CASA 292/14 - Conditions and direction about Jabiru engines

[Icarus]

Good evening Bruce.

 

Well argued Brendan. I wish I had your faith in bureaucrats.Once I asked what qualifications one of them had and I was howled down by people ( on this site ) who said that it was unfair to ask. As far as I know, they have neither the qualifications nor experience to justify the extreme power they wield.

Just suppose CASA officials are not appropriately expert , ( have another read of Oscar's comments)... would you really say they should not be held to account? Or at least exposed ?

 

Of course they should be held to account, expert or not. but they also cant be expected to do their job properly with the fear of personal litigation hanging over their heads.

 

They would just sit at their desk on their hands fearing any investigation or instrument they enact ,with whatever proof ,could result in losing their house etc.

 

It would be aviation anarchy:naughty:

 

I believe 1 or 2 CASA employees have been pushed to resign over the instrument. Probably for the clumsy way the instrument was started and for not getting some better data. It looks bad for CASA if they start these actions with weak data at best. So those 2 were held to account for that.

 

Who decides the experts are experts? the experts?

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Brendan, I agree with your comments. Both Jabiru and RAA should have acted before CASA stepped in. Both organisations should have their own Safety Management Systems in place monitoring incident data to identify any trends. CASA should only be monitoring / auditing these SMS to ensure they are effective, not stepping in and taking action.

 

 

[Icarus]

Yes Roundsounds, come to the dark side my friend. The new young green socialist party meets at Nimbin on Friday night. Mr Gnu will be guest speaker.

 

 

[jetjr]

Lots posted on this previously

 

Despite good humoured discussion there are lots of owners here facing massive losses for not much good reason

 

We find it pretty hard to be flippant about it

 

Yes records are thin, is it RAA job to maintain these? All incidents and accidents are to be reported to CASA, if the records are thin, whos to blame.

 

CASA are not without reproach, they answer to ministers and the people.

 

There is a personal angle to this action. Rod being Rod has ruffled plenty of feathers over the years.

 

Even some within RAA ok with the action which shows shortsighted representation

 

 

[Guest john]

The 2 CASA ex employees that have supposedly passed through CASA's revolving door & who have been made the sacrificial lambs over this Jabiru engine saga, will now in all probability find it difficult to qualify for long term Centrelink unemployment benefits (& mind you they are going to be unemployable in the Commercial & Private sector in Australia for a long time)due to the EXTROADINARY GENEROUS FINANCIAL BENEFITS that CASA have to legally pay them under the terms of their employment once they clean out their desks, which we little people have unfortunatley have to contribute to through our taxes.

 

The only good thing that will have come out of this ongoing & painful Jabiru exercise, is that the CASA Executives will think very carefully in the future before they go off half cocked again preaching the magical word of SAFETY.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

No CASA employees have been moved on.

 

 

[Nobody]

The 2 CASA ex employees that have supposedly passed through CASA's revolving door & who have been made the sacrificial lambs over this Jabiru engine saga, will now in all probability find it difficult to qualify for long term Centrelink unemployment benefits (& mind you they are going to be unemployable in the Commercial & Private sector in Australia for a long time)due to the EXTROADINARY GENEROUS FINANCIAL BENEFITS that CASA have to legally pay them under the terms of their employment once they clean out their desks, which we little people have unfortunatley have to contribute to through our taxes.The only good thing that will have come out of this ongoing & painful Jabiru exercise, is that the CASA Executives will think very carefully in the future before they go off half cocked again preaching the magical word of SAFETY.

Do you have a source for that? I don't think that anyone has left. If it really was the case wouldn't CASA let the instrument expire rather than extend it?

 

 

[facthunter]

CASA have a record of going off on wrong assumptions, occasionally, and usually AOPA has brought them back to reality. Their reputation throughout the industry is poor. (Just ask around). They must know this themselves. This is not CASA bashing. It is unfortunately the fact.

 

No one argues they have the authority. The Legislation gives them that but they must never be beyond analysis and transparency and answerability for their actions. As far as the individual employees being sued, they will be indemnified by their conditions of employment. (unless they act unlawfully) The CASA has been ruthless at times in pursuit of individuals ( like farmers who fly planes) far beyond the effect of the "transgression". The rules of strict Liability we operate under are judicially unjust. (Ask any legal expert.) Lots of room for urgent improvement there. Nev

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Brendan

 

As facthunter intimated CASA has a long and chequered history of acting without evidence and with malice against many many operators in the past.

 

When CASA has commenced action they cite "safety" and in many situations that does two things.

 

It lifts them above scrutiny and opens the doors to doing whatever they like with impunity because it is being done for "safety".

 

Secondly it cuts down anyone who dares to criticise or complain because to do so is tantamount to saying that person does not care about safety and is thus not worthy of being part of the debate.

