Yet another Jab down.....

[horsefeathers]

There are 2 main engine brands that we use, Rotax and Jabiru. Could we get, and how could we get, statistics on all the failures of any kind both in the air and on the ground, and compare them to see exactly where we stand and if there is an alarming difference then possibly something could be done in the interests of our safety...but you need facts and only facts

Exactly.

I fly a Rotax 582,so I have no axe to grind.

 

As yet, I have not seen hard statistics about actual causes of jab engine failures, (lots of conjecture) and until these are produced, this forum is about as useless as the proverbial on a bull, except that jab forumites may keep a better eye on engine maintenance.

 

In other words, someone using the infamous so called RAA slush fund should investigate each jab failure and give the membership hard facts, not innuendo. This may just save a future lawsuit against RAA for inaction

 

 

[motzartmerv]

spend time looking at the task of allowing those who engineer upgrades be allowed to implement them. Start investing time sorting out regulatory ways out for all those stranded and broke Jabiru owners mentioned. .

Investing time in sorting this mess? A noble thought but really? Its up to me now to chase up regulatory and engineering change to a "CERTIFIED ENGINE"?

 

Mate, with all due respect, " that aint my job". Nor is it yours or anyone elses, apart from the company that profits from them, and their shortcomings.

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

spend time looking at the task of allowing those who engineer upgrades be allowed to implement them. Start investing time sorting out regulatory ways out for all those stranded and broke Jabiru owners mentioned. Running down the product and belting on about Jabiru fixing it, isnt working and is unlikely to. Just brings down Jabiru owners not the company.Just say we follow your advice, totally redesign engine (to you specs of course) and it without doubt proves to be reliable for 5000 hrs TBO without even oil changes. How is this going to help 25 reg Jabiru owners?

 

Jabiru either cant or wont get involved in re-engineering their engines. Maybe from experience in things like Hydraulic lifters. Where what was a widely used and promoted technique has turned out to be a major contributor to a string of problems over years. No doubt cost them dearly and IMO still does. Continually saying that they should fix it is such a waste of time.

 

Now with Ian working on his own thing I doubt he is going to hand his IP to Jabiru. Leaves them with problems and not much solution.

 

People with LSA purchased them with the restrictions in place to get a factory built aircraft. It was always going to be the case that were there issues builder wouldn't recognize, see a commercial conflict etc etc. that they were stuck with what they bought. Even common sense upgrades would maybe not be permitted.

 

Aftermarket upgrades is a logical and solid answer but at this stage they can only sell them to small number of 19 regd aircraft so who would spend the time and money? And it will take a lot of both.

 

How about get going getting paperwork together on 912 transplants going, build a kit.

It doesn't need a "Committee to re-invent the Wheel"; the regulatory options are all set out in CASR Part 21.

IMHO, LSA is a dead-end, for the reasons JJ has mentioned. The "Solid" way is via Supplemental Type Certificate modifications (CASR 21 subpart E). You have only to look at the plethora of STCs approved by the FAA to see how important this mechanism is; but it's not available for LSA aircraft.

 

 

[jetjr]

It isnt certified Merv, only a few 4 cyl. So I suspect CASA doesnt give a rats other than the LSA structure has provided the impression they are somehow certificated.

 

I agree with your point of view but it doesnt get anywhere.

 

We spend plenty of time here discussing the point.

 

Mainly directed those in positions able to do something constructive. If it is such a massive problem and such an easy fix, imagine the returns you could make?

 

Shouldnt RAA look into this regulatory problem and support someone looking to STC setup for LSA. It is a bigger issue than just this Jab engine problem. What happens when a Euro special has some structural issue and they are gone, been sold or cant afford the work to fix it?

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

This is what annoys me.. Why should it be up to Ian, or camit, or the owner to sort the problem?

Good question. Next question?

 

 

[Russ]

My 160C is now on the market.

 

 

[turboplanner]

How about Maj, Merv, TP and Alf and others spend time looking at the task of allowing those who engineer upgrades be allowed to implement them. Start investing time sorting out regulatory ways out for all those stranded and broke Jabiru owners mentioned. Running down the product and belting on about Jabiru fixing it, isnt working and is unlikely to. Just brings down Jabiru owners not the company.Just say we follow your advice, totally redesign engine (to you specs of course) and it without doubt proves to be reliable for 5000 hrs TBO without even oil changes. How is this going to help 25 reg Jabiru owners?

 

Jabiru either cant or wont get involved in re-engineering their engines.

Your last line sums it up in a nutshell.

