pj8768 Posted November 8, 2015 Posted November 8, 2015 Flying early afternoon, heard mayday call on area frequency SW slopes NSW, before 1pm EST. Jabiru pilot said engine had stopped 4,500 feet or thereabouts. Landed in paddock out of Bordertown South Australia. I think I have the callsign right. I think I heard 2 pob. I think a medical chopper was involved in relaying messages from nearby, relayed that they'd landed safely in a paddock (unverified). Interesting to hear the amount of questions being asked by Melbourne centre re POBs, EPIRB, etc over what felt like minutes - was waiting for the pilot to politely sign off so he could concentrate on flying the plane.
Happyflyer Posted November 8, 2015 Posted November 8, 2015 Flying early afternoon, heard mayday call on area frequency SW slopes NSW, before 1pm EST.Jabiru pilot said engine had stopped 4,500 feet or thereabouts. Landed in paddock out of Bordertown South Australia. I think I have the callsign right. I think I heard 2 pob. I think a medical chopper was involved in relaying messages from nearby, relayed that they'd landed safely in a paddock (unverified). Interesting to hear the amount of questions being asked by Melbourne centre re POBs, EPIRB, etc over what felt like minutes - was waiting for the pilot to politely sign off so he could concentrate on flying the plane. Well done to that pilot to put it down safely. If you got the rego right there is a photo here. http://www.sabc.org.au/All/Photos/Aircraft/JabiruJ230/DSCN9767.html 1
facthunter Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 I would rate an engine stoppage due a tank being run empty while another still had fuel in it as an incident. If something isn't done to rectify it quickly it will probably become an accident, as a consequence. If no damage occurs it is still an incident..Nev 3
fly_tornado Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 If you can make it back to the runway its an incident, if you don't its an accident.
gandalph Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 Not everyone reading this thread would be aware that the Jabiru in question was factory built, its an important fact and highly relevant to the accident. Why is it highly relevant? I'd have thought the facts relevant to the INCIDENT are: The engine failed to produce power while the aircraft was in flight. The cause of that failure to produce power is as yet undetermined or undisclosed to this forum. The engine was maintained by an as yet undisclosed person or organisation to a standard as yet undisclosed to this forum. The engine had run a number of hours as yet undisclosed to this forum. Everything else regarding the incident is, as far as this groups knowledge is concerned, an assumption and remains so until someone with the further FACTS chooses to disclose them to this forum. Not that that's likely to stop the loony fringe from speculating as usual. 1
Bruce Tuncks Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 I have landed power out in many paddocks near Bordertown, in a glider admittedly. I fail to see the excitement here. The safety feature of all our aircraft is the low landing speed, NOT the engine always working. And many paddocks around Bordertown are as good as many landing fields. Just so long as the pilot was allowed enough height to plan a proper outlanding then there never was a danger, only an inconvenience. I just wish our "safety" authority understood this, but I think they are too dumb.
Happyflyer Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 Oscar, if you can make it back to the runway its an incident, if you don't its an accident. CASA have restrictions on Jabiru for this reason. What's this then? 1 1
fly_tornado Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 So what does Jabiru charge to rebuild a 3300 these days?
biggles Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 Not everyone reading this thread would be aware that the Jabiru in question was factory built, its an important fact and highly relevant to the accident. Not sure why the fact that the aircraft is factory built is ... " important and highly relevant to the accident " FT , the engines are identical in both factory and home built, and both can be maintained by the owners ..... Bob
Guest Maj Millard Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 What's this then? That's someone who jumped on the brakes too hard prior to running off the runway by the look of it.....
