Jump to content

JABIRU 2016 UPDATE


JEM

Recommended Posts

I heard a good joke today, well its kind of funny depending on where you sit in aviation.

 

How do you get your own Jabiru for FREE ? Buy a block of land and wait !

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 680
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well I won't give that a funny asmol but let me explain.

 

I did find it funny (I always enjoy jokes) but given the amount of pain that some of our fellow forum members have gone through I personally think it is a bit over the top especially in this thread and as funny as it is as far as jokes go I find it in bad taste.

 

 

  • Agree 10
  • Winner 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a lot of experience with political matters and very rarely keep up with the ins and outs of the differing levels of government but I do have an ingrained pessimism in regards to casa changing for the better.

 

The thing that caught my attention when watching the vid was when the senator asked (can't remember word for word!) "why were they only restricted from flying over populous areas why weren't they grounded altogether?" And all I was thinking was don't give them any ideas!

 

Anyway as far as I am concerned Yes it would be nice to have the casa held accountable for all their actions (not just the jab saga) but the pessimist in me looks at the past and sees unimplemented recommendations from things like the Forsyth review and it doesn't fill me with hope and wonder for the future

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a bit of sympathy with the CASA logic on that one. IF there is only you, or you and an informed one other it really shouldn't matter, but in the real world an ultralight falling on you wouldn't rate as a likely cause of death, either. Nev

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The majority of Jabiru engines would be sold overseas and CASA's "investigations" would include them in the data set. Jabiru's commercial interests need to be protected, so don't expect CASA to disclose anything that leaves them open to being sued.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everybody - and seriously - email O'Sullivan, congratulate hiom for opening this au to proper inspection. THIS IS IMPORTANT! - not just for Jabiru but to forestall CASA expanding this kind of BS throughout the Rec Av scenario.https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Contact_Senator_or_Member?MPID=247871

Done.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everybody - and seriously - email O'Sullivan, congratulate hiom for opening this au to proper inspection. THIS IS IMPORTANT! - not just for Jabiru but to forestall CASA expanding this kind of BS throughout the Rec Av scenario.https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Contact_Senator_or_Member?MPID=247871

Done

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter that you get an automated response: the Senator's staff see the numbers coming in and that will tickle them to tell him it's a hot button issue.

That was a verification that I did it, next time I'll just;

 

Done.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everybody - and seriously - email O'Sullivan, congratulate hiom for opening this au to proper inspection. THIS IS IMPORTANT! - not just for Jabiru but to forestall CASA expanding this kind of BS throughout the Rec Av scenario.https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Contact_Senator_or_Member?MPID=247871

Done, and I've also pointed the Senator to some info which may kick CASA while they're down.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if that appeared as combative, Bex: I did assume that you were reporting the automated response and simply wanted to advise others that this is still a 'result'. MP's staff filter everything incoming to the MP and it's important that they see public interest in an issue, because that's what gets it pushed up on the MP's agenda. Once the MP's office gets a heads-up that this is something the MP can 'exploit', it gets a whole different status: the office starts to look at what's coming in, rather than just push it aside to the 'send thank you letter' pile, and from that action will start to happen.

 

Some of us out here have been working up material analysing and explaining the many aspects of what has been wrong with this CASA action, but for that to be effective it has needed a 'champion' who can use it to screw CASA to the wall. It looks as if we may just have our 'champion' now, and every bit of encouragement that he can be given to run with the ball will help to ensure that the backgrounding information will be looked at and used if it is cogent to the issue.

 

If we can - as a community - utilise this opportunity to demonstrate to CASA that Recreational and Sport aviation is NOT just something that CASA can kick into the gutter because it might be annoying, then we have a far better chance of being treated with respect and fairness in the future. This is not JUST about Jabiru (and incidentally, CAMit, as you will appreciate) but the advancement of the entire sector of aviation. If we - as a community - just sit on our hands here, it opens up a pathway for CASA to regulate us out of existence, or at the very least to reduce us to virtually 'outlaw' status in aviation terms. We need to fight, and every bit of support we can give to any 'champion' for us, is important - even if one gets no more than that automated response as you reported, it is a brick in the wall for us.

 

 

  • Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everybody - and seriously - email O'Sullivan, congratulate hiom for opening this au to proper inspection. THIS IS IMPORTANT! - not just for Jabiru but to forestall CASA expanding this kind of BS throughout the Rec Av scenario.https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Contact_Senator_or_Member?MPID=247871

Done.

 

Look at around the 8:00 in the clip. In response to the Senator O'Sullivan's question on what was causing the engine failures, (After

 

assuming that CASA had carried out extensive investigations into each and every incident.)

