Downunder Posted November 29, 2014 Posted November 29, 2014 Definately has alot to do with this thread........ 1 1
Old Koreelah Posted November 29, 2014 Posted November 29, 2014 Maybe a ballistic recovery system as well . I presume this is a light-hearted comment, Oz. If serious, I totally disagree, even though I have. A backup parachute may be in order for those aircraft prone to poor handling when flown engine-out, and it may also be prudent for experimentals (the reason I fitted one). The Jabiru airframe would possibly be the least likely to need one, being robust and having an exceptional survivability record in forced landings. Because they have that backup, it seems that some pilots just pull the Big Red Handle when viable landing sites are available. (I suspect the same sort of thing is behind the disproportionately large number of deaths associated with Rotax engines: "I've got the R-motor up front, so I can take risks..." 1
ozbear Posted November 29, 2014 Posted November 29, 2014 True, although that was a bit of a "rush of blood to the head" thing. Me and the boys at YCAB have the world's only two Rotaxified J160's. There are unlikely to ever be any more. It goes fine, but for the $, time and stress involved I should have just flogged it off and bought a Tecnam or whatever.I gussied up the paint job while I was at it. Not that this has anything to do with the thread ... I think it has a lot to do with this thread I think jabiru should offer the Rotax engine option they would probably be a world beater and be a short term answer to their problems it's probably been said before . 6
ozbear Posted November 29, 2014 Posted November 29, 2014 I presume this is a light-hearted comment, Oz. If serious, I totally disagree, even though I have.A backup parachute may be in order for those aircraft prone to poor handling when flown engine-out, and it may also be prudent for experimentals (the reason I fitted one). The Jabiru airframe would possibly be the least likely to need one, being robust and having an exceptional survivability record in forced landings. Because they have that backup, it seems that some pilots just pull the Big Red Handle when viable landing sites are available. (I suspect the same sort of thing is behind the disproportionately large number of deaths associated with Rotax engines: "I've got the R-motor up front, so I can take risks..." But how many of those fatals can be attributed to engine failure? Just being powered by rotax doesn't make them more prone to fatalities things like VFR into IMC and codger factor (old blokes in fast planes) might be more like it.as well as airframes like the RV that aren't very crash friendly. 3
vk3awa Posted November 29, 2014 Posted November 29, 2014 Maybe another solution would be for the mandatory fitment of CHT probes on every cylinder with a display in the cockpit with a audible alarm that is set at a certain temperature.[ And now that I remember - last year there was a 3300 on our field having the through bolts done. After the new bolts were installed and torqued up, the prop didn't want to turn. Cases fretted out at 700-odd hours. Funnily enough the top end was all good ...The engine was biffed - based on past experience, there didn't seem to be much point asking Bundy to care. The problem of through bolt failure and crankcase fretting go hand in hand. 3
gandalph Posted November 29, 2014 Posted November 29, 2014 The problem of through bolt failure and crankcase fretting go hand in hand. Well worth talking to CAMit re through bolts. Their through bolts are very different to the standard Jab ones and have been designed to address the issue of case fretting. 1 1 1
Old Koreelah Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 ...Just being powered by rotax doesn't make them more prone to fatalities things like VFR into IMC and codger factor (old blokes in fast planes) might be more like it.as well as airframes like the RV that aren't very crash friendly. Re-read my post. I wasn't blaming the engine, except perhaps for the fact it might give some pilots a sense of invulnerability. 1
ozbear Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 Re-read my post. I wasn't blaming the engine, except perhaps for the fact it might give some pilots a sense of invulnerability. Sorry O.K I was more adding to than disagreeing yes it maybe it could also mean Jab drivers are better prepared for engine problems and always looking for somewhere to Outland as all pilots should.
