CASA 102/15 - Conditions and direction concerning certain aircraft fitted with engines manufactured

[facthunter]

My reference is "subtly" trying to show the suggestion is preposterous. I wasn't aware that anybody had actually said it. I remove myself from such an implication in the strongest terms. Nev

 

 

[storchy neil]

The suggestion here I'm guessing refers to a deceased former Board Member that I counted as a personal friend and a bloody good bloke. I have never heard it suggested from any Board Member that that person was involved in any way in the action CASA took.

 

some jonny come lately who don't didn't know him don

 

don new cons is closing a hole or two ref Canberra meeting :oops:neil

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Ok, time for my apology, Russ. I may have gone in a bit hard . Unfortunately, your comment set me off intemperately largely because it was so brief and seemed typical of some of the loose, unsupported comments posted here from time to time. Vague and derogatory. However, I now appreciate that these were more than superficial comments and you may have had good reason to think that way.

 

All I can say is that I know the RAAus Board is not complicit in any way in the action taken by CASA and, as stated before, has vehemently objected to CASA and demanded that they justify their action or withdraw.

 

I don't know of any current Board Member that is anti-Jabiru or even secretly supports CASA's actions. The preferences of ex-Board Members no longer interests me. That bell is rung. What I can say is that it is widely known that three of the then and current Board Members operate Jabiru's in their flying schools. For example, the Lone Eagle Flying school in SEQ, where Trevor Bange is the CFI and L2, routinely gets 1,000 hours from their Jabs before a top end overhaul is needed. Their operating and maintenance practices are what makes their Jab engines so reliable and enduring. I can assure you that if there was one "rogue" Board Member, he/she would run into a great deal of opposition from the three Board Members who operate several Jabs each.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

. . . Few are saying RAA had involvement but over years some influential members and board members did.When you consider the leaders at SASO currently, the personal view of these people becomes very important.

In a democratic society such as RAAus, the ballot box is the answer. Back in about 2010 when a few of discovered how poorly RAAus was being run, we got together and mounted a campaign of asking pointed questions at Natfly sessions. WE got a very poor response from the Board then and decided we couldn't fix the issues as ordinary members and campaigned to be elected to the Board with the attempt to fix from within. Unfortunately, I was the only one to get elected and it was 2 against 1 in the Exec and about 10 against one on the full Board.

 

Next we tried a members revolt and at the Queanbeyan meeting we got tremendous support. Shortly after that, reform-minded members ended up with a majority on the Board. Some of the old guard had been replaced and it wasn't long before virtually all were gone and were replaced by progressives who understood and respected good governance. Point is that in a representative democracy, if you don't like the way it is there is a way to fix it and that way is open to all who are prepared to commit the time energy and even emotion.

 

There is problems with incident reporting down to the lack of facts behind accident reporting. Often done well after the event and by those looking for retribution and shirking blame. Self maintenence and reporting is unlikely to see unbiased reports. Many are most concerned about insurance outcomes and personal ego bruising at that point rather than accurate reports for product development.

Couldn't agree more. If statistics are ever going to be helpful you need more and accurate reporting of issues. If every Jabiru engine fault were reported and accurately documented then sensible conclusions could be drawn from an honest evaluation of the data. Same of course could be said for Rotax. CASA will make decisions based on poor quality raw data if that's the only official data available. That does not excuse them though from spurious unsupported conclusions or actions.

 

 

[Russ]

G,day there Don.......thanks for the latter reply, yes I was influenced by mails/ comments/feed backs. Hence forth here, I shall view the saga in a different light.

 

I've been simmering away here, watching/reading etc, whilst holding "other" knowledge.

 

Ok....let's move on.......again, thanks

 

 

[Oscar]

Guys: we progress! A chapeau to all.

 

Who did what to whom, when, is no longer important. What is important, is how the f%ck we can get Recreational Aviation out of the mess that has been caused, with a still reasonable chance that our only serious Australian aircraft manufacturer and definitely the only Australian certified aero-engine manufacturer, can remain in business. It would be a rather nice result - don't you think - if such things as training costs, the opportunity to own an aircraft but recoup some of the expenses through cross-hiring etc., could be kept as low as possible? That is NOT going to happen if Jairu and CAMit go out of business.

 

So: can we all take a deep breath here, accept that our different positions and perceptions have been aired - and seek to fight the enemy rather than ourselves?

 

Has - surely - to be worth a shot.