 

 

[Admin]

I believe we need to "Watch this space" over the next few weeks as we may be alerted to, and possibly very publicly, investigations that have been underway in the area of Jabiru engines. It is not for me to say any more other than RAAus, CASA and ATSB are all involved so let's wait and see what comes out in the interest of safety for us all

 

 

[turboplanner]

Good question. Next question?

Dafydd, as I recall you told us you certified this engine. You used the quaint "certificated" term , but when you certify something for the automotive arm of the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development you have ownership in that product.

 

It's not product liability you need to be worried about, it's public liability, and if someone doesn't make it in a forced landing the lawyers decide who they'll go after.

 

So it would be in your interest to answer either directly or by example, Motz's question.

 

POST EDITED AS IT DOES NOT ADD VALUE - MOD

 

 

[Russ]

POST DOES NOT ADD VALUE - MOD

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

Dafydd, as I recall you told us you certified this engine. You used the quaint "certificated" term , but when you certify something for the automotive arm of the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development you have ownership in that product.It's not product liability you need to be worried about, it's public liability, and if someone doesn't make it in a forced landing the lawyers decide who they'll go after.

 

So it would be in your interest to answer either directly or by example, Motz's question. Your comment above is not a good look.

You recall incorrectly. And the legal term is "certificated" (i.e. issued with a certificate); look up the regulations. If you do not comprehend that there is a difference between CASA and the automotive arm of the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, it's about time you did.

The Jabiru 2200 J and 2200C were certificated by CASA; see for example http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/casadata/cota/download/ve501.pdf

 

Nobody but CASA has the authority to issue a Type Certificate. I was involved in quite a few of the aspects of the type certification testing of the Jab 2200J; but I did not do any of the finding of compliance.

 

The Type Certificate is a certification BY CASA that the product complies with a specific design standard (product safety standard). I strongly suggest you read CASR 21 subpart B before you make this sort of pronouncement.

 

POST EDITED AS IT DOES NOT ADD VALUE - MOD

 

I have no commercial interest in Jabiru or anything Jabiru does, and no say whatever in the management of the company; I've simply been used by them as a consultant from time to time - mainly in regard to flight testing, but also in helping to run the J2200 engine certification tests. Those tests were run under the observation of about half a dozen CASA engineers, who were on-site for about a week.

 

POST EDITED AS IT DOES NOT ADD VALUE - MOD

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

There are 2 main engine brands that we use, Rotax and Jabiru. Could we get, and how could we get, statistics on all the failures of any kind both in the air and on the ground, and compare them to see exactly where we stand and if there is an alarming difference then possibly something could be done in the interests of our safety...but you need facts and only facts

The facts are there Ian...go and look at the accident and incident reports for the last two years which are presented and constantly updated on the RAAus website as they occur by Ops. Additionally CASA recently requested we supply them with the data that the RAAus has on file.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Personal opinion follows:-

 

So RAAus is a incorporated association which at the end of the day is a group of members that all have a common goal of commiting aviation in a specific subset of aircraft. Does the association of itself have any powers beyond that of each individual? No it doesn't! Except possibly in financial power in that the group can, if it chooses, throw more resources at a problem than a single average individual might.

 

In order to facilitate committing aviation our early association board members arranged to have RAAus act as a delegate for CASA in return for some exemptions and some payments. In turn CASA said, you do those things, but you must do them to our standard.....

 

So when I hear people say that RAAus must do something I wonder what it is that they would have us do? If members reporting of accidents and incidents is accurate and we in RAAus can see a trend, then CASA, to whom that same data is provided can also see a trend. We could, notwithstanding that they should see it if we can, point it out to them, but what exactly, other than that pointing out, would you want an organisation like ours to do?

 

Bear in mind that CASA only recently started to progressively ground us because we couldn't do the things we were supposed to do according to the way we said we would do them in our manuals of procedures based on the way that CASA wants them done....

 

Again only recently we couldn't tell how many members we really had......

 

So I truly wonder what it is that members want us to do that is commensurate with our real, rather than imagined maturity.

 

We could try and gather those affected together to see if there is a class action possibility.....but if we were to have skin in the game would those other members, the majority, who don't have a Jabiru engine be happy we are using their funds for that purpose, would they be happy that registrations and renewals fall behind again because we only have sufficient staff at present to meet the manual way of doing things? What is the likelihood of success........

 

In answer to these questions its my view that RAAus as an organization is barely managing to keep its head above water at present. We are in the process of trying to change to make us more sustainable than we currently are. We don't have the funds, nor the capacity, nor the expertise and are very unlikely to have the total membership support to kick of a legal tilt at seeing if we get heads or tails on the coin toss.....

