gandalph Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 No they are not.The RAA figures are useful in that they can be broken down into Jab engine sizes and times, Rotax two strokes can be separated, and diferences can be more accurately assessed, just by looking at the numbers. Right. So the ASTB figures don't suit your purposes and so they are useless? You're a hard man to please!
qolbinau Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 The ATSB data indicate in my opinion that while Jabiru engines seem slightly less reliable than Rotax engines, reported incidents are low for both and there are only marginal differences in reported incidents. Thus, there does not seem to be a massive cause for concern about the safety of Jabiru engines based on this data. Does the data CASA is using to make its decision RE: Jabiru differ from the ATSB data? 45 engine failures (or whatever it is) is meaningless without any baseline or comparison statistics. Apologies if this discussion has already been had.
motzartmerv Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 C'mon Merv! Someone said on the forum that "out of 2000 jabiru engines in service only 500 reached TBO" So it stands to reason that if I post here that out of 2000 jab engines in service 75% reach TBO my figures would be believed and be quoted as fact somewhere down the line? Really? Why not? My rumour is just like the other one i.e Useless and without a shred of credibilityp.s. Wanna buy a good used Harbour bridge? No argument here. My point was that people are claiming casa are being missleading by holding back data. The raa have figures available for anyone who wants to look, that are on par with what casa are quoting. It seems some don't mind using " some figures" I help suport their case, and cry foul over other figures. If we honestly believe casa would falsify records and then act on them, then we really do have some problems. Conspiracy theories are easy to find, easy to propogate and can be a good distraction from the real story. So we have two Options here: 1. Casa are talkin sh1t and have falsified numbers, 2. There were actually a Shirtload of engine problems and they need to act. Not trying to sell a harbour bridge, but I know which option I would be betting on. 1 1
qolbinau Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 No argument here. My point was that people are claiming casa are being missleading by holding back data. The raa have figures available for anyone who wants to look, that are on par with what casa are quoting.It seems some don't mind using " some figures" I help suport their case, and cry foul over other figures. If we honestly believe casa would falsify records and then act on them, then we really do have some problems. Conspiracy theories are easy to find, easy to propogate and can be a good distraction from the real story. So we have two Options here: 1. Casa are talkin sh1t and have falsified numbers, 2. There were actually a Shirtload of engine problems and they need to act. Not trying to sell a harbour bridge, but I know which option I would be betting on. The third option could be that they have misinterpreted statistics, or that the data are unrepresentative (as RAA have claimed). Where are the RAA figures?
Guest Ornis Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 Bonobos and chimpanzees share about 99% of our DNA but don't look or act like us. http://news.sciencemag.org/plants-animals/2012/06/bonobos-join-chimps-closest-human-relatives So, what do statistics mean?
Happyflyer Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 Bonobos and chimpanzees share about 99% of our DNA but don't look or act like us. I'm not too sure about that! Class photo 1963. 4
Guest Ornis Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/northern-advocate/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503450&objectid=11379736 Jabiru 3300. Lost power on takeoff. (Not a high-hour engine but to be fair not a Jabiru-installation either.)
Oscar Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 Just like the "phony casa figures" :) just sayin. Now, Merv, we don't actually know they are phoney, don't jump the shark there just yet. What we do know, is: a) CASA has not made the data publicly available for scrutiny; b) the aviation industry has no trust in CASA's use of 'safety data'; c) the CASA data was provided to the RAA Board on 17 December; since RAA has not published that data we can, I believe, reasonably assume this was done with an embargo on its re-distribution. I know that members of the RAA Board directly involved in preparing the response to that data worked almost non-stop from the time they received it to the time CASA lowered the boom, and in the light of d) below, I am pretty damn sure they would have substantiated their conclusions if they were allowed to so do ; d) RAA, having had a minute amount of time to examine the data, has stated: CASA has not undertaken robust analysis on reliable data to establish with any degree of accuracy that the failure rate of Jabiru engines is increasing over time. This is despite their statement that they have found statistically significant evidence in support of their claims. e) the timing of CASA's final action - coming on the last working day of the tenure of the Acting DAS, when the new DAS was already bringing himself up to speed (and had been continuously briefed by RAA since this whole farrago started), was a classic piece of dirty action that stinks of a lack of confidence that the new DAS would take the same POV - even though, quite obviously, he would be reviewing the same 'evidence'. So: 'you might say it's phoney, I couldn't possibly comment on that...' 2 1
Jabiru7252 Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 I'm not too sure about that! Class photo 1963. This is the mob CASA sent to meet with Jabiru. 1 3
dazza 38 Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 This is the mob CASA sent to meet with Jabiru. Jeez I hope the 7252 in your Avatar isnt your rego number. CASA may be gunning for you after they have finished their festive activities.
