while waiting, do not full load a cold engine, do not overfill the oil, research the oil viscosity for your climate, if using Avgas change oil regularly, inspect the through bolts regularly, inspect valve washers at services, during preflight check oil cooler and cowl inlets and outlets for blockages like grass. I do not know whether doing this will stop a failure but if you handle an engine badly it is more likely to fail. I had a 912 and a 3300 and I only felt nervous over country without landing options and that was in both. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 There is nothing wrong with the current L1 system, it is the basic design of one particular engine that is at fault. For clarity, the reason I say this, is because we have around 3500 aircraft on the register and a fair chunk of them are L1 maitained and they are not falling out of the sky in any resonable number to suggest that the owner maintainer is responsible IMO. 2 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Yep fair enough poorly worded, Im sure there are good LAMEs out there with Jabiru experience but I dont know of them. Dont think the stats back up the idea that professionally maintained engines do better than privately. Its often touted after a failure, as assurance it was maintained correctly. What I meant was that placing an unknown engine in the hands of a LAME doesnt mean it will be maintained as it should be. It will be done to Jabiru documents no doubt but plainly this isnt enough. The mainstream system works on having accurate documents, well sorted installations and clear, proven maint procedures. Much of which are present with these uncertified engines. The issue Im trying to make is currency and experience on the engine are more important than qualification or documentation going with it. The most dangerous maintainer is one who thinks they know it all. Also dont underestimate all owners, just because they arent a L2 doesnt make them unsuitable or without experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dafydd Llewellyn Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I'd not tackle anything major on a Jab OR a 912; though I've fully rebuilt many a car or light truck engine; there are too many subtle little tricks and special tools involved. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVOCET Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Ditto I'd not tackle anything major on a Jab OR a 912; though I've fully rebuilt many a car or light truck engine; there are too many subtle little tricks and special tools involved. Ditto , Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
01rmb Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 I am sure a lot of people (owner maintainers or LAMEs) think they know how to maintain a Jab/Rotax engine but don't really understand the nuances and subtle differences needed to run them well and critically to identify things before they become a serious problem. These engines are built to get a lot of power from a light package which by the very nature requires compromise in tolerance that are not an issue with a typical GA engine. Things like lead fouling from avgas fuel may just have a Cessna running rough but in a Jabiru it will cause much more serious issues with exhaust valves failing. It is a bit like a tractor engine vs a F1 engine - Large differential in power/weight with much finer tolerances in valves and pistons and therefore way more susceptible to less than perfect maintenance and handling. With servicing, you are far better off with somebody who knows the finer points of looking after these engines. If you don't know what to look out for, the first you will know about it is when you are looking for a nice paddock to land in. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Yep fair enough poorly worded, Im sure there are good LAMEs out there with Jabiru experience but I dont know of them. Dont think the stats back up the idea that professionally maintained engines do better than privately. Its often touted after a failure, as assurance it was maintained correctly. What I meant was that placing an unknown engine in the hands of a LAME doesnt mean it will be maintained as it should be. It will be done to Jabiru documents no doubt but plainly this isnt enough. The mainstream system works on having accurate documents, well sorted installations and clear, proven maint procedures. Much of which are present with these uncertified engines. The issue Im trying to make is currency and experience on the engine are more important than qualification or documentation going with it. The most dangerous maintainer is one who thinks they know it all. Also dont underestimate all owners, just because they arent a L2 doesnt make them unsuitable or without experience. Your 2nd last paragraph should have come first. The rest of your sentiments are well on the money. Some owners of machinery are fit only to be escorted to the machine strapped in and instructed to touch nothing, then you take the keys away from them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVOCET Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Your 2nd last paragraph should have come first. The rest of your sentiments are well on the money. Some owners of machinery are fit only to be escorted to the machine strapped in and instructed to touch nothing, then you take the keys away from them. I think this " fly away mo more to pay" Mentality that was coined to sell more aircraft , worked well for sales but introduced a class of pilot that in some cases dont have the "ear" to pick up on subtle changes in engine performance ect. I lent my series 1 landrover to some one who took off with the choke left on and proceeded to drive away , needless to say when i caught up with him did not notice it was running rough , even though the day before drove it around With the engine running great . Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RKW Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 POST DOES NOT ADD VALUE - MOD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVOCET Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 I Series one. That's the antichrist model! It is now , decided to run on 3 cyl , Oiling no 1 spark plug , think its a valve stem seal ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 I'd not tackle anything major on a Jab OR a 912; though I've fully rebuilt many a car or light truck engine; there are too many subtle little tricks and special tools involved. Thank you for an open and honest post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabiru Phil Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Been around machines for 60 plus years. I reckon I have a good grasp of the sound of a motor by now. I have a great regard for professional services by lame 2's. 100 hourly or 12 months. They picked up an exhaust valve that needed lapping in, a ring that was not sealing right. So for about $450 a year or $5.00 an hour, I am pretty confident that when i fly I have the odds on my side. The outlay may deter some from my theory of safe flying, hope not. Rider, get an expert on the engine you have. Phil 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 And just so this particular post doesn't go stale anytime soon... ....ops have confirmed this morning yet another J230 engine failure and emergency landing last Sunday in the Townsville area. Sounding like a sucked valve resulting in piston and other serious damage with a lucky emergency landing for the pilot. Members are reminded that failure to report an accident or incident ( and the above qualifies) is now a serious infringement of an ATSB federal law requirement in regulations. This aircraft is believed to have around 350-400 hours, was well maintained, and often used. I Know the pilot personally and I am happy to hear of no injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Glad hes ok Maj. Has there been a reg change re reporting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russ Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Surely this day and age, a performance engineering shop could machine up a valve and retainers etc etc, from " suited " material , that will do our job reliably, jabs dropping valves is my own worries. No warning.......all over red rover. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Often there IS warning. eg.Valve guide wear Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Plenty of other engines out there that don 't drop valves anymore ...your modern motor vehical for instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 It Glad hes ok Maj. Has there been a reg change re reporting? It has always been a requirement or recommendation Motz...ATSB has recently formalized it and I believe it's in our ops manual.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Often there IS warning. eg.Valve guide wear Nev So what are you saying ?.......are you supposed to replace all valve - guides every four hundred hours ?....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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