 

So again I ask what is it that members would have us do so that:-

 

1) if the issue is an issue that anything we might say or do doesn't end up with the organization defending a defamation action.

 

2) our needs to modernize ourself so that our longer term survival is not jeopardised are not interfered with.

 

3) our relationship with the regulator is not damaged.

 

4) our membership broadly supports what it is that we are doing....I mean a simplistic view might be "I fly Rotax" so I don't want any of my membership money spent on this......A more considered view might be" If enough J's fail and someone(s) are killed then CASA might step in and legislate us all to some extent that we all are subject to additional costs and restrictions...so its not black or white..

 

 

[Admin]

The facts are there Ian...go and look at the accident and incident reports for the last two years which are presented and constantly updated on the RAAus website as they occur by Ops. Additionally CASA recently requested we supply them with the data that the RAAus has on file.

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.

 

 

[biggles]

My 160C is now on the market.[ATTACH]32696[/ATTACH]

Nice looking 160 Russ . May not be as popular as it's big sister but I think will become a classic in time , but then again I also have one , so may be a little biased . Hope the comments here have not been a catalyst in your decision to sell .

 

Bob

 

 

[motzartmerv]

160 is the best aeroplane Jab have produced (IMHO). Fantastic little plane!

 

 

[01rmb]

And a possible outcome of all this is that CASA simply requires that all maintenance be performed by a LAME to ensure that proper maintenance is done on all aircraft engines for Jabiru and Rotax alike to identify and rectify any problems. In my quick look at the incident figures there still have been a number of Rotax failures so why would CASA differentiate? Without knowing how many of each type are flying the number of failures between each type is irrelevant to working out failure rate. ie Ford, Holden and Toyata have the most car crashes so they must be unsafe...

 

I believe that better fuel, better maintenance and some better components if they could be fitted to 24 registered aircraft (aka CAMit and most probably even Jabiru) will go a long way to improving the situation. So if there is a component fix - how does it get implemented if the current restrictive licencing requirements prevents them being fitted? Surely being able to modify a 24 registered aircraft with properly tested components/modifications without needing the aircraft manufacturers approval or/and with a huge associated expense is something that we and RA-Aus (as our members representative) should be seeking from CASA.

 

If Jabiru aircraft stop flying then it will leave a lot of people (I don't know but is it 2/3 ?? of the RA-Aus fleet with Jabiru powered aircraft) with a large fibreglass paperweight. If all aircraft face additional limitations - how will that go for members/pilots/owners (Jabiru and no Jabiru alike) and RA-Aus?

 

I would absolutely like to see reliability and maintenance improve since it is me and my family flying in the aircraft but I fear throwing Jabiru under the bus will not help the recreational aircraft industry as a whole. Surely a collaborative approach with Jabiru, RA-Aus and CASA will gain a better outcome.

 

 

[Russ]

I absolutely love it.....I point it, and just go. I might run into "shyte" enroute, it handles that no probs,

 

Short field landings / takeoffs, economy, comfort, storage, endurance.....love it.

 

But.......that random thought of doom ( engine ) enroute, nags at me. And reading the goings on here doesn't make it easier.

 

I believe ( unconfirmed ) the Camit project has stalled ( 2.2 ) I've been waiting with baited breath to get one, when....that eventuates now, is any bodies guess. I would not be surprised if $$$$ was the factor, as it would be serious $$$$. Time will tell.

 

 

[biggles]

I absolutely love it.....I point it, and just go. I might run into "shyte" enroute, it handles that no probs,Short field landings / takeoffs, economy, comfort, storage, endurance.....love it.

But.......that random thought of doom ( engine ) enroute, nags at me. And reading the goings on here doesn't make it easier.

 

I believe ( unconfirmed ) the Camit project has stalled ( 2.2 ) I've been waiting with baited breath to get one, when....that eventuates now, is any bodies guess. I would not be surprised if $$$$ was the factor, as it would be serious $$$$. Time will tell.

Yes Russ ,I guess that thought of an engine out is always there no matter what engine is up front ,however there are a few simple precautions that people can do to minimise the risk of an engine failure ,and they are well documented . A cold pullover (I usually do around 10 or so compressions ) will generally give an indication if something is amiss - unusual sounds , low compression etc. and don't forget to ensure that the engine oil is at the recommended level . These are to minimum checks I perform on the engine before the first flight of the day and before the next leg of the journey .

 

Bob

 

 

[Russ]

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.

