CASA - Draft Proposal for Jabiru Aircraft

[turboplanner]

Well you have my sympathy; that's not what we want when we set out with our dreams of flying.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Hello Bex

 

Regarding the Rotax and how reliable it is --- you were the first to mention the gear box issues.

 

I would like the know the cost of running a Rotax. It is all through away when it reaches its time.

 

Here is one of the issues -- the initial cost of a Jab is far less than a Rotax. So more people can afford the less expensive item.

 

Is it a case of save money and lets have a punt??

 

Regards

 

KP.

 

 

[Keith Page]

This topic has generated a lot of comment and discussion from the groups of people that support and those that do not the CASA restrictions on aircraft owned by RA-Aus members. The people that own a Jabiru aircraft and are directly affected by these restrictions are most concerned about engine reliability because they fly behind one and any measures taken to improve this.I agree that there are those that have experienced problems (and financial loss) and agree that something should be done but in a way that actually achieves the goal of improving reliability not punish people who through good practice do not have a problem. The best solution is to require Jabiru to undertake the investigation and research of the failures and to implement engine improvements in parts, maintenance or operational processes. To restrict all operations based on engines over 25 year history with no regard to the version, level or quality of maintenance or operational use (flight training is going to take a far heavier toll on aircraft than a quiet sunday morning flight) is extreme and with no regard for evidence of why the failures occur.

 

For those that feel it is CASA's duty to uphold safety, no matter the consequences, on the basis that CASA's actions relate to saving lives - Will the same people that support these current actions to restrict aircraft operations take the same position if next week, CASA determines that the current RA-Aus medical requirements are too lax and that everyone that flies needs to complete the CASA Recreational Aviation Medical Practitioner’s Certificate or Class 2 medical before their next flight to eliminate the threat of old unhealthy people with dodgy tickers flying around with passengers over populated areas? Probably just as much or more evidence against letting people fly who can't satisfy the Class 2 medical requirements as there is against the failure rate of Jabiru engines...

Good Morning 01rmb

 

Very good points more of us should take this medical thing on board as a lot of us could get grounded and the only fun we will have --- pushing a wheel barrow for the rest of our lives.

 

As this everyone thread is on to statistics:- How many incidents have been attributed to?? " unhealthy people with dodgy tickers.

 

Another interesting point those with "dodgy tickers" are heavily monitored that is -- they have thorough examinations on a very regular basis just to monitor/identify looming problems and when identified immediate remedial action can be commenced.

 

It is the people who are not monitored just wandering about thinking all is OK and not aware of what is sneaking up on them, these pore folk do not get a lot of warning.

 

Regards

 

KP.

 

 

[rankamateur]

Here is one of the issues -- the initial cost of a Jab is far less than a Rotax. So more people can afford the less expensive item.Is it a case of save money and lets have a punt??

And what is the first rule of punting?, "Don't bet what you can't afford to lose", so they apparently think they can afford a Rotax, if they think they can afford to rebuild a Jab every couple of hundred hours.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Good Morning 01rmbVery good points more of us should take this medical thing on board as a lot of us could get grounded and the only fun we will have --- pushing a wheel barrow for the rest of our lives.

As this everyone thread is on to statistics:- How many incidents have been attributed to?? " unhealthy people with dodgy tickers.

 

Another interesting point those with "dodgy tickers" are heavily monitored that is -- they have thorough examinations on a very regular basis just to monitor/identify looming problems and when identified immediate remedial action can be commenced.

 

It is the people who are not monitored just wandering about thinking all is OK and not aware of what is sneaking up on them, these pore folk do not get a lot of warning.

 

Regards

 

KP.

Keith, looks like you missed my earlier posts in which I covered this:

 

"However, there's no evidence supporting excessive incidents or fatalities in this category, and never has been throughout the history of aviation, so this is just a red herring.

 

If a trend did develop, then CASA would be bound to act, and would probably do what they did with Angel Flight and Jabiru engines - suggest a path to reduce the risk, invite commentary,

 

and then make a decision to reduce the potential injuries and loss of life.