 

I have been in aviation for about 30 years and without even going looking for it I recall cases where they have stripped pilots licences or companies for bizarre interpretations of the rules.

 

They have charged people and taken their licences or livelihoods for events that the courts have found casa acted unconscionably. Sadly plenty of people with even stronger cases have not had the finances or the strength to fight CaSA and have moved on.

 

In cases where the affected person has fought on CASA has held on with the the endless financial backing of the government until the defendants run out of money or stamina.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Brendan, I agree with your comments. Both Jabiru and RAA should have acted before CASA stepped in. Both organisations should have their own Safety Management Systems in place monitoring incident data to identify any trends. CASA should only be monitoring / auditing these SMS to ensure they are effective, not stepping in and taking action.

Jabiru HAVE acted. There have been numerous service bulletins, modifications and upgrades to their engines since they first built their first engine. I'm not sure what else they could have done. The flippant answer is "get it right, right from the start" but that's a complete impossibility. No engine in any form of transport has ever been the final best design right from the start. I remember when Rotax was a name spoken with shaking head and shudders of disbelief that anyone would dare fly behind one. My how they have changed with development and without having restrictions put on them.

 

So who defines what form "should have acted" should have taken.

 

CASAs actions were started without evidence and in every other part of our society you just cannot do that!!!

 

They should never have stepped in until their evidence was more than rumblings of discontent from a part of the industry. It defies the current allowable nature of all actions by authorities in our society EXCEPT it seems in CASAs sphere of influence.

 

What they should have done was, having become aware of murmurings of discontent, was actually got the data first. Once they had data they could make sensible decisions.

 

I suspect that had they got the data first they would not have acted as they did.

 

 

[Icarus]

Jabiru HAVE acted. There have been numerous service bulletins, modifications and upgrades to their engines since they first built their first engine. I'm not sure what else they could have done. The flippant answer is "get it right, right from the start" but that's a complete impossibility. No engine in any form of transport has ever been the final best design right from the start. I remember when Rotax was a name spoken with shaking head and shudders of disbelief that anyone would dare fly behind one. My how they have changed with development and without having restrictions put on them.So who defines what form "should have acted" should have taken.

 

CASAs actions were started without evidence and in every other part of our society you just cannot do that!!!

 

They should never have stepped in until their evidence was more than rumblings of discontent from a part of the industry. It defies the current allowable nature of all actions by authorities in our society EXCEPT it seems in CASAs sphere of influence.

 

What they should have done was, having become aware of murmurings of discontent, was actually got the data first. Once they had data they could make sensible decisions.

 

I suspect that had they got the data first they would not have acted as they did.

Ok.

Pretty persuasive arguments.

 

I accept that this is probably more a casa vendetta more than anything else.(I was wrong)

 

I better have my wits about me when dealing with them in future.

 

thanks for the heads up.

 

 

[ryan4321]

Jabiru HAVE acted. There have been numerous service bulletins, modifications and upgrades to their engines since they first built their first engine. I'm not sure what else they could have done. The flippant answer is "get it right, right from the start" but that's a complete impossibility. No engine in any form of transport has ever been the final best design right from the start. I remember when Rotax was a name spoken with shaking head and shudders of disbelief that anyone would dare fly behind one. My how they have changed with development and without having restrictions put on them.So who defines what form "should have acted" should have taken.

 

CASAs actions were started without evidence and in every other part of our society you just cannot do that!!!

 

They should never have stepped in until their evidence was more than rumblings of discontent from a part of the industry. It defies the current allowable nature of all actions by authorities in our society EXCEPT it seems in CASAs sphere of influence.

 

What they should have done was, having become aware of murmurings of discontent, was actually got the data first. Once they had data they could make sensible decisions.

 

I suspect that had they got the data first they would not have acted as they did.

 

Well said - and I hope you forward these comments to CASA. A very logical statement to a very illogically thinking governing body!

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Well said - and I hope you forward these comments to CASA. A very logical statement to a very illogically thinking governing body!

I wrote to CASA at the beginning of this basically saying amongst other things, "If you have data (other than stating "a high and increasing number.....") please release this information so that owners and operators of Jabirus can make informed decisions about whether to fly or not. I pointed out that if they were in possession of information that might impossible for individual owners to know, AND if they felt they had a duty of care to the general public on the ground, then they also had a duty of care to pilots flying the aircraft . I asked for the data or at least some data upon which I could make an informed judgement as to whether it was safe to fly a Jabiru powered aircraft.

 

I got the same form letter back as everyone else, which if I recall but could be wrong, said CASA was responding to concerns from the industry and pilots are left to make their own judgments as to whether they wanted to fly.

 

Will I send this? - nope, I have sent it all before.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

I just see that CASA have extended the limitations again. The only difference being that your passenger now only has to have signed the form within 3 months instead of 28 days.

