JABIRU 2016 UPDATE

[JEM]

Just received from Jabiru.

 

Hello Jabiru Fleet,

 

Welcome back to 2016 and our first update for the coming year.

 

Sales are continuing to go well in our overseas markets. Jabiru North America currently have six J230’s on order. Two will depart at the end of this week, two in March and two more in May. We have a J170-D due off the production line within the next few weeks and it will be leaving us in March for its new Australian home. It is great to see these new Jab’s flying the coop.

 

Our roller cam engines are receiving a very good press. Total hours are now exceeding 30,000. Several of these engines have been back for their top end overhaul at 1000 hours in good condition and returned to service. Close to 100 people have now been through the Engine Maintenance Workshop held here at Jabiru. This training program, along with the on-going engineering research and development here at Jabiru is greatly improving the overall professionalism of the fleet. We will all keep up the good work and blitz those Rotax’s J

 

The CASA limitations are unfortunately still in place. Information we have received tells us that the on-going airworthiness department of CASA has no further issues with Jabiru. We are unsure of the reasons why the limitations are still in place. It would appear that the matter of lifting these restrictions may be held up by the legal department. We would of course like the limitations to be lifted as soon as possible. We continue to provide correspondence to CASA, Mr Warren Truss MP and our local members of parliament. The more correspondence they receive on the impact the limitations continue to have on owners and operators will assist. Correspondence can be sent to CASA, your local member, Mr Warren Truss MP at [email protected] and the Industry Complaints Commissioner CASA at [email protected]

 

The team here at Jabiru looks forward to the coming year with positivity and as always we sign off with “Happy Landings”

 

 

JABIRU AIRCRAFT PTY LTD

 

PO Box 5792

 

Bundaberg West Qld 4670

 

Ph: 07 41551778

 

Fax: 07 41552669

 

Email: [email protected]

 

www.jabiru.net.au

 

www.facebook.com/JabiruAircraft

 

 

[Oscar]

Of course CASA Legal Dept. is holding up any lifting of the restrictions - because it has realised that to do so places it in an extremely exposed legal position. Many people have seen this one coming - and quite a few could see it, and were howled down when they foresaw it, even before the action was put in place.

 

It's really quite simple: In its unseemly and wildly executed lunge at Jabiru's throat, CASA left itself with NO way out of the restrictions, in terms of any metric by which it could say: 'this is what is considered satisfactory; when this is met, the restrictions will no longer be needed.' NO specific issue was noted.

 

The situation can be summed up as:

 

If CASA lifts the restrictions without issuing a statement that a specific issue/issues have been satisfactorily addressed (and whatever was identified as an issue/s would have to stand up to scrutiny in a Court of Law), then one OR BOTH of the following circumstances could easily arise:

 

a) an action by Jabiru / a class action on behalf of owners/operators for loss of income, value, reputation, utility ( and there are probably more than just these) is very likely to succeed because CASA would have de facto admitted that there was no specific 'safety issue' that has now been rectified; AND ( not OR):

 

b) in the event of a future crash in circumstances prohibited under the restriction, those affected by that crash could sue CASA for lifting the restriction without any palpable reason, thus compromising the 'safety' mantra that was invo0ked in the first place.

 

The action by CASA has been a monumental, intercontinental, fur-lined, multi-coloured hypersonic cluster-f%ck. If we had an effective Parliament - rather than a useless Opposition and a Government doing nothing but walking around with its hands covering its groins to avoid the kicks coming from everywhere - there would be an enquiry followed rapidly by the public lynching of Farqharson, Jonothan Aleck and quite probably all of the Sport Aviation department crew.

 

Don't blame Skidmore for the situation: he was ambushed and nailed to the wall by Farqharson in the last HOURS of Farqharson's tenure of the office. In terms of the survival of an Australian aviation industry - albeit in a small, but internationally-significant way - this is a national disgrace. In terms of 'maintaining aviation safety' - it is an administrative-failure disgrace that would - in a democracy with any sort of effective government pursuing the 'business of government' - have the agency responsible dismembered and rendered 'dead, cremated, and its ashes scattered to the winds'.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

It would be nice to see Four Corners do a spread on this. That would put the cat amongst the pigeons and open the door for the aforementioned class action.

