CASA - Draft Proposal for Jabiru Aircraft

[Rolf]

Here is a quick extract of RA AUST's safety policy

 

Not sure if our president (and some in this forum) read this before they wrote there response to CASA

 

Safety Policy

 

Our commitment is to:

 

• develop and embed a safety culture in all our recreational flying activities that recognises the importance and value of effective aviation safety management and acknowledges at all times that safety is paramount(Comment:Above financial interest ?);
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

• clearly define for all members their accountabilities and responsibilities for the development and delivery of flying safety strategy and performance;
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

• minimise the risks associated with aircraft operations to a point that is as low as reasonably practicable/achievable;
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

• ensure that externally supplied systems and services that impact upon the safety of our operations meet appropriate safety standards;
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

• I cannot see many response in this threat that seem to take this policy serious.
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

• By the way where is our safety manager hiding in all off this.
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

• The facts are that RAAUS and I am sorry to say this, Jabiru owners themselves have accepted the problems for far too long. I believe that RAAUS has not fulfilled its duty to its members and has been sleeping on this issue for far too long. If RAAUS WOULD HAVE ACTED EARLIER maybe the mess we are in right now could have been avoided.
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

• I had 2 engine failures in training thanks god with the CFI on my side. I made my decision 4 years ago. What took so long. I feel for every Jabiru owner but lets face it the only way out and to minimise the damage is for Jabiru to fix the problem as soon as possible and stop the denial.
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

• Lets point our fingers in the right direction and stop blaming the people that raise there concerns for very good reasons.
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

[dutchroll]

I totally disagree with Dutchroll. CASA are NOT interested in my safety. By far the most dangerous thing I do is being forced to fly lower than safe to in order to leave unused airspace above me.For years, we were forced to fly below 5000ft, even when going to Tasmania, and it took Eugene Reid and the RAAus years of work to drag CASA and Airservices or whoever into permitting us to fly there with safety.

Yes I know some of the culpability belongs to Airservices, but CASA should be on our side when a safety issue is at stake.

 

Until I see this I will continue to know that CASA is hostile to my safety, no matter what false words are in their title.

So over one solitary issue, which is predominantly an Airservices issue (Airservices are the airspace managers in Australia), you deem CASA completely disinterested in Australian aviation safety?

What's "lower than safe"? Minimum safe altitudes are well defined. The rest is subjective. There are many more safety issues I'd be concerned about with flying a small single engine aircraft to Tassie before I started getting worried about not being above 5000 ft!

 

 

[Rolf]

Hi Bruce

 

I totally agree that there are other safety issues but this threat is about 1 particular problem. Just because there are other risks that might have a higher severity does not mean you brush all the others aside this is not how safety works. If You as an experienced pilot I take it think there are other and more severe risks that can be mitigated I kindly ask You to put them forward to our safety manager to keep us low hour pilots safe, but don't mix them up in this threat!!

 

 

[facthunter]

IF you literally used that policy doc (except the one listed 3rd) you could justify any process whether realistic or not. Nev

 

 

[Captain]

........ but has been escalated up to the Office of the Director & signed by Steve Neal who I presume is a PA of the acting director Terry Farquharson.

The CASA website lists Steve Neal as "Section Head - Government Industry and Community Relations" so it appears that his role is to look after the CASA's "relations" with Industry and Community.

 

 

 

Perhaps he is there to undo the damage that others have done ..... or perhaps to spin the current position to best effect for CASA ..... or perhaps he is simply dedicated to looking after YOU.

 

 

[rhysmcc]

I don't think you can blame airservices for not being able to access above 5000ft or controlled airspace, they don't write the regulations.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

In a light plane, ALTITUDE=SAFETY. Engine failure is of no consequence if you have enough height to glide to an airfield, avoiding all of the litigation-incurring obstacles on the way.

 

The front cover of my Jabiru flight manual says that the aircraft shall be operated with a view to the fact that the engine may cease at any time, and I do operate it like this except when I am prevented from doing so.

 

The primary safety feature of all our aircraft is NOT the reliability of the engine, it is the low stalling speed.

 

This is why the stall speed restriction is there. You only have to keep flying the plane and if necessary aim the fuselage between obstacles to walk away. The higher you are, the more choice you have of spots to put down in.

 

"Lower than safe" means not having an engine-out glide to a landing spot. Sorry for not spelling this out, I guess I've flown gliders too much and I think its obvious.

 

Well even if you can't reach a good landing spot, the Jabiru has a tough structure with the high-wing giving a roll-cage, and it therefore has a good safety record. Look at the USA figures of fatalities , you will see the Jabiru is about the safest and I think the Lancair is the least safe.

 

Getting back to dutchroll's point, I didn't say that CASA is not interested in anyone's safety, I said they are not interested in mine. Fare paying passengers should be their area of concern.