 

 

[Camel]

For those interested, FACTS. I have proof.

 

Quote from CASA SASO

 

Data collected in this process came from a variety of sources, ATSB, Airservices, RA-Aus, direct reporting to CASA and eventually from Jabiru itself. In this process all information was considered that related to Jabiru Powered Aircraft, this included VH and Recreational registered aircraft. CASA reviewed all RA-Aus accident and incident data in December 2013 in relation to piston engine reliability from 2012 and 2013 , this data was provided back to RA-Aus in May 2014 and again in August to the new CEO. Further request of data specifically in relation to Jabiru engine failures was requested from RA-Aus in August 2014 and supplied by them. While RA-Aus may not agree to the number of occurrences identified, not all of them came from RA-Aus data.

 

RAAs VIEW

 

Read the submission to CASA.

 

https://www.raa.asn.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/RA-Aus-Submission-to-CASA-re-Jabiru-Proposal-dated-21-Nov-2014.pdf

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

 

FOI application paid and accepted will be released BUT.......CASA will not release this data because Jabiru have objected to it being released.

 

MINISTER TRUSS

 

Sent original standard letter, sent more mail and phoned, Has failed to respond.

 

CASA INDUSTRY COMPLAINTS COMMISSION

 

Supports CASA's action.

 

DIRECTOR OF CASA

 

No response to my letter

 

OMBUDSMAN

 

Said do above and then come back, on my way !

 

 

[Oscar]

Icarus (Brendan), you have raised a number of points that I believe are entirely deserving of considered and respectful response.

 

If I misrepresent your position here, I apologise and most certainly ask you to correct me. It does seem that you feel that people here - absolutely including me - are attacking CASA's action with a primary/sole purpose of defending/supporting Jabiru at the expense of accepting the 'safety' argument for the CASA action. While I am completely comfortable with the charge that I believe Jabiru should be defended against what I see is an arbitrary, badly-applied and damaging action on CASA's part - damaging not only to the Jabiru company but indeed every owner/operator of Jabiru-powered aircraft worldwide - this is a far more serious issue than just 'attacking CASA because they are hitting on Jabiru'.

 

As others here have stated, CASA is not considered by the aviation industry in Australia to be discharging its responsibilities in a reasonable, responsible and above all equitable manner. May I suggest that if you are not conversant with the industry submissions to the Forsyth Review - all of which were presented many, many months before the 'Jabiru' issue took place - then your knowledge of the 'industry' appreciation of CASA's operation would be immeasurably increased. The way in which the 'Jabiru' issue has been handled is inimically contrary to the direction for the operation of CASA proposed by the Forsyth Review - and which has almost entirely accepted by the government. So - in effect - you seem to be placing those of us who are at odds with the CASA action squarely in the camp of a far larger range of people - from the Minister responsible for CASA - down.

 

I've just seen your most recent response, and it's most reasonable. But - I believe you are owed more explanation than just being 'battered into acceptance'. I would, if I were in your position.

 

So - here goes - as a quick summary.

 

1. ALL standards for aeronautical safety have acceptance of a 'failure' figure. TBO's are initially set by performance against a standard developed by an Airworthiness Authority ( e.g. EASA, ASTM , FAA, BCAA etc.) and then modified in the light of operational experience. Jabiru engines have been certificated/certified against those standards.

 

2. The CASA action was based on a 'metric' that has absolutely NO acceptance nor rationale, in any International/national standard. 'Not as good as Rotax' is NOT a Standard - it is a qualitative judgement and the use of it as a de facto 'Standard was NEVER communicated to Jabiru as a potential reason for action - let alone was Jabiru warned that such a metric might be applied.

 

3. When the CASA action was applied, there was NO indication of what remediation action by Jabiru would lift the restrictions. 'Until we feel happy about it' is NOT a valid definition of acceptable action, nor is it anything by which Jabiru could be expected to direct any action towards.

 

4. 'Safety' is not a metric - it is a quality in the Aristotlean sense, or in the more prosaic sense, an 'outcome'. 'Incidents' are NOT necessarily 'outcomes'. Having a fall from a step-ladder is an 'incident' - but being killed or injured as a result of that fall, is an 'outcome' in the safety sense. It happens to be a FACT that Jabiru in-flight engine failures, in terms of outcomes of death/injury, are in this country - the subject of the CASA action - fewer than the 'standard' used by CASA to justify its action. All automotive conversions, Lycomings, Continentals, and I am afraid Rotaxes of either two or four-stroke operation, have WORSE safety outcomes than Jabiru engine failures. Yet, CASA has not moved against them in a similar fashion as it has towards Jabiru engines. If Jabiru engines 'do not make the grade' as decided by CASA - can you suggest why other engines with worse safety outcomes are NOT being subject to similar 'preventive' safety restrictions?