kaz3g Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 What's this then? A very sad DC3 and an embarassed pilot who was doubtless a tad heavy on the brakes after touchdown. At least he kept it straight, I suppose. Kaz
JEM Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 Bordertown Chronicle newspaper report with photo http://www.borderchronicle.com.au/story/3477943/aircraft-emergency/?cs=1433
kasper Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 Not everyone reading this thread would be aware that the Jabiru in question was factory built, its an important fact and highly relevant to the accident. But actually if the engine stopped WHAT difference does it make if the airframe was factory built or homebuilt from kit? Last I checked the engine for a kit jab did not require you to assemble it from components. If the issue that causes the outlanding is identified as one of airframe manufacture failing or design then the fact that it is factory or home built may have a bearing on root cause analysis BUT given the minimum details of the report the factory build aspect does not seem relevant. After all it is entirely possible to suffer fuel exhaustion or starvation at 4,500ft resulting in engine stoppage - equally the engine may have internally "eaten itself" resulting in stoppage - we do not know but factory vs homebuilt does not seem relevant at this stage 5
tinydrip Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 Great to see a favourabe outcome to an engine out situation and not another RIP statistic. Well done pilot. 7 1
gandalph Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 Bordertown Chronicle newspaper report with photohttp://www.borderchronicle.com.au/story/3477943/aircraft-emergency/?cs=1433 Ah well there's the problem. You can see in the photo there's an obviously factory built tail tie down hanging down behind the plane. It must have been sucked into the factory built inlet system causing the factory built engine to give up the factory built ghost. 4
facthunter Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 Well I would pay more for a factory built in most cases. Jabiru being one, but there are some I would prefer to build myself, depending on the method of construction. I wouldn't expect it's resale to be more though. (unless someone watched the build and appreciated some extra features) You would have to sell the idea, and most trust the factory to be consistent and meet a standard. Nev
Oscar Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 Not only the tail tie-down, but the pilot had obviously taken off with what look very suspiciously like factory-built cowl plugs.. However, one has to say that the occupants were fantastically lucky to survive such a horrific crash, the damage and devastation... 1 2
facthunter Posted November 10, 2015 Posted November 10, 2015 Looks dangerous to me. Flying in a plane that has attracted so much attention from the Authority. This might catch on if we aren't careful. People might just do it for a dare. Nev 2 2
gandalph Posted November 10, 2015 Posted November 10, 2015 Do we know the cause of the engine failure yet? we should be congratulating the pilot for his competent handling of a critical incident. We should then wait for some FACTS to emerge rather than speculate on the cause.
kasper Posted November 10, 2015 Posted November 10, 2015 Please stop Jabiru bashing every time there is an issue. The event at the start of this thread is in my opinion a HUGE positive to the RAA - how about a view of WELL TRAINED AND COMPETENT RAA PILOT LANDS AIRCRAFT SAFELY FOLLOWING ENGINE FAILURE WITHOUT INJURY OR DAMAGE ... 3 8 4
Oscar Posted November 10, 2015 Posted November 10, 2015 The ONLY facts that we know about this incident are: that the noise stopped and that the aircraft made an impeccable, safe, undramatic landing on an average Australian paddock. Two occupants completely unharmed and by inference from the photo, sufficiently unfazed by the incident to secure the aircraft on the ground very competently, including placing all aperture covers including the static tube as per a normal end-of-flight. Any glider pilot would regard the end result of that 'incident' as a normal outlanding, that happens when the 'factory' lift for the day quits before you can get home. 3
Guest ozzie Posted November 10, 2015 Posted November 10, 2015 Looking at that photo all one could think is what a great place to do a deadstick landing. Everyone should have this type of country under them, just in case. Lazar leveled, freshly harvested not a fence in sight. Like how could you screw that up?
M61A1 Posted November 10, 2015 Posted November 10, 2015 unplanned engine stoppage qualifies it as an accident. hopefully, no one put off buying or flying a jabiru Some clarification from the ATSB, Transport Safety Investigation Act..... 3 Definitions (1) In this Act, unless the contrary intention appears: Accident: means an investigable matter involving a transport vehicle where: (a) a person dies or suffers serious injury as a result of an occurrence associated with the operation of the vehicle; or (b) the vehicle is destroyed or seriously damaged as a result of an occurrence associated with the operation of the vehicle; or © any property is destroyed or seriously damaged as a result of an occurrence associated with the operation of the vehicle. It was an "Incident", nothing more, nothing less. 4
bull Posted November 10, 2015 Posted November 10, 2015 I,ll have to back up FT on this one,,so ok everyone thinks their aircraft is the ducks nuts etc etc,,,,,,,,BUT the amount of JABIRU,S that keep falling out of the sky even now,for whatever reason is still a worry to any sane person that has to think about that piece of alloy sitting in front of them in a training environment,,still increases the pucker value to a high level, apon the slightest burble in sound from up front. Now to me and me alone I don't like flying behind a jabiru engine and try to avoid it at all costs,,,has to be a distraction to the new pilot just soloed and add to the worry factor..........................
alf jessup Posted November 10, 2015 Posted November 10, 2015 Think youll find the failure rate of 3300 is quite low, maybe even lower than 912. Who knows the data isnt released, ATSB says the failure rate is about the same except Rotax is increasing.Maybe we should start a thread discussing the Jabiru limitations, maybe shoot for 80 pages, certain people will argue for weeks yet still defy evidnece and sense to defend CASA Jetjr The failure rate of the 3300 will be much higher than the 912 as over 50,000 912's have be produced and are out in the world, there would be lucky to be 2000 if that 3300's made so there can be no comparison on failure rates 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