Camel Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 When CASA finish their festive season they are going to have to run for cover because there is going to be some unhappy people to greet them. The monkeys are smarter than CASA. It is widely known that CASA are trying to destroy aviation in this country. GET RID OF CASA IN RECREATIONAL AVIATION !!!!! 2 1 2
dazza 38 Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 When CASA finish their festive season they are going to have to run for cover because there is going to be some unhappy people to greet them. The monkeys are smarter than CASA. It is widely known that CASA are trying to destroy aviation in this country. GET RID OF CASA IN RECREATIONAL AVIATION !!!!! The new DAS Mark Skidmore is a reasonable and approachable sort of bloke , he is totally different to the previous guy. It is going to take him a while to get his head around civil aviation but it is not all doom and gloom.
Kyle Communications Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 That figure quoted by CASA or the RAA was it 42 engine failures in the last 12 months or something....They are the "reported" figures...we all know that the real figures could be more than 5 times that as most from what I have seen have never been reported Mark 1
Jabiru7252 Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 When CASA finish their festive season they are going to have to run for cover because there is going to be some unhappy people to greet them. The monkeys are smarter than CASA. It is widely known that CASA are trying to destroy aviation in this country. GET RID OF CASA IN RECREATIONAL AVIATION !!!!! Why on Earth would CASA try to destroy aviation in this country? That makes no sense and it cannot be widely known because I didn't know that and I know everything, well according to my friends six year old. Anyway, if they did destroy aviation in this country, they would be out of a job. At least they are not (as yet) like the complete imbeciles that insist I do a one day course on using a ladder or frigging pencil sharpener. Those fools need to be beaten on the kidneys with large tree branches.
Jabiru7252 Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 I heard of one instance where three or four engine failures belonged to the same airplane owner who dicks around with his (or her!) plane like it was a go-kart or something. Then has the audacity to rubbish Jabiru engines. Long sigh.... 1
frank marriott Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 Gee Mark, I dispute the "we all know " bit But leaving that aside you are suggesting over 200 in 12 mths, getting pretty inventive there I suspect - must be an exceptional large percentage in South Qld. then. 2 1
Guest Maj Millard Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 Gee Mark, I dispute the "we all know " bit But leaving that aside you are suggesting over 200 in 12 mths, getting pretty inventive there I suspect - must be an exceptional large percentage in South Qld. then. It's been suggested to me by some that up to 50% of actual occurrences wern't being reported, and that a culture had developed not to report for obvious reasons. Possibly one reason the ATSB came out and mandated reporting of all incidents or accidents of all the Australian fleet within 48 hours of occurrence. ATSB wants the facts folks......
jetjr Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 Could be right but seeing as action is one manufacturer has worse reliablity versus another it doesnt mean much UNLESS you trying to say only Jabiru incidents go unreported Its likely to be similar and therefore not a differentiating issue Seems we all agree reporting needs to be improved to make solid descisions, why didnt the next step become serious data collection from owners and maintainers 1
coljones Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 I think it was stated in this forum that out of 2000 Jab engines in service only 50 reached TBO. Enough statistic for me. But I also understand that for a private owner doing 50 to 100h a year it might not be such a big issue. For TFT's it should. You have half answered one of your assertions. But how many Jab engines are there with less than TBO hours that are still operational? If only 50 reached TBO what is the status of the other 1950? If they have all failed did they fail at TBO-10 hours or some other figure? Or are all 1950 still pounding away doing stirling service? 2
frank marriott Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 It's been suggested to me by some that up to 50% of actual occurrences wern't being reported, and that a culture had developed not to report for obvious reasons. Possibly one reason the ATSB came out and mandated reporting of all incidents or accidents of all the Australian fleet within 48 hours of occurrence. ATSB wants the facts folks...... By who - more BS 4 1
Geoff13 Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 So sad to see on this thread that so many people refuse to look at the issues and continually attack the man. And it is happening on both sides. No wonder CASA had to do something if that its the attitude. 2 1
motzartmerv Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 By who - more BS You report your failures frank?
coljones Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 That figure quoted by CASA or the RAA was it 42 engine failures in the last 12 months or something....They are the "reported" figures...we all know that the real figures could be more than 5 times that as most from what I have seen have never been reportedMark But we don't know what the real rate is either. Many of the assertions being made in this thread about under reporting don't appear to have the support of data. (let alone statistical evaluation). If there is under reporting with Jabiru then there is in all likelihood under reporting across the entire fleet. It may change the quantum but the ratios between various types will remain pretty-well constant. (or is this becoming a Holden vs Ford shoutfest where the other side are all liers, voyeurs, jongleurs, tinkers et al) 1
dazza 38 Posted January 3, 2015 Posted January 3, 2015 It has never been Ford verses Holden. More like Holden verses BMW. Nobody denies that Rotax are a lot more expensive than Jab motors. But quality costs money. That is why I own two KTM Motorcycles. Expensive yes, but top quality stuff with the latest technology. You only get what you pay for. 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now