Jabiru ?4784 mayday call landed paddock near Bordertown

[2tonne]

I did my early training in a J160 and soloed in it. Can't say I suffered from pucker value to a high level. Doesn't matter what engine I am flying behind I keep in mind that it might stop and fly accordingly.

 

 

[alf jessup]

I did my early training in a J160 and soloed in it. Can't say I suffered from pucker value to a high level. Doesn't matter what engine I am flying behind I keep in mind that it might stop and fly accordingly.

Agree 2tonne,

 

I did my training in RAA behind a J160 and had no issues also have in total about 40 odd hrs behind one, just like you say don't fly where you can't land or minimise the time over inhospitable terrain no matter what your sitting behind

 

 

[facthunter]

REAL aviators don't use terms like "falling out of the sky". It's not factually accurate and is sensationalist.Nev

 

 

[Nobody]

No problems, prove it, numbers flying is irrelevant as RATE is per flight hourCASA and Jabiru knockers argue US numbers are irrelevant and they show Jabiru to be one of the safest aircraft, so you cant play both ends. Either talk Australia only or not

ATSB (the only data we have) report indicates no such bias of failures to Jabiru in fact comment failure rates are similar, maybe more vocal whiners when it does.

 

CASA included runway incursions and fuel issues in their numbers to support the action.

 

I thought you left here and were never coming back Bull?

I think that this is the link to the ATSB report you mention no?

 

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2013/ar-2013-107/

 

There are a few question that come out of this or any other safety analysis.

 

1. Do the Rotax numbers include the Rotax 2 stroke engines? Looking at the third paragraph it seems that it does as it mentions it includes all the RAAus aircraft with a rotax manufactured engine.

 

2.. The rates quoted are for failure or malfunction. Does running rough but still making power count as a malfunction? A more useful statistic would be the number of forced landings per flying hour due to power loss that didn't involve fuel exhaustion,starvation or contamination. Unfortunately this data isnt available/published.

 

3. How should a failure that was detected on the ground be handled in the reporting of the statistics? If during a preflight a cylinder has low compression due to an exhaust valve problem does that count as a "malfunction"? What about a crack in the head? Do accident statistics capture the real situation or is there another measure?

 

I think the USA data you refer to is this report.

 

http://flightdesign.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/The-Aviation-Consumer-LSA-Accidents.pdf

 

This report looked at overall safety in which the jabiu does well because its airframe is so good. Ie it is good despite its engine rather than because of it.

 

Understand I am not knocking Jabiru., my thoughts on them and their aircraft are articulated here:

 

Jabiru experience

 

 

[jetjr]

Yes, CASA changes what data they include to justify a position

 

No breakdown between Rotax models just like no breakdown for Jabiru models

 

You're correct re airframes vs engines but if thats he case perhaps only certain engines in certain airframes should be limited? At least only certain engine models.

 

Alas the data breakdown doesnt exist so limit the lot.......

 

Without debating the data, the least you can say is that it isnt conclusive or able to be reasonably acted upon.

 

Small data sets are highly prone to variation

 

 

[Oscar]

No, the accident /incident statistics certainly don't cover the real situation because there is in most cases, inadequate investigation of the causes of the accident/incident. For instance, in the last nearly 24 months, we have had two accidents - proper, write-off-damage accidents: one being an out-of-fuel situation (Runcorn), one being a 'failed to run on water' situation (Nattai). The Nattai accident isn't listed on the CASA data but the Runcorn one is - without explanation. There are certainly 'incidents' that have all the hallmarks of carby ice; there is at least one incident where the fact that mandatory SB's had not been carried out etc.

 

Basically, the statistics MOSTLY list nothing but the result, but it is the cause/s that is the information needed to make decisions. That is what is very much lacking for sports-aviation-class engines. Nobody, I think, contests the fact that the name Jabiru features far more frequently than anybody would like in sensationalist stories, but we only very rarely see any follow-up report on the true circumstances and cause/s of the result.