 

Included in the answer was "Roller Cam Valves".

 

Roller Cams were introduced as part of the solution, not the cause.

 

What's the penalty for misleading a Senate hearing ?????

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got the distinct impression that O'Sullivan had a very damn good idea of the 'quality' of the data, and that he was basically firing warning shots over CASA's head that they will be called to the Headmaster's office and required to explain in detail. He seemed to indicate, by a gesture, that he had quite a portfolio of material that they were going to be required to answer, and letting them know that if those answers were not acceptable, they would find those shots were merely sighting-in for the heavy artillery bombardment. If you've every watched Heffernan in action, his couple of somewhat laconic comments were the equivalent of him pinning a frog down to the laboratory bench prior to commencing dissection - and he usually dissects with a large hammer (remember the comment about Gillard being 'deliberately barren'? )

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Done.

 

Gosh I didn't realize just how bad CASA were.

 

They said that the Jabiru engine had 3 times the in-flight failures of any similar -power engine. I think this is a demonstrable lie.

 

The Volkswagen derivatives have a much worse failure rate in my experience.

 

AND they made it seem as if RAAus was behind them... I hope this is also a lie.

 

I didn't go into any of this in my thank you email, but we need to make sure O'Sullivan is properly made aware of any shortcomings in the CASA story.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The majority of Jabiru engines would be sold overseas and CASA's "investigations" would include them in the data set. Jabiru's commercial interests need to be protected, so don't expect CASA to disclose anything that leaves them open to being sued.

What happens overseas has no interest to CASA, anecdotal evidence says there is far less problems in RSA and USA anyway.

 

If anything FAA should have followed CASA stance if there was an issue, they havent which says a lot

 

The data set has been seen under FOI and it is in fact as fraudulently assembled as was believed by RAA and Jabiru at the time of action being instigated.

 

 

  • Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everybody - and seriously - email O'Sullivan, congratulate hiom for opening this au to proper inspection. THIS IS IMPORTANT! - not just for Jabiru but to forestall CASA expanding this kind of BS throughout the Rec Av scenario.https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Contact_Senator_or_Member?MPID=247871

Done

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happens overseas has no interest to CASA, anecdotal evidence says there is far less problems in RSA and USA anyway.If anything FAA should have followed CASA stance if there was an issue, they havent which says a lot

The data set has been seen under FOI and it is in fact as fraudulently assembled as was believed by RAA and Jabiru at the time of action being instigated.

The data collated by Casa, it was then assessed by the FAA policy, so it has been used against the FAA policy or standards yet the US are not isueing any restriction.

 

This can be read in a letter from Casa to RAA which I have a copy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The data collated by Casa, it was then assessed by the FAA policy, so it has been used against the FAA policy or standards yet the US are not isueing any restriction.This can be read in a letter from Casa to RAA which I have a copy.

Jabiru have looked at the 'CASA' interpretation of the FAA criteria and they believe that CASA has made a fundamental, and quite serious, error in the way in which they have applied the FAA methodology. I am not a statistician so am not able to comment on that, but IF Jabiru is correct ( and they'd be pretty silly if they have not checked very carefully their conclusion), then Jabiru aircraft have a considerably better overall fatality rate figure than GA. And since RA in Australia has ZERO fatalities or injuries to 'innocent bystanders', it is a nonsense for CASA to suggest that ANY RA aircraft has a demonstrated 'heightened level of risk' for those on the ground.

 

To use 'potential' as a justification, introduces a huge area for subjective judgement. ANY aircraft that is in flight has 'potential' to crash. 'Potential' as a reason, allows CASA to pick anything it likes, to justify its actions.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that people don't look at the actual risk. They look at what other people guess is the risk.

 

If you look at the actual incidents of people killed on the ground, it is clear that the most risk comes from:

 

1) Cargo flights

 

2) Small jets

 

3) Large jets

 

4) Military jets

 

5) Medium turboprop

 

Not necessarily in that order, but these are the aircraft that appear most in accidents where bystanders are killed on the ground. Single engine piston barely appear on the list - even when they crash into urban areas.

 

It's not really surprising if you look at it objectively - the danger comes from speed+mass, and fuel carried.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everybody - and seriously - email O'Sullivan, congratulate hiom for opening this au to proper inspection. THIS IS IMPORTANT! - not just for Jabiru but to forestall CASA expanding this kind of BS throughout the Rec Av scenario.https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Contact_Senator_or_Member?MPID=247871

Done !

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...