Captain Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 OK 7500 it should have been. To just take this a tad further while we are all waiting for CASA's next Fatwa on the J issue(s), or one of J's responses that all is hunky-dory, the definition that I can find in the Regs states that "Cruising Level" is "A level maintained during a significant portion of a flight". How big is "significant" in aviation cruise level terms? By my dictionary "significant" appears to mean "having or expressing a meaning; indicative, having a covert or implied meaning; suggestive". or probably more relevantly "important, notable, or momentous". So if you level off at any time to avoid traffic is it significant, important, notable or momentous and are you therefore then in "Cruise"? And by extension are you therefore likely to be considered by some forum members to be at a "Cruising Level" whenever you are not climbing or descending? 1
Guest Ornis Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Rod Stiff has never taken a scrap of notice of anyone, or at least admitted that he has, instead choosing to blame his customers. That's why CASA shook the tree. What fell out? The widespread perception that Jabiru engines are unreliable and unsafe. Jabiru can wriggle and squirm but what most pilots want is an engine that does what is expected and claimed. That's what CASA demands too. Not perfection; "average" will do. Being "cheap" is no excuse for not being fit for purpose.
turboplanner Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 To just take this a tad further while we are all waiting for CASA's next tome on the J issue(s), the definition that I can find in the Regs states that "Cruising Level" is "A level maintained during a significant portion of a flight". How big is "significant" in aviation cruise level terms? By my dictionary "significant" appears to mean "having or expressing a meaning; indicative, having a covert or implied meaning; suggestive". or probably more relevantly "important, notable, or momentous". And if you level off at any time to avoid traffic is it significant, important, notable or momentous and are you therefore then in "Cruise"? And by extension are you therefore likely to be considered by some forum members to be at a "Cruising Level" whenever you are not climbing or descending? Depends whether you have an ingrown toe nail or not.
ave8rr Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 What has VFR cruising levels and flight in CTA got to do with the topic of this thread? 3
facthunter Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Regarding the Jabiru question we keep reverting to non specifics and that is raking old ground. I can't see the point of that. Those who don't like Jaburu's keep saying the same thing, and those who don't see that as productive, turn off. Nev 4 1
facthunter Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Regarding the cruising levels It NEEDS a new thread. Nev 3
Teckair Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Regarding the cruising levels It NEEDS a new thread. Nev What about the ingrown toe nail? 1
motzartmerv Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 What about the ingrown toe nail? Scissors!!!
Phil Perry Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 We have some similar rules in the UK, ie, we can ( repeat CAN ) use the quadrantal rule below FL245, ie, the "NOSE" rule, clockwise, North - Odd - South - Even, ( this is just a basic aide memoire ) remembering to start ODD in the first quarter, 360 to 089 Deg, then Odd plus 500ft from 090 t0 189 deg. You can guess the rest, but being me, I'll write it anyway. . . . 180 to 269 deg, Evens and 270 to 359 deg, Evens plus 500 ft. This isn't Mandatory,. . . . and you can use the semicircular rule if you wish. ( already very nicely pictured in this thread ) the question always asked is. . . . . BUT SIR,. . . . what if I want to descend or climb ? well, you'd better climb / descend in a circle then, or keep your eyes well open and your TCAS tuned to max, if flying VFR. If you are flying IFR then it's a bit easy peasier, just ask the nice lady or bloke on the radar to check if there's some other piece of hardware which could adversely affect your vertical progress to your desired alteration of cruising level. . . . . . That's what they are paid to do, and they really Don't mind you asking. . . . In the UK the Transition altitude is 3,000 feet, if I remember correctly in Australia it was 11,000 ft. . . ? and above that altitude it is adviseable to change to Flight Levels, to stay on the same songsheet as everyone else, ie, not much use calling London Information and giving a full position report and telling them you're cruising at 5,500 feet on the Buggerupfield QNH, or RPS ( regional pressure setting, Area QNH doesn't exist in the UK, since a QNH reference can ONLY be specific to a small local area anyway ) when all the other competitors are using a vertical displacement reference to 1013.25 Hectopascals ( used to be millibars ) and reporting at FLIGHT LEVELS ! Bit meaningless really. . . the only thing wrong with having a transition level so low ( 3,000 ft ) in the UK is that the lower ones, such as FL 35 are sometimes unavailable for cruising due to terrain clearance issues, during periods of very changeable high to low atmospheric pressure. ( Yes,. . . When flying VFR then this shouldn't be an issue, but I didn't make up the rules ! ) If flying IFR, nobody in their right mind would plan to cruise that low anyhow. . . . Most LSA / Microlight pilots in the UK don't cruise at the sort of levels which have been mentioned earlier in this thread, ie, it's difficult, ( putting it mildly ) to cruise for any distance over the UK at 8,000 feet, there's always some airspace which you're going to have to dive under very shortly, even at speeds of sub 100 knots. . . . and, who the heck wants to fly that high anyway, unpaid, wearing out your cabin heater in a toy appliance ? Phil
Guest Ornis Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 ... keep reverting to non specifics ... Those who don't like Jaburu's keep saying the same thing ... Okay. Let's be specific. Name one good thing about Jabiru engines, apart from being - apparently - affordable.