 

CASA, and the Politicians are likely to have received many colourful hypotheticals like this, but all they serve to do is get people asking questions about whether RA operations are safe, and ensure some close attention for a while. This probably won't do any harm, flushing out people flying for commercial use, aerobatics, beat ups, fuel exhaustions etc."

 

If there is any evidence, then yes it's time to think about groundings, but let's not have thought bubbles about things for which there are no trends.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

I sent in my bit to CASA with a copy to my MP and one to Jabiru. Here's an abbreviated version...

 

I said how I have operated a Jabiru engine for 13 years now with no problems, but as a light air-cooled motor it needs to be operated with care , that is with respect to temperatures and fuel. Failure to do this could lead to detonation and problems with the through-bolts etc. How can you hold Jabiru responsible for detonation when it is a fuel/operating problem?

 

My engine has adequate through-bolts for normal combustion, I have done the calculations myself. Later engines have larger through-bolts and can take more abuse, but why has my engine not given problems?

 

It's not just my engine, at Gawler the circuit often has 2 or 3 Jabirus doing training, and they are quite reliable, usually reaching time before overhaul without issues. Maybe our fuel is better, maybe we have fewer fools.

 

Yes the Jabiru is not as good as a water-cooled engine for a technically incompetent person.

 

It appears you are demanding a fool-proof light air-cooled engine, and I maybe you lack the technical expertise to realise that this is impossible.

 

I recommend CASA make financial restitution to Jabiru for harm caused....

 

well I've said all this before, and I've failed to find out if CASA has any technically qualified person working on this, so I reckon thats it for my input to this topic.

 

regards, Bruce.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I think they'll love that Bruce, and the MP will appreciate that detail.

 

Of course he might misunderstand, and ask the Minister to restrict pilots with less than your experience and special knowledge, or who are foolish, from flying those aircraft.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

One VERY INTERESTING thing that came up in the Jab discussion was the

reliability of Rotax engines. OK, - the engine "core" will do 2,000

 

TBO, but private pilots or schools doing big hours have to rebuild their PSRU

 

(gearbox) every 350-400 hours. The gears are fine, its the torque damper that

 

flogs out - you apparently get a tell-tale vibration in certain rpm ranges. Rotax are

 

very coy about this - particularly given the $3,000 odd bill owners face

 

each time.

 

o ( charter / flying school etc ).

Current rotax gearbox inspection is 600hrs.

 

None of ours (7) have ever ended overhaul until the second or third inspection. 1200hrs+

 

The rough running at certain rpm is NOT hear box related. That's a very typical rotax thing due unbalanced carbies. You can balance them and get rid of the what we call " rough range" bit it will slowly come back over 20ish hours and most people deal with it.

 

The sprag clutch is a far bigger issue for rotax engines that don't have soft start modules.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Bruce. I'm not sure that insulting Casa, operators and everyone that has had problems with jabs in a letter with no real points, is going to help your cause.

 

You need to be dispassionate when dealing with officialdom.

 

Casa knew people owned jabs when they released this draft,

 

They knew schools use them

 

They knew ' fools' operate them.

 

They knew they would be swamped with letters from owners saying my engine is fine... You need to adress the draft directly, not rant.

 

Have you sent your letter yet? Of not I respectfully suggest some " reworking"

 

:)

 

 

[Geoff13]

I sent in my bit to CASA with a copy to my MP and one to Jabiru. Here's an abbreviated version...I said how I have operated a Jabiru engine for 13 years now with no problems, but as a light air-cooled motor it needs to be operated with care , that is with respect to temperatures and fuel. Failure to do this could lead to detonation and problems with the through-bolts etc. How can you hold Jabiru responsible for detonation when it is a fuel/operating problem?

 

My engine has adequate through-bolts for normal combustion, I have done the calculations myself. Later engines have larger through-bolts and can take more abuse, but why has my engine not given problems?

 

It's not just my engine, at Gawler the circuit often has 2 or 3 Jabirus doing training, and they are quite reliable, usually reaching time before overhaul without issues. Maybe our fuel is better, maybe we have fewer fools.