 

Imagine the theme - the Australian government through its regulatory body CASA basically committing fraud to cause the near demise of one of the David vs Goliath businesses that Australian government so proudly likes to tell us we are capable of doing here in this great land.

 

Add to that the loss of value of hundreds of average Aussie guys who put their life savings into a cheap but actually statistically safe machine.

 

Would make as good a program as some of the exposes they have done over the years.

 

 

[turboplanner]

We've heard the blah blah all before Oscar.

 

Some very positive news coming out of Jabiru for the future.

 

CASA have a duty of care to ensure the protection of existing owners, pilots passengers and businesses are protected by the specifications which led to the Instrument, that's all, easy to understand, and it's logical that that will take a while.

 

 

[Oscar]

We've heard the blah blah all before Oscar.Some very positive news coming out of Jabiru for the future.

CASA have a duty of care to ensure the protection of existing owners, pilots passengers and businesses are protected by the specifications which led to the Instrument, that's all, easy to understand, and it's logical that that will take a while.

Perhaps, but apparently you do not have the wit to understand the situation.

 

 

[turboplanner]

You're the one telling the emotional hypothetical Oscar; I'm simply going by the law, and until the issues listed in the instrument, are removed from the "reasonably foreseeable risk" category, CASA's actions seem prudent.

 

 

[Camel]

We've heard the blah blah all before Oscar.Some very positive news coming out of Jabiru for the future.

CASA have a duty of care to ensure the protection of existing owners, pilots passengers and businesses are protected by the specifications which led to the Instrument, that's all, easy to understand, and it's logical that that will take a while.

Oscar is spot on and I take offence to you calling it blah blah ! Oscar owns a Jabiru and so do I, do you own a Jabiru ? You need to be part of the solution not part of the problem ! But I doubt Jabiru will lead any legal action as they need to deal with Casa forever, but I have a lot of information regarding this matter (which I believe Oscar, Jabiru and RAA have seen some ) and it was not well handled and showed their attempt to destroy Jabiru and RAA because if it was about safety it would have been discussed prior to the published proposal and the replies to the proposal was significant.

 

 

[Camel]

You're the one telling the emotional hypothetical Oscar; I'm simply going by the law, and until the issues listed in the instrument, are removed from the "reasonably foreseeable risk" category, CASA's actions seem prudent.

Turbo, have you ever heard of an AD placed on an aircraft or engine and only enforced or complied with in the country of origin.?

 

 

[Oscar]

You're the one telling the emotional hypothetical Oscar; I'm simply going by the law, and until the issues listed in the instrument, are removed from the "reasonably foreseeable risk" category, CASA's actions seem prudent.

Please provide us with your wisdom: what ARE 'the issues listed in the instrument?'

 

 

[turboplanner]

Please provide us with your wisdom: what ARE 'the issues listed in the instrument?'

If you read the instrument Oscar you'll possibly find them.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

You're the one telling the emotional hypothetical Oscar; I'm simply going by the law, and until the issues listed in the instrument, are removed from the "reasonably foreseeable risk" category, CASA's actions seem prudent.

Which law?

 

There is no law where anyone CASA or you or me can simply deem a situation to be occurring without any proof it actually us - just using the scuttlebutt and rumourmongering of disgruntled competitive parties in the industry. Regulatory bodies such as CASA are supposed to have some viable proof and statistics first. True they may not be expected to have complete finalised stats but they are expected to have "some" stats. CASA brought in the rules and THEN sought statistics. That us not part of the law.

 

In fact CASA are known ( and proven in court on several occasions ) to act outside the law because they deem themselves to be the law until someone has the funds and capacity to take them on. Further they have endless pockets and can generally hold out till the plaintiff runs out of cash.