 

Is there any difference between being killed/injured by the failure of a Jabiru engine as against the failure of any other engine?

 

5. The CASA action has relied on a statement of statistics that have not been made transparent - and that, indeed, CASA is resisting all efforts to be made transparent. Surely, that alone should make those who support the validity of the CASA action rather more than unsettled? If right is on your side, why would you HIDE the evidence?

 

Icarus (Brendan) - no reasonable person should have any issue with the concept you have expressed, that safety is a major issue. I certainly do not. However, I seriously believe that the CASA action against Jabiru has flaws in concept, basic validity, delivery and ultimate effect that bring into serious question the motives of CASA.

 

 

[gandalph]

If Jabiru engines 'do not make the grade' as decided by CASA - can you suggest why other engines with worse safety outcomes are NOT being subject to similar 'preventive' safety restrictions?

The rest of us chickens should be as worried as all get out about if (or when) that particular axe will fall.

 

 

[Oscar]

The rest of us chickens should be as worried as all get out about if or when that particular axe will fall.

Just as soon as there is a 'catastrophic' event following an engine failure where a non-Jabiru engine is in the picture.

 

 

[Camel]

Oscar said"........ 5. The CASA action has relied on a statement of statistics that have not been made transparent - and that, indeed, CASA is resisting all efforts to be made transparent. Surely, that alone should make those who support the validity of the CASA action rather more than unsettled? If right is on your side, why would you HIDE the evidence?

 

Oscar, read my post #941 , it is JABIRU stopping the freedom of information of the statistics that CASA use the 46 engine failures.

 

 

[2tonne]

Oscar said"........ 5. The CASA action has relied on a statement of statistics that have not been made transparent - and that, indeed, CASA is resisting all efforts to be made transparent. Surely, that alone should make those who support the validity of the CASA action rather more than unsettled? If right is on your side, why would you HIDE the evidence?Oscar, read my post #941 , it is JABIRU stopping the freedom of information of the statistics that CASA use the 46 engine failures.

Just out of interest, on what basis could Jabiru interfere with an FOI request?

 

 

[SDQDI]

For those interested, FACTS. I have proof.FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

 

FOI application paid and accepted will be released BUT.......CASA will not release this data because Jabiru have objected to it being released.

Camel I must admit I haven't read every line of each post in this thread and also admit I don't own or run a jab, I do have friends that run them though. I just wanted to understand this part of your post a little more.

 

Does that relate to the data/numbers that CASA won't release? I did mention 30 or 40 pages ago that a reason for them not releasing the data could be because jab didn't want them to. If it is jab stopping the release of numbers surely that would only because it wouldn't paint a nice picture?

 

 

[Aldo]

Oscar

 

As always a very precise and comprehensive post, point 5 though, if what Camel is saying above is true (and I have no reason to believe that it's not) is becoming a bit of a two way street CASA wont release the data that brought the instrument into force and Jabiru are objecting to the release of information under the FOI act. If the data that CASA acted upon is flawed (and I believe it is) why would Jabiru be objecting to the release of that data.

 

It doesn't make sense from either point of view

 

For the record I do own a J230 so I have a vested interest in the eventual outcome.

 

5. The CASA action has relied on a statement of statistics that have not been made transparent - and that, indeed, CASA is resisting all efforts to be made transparent. Surely, that alone should make those who support the validity of the CASA action rather more than unsettled? If right is on your side, why would you HIDE the evidence?

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATIONFOI application paid and accepted will be released BUT.......CASA will not release this data because Jabiru have objected to it being released.

[Camel]

Just out of interest, on what basis could Jabiru interfere with an FOI request?

I asked for the relevant law that allows Jabiru to object and the reply was !

 

As detailed in my decision letter, Jabiru objected to the release of parts of the documents, which they are able to do under the FOI Act. I made a decision to release the documents to you, however as Jabiru objected, I am unable to do so until Jabiru has exercised their review rights or the review period runs out.

 

 

[coljones]

snipsnip

snip

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

 

FOI application paid and accepted will be released BUT.......CASA will not release this data because Jabiru have objected to it being released.

 

snip

 

snip

 

snip

Has Jabiru indicated why they are the reason for refusal by CASA to release?

 

 

[Camel]

Camel I must admit I haven't read every line of each post in this thread and also admit I don't own or run a jab, I do have friends that run them though. I just wanted to understand this part of your post a little more.Does that relate to the data/numbers that CASA won't release? I did mention 30 or 40 pages ago that a reason for them not releasing the data could be because jab didn't want them to. If it is jab stopping the release of numbers surely that would only because it wouldn't paint a nice picture?

The FOI I have asked for is the CASA quoted 46 engine failures !

 

It was a major surprise that Jabiru objected, those I have told also have been surprised, now that CASA have continued the restrictions I will release information I had.