 

Yes the Jabiru is not as good as a water-cooled engine for a technically incompetent person.

 

It appears you are demanding a fool-proof light air-cooled engine, and I maybe you lack the technical expertise to realise that this is impossible.

 

I recommend CASA make financial restitution to Jabiru for harm caused....

 

well I've said all this before, and I've failed to find out if CASA has any technically qualified person working on this, so I reckon thats it for my input to this topic.

 

regards, Bruce.

Seems fairly typical of the egotistical attitude of I am better than anyone else that I am quickly coming to expect from this site.

 

Cheers Geoff13

 

 

[facthunter]

Some of that would be in your perception Geoff. The service life of the engines quoted are real. You can't get an engine to last longer on your ego, alone. Nev

 

 

[Geoff13]

Totally correct FH. All in my perception. My perception is that anyone who says they are not having a problem with there engine so the people who are may be fools has a serious ego problem. As do in my perception many other users of this site. But that is for another thread as soon as I get time.

 

Cheers Geoff13

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Bruce you need to address the 40 odd engine failures, that's the issue. Your arguement that raising safety standards is a bad idea because you haven't had an accident is intriguing but ultimately pointless.

 

 

[facthunter]

I didn't SAY ALL. I said some. Big difference. Perhaps I should say MAY instead of would. I regard getting to the 2,000 hours as pretty remarkable because even most Cont-mings need a "top", to get those sorts of hours. You would have to admit they must be doing something right. I have NEVER suggested trying to make them reach that figure, Nev

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

m

 

Current rotax gearbox inspection is 600hrs.None of ours (7) have ever ended overhaul until the second or third inspection. 1200hrs+

The rough running at certain rpm is NOT hear box related. That's a very typical rotax thing due unbalanced carbies. You can balance them and get rid of the what we call " rough range" bit it will slowly come back over 20ish hours and most people deal with it.

 

The sprag clutch is a far bigger issue for rotax engines that don't have soft start modules.

Motz...last time I talked to Wal he said the gearbox service has gone out to 1000 hrs.........most sprague clutch replacements I have done have been the direct result of owners using non- recommended oils .....with silicon additives in it.

 

 

[puddles_7]

I sent in my bit to CASA with a copy to my MP and one to Jabiru. Here's an abbreviated version....

Bruce you appear to have copped some heat from your letter. I read it and saw it for what you meant. I don't believe there is a structure that CASA require from pilot responses. At least you sent a response that was clear and concise. If others want to criticise for your response then that's their problem.

Well done

 

Cheers

 

Puddles_7

 

 

[facthunter]

ft The fact that SOME engines make it repeatedly has to be part of the picture, and should be part of the analysis. If we applied the same logic to the RAAus we would ground the whole fleet if we had a period of bad performance somewhere or with some types. You can't quote a figure (X) failures without analysing what happened, unless you are not serious about fixing the problem. Saying things like "valve failed, Piston failed" etc tells little about what's happening.

 

Bit like saying "wing failed, structurally" when it is control flutter or overload, or the result of hangar rash. Nev

 

 

[Geoff13]

I didn't SAY ALL. I said some. Big difference. Perhaps I should say MAY instead of would. I regard getting to the 2,000 hours as pretty remarkable because even most Cont-mings need a "top", to get those sorts of hours. You would have to admit they must be doing something right. I have NEVER suggested trying to make them reach that figure, Nev

I know you didn't say all. But if fact it is true that it is all in my perception.

 

There are some areas where I would rate myself as an expert and be able to back my thoughts up with science. If I commented on those areas I would suggest that would not be in my perception.

 

But this area of laying blame and accusations of fools, and the thought process that I can't be wrong because I am a pilot, or the concept that if you don't know something then you should read about it rather than ask people who are passing themselves off as experts is actually fairly foreign to me. And I admit that my comments in this area are simply my perception and not based in any scientific fact.