 

 

[storchy neil]

thanks don yeh 2010 I was one of many that was pxxx off with the old board and the way it was being run they broke me through neglect to come to my aid

 

so I have to get on with being able to write how I was shafted at that time bloody funny how when the jab issue arose casa stepped in and effected more persons when the sxxx hit fan

 

so now rotax powered aircraft and the number is going up of accidents will they cop the same shxxx

 

I have a feeling it will neil

 

 

[facthunter]

There is every reason to believe other 'matters" could be dealt with in the same way as this has. What comes next? is a fair comment. Ok........ wait till it happens? I've already lost quite a lot of dollars by CASA changing the rules in mid stream. I have a lot of friends getting out of aviation and feeling better for it. It needs a fundamental change to the way things are done in this country, in aviation or the future is bleak. If you are keen get on with it and stick together. Everyone is in the same boat. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

Before the RAAUs problems were fixed there was a lot of hot air in th media and also on this forum. I wasn't aware of what all the problems were, I was just happy to be able to fly. The problem I saw was that myself and a load of members were unaware of the problems and when we asked for information it was not available. We were told to contact someone for the info. Not good in my opinion. If someone has a gripe and they are asked to explain it. That explanation needs to be easy to read and not hidden, so that the person with the gripe can't be sued or for some other reason.

 

I take the view that if someone can't explain their position, I am not going to take their side.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

There is every reason to believe other 'matters" could be dealt with in the same way as this has. What comes next? is a fair comment. Ok........ wait till it happens? . . . .

Nev, this may sound ridiculously optimistic but I think that the "Jabiru Solution" would not have happened under Mark Skidmore's leadership. I am a little disappointed he has not been of a mind to end this fiasco but I understand what a deep hole was dug the day before he was to take office. The big problem with lifting the instrument is that it puts CASA in the unenviable position of saying "All Jabiru engines now have the CASA seal of approval".

If CASA had been a lot less vindictive and a lot cleverer they could have quietly ramped up the pressure on Rod Stiff to DEFCON 1 and achieved the improvements on the widely known faults (thru bolts etc.) and then not be in the position they are now . . . Between a rock and a hard place.

 

We have the 10 point test provided by Mr Skidmore to test any new action by CASA and it is being used effectively by the industry. A massive test in my view will be what happens to the crazy idea about legislating fuel reserves with massive penalties of strict liability. The CAAP (234?) is fine as it is and leaves common sense and discretion to the PIC. The proposed Regs are just idiotic and show a total lack of understanding of aviation.

 

 

[storchy neil]

no don not the day before he took office the jab fiasco was going on well before he took office and nobody was bloody well listening neil

 

 

[DonRamsay]

One thing I really miss about Natfly is not getting to catch up with good mates like you Neil.

 

 

[Oscar]

Nev's warning is one which should be taken seriously.

 

While I believe that Skidmore is sincere and committed to changing the culture at CASA, people should read the history of CASA internal machination s to see how effective that has (n't) been in the past. Paul Phelan's article in Pro Aviation (

 

http://proaviation.com.au/2014/02/22/proaviations-submission-to-the-asrr/ - scroll down past the actual submission to the part entitled 'Palace Revolution') is an entirely accurate, and actually fairly restrained, description of internal opposition to Bruce Byron's attempts to make similar change. It's an eye-opener for those who may think that CASA is inherently a good organisation that just stumbles a bit now and then.

 

Sober reflection and some not-too-fanciful extrapolation on how the Jab. situation has progressed should give people concerns. As Nev has said: 'What comes next?'

 

Well, here's a possible scenario. Let us assume that there is a 'high profile' accident involving an aircraft that is somewhat over-represented in the serious accident /hours flown tables - and without doing any finger-pointing here, we all know that there are some that fall into that category. A quick glance at: https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwj72YfDu9_LAhXENpQKHasHDZMQFggbMAA&url=http://jabiru.net.au/images/The%20Aviation%20Consumer%20-%20LSA%20Accidents.pdf&usg=AFQjCNFLMJ995QOeUQRA6KAdAD_1uhikQQ&bvm=bv.117868183,d.dGo&cad=rja presents some names familiar to us all, with numbers that could trigger some reaction from CASA.

 

Let us also assume that the 'finger of blame' is directed at, say, the occupant safety features or certain aerodynamic features that are believed (even if not conclusively demonstrated) to be a significant factor. Inadequate analysis, you might say: well, from where does THAT sound familiar?

 

Now, an engine is a discrete component that can be removed, changed, replaced (with admittedly, varying degrees of complexity and not always without other consequent work needing to be done, but in broad terms, an engine is a lump out the front (in most cases) that one can more or less isolate for action.