 

As has been correctly pointed out where a plaintiff has to deal with CASA in the future over other subjects then it is sometimes in the plaintiffs ( unfair ) but best interest to just "suck it up and move on".

 

That does not make it the law.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

Perhaps, but apparently you do not have the wit to understand the situation.

I'm sure he is at least half way there.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Oscar is spot on and I take offence to you calling it blah blah ! Oscar owns a Jabiru and so do I, do you own a Jabiru ? You need to be part of the solution not part of the problem ! But I doubt Jabiru will lead any legal action as they need to deal with Casa forever, but I have a lot of information regarding this matter (which I believe Oscar, Jabiru and RAA have seen some ) and it was not well handled and showed their attempt to destroy Jabiru and RAA because if it was about safety it would have been discussed prior to the published proposal and the replies to the proposal was significant.

Oscar appears to be speaking for CASA's current policy on the matter; maybe you could get CASA to confirm he has represented them correctly, then it wouldn't be blah blah.

I have perhaps been part of the solution with Jabiru J170 on two occasions; the AD which avoided ground steering lockup with pedal extenders, and the AD to reduce the chances of helicoptering when landing into gusty quartering winds. I was most impressed with the speed of Jabiru's response and the effectiveness of the actions.

 

I've read the parts of your information which were made public on this site, and concluded the question was reasonable and the answer was reasonable, but the matter had long since begun, and I don't think that addressed the questions; "who originally asked CASA to take action?" and "what information was provided to CASA to justify the request?"

 

My comments in #6 would be the same if it was the Acme Lawn Mower company which had had problems with blades shattering and had supplied a new shatter-proof blade on every lawn mower. That leaves the lawn mowers out in circulation to be tracked down and the blades changed over. Even in the formal motor vehicle recall programme, manufacturers have difficulty tracing second and third owners to advise there is an issue, and getting all the people to bring their cars in for a free changeover. Hence, you are not likely to see statements declaring there is no longer a problem, and it is equally difficult for the government to announce the end of a recall.

 

 

[turboplanner]

CASA have a duty of care to ensure the protection of existing owners, pilots passengers and businesses are protected by the specifications which led to the Instrument, that's all, easy to understand, and it's logical that that will take a while.

Jaba-who, that's all the post says, I was talking about the situation just now.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

If you read the instrument Oscar you'll possibly find them.

Gottem, read em. Oscar is still right!

The instrument does not outline any of the reasons, the sats or the remedial work required.

 

In the explanatory notes ( not the instrument) there is some additional information but NOT that which you claim to be present.

 

In the explanatory supplement.

 

CASA do not define what remedial issues are required they simply say when remedial work to an undefined standard acceptable to CASA has been carried out then they will relax the instrument. At no point in the explanatory supplement or the instrument is there any description of what work must be done. Indeed they give them self the loophole of simply saying even if you do remedial work we can claim we don't think it will fix the problem and thus not relax the instrument.

 

In regard to the stats -

 

They do not outline the statistics. They say " high, and increasingly high" (sic) in the latest and "high and increasing" in the original supplemental notes ( and as has been discussed many many times it is apparent that CASA did NOT have stats until after they issued the instrument and only after being taken to task by parties who had suffered a loss because of it.

 

Further In the supplements CASA hold themselves out to be responsible for the safety of all persons who could be involved in an incident except the pilot.

 

But when I personally communicated with CASA and outlined their legal obligation to ME if they were in possession of data which I could not be expected to know myself ( statistics that are impossible for me as a fairly isolated pilot in a rural area to know or get) but which they had - then they are legally obliged as the regulator to give them to me so I can be as informed as the rest of the population that they are tasked with protecting. But surprise surprise CASA was never forthcoming.

 

In short the instrument does not say what you say it says. Perhaps you should read it yourself.

 

Google this

 

CASA 102/15 - Conditions and direction concerning certain aircraft fitted with engines manufactured by Jabiru Aircraft Pty Ltd

 

- F2015L00974

 

 

[frank marriott]

Jaba

 

Don't start him again. Alan (& a couple of his followers) went on and on about rubbish when this all started and will continue with the same stuff again if encouraged. I though we were over that stage. I already have copies of the relevant material.