 

 

[turboplanner]

In a light plane, ALTITUDE=SAFETY. Engine failure is of no consequence if you have enough height to glide to an airfield, avoiding all of the litigation-incurring obstacles on the way.

This is the belief which is central to the whole screaming match. A lot of people, like you, believe the same.

 

Forced landings would be a non-event, and CASA's action would not be justifiable if everyone could conduct a safe forced landing

 

They would even be a non-event if people achieved a few bruises and scratches after landing at what what you call the "primary safety feature" - the low stalling speed.

 

However, RA pilots haven't been achieving that in recent years, with a number of aircraft dropping out of the sky and drilling the ground, killing everyone on board.

 

 

[Teckair]

I don't think you can blame airservices for not being able to access above 5000ft or controlled airspace, they don't write the regulations.

And CASA or RAAus shouldn't be blamed for Jabiru issues.

 

 

[Rolf]

I am sorry Bruce and Nev

 

I believe you are really missing the point in this discussion. There are flight situations were en engine failure will result in serious consequences as takeoffs and landings. Situations frequently exercised during circuit training. So I believe CASA's restrictions in regard to training operations are quite reasonable to protect student pilots.

 

I personally cannot comprehend the "she will be right attitude" in this forum.

 

I cannot imagine anyone in this forum to accept that there car engine have to have the heads pulled off every couple of hundred hours to ensure the engine does not stop. So why are you accepting this in an engine aircraft?

 

The facts are RAAUS and Jabiru have been negligent in these matters and something needed to be done for the benefit of everyone including all Jabiru owners.

 

 

[Teckair]

The facts are RAAUS and Jabiru have been negligent in these matters and something needed to be done for the benefit of everyone including all Jabiru owners.

What about people who continued to buy Jabirus when the issues were well known whose fault is that? How was RAAus negligent?

 

 

[biggles]

However, RA pilots haven't been achieving that in recent years, with a number of aircraft dropping out of the sky and drilling the ground, killing everyone on board.

Interesting comment Turbo ! My recollection of 'recent fatals ' has mainly been VH registered aircraft .

 

Bob

 

 

[turboplanner]

Ah right, so all the RIPs over the last few years have been imaginary?

 

 

[Ian Burdon]

Ah right, so all the RIPs over the last few years have been imaginary?

None of these have involved Jabiru's as far as I know.

 

 

[Teckair]

None of these have involved Jabiru's as far as I know.

But it does show pilots not coping with engine failures.

 

 

[kgwilson]

So how many fatal accidents in the last say 3 years have been attributable to failed forced landings due to engine failure?

 

 

[Chird65]

...I cannot imagine anyone in this forum to accept that there car engine have to have the heads pulled off every couple of hundred hours to ensure the engine does not stop. So why are you accepting this in an engine aircraft?.

Rolf, comparing cars engines to aeroplane engines never works.

 

I agree; why do I need maintenance every 100 hours as compared to 15,000 km - why does one need an engineer as compared to a TAFE qualification. But that is what it is and we can not compare the two.

 

I disagree that there is a she'll be right attitude. Most of the Pro Jabiru supporters want to know the actual raw figures as well as the statistics that show there is a "extraordinary high rate" and growing trend of failures. Also, the safety outcome required is not achieved by punishing the operators of the aircraft.

 

Those that have had engine problems, rightly, have had a wakeup call and have adjusted there concept of risk. Some choose not to fly Jabirus, some choose to try to get to the bottom of issues and others choose to tell as many as they can of their perceived risk.

 

I for one want to see some confirmation of the issues from both CASA and Jabiru. That way I get two opposing views and can then try to make my own decision on the risk. At this point I do not have that information.

 

Chris

 

 

[turboplanner]

Someone said a while back that Angel Flight had operated for years without a fatality.

 

That wasn't correct, three people were killed, and that triggered some CASA action.

 

Here are the links to the ATSB Report and CASA's Discussion Paper, so you can see the CASA process in action rather than just assume CASA have set their sights on attacking rather than addressing.

 

ww.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2011/aair/ao-2011-100.aspx

 

http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/newrules/ops/download/dp1317os.pdf

 

 

[facthunter]

An unplanned engine out will never be a non event, unless you are most fortunate in the circumstances you find yourself in, but if trained for, is better than an inflight fire, or structural failure or CFIT or mid air collision, or such..

 

No plane is a hands off don't inspect or test, just fly it proposition. You inspect your airframe, the controls the tyres brakes and try to make your electrics safe and change fuel and coolant hoses etc do a fuel drain every time you fly.. Flying is markedly different from many other activities, inso much as till you get it back on the ground you can't work on it, or add fuel or even clean oil off the windscreen . Helicopters used to have about 7 man hours work for each hour in the air. not long ago. The amount of maintenance on them is still high relative to a lot of things.. They still have their place.