 

 

[Yenn]

One person here says that Jabs are falling out of the sky at an excessive rate. nother says that there have been 2 accidents in the past 24 months. They can't both be correct, can they?

 

As far as mandatory SBs are concerned, according to RAAus I failed to carry one out on the Corby tailwheel spring support. I don't know where they got that information from as I had done the SB and I emailed them with my thoughts on their publishing that I hadn't done the work. All I have is silence from RAAus.

 

 

[Oscar]

Sorry, Yenn, my badly-worded post: there were two accidents that were quite obviously no fault of the engine, but at least one is listed in the CASA data as 'engine-related''.

 

 

[planedriver]

Accident.

Incident.

 

 

Did I get that correct or is the Rotax powered plane an incident and the Jabiru powered plane an accident?

Not the best of outcomes, but it may have been better if the buggers had cut the grass.

Looks like it should be in the again soon and no fatals which is the best news

 

 

[DrZoos]

CASA wouldn't have restricted Jabiru without evidence of the issue existing. The only evidence that's not in the public domain would be the engine rebuild books at Jabiru, CASA perusing them must have highlighted just how serious the issue really is.

Hog wash, CASA do what they want when they want , with absolutely no regard for fairness, facts or common sense....

almost every person i know that has dealt with CASA on anything , but the simplest of matters, for any period of time will say similar...

 

CASA is a beuaraucratic disaster that needs to have its wings clipped beynd recognition

 

 

[bull]

I am surprised that a pilot would use such language, isn't this the kind of language that the uninformed media use, even after a successful forced landing? Don't we laugh and poke fun at journos who think every engine failure results in the plane 'plunging to the ground"

Octave sorry about the ,,,falling out of the sky bit,,,i was in a hurry ,,,I should have said ,,,,the amount of jabiru ,s that are being reported to be having ,,,,a forced landings ,,,b crashes ,,,c,,,,engine issues,,,,,,d media attention etc etc etc sorry,,,,,,about that

 

 

[Camel]

Funny how people own Jabiru's like them and understand the issues where as those who own nothing and even don't fly are the knockers and bashers ! At the end of the day it's about price and if you want the best you pay for it ! Jabiru are good value for what they do, engines treated well go ok and maybe extra maintenance required. As a motor mechanic looking at the motor car industry there are a lot of crap cars people buy and speak to them and they are happy, I did my time on Leyland, they had some lemons ! But I love some of the models !

 

If you don't know the facts stop ruining everyone else's fun, Casa.have not assessed the Jabiru engine failure issues fairly and if done properly they would have identified the actual issues.

 

 

[facthunter]

Hand grenades, Boat anchors, garden ornaments. Good ones chaps. You are supposed to be above what we constantly read in the sensational inaccurate press. Your "OPINION" in this instance isn't worth reading as it contributes NOTHING of substance to a subject that affects a lot of people here. I'll bet YOU get unimpressed if others regard your hobby as a suicidal silly irresponsible pastime. Nev

 

 

[jetboy]

Not the best of outcomes, but it may have been better if the buggers had cut the grass.Looks like it should be in the again soon and no fatals which is the best news

Ironically, this was the last of 3 inflight engine failures in as many months. I heard the maydays for the first 2. It was not intending to land there. The failure causes were never proved, just suspected as carb ice. a few planes have been retrofitted with extra intake heaters - electric or coolant operated - since.

Gotta love those reliable R912 installations. Especially the factory built versions with the flimsy or non existent carb heat systems.

 

If it were a homebuilt i.e. "amateur built category" it would have been required to meet the FAR rules for carb heat air intake temperature rise before being let loose on the unsuspecting public

 

 

[kasper]

clipped ...Gotta love those reliable R912 installations. Especially the factory built versions with the flimsy or non existent carb heat systems.

...