 

Only after some subpoenas are issued down the road will some people start to watch what they say.

 

Interesting times ahead I suspect.

 

 

[turboplanner]

CASA do not define what remedial issues are required they simply say when remedial work to an undefined standard acceptable to CASA has been carried out then they will relax the instrument.

That's standard public liability procedure. The reason is that if they did specify what work had to be done, they would become liable for that advice, and if it didn't work people could sue them. For the same reason it's the Dealer that registers your new car, committing to its compliance, rather than the State Government taking the fall if it's non-compliant. It's just the way the system works now.

 

 

[turboplanner]

JabaDon't start him again. Alan (& a couple of his followers) went on and on about rubbish when this all started and will continue with the same stuff again if encouraged. I though we were over that stage. I already have copies of the relevant material.

 

Only after some subpoenas are issued down the road will some people start to watch what they say.

 

Interesting times ahead I suspect.

Well your level is liking Bex's referral of me as a half-wit, so maybe you shouldn't give yourself heart flutters.

It might be very interesting indeed if the material you have answers the two questions in my post #13

 

If it does, don't hold back, tell us the truth!

 

 

[biggles]

But I doubt Jabiru will lead any legal action as they need to deal with Casa forever .

Camel , having regard to what now must be a very significant amount due to lost sales ,together with much damage to the brand name , I would be extremely surprised , and disappointed , if Jabiru haven't already briefed their legal team in anticipation . I think this has a long way to run yet ..... Bob

 

 

[Camel]

Camel , having regard to what now must be a very significant amount due to lost sales ,together with much damage to the brand name , I would be extremely surprised , and disappointed , if Jabiru haven't already briefed their legal team in anticipation . I think this has a long way to run yet ..... Bob

I hope your right, I hope the three stooges are let go and sued !

 

 

[2tonne]

TP, it seems to me that you view the law as being very black and white. In my experience, that is not the case. All kinds of human biases come into play when it comes to interpreting and applying the law, both statue and common law precedent, and always influenced by the facts in each case.

 

I once heard this great talk by a barrister about a particular Court case. He spoke for an hour and a half about all the precedents and the legal tests you would need to satisfy in order to get a preliminary injunction granted. It was all very complicated. At the end of the talk, the most highly respected senior barrister in this field got up and said "yes, that is all very good, but what it really comes down to is whether the judge likes your client".

 

Personal biases and different viewpoints play a big part in legal proceedings and also in the application of the law by administrative bodies.

 

 

[turboplanner]

TP, it seems to me that you view the law as being very black and white. In my experience, that is not the case. All kinds of human biases come into play when it comes to interpreting and applying the law, both statue and common law precedent, and always influenced by the facts in each case.I once heard this great talk by a barrister about a particular Court case. He spoke for an hour and a half about all the precedents and the legal tests you would need to satisfy in order to get a preliminary injunction granted. It was all very complicated. At the end of the talk, the most highly respected senior barrister in this field got up and said "yes, that is all very good, but what it really comes down to is whether the judge likes your client".

 

Personal biases and different viewpoints play a big part in legal proceedings and also in the application of the law by administrative bodies.

Yes, I agree with what you are saying.

 

 

[biggles]

I hope your right, I hope the three stooges are let go and sued !

I think they would be indemnified by their employer ( the taxpayer ) against professional negligence or whatever . But I do think Oscar's idea of a public execution would be in order .... Bob

 

 

[Soleair]

Is there not a case for CASA to release the information on statistics of failures, on which they based their action, under the Freedom of Information Act?

 

Or don't we have one in Australia?

 

 

[turboplanner]

Is there not a case for CASA to release the information on statistics of failures, on which they based their action, under the Freedom of Information Act?Or don't we have one in Australia?

I believe that may already have been done.

FoI Rule No 1: Know the answer before you ask the question, or you may get another answer to another question.