 

 

[dazza 38]

And a possible outcome of all this is that CASA simply requires that all maintenance be performed by a LAME to ensure that proper maintenance is done on all aircraft engines for Jabiru and Rotax alike to identify and rectify any problems. In my quick look at the incident figures there still have been a number of Rotax failures so why would CASA differentiate? Without knowing how many of each type are flying the number of failures between each type is irrelevant to working out failure rate. ie Ford, Holden and Toyata have the most car crashes so they must be unsafe...I believe that better fuel, better maintenance and some better components if they could be fitted to 24 registered aircraft (aka CAMit and most probably even Jabiru) will go a long way to improving the situation. So if there is a component fix - how does it get implemented if the current restrictive licencing requirements prevents them being fitted? Surely being able to modify a 24 registered aircraft with properly tested components/modifications without needing the aircraft manufacturers approval or/and with a huge associated expense is something that we and RA-Aus (as our members representative) should be seeking from CASA.

 

If Jabiru aircraft stop flying then it will leave a lot of people (I don't know but is it 2/3 ?? of the RA-Aus fleet with Jabiru powered aircraft) with a large fibreglass paperweight. If all aircraft face additional limitations - how will that go for members/pilots/owners (Jabiru and no Jabiru alike) and RA-Aus?

 

I would absolutely like to see reliability and maintenance improve since it is me and my family flying in the aircraft but I fear throwing Jabiru under the bus will not help the recreational aircraft industry as a whole. Surely a collaborative approach with Jabiru, RA-Aus and CASA will gain a better outcome.

I read somewhere that the fleet has approx 1/3 Jabiru, 1/3 Rotax 912 and the last 1/3 is a combination of the Rotax 2 strokes and all the other engine brands combined like Subaru, Hirth ect.

 

 

[Camel]

And a possible outcome of all this is that CASA simply requires that all maintenance be performed by a LAME to ensure that proper maintenance is done on all aircraft engines for Jabiru and Rotax alike to identify and rectify any problems. In my quick look at the incident figures there still have been a number of Rotax failures so why would CASA differentiate? Without knowing how many of each type are flying the number of failures between each type is irrelevant to working out failure rate. ie Ford, Holden and Toyata have the most car crashes so they must be unsafe...I believe that better fuel, better maintenance and some better components if they could be fitted to 24 registered aircraft (aka CAMit and most probably even Jabiru) will go a long way to improving the situation. So if there is a component fix - how does it get implemented if the current restrictive licencing requirements prevents them being fitted? Surely being able to modify a 24 registered aircraft with properly tested components/modifications without needing the aircraft manufacturers approval or/and with a huge associated expense is something that we and RA-Aus (as our members representative) should be seeking from CASA.

 

If Jabiru aircraft stop flying then it will leave a lot of people (I don't know but is it 2/3 ?? of the RA-Aus fleet with Jabiru powered aircraft) with a large fibreglass paperweight. If all aircraft face additional limitations - how will that go for members/pilots/owners (Jabiru and no Jabiru alike) and RA-Aus?

 

I would absolutely like to see reliability and maintenance improve since it is me and my family flying in the aircraft but I fear throwing Jabiru under the bus will not help the recreational aircraft industry as a whole. Surely a collaborative approach with Jabiru, RA-Aus and CASA will gain a better outcome.

Don't kid yourself thinking LAMEs are going to solve anything, in 9 years of owing a GA plane after any work was done by a LAME I found plenty of mistakes, and some very dangerous mistakes.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

My experience with LAMES and Jab engines would be on par with L2's.

 

Plenty of failures and breakdowns with LAMES sigs on the MR's,

 

 

[alf jessup]

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.

Russ,

 

No one is ever going to call anyone stupid unless they do stupid things while flying, what you have is a healthy respect for living and it is called self preservation, I got that way towards the end in the trikes after about 760hrs flying them, started not liking the turbulence ect,

 

No engine is bullet proof not even the mighty R I fly behind and I acknowledge that, but I still have more confidence in it than other brands, each to their own mate.

 

An engine failure shouldn't kill you if you handle it right but also it is nice to have a little confidence on what's pulling you through the air.

 

There is nothing saying your J160 is going to fail after the wheels leave terra firma and that goes for mine too, but we all have to still practice what we were taught during our training and practice it regular, plenty of pilots out there wouldn't have done a drill since their last BFR and are quite happy to sit fat dumb and happy until the noise stops then deal with it, but that is not for me and although regular practice won't necessary make you perfect it might just make you a little more comfortable when the noise stops.

 

Alf

 

 

[motzartmerv]

POST DOES NOT ADD VALUE - MOD