 

IF you want a better engine buy the Rotax but you can't (or don't rebuild it) and it's a lot dearer and so are the parts. I wouldn't mind making my own engine but no doubt lots here wouldn't want that available perhaps.

 

I don't mind being disagreed with, but if you have to misquote it or remove it from context, to make the point that is hardly fair is it? Nev

 

 

[alf jessup]

Ah right, so all the RIPs over the last few years have been imaginary?

Turbs,

 

Quite a few of those RIP's have been from sheer stupidity, Trike flying from Temora to Cootamundra in the dark hitting a tree & a windmill killing 2, Pioneer near Kerang or there abouts doing a beat up collecting a swer wire between a shed and a house killing 2, (30 odd hrs experience in that pilot but the deceased's brother in law said he was safe (yeah right), the sting near Goulburn was an engine failure but the pilot drove it in to the paddock,.

 

Yes there have been a few but there aren't too many associated with Jabiru after an engine failure.

 

Alf

 

 

[alf jessup]

So it would seem that more people have died flying behind Rotaxes than any other aircraft engine in Australian Recreational aircraft?

Deb,

 

I would say yes but not the engines fault, geez my old trike a Rotax 912 was involved in a fatal recently but it was pilot error.

 

Not many Rotaxes stop but plenty of pilots flying kill themselves without the engine failing from being lax or stupid.

 

You guys with Jabs are fortunate to have a very good survival cell, by god it's been tested plenty of times when the engines have stopped.

 

Next Question?

 

Alf

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Turbs,Quite a few of those RIP's have been from sheer stupidity, Trike flying from Temora to Cootamundra in the dark hitting a tree & a windmill killing 2, Pioneer near Terang or there abouts doing a beat up collecting a swer wire between a shed and a house killing 2, (30 odd hrs experience in that pilot but the deceased's brother in law said he was safe (yeah right), the sting near Goulburn was an engine failure but the pilot drove it in to the paddock,.

 

Yes there have been a few but there aren't too many associated with Jabiru after an engine failure.

 

Alf

Sounds like we need to Ban pilots!!!...

 

 

[dmech]

Hi dmech, being in the engine re-manufacturing business myself, I am really interested in what steps your have taken to eliminate the resonance problems. I absolutely agree that the bigger bolts will still break in the long term or in the short term shift the problem elsewhere. The flywheel bolt failures are the first red flag for me and I really question the logic in changing from all wood to a composite propeller.JimG

HI JIM, I would like to advise our steps to eliminate problems , however there would be jab owners wanting to modify their engines , since this would require dismantling of engine, it might lead incorrect assembly and resultant problems that could be blamed on the modification it self , as we have seen . L2'S might not want to do the job as they are supposed to adhere to the manufacturer build instructions, this may put there privilege's at risk, could end up in a legal system , then expert witness's ,probably from j... and we know what they would say, and all in front of a judge who wouldn't know where a tow ball goes!! . I contacted rs jan 2013 and was told that there was no problems with their engines , before I could explain any thing he bought my call to an end. A letter was sent to casa regarding the fix march 2013 , not by me but by owner of first engine modified . I believe CASA contacted jab end of 2013 but nothing productive resulted . I believe the present action is a shot across the jab bow, next shot might be direct hit [ really hope it doesn't come to that]. I have sent a letter to CASA detailing the fix , and a fix for valve problems. that was last week. I'm about to send another letter to CASA with supporting engineering data , today or tomorrow.So with the above in mind and the fact casa has my info , I think it's probably best to wait and see how casa deal with it . after that if nothing eventuates, I can make our findings available. However, any mods you do are at your own risk, however I know you wont be disappointed.

The engines mod. here so far, are going fine.

 

A.D. [email protected]

 

 

[alf jessup]

Sounds like we need to Ban pilots!!!...

Correct Andy, without the human element we don't have planes, engines or death from them.

 

 

 

[turboplanner]

Turbs,Quite a few of those RIP's have been from sheer stupidity, Trike flying from Temora to Cootamundra in the dark hitting a tree & a windmill killing 2, Pioneer near Kerang or there abouts doing a beat up collecting a swer wire between a shed and a house killing 2, (30 odd hrs experience in that pilot but the deceased's brother in law said he was safe (yeah right), the sting near Goulburn was an engine failure but the pilot drove it in to the paddock,.

 

Yes there have been a few but there aren't too many associated with Jabiru after an engine failure.

 

Alf

Point is Alf, if you're going to freeze up, pull up, or drop the controls and pray to Jesus when the engine quits, all from altitude, or if you are prone to flying over country you can't land on, then that's not related to the particular make of aircraft under you or engine in front of you. Fortunately the statistics are still low enough that they haven't had time to balance out across makes.