 

Cheers Geoff13

 

 

[poteroo]

Another try to increase the size of this clip from yesterdays Australian regards how Honda were able to 'massage' the accident statistics to the extent that they only reported 39% of them to the US Regulator. A good reason why an industry body should collate sensitive data and not rely on those with a massive vested interest to do it. happy days,

 

 

 

[motzartmerv]

ft The fact that SOME engines make it repeatedly has to be part of the picture,

Pray tell how 'some engines' can make it repeatedly? Are there jab engines that have made 2000 hrs 'repeatedly'? Or were you referring to the operator?

In this case we have one individual running an engine for 13 years.. No numbers, no other data, other than " Ive had no problems'.. Then amore annacdotal evidence of " i know of a school that n

 

'normally' make tbo".. Again, not valuable contribution to the "stats" or to the weight of argument. I would be encouraging the schools in question to submit replies themselves along with DATA to support the notion.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

mMotz...last time I talked to Wal he said the gearbox service has gone out to 1000 hrs.........most sprague clutch replacements I have done have been the direct result of owners using non- recommended oils .....with silicon additives in it.

Yea maj, thats right. Forgot they had blown it out a bit.

 

I just had a gearbox off a sportstar that has done 1700 hours. First overhaul of the gearbox.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

. . . Honda were able to 'massage' the accident statistics to the extent that they only reported 39% of them to the US Regulator. A good reason why an industry body should collate sensitive data and not rely on those with a massive vested interest to do it. happy days,

To be fair, the independent audit was commissioned by Honda and they reported the defects exposed by the report. Many of the serious issues were already known to the authorities because Honda reported them out side the EWR system or were known to the authorities by their own systems.

But, I agree any information provided from Jabiru may be of questionable value because of the widely commented practice of Jabiru "repelling borders" - many who report that their is a problem with their Jabiru engine are accused of being a poor operator or maintainer or both. This could be a reason why Jabiru defects are not reported to Jabiru or to RA-Aus or CASA.

 

 

[facthunter]

I really don't know why we keep this unending comparison up with Rotax. The motor is a totally different concept and the NEXT model even more so. They have gone down the high tech road and the "ordinary" pilot further removed from knowing what is going on (or not going on) with his engine. I'm talking about engine management and water cooling and reduction gears AND the ability for the owner to work on it etc

 

Merv To clarify, I'm not suggesting "a" motor repeatedly does reach 2000 hours. I also said I don't "EXPECT" them to do that and I don't think people should expect that either without a top. A lot of people will time expire an engine before that figure anyhow. Only schools will do it (make the TBO) in normal circumstances.

 

TBO has never meant to be ""without work". The valves and heads of a conventional motor can be compared with the hot end of a jet engine which is often replaced before the rest is overhauled. Nev

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Yea maj, thats right. Forgot they had blown it out a bit.I just had a gearbox off a sportstar that has done 1700 hours. First overhaul of the gearbox.

Our gearbox was overhauled at 900 hours. Our Sprag Clutch died despite the soft start at around 1200 hours possibly because of battery cables that were too light and too far from the starter motor and a battery towards the end of its life. Our 912ULS also features some rough running in the 4,500 to 4,900 range that seems to be persistent. However, this is not a rev range we use very often and easy enough to live with.

Even with these significant maintenance expenditures, I estimate the Rotax as a significantly cheaper engine over 2,000 hours than would be expected from a Jabiru engine despite the differential initial outlay. This is even more likely if all repairs and maintenance checks are done by a L2 and costed accordingly.

 

I've recently flown with the new, improved, 912iS Sport and it is an absolute delight. Starts easily, reliably with no magic and runs at all rev ranges as smooth as silk. I've read through the maintenance manual and servicing is a very simple affair with no carbies to balance and diagnostic read-outs from the ECU. Yes, you pay a lot for it and some competition with Rotax would be very beneficial.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Don, the sprag cops a pizzling if theres any loss in Crank from the batt.. We learned this the hard way...

 

Most of our rotaxes 'rough spot" is at around 3-3500 range. Have never had up as high as yours. How long has it been like that?