Those R912 heaters (both the electric and coolant heated ones) work a treat ... 10 years flying it the UK where carb-ice-is-mandatory-at-all-times-you-want-to-fly made me completely aware of the impact of carb ice and the effectiveness of the 912 systems used over there.

When flying Jabs in Oz in the 90's I only once experienced what I know to be carb ice and that was in hundreds of hours training in them ... but I am process freak with a mechanical bent and run through lists and monitor/manage to the specified limits on what I fly.

 

And FYI the ONLY engine that has ever blown up on me was a R912 - high power complete seizure, snapped the crank, broke the case open, threw the aircraft sidewards and twisted the engine frame on stopping ... at least it did not fall of the airframe so all the bits were in one place to collect after 'landing' ... but I still fly them and Jabs and 2 strokes

 

 

[Jaba-who]

I have never experienced carb ice in the jab although most of my flying is in high temperature environments ( but often high humidity so still a risk. )

 

A couple of my mates have and have attended to it promptly without engine stoppage.

 

But then again when I was learning to fly fixed wings the aero club ( with all cessnas and no jabs) had had stoppages and always taught pro-Active carb heat management to all students.

 

So again this is not a problem of the jab engine but of all carbureted engines in certain circumstances and failure of pilots to be ahead of the game.

 

 

[planedriver]

No aircraft is immune from the possibility of carburetta ice, if that was the cause in this case. The choice of carby and cowl design is very important, but so is the manner in which it is operated.

 

Pipers do not seem to have as many problems as some Cessna's fitted with the same engine, due partly to the engine temperature and air flow within the cowl.

 

It is also important that that the PIC is aware of certain conditions where it is most likely to happen, and to operate his engine in a manner to minimize the risk.

 

With good maintenance, and understanding temperature limitations both high and low, the Jabiru still represents a good bang for the buck.

 

Some folks have a feeling for engines and are mindful of what's going on under the cowl rather than just driving the thing, then the chances of some of the problems happening, can be minimized.

 

 

[Geoff13]

Totally agree with the last sentence planedriver. It is the same with all machinery. Some have the feel, some do not.

 

 

[biggles]

I make a practice of applying carby heat whenever the throttle is other than fully open .... Bob

 

 

[Jaba-who]

I make a practice of applying carby heat whenever the throttle is other than fully open .... Bob

I think this is probably going too far. But I take your point.

 

Given you are in victoria, maybe your air temperatures are usually fairly low although I would have thought your humidities would be generally fairly low too. Unlike up here in tropics. but if you run your engine at about 2900 rpm as Jabiru suggest then almost constantly have carb heat on. This will thin out the air and have you flying in a constant start of partial power. Will change your fuel air ratios so you will be running lean and maybe too lean - getting hotter CHT's (or maybe cooler if you are in the lean of peak band. ) But I'm sure you get my meaning. carb heat has downsides as well.

 

So overall there is a sweet spot of range where you should be having carb heat on. Not too much and not too little.

 

 

[jetjr]

Jabs have a great carb heat system, you can run with it on all the time if you like.

 

Air is all filtered

 

Um ....... Carb heat makes it run rich, not lean, pretty safe.

 

 

[facthunter]

I've seen people attempt a go around and abort it due obvious lack of power caused by carb heat still on on the older Jabiru. I don't know why anything later would behave differently. Nev

 

 

[jetjr]

Yes using it upon landing is a bad idea, as per training and poh

 

 

[turboplanner]

Here, once again are figures published by RAA.

 

CASA not only have these, but the failures before and the failures after, because RAA published them without any restrictions, which is commendable.

 

For those who continue to belch false information that there is no breakdown by engine type, have a look at the breakdown by engine size as published by RAA, which every member has had a chance to see.

 

EXX22.xlsx

 

EXX22.xlsx

 

EXX22.xlsx

[jetjr]

Old data TP, 34 in 5 yrs....... No injuries?

 

There is no breakdown by model, only size

 

Casa reckoned 45 in one year, yes the data has been seen, there are incidents and service difficulties there not even on flight or engine related