 

IF one starts to look at other factors such as occupant safety / aerodynamics, it's going to get extremely difficult for changes to be made in many cases without serious re-design and manufacture - IF that can in fact be done at all. We talk about the possibility that there are Jabs. sitting in hangars unused because of the engine problem, and that may well be true - but a revised Jabiru /CAMit engine can be substituted fairly easily ( though at obviously a cost that many owners would not have anticipated to be suddenly stuffed before them). Yes, there are regulatory difficulties and hurdles to be surmounted - but your basic Jab. airframe remains usable, in the long run.

 

But you can't go out with a tin of resin and some fibreglass and change basic structure or form in, for example, a c/f aircraft that is manufactured using autoclaved procedures. For those, you might as well take out the Rotax and throw the airplane away...

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Dan Johnson is in on the story now, bydanjohnson.com "Jabiru Engines’ Battle With Australian Government"

 

Dan showing the poor journalism skills he is famous for

 

 

Jabiru NA is rolling out this meaningless table to justify the case against CASA, mixing aircraft type, brand and engine type into one table

 

 

 

[jetjr]

No its the same data just this one is looking at fatalities not breakdowns

 

Assumptions on hrs flown though

 

A far more serious number dont you think? People actually getting hurt or killed.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Not all fatalities relate to engine failures, most of the trikes fatalities would be loss of control. Jabiru are really digging the bottom of the barrel relying on misinformation to maintain their reputation for reliability.

 

 

[gandalph]

Jabiru NA is rolling out this meaningless table to justify the case against CASA, mixing aircraft type, brand and engine type into one table

That's why its called a COMPARISON FT . If it just listed one aircraft type or brand, or type or one engine type or brand it wouldn't be a comparison it would be a data point.

 

C'mon FT lift your game, who's dredging the bottom of the barrel now?

 

 

[gandalph]

Jabiru are really digging the bottom of the barrel relying on misinformation

Hello Pot, Have you met Kettle?

 

 

[jetjr]

And very few - near none - engine failures in Jabirus result in fatalities.

 

Std workplace risk assessment says a frequent event with no injury is much less critical for action than a rare one with fatal outcomes.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

That table looks alright to me. What exactly is your problem with it FT?

 

For example, there are a lot more fatalities with Cessna 172's than Jabiru, for about the same number of aircraft. Is this factually true or a fabrication?

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

I've said this before and I'll keep on pointing it out...

 

For an Australian male in his 60's:

 

Mortality from all causes = 10 in 1000 per year

 

extra risk from flying = 1 in 1000

 

extra risk from 5kg overweight = 2 in 1000

 

extra risk from inactivity = 4 in 1000

 

So if somebody was staying active and watching his weight to keep fit for flying then it is insane to stop him on "safety" grounds. Like shooting him for risking himself.

 

 

[Oscar]

That table looks alright to me. What exactly is your problem with it FT?For example, there are a lot more fatalities with Cessna 172's than Jabiru, for about the same number of aircraft. Is this factually true or a fabrication?

Oh gods, it is still ALIIIIIVE... next, we'll be seeing the opening of the FTburger franchise chain.... strictly for vegetarians, because its menu will be based on organic patties produced by free-range bulls... ( See" 'Stripes')

 

It appears to me that that table is produced from ATSB data - and ATSB data could never be correct, could it - unless it proves (with the caveat that OF COURSE, there are hundreds of unreported incidents) that Jabiru engines have a deadly serious problem, when it becomes magically, gospel.

 

FT and Donald's Rump have a lot in common, other than of course wealth and the fact that at least some of his constituency actually believe in him ( Rump, not FT...) The most obvious difference between them, however, is that in Rump's case the hair between his ears is mostly on the outside.

 

 

[facthunter]

CASA are tending in the one WRONG direction. More mandated goals and performance outcomes of difficult to assess effectiveness with more penalties. Pilots will fall out of the sky IF WE (CASA) don't prescribe and enforce all definable operational parameters. Inevitably thinking people will exit flying as a pleasurable pastime. On what basis could one expect the light at the end of the tunnel to exist? Nev

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Hello Pot, Have you met Kettle?

Gandie, I had a good laugh when I read that too. Your and Oscars comments merely icing on the cake.

 

 

[storchy neil]

nev :please:CASA have found the tunnel that will make headlines :oops:for crist sake tun on the light no put in bigger globe neil