dazza 38 Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 The problem of through bolt failure and crankcase fretting go hand in hand. I agree, I was thinking along the lines of trying to prevent pilots from over heating the engine as well. It all helps I guess 1
rankamateur Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 I think it has a lot to do with this thread I think jabiru should offer the Rotax engine option they would probably be a world beater and be a short term answer to their problems it's probably been said before . As a short term answer I can see this financially saving Jabiru and killing off CAE. 2
Old Koreelah Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 Sorry O.K I was more adding to than disagreeing yes it maybe it could also mean Jab drivers are better prepared for engine problems and always looking for somewhere to Outland as all pilots should. No worries, Oz. Much as I love my Jab engine, I always fly with an eye on clearings. 1
gandalph Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 As a short term answer I can see this financially saving Jabiru and killing off CAE. I agree. That would be a BAD result for Jab owners 1
Mick Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 Elsewhere is has been discussed, CASA are prepared, and theres precedent, that upon the disappearance of LSA cert holder, they will approve other parts suppliers. I am curious to know what that precedent is? Not disputing, just like to know? 1
ianboag Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 I think it has a lot to do with this thread I think jabiru should offer the Rotax engine option they would probably be a world beater and be a short term answer to their problems it's probably been said before . [email protected]. Drop me a "hello" email and I will explain why it will never happen
ianboag Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 There is a J170 west of Melbourne with a 912s fitted. I have quite a few photos of the install I'd be interested to see the pix. PM or send to [email protected] From what I understand of the Oz rego system, it would have to be a 19-rego? The paperwork for a 24- plane is just waaaay too hard. 1
planesmaker Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 It is 19 registered and I'm pretty sure it's a j160. Modelled after my installation. Tom 1
bexrbetter Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 And for the avatar crowd, I am truly a bogeyman .... You got a cold? "I've got the R-motor up front, so I can take risks..." Ahh, the "Cirrus Syndrome" ... can't stall 'em so we'll just turn a little tighter on approach, watch this ... 1
ianboag Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 Been "bogey" all my life. It's why our he-dog is Humphrey and the she-dog is Lauren .... 2 1
ianboag Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 J170 it is..... Climbs like an angel on a fishing line with a high powered reel. Now where have I seen THAT? I imagine that a 170 does it even better than my 160 .... I must admit, there were days when I felt that carrying a passenger in my J160 got all interesting on takeoff with a no-wind hot day 1
ianboag Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 Pretty sure it's a j170 but I have been told before I'm wrong by certain peanuts in the gallery. Climbs like an angel on a fishing line with a high powered reel. It appears to be using a what looks like a standard Jabiru engine mount with a big sheet of thick alloy or stainless as an adaptor plate to match it to the Rotax. I'll have to drag out my photos We talk about "homesick angels" here. Did a test for best rate of climb (two-up) from 1000-3000 - ft between 70 and 90 KIAs. It came out at about 850 ft/min for all the speeds we looked at - at 70 KIAs the problem is having one's feet higher than one's head. Interesting - that's how mine (and the YCAB one) work. It's ally - think of it as a "false firewall". Looked like a daunting bit of CRC until I found I could get the whole thing done by a local water-cut outfit for $300 including the metal. I doubt that putting the plate on the front of a standard Jab mount would work as everything would be too far forward. Anyway, they have something that works and who cares?
bexrbetter Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 Been "bogey" all my life. It's why our he-dog is Humphrey and the she-dog is Lauren .... Ahh ok, just thought you may have had a runny nose. 1
ianboag Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 Ahh ok, just thought you may have had a runny nose. I used to have a reward on offer for the best take on "bogey", "bogey-up-your-nose", "bogle" .... etc etc. The world ran out of new ones sometime in the 1960's. I was in my teens ... :-) 1
kaz3g Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 Given this action by CASA and some of the comments on here have exposed potential issues with Jabiru engines, owners of flying schools are leaving themselves open to be liable for injury (or death) to their instructors under the Workplace Health and Safety act. Owners are responsible for ensuring the workplace is safe for all their staff including instructors, both on the ground and in the air. There have been many transport companies that have been found liable for knowing there were defects with a particular truck/bus etc, but still allowed their drivers to drive and then the driver was injured or killed in the defected truck/bus. I think the blanket situation which Jabiru aircraft owners face at the present time where no specific defect has been identified can easily be distinguished from the situation of a particular bus owner who takes to the road with a known defect, but that's just my personal view unsupported by any research. I also think the alleged reduction in the number of known engine failures due to engine malfunction to just 12 is very significant, the other 28 being attributed to other factors. If true, this sits alongside the data from the USA which similarly documents a much lower failure rate than CASA initially stated. Kaz 2 3
alf jessup Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 Sorry O.K I was more adding to than disagreeing yes it maybe it could also mean Jab drivers are better prepared for engine problems and always looking for somewhere to Outland as all pilots should. Engines don't kill people no matter what brand they are Pilots kill themselves through stupid decision making, bravado and the false sense of security that it won't happen to them as it always happens to someone else Possibly a lot never practice any emergency drills between BFRs and when the pressure is on in a real life scenario they don't handle it well You will probably find more people have died from non engine related issues of late I should make reference to our type of flying not GA or commercial as a few if them have passed over through EFATO Alf 3
bexrbetter Posted November 30, 2014 Posted November 30, 2014 I used to have a reward on offer for the best take on "bogey", "bogey-up-your-nose", "bogle" .... etc etc. The world ran out of new ones sometime in the 1960's. I was in my teens ... :-) No need to put me in your sights, I'm not the bogey here .... 1
Recommended Posts