fly_tornado Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 the factory have a lot of experience reconditioning the engines 1
Captain Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Okay. Let's be specific. Name one good thing about Jabiru engines, apart from being - apparently - affordable. They use Avgas. It's still got me beat how 912/914 owners go cross country touring, as you just HAVE to get sick of arranging ULP wherever you need to refuel, or do more airports have ULP available these days? When I bought my 230 I also felt that other advantages were ... no gearbox and the fact that they were relatively low revving + air-cooled. (I also spoke to numerous owners and schools before I purchased and to a man they all offered nothing but praise for the engines and airframes.) 7
01rmb Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Power to weight ratio.Air cooling. Light weight. Suitable for specific aircraft types. Simple design. Easy to service and work on. Affordable.... Plus Cheap replacement parts / service No gearbox or water cooling complexity/weight Only engine available with 90kw/120hp and 275NM torque under 84 kg 3
Old Koreelah Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Okay. Let's be specific. Name one good thing about Jabiru engines... ...they got thousands of us into the air. 4 3
Downunder Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 It's still got me beat how 912/914 owners go cross country touring, as you just HAVE to get sick of arranging ULP wherever you need to refuel, or do more airports have ULP available these days? .) Rotax 912/914 run on Avgas just fine and many users run them on Avgas all their lives.......only need to increase the oil changes......and may have to service the clutch earlier. They can also run on any mix of avgas/unleaded provided the octane is correct for the engine. 1 2 1 2
Guest Ornis Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 No one's mentioned reliability. So, the Jabiru is a simple, air-cooled, direct-drive, high-powered, lightweight, affordable and easy-to-work-on engine. That might break a through-bolt, flywheel bolt or exhaust valve at any time. And stop. Never mind. We won't think about that. Have a "stiff" drink. CASA! Pay attention! Your intercession is unwelcome and unwarranted! We don't "do" reliability here.
alf jessup Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 ...they got thousands of us into the air. And got some of you back on the ground quicker than you wanted to be, and blamed you for it also. Alf 3 1 1
01rmb Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Reliable enough if you operate them within specification, undertake preflight inspection and other maintenance as per POH. Even the poor figures provided by CASA puts partial or full engine failure no worse than 1 in 3300 flights. If it wasn't reliable enough I would not fly behind one. 3 2 1 2
Guest Ornis Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Reliable enough if you operate them within specification, undertake preflight inspection and other maintenance as per POH. If it wasn't I would not fly behind one. Email from Jabiru, 26 November. "Records given to CASA for this year indicated 40 engine incidents. Of these incidents there have been twelve engine stoppages in flight resulting in forced landings." Twelve force landings. Twelve! That's just the ones reported... PS. Does your engine have hydraulic lifters?
alf jessup Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Obviously proves one thing, us non Jabiru engine owners are far better maintainers than you lot because we got a darn sight more engines out there worldwide than the 6000 Jabiru engines and we have a far less failure rate. Or it could be ours costs more because you get what you pay for. Damn that's 2 things:doh: 3
motzartmerv Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Reliable enough if you operate them within specification, undertake preflight inspection and other maintenance as per POH. You maintain by the POH? Maybe thats been our problems all along. We are maintaining IAW with the "maintenance Manual" and not the Pilot Operating Handbook. Ill contact our Lame's, L4's and L2's and break the news. 2 2
Guest Maj Millard Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 They use Avgas. It's still got me beat how 912/914 owners go cross country touring, as you just HAVE to get sick of arranging ULP wherever you need to refuel, or do more airports have ULP available these days? When I bought my 230 I also felt that other advantages were ... no gearbox and the fact that they were relatively low revving + air-cooled. (I also spoke to numerous owners and schools before I purchased and to a man they all offered nothing but praise for the engines and airframes.) No dramas Captain...912s are happy with either mogas or Avgas...you pump whatever you can get convieniently.
Recommended Posts