JABIRU 2016 UPDATE

[kasper]

Maybe during the re-write of the tech manual create two groups of maintenance practices?1/ Want to do all of your own stuff without being trained or assessed- go for it but don't fly over innocent 3rd parties. Like the roots of AUF.

2/ Want to fly over 3rd parties / mix with commercial aircraft - maintain the aircraft in accordance with approved methods by suitably qualified people, as determined by RAAus.

... that already mostly exists in the current RAA system with the L1/L2/L3 divisions

What I think you are looking for is actually aircraft specific for those that wish to access class A, B, C or D where its a no-go unless the engine is certified.

 

IF CASA want the certificated engines to be maintained by L2s then they can get that written into the Tech Manual ... there is already a requirement to maintain the aircraft in accordance with Tech Manual so the circle is complete without having to further segregate L1s into can't do maintenance ... it's just that a certified engine not maintained by L2 then becomes the equivalent of an uncertified engine for the purposes of accessing airspace where that certification is the only justification CASA have of accepting the risk.

 

AND if there is stratification within the L2's to be introduced to require levels of certificated training to work on those engines that already exists in the L2 process because the RAA Tech can apply whatever restrictions they want on L2s as part of there approval ... but it swill probably end up being formalized in a tech manual draft.

 

The power of the existing L2 approvals is clear and as an example on mine I self requested on application for L2 to not have any primary composite structures on my L2 and the L2 work was a part time weekend job (along with instructing) and I was balancing my work/life ... basically I was trying to avoid being dumped with 6 LSA55 Jabirus on the field as 'mine' to deal with because I was focusing my time on 2 strokes and older air frames ...

 

And in any event, an L2 will self assess their personal comfort and ability before taking on work ... my L2 was granted based on my work overhauling and repairing tiger moths plus other automotive experience and I have since done the R912 course in the UK and pulled down and rebuilt all the 2 strokes (other than crank splitting), worked in an aircraft factory building components and airframes plus had UK BMAA maintenance authority without restriction I feel it would be reasonable for me to self assess if I am capable and competent to do what someone asks ... as would any other L2.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Merv, I think that such a quick response indicates at least that the issue is very much 'on their radar' - at least they are opening emails (this was to O'Sullivan's Office Manager using her personal email sent to me in response to my 'standard' message through the Parliamentary 'contact' channel) and it was definitely not an automated response.

Merv, the whole 'Jabiru vs CASA' issue is more than just people aligning in one camp or the other: it goes to the heart of whether Recreational and Sport Aviation has a right to be taken seriously by CASA or is merely a rubber ball in CASA's sandpit to be kicked around when someone in CASA is having a career-advancement/threatening moment.

 

Recreational and Sport aviators are not just bogans who buy jet skis / trail bikes / mini-monster trucks so they can go out and blast noisy holes in other people's peaceful enjoyment of the environment. I believe that we - generally - are respectful members of our community.

 

Merv: you run a FTF. I will bet London to a Brick that you teach your students to:

 

Fly competently and safely;

 

Observe regulations; and

 

Respect the community over which they fly.

 

I believe that with those ethics pretty much the norm in Recreational and Sports aviation - we deserve better from CASA than arbitrary bureaucratic imposition based on half- ar$ed compilation of dubious evidence.

 

And that is what this fight is really about.

Couldn't agree more Oscar. I hope this all gets resolved soon, but as you have pointed out, the regulator really does seem to be pinned against a wall. That can NOT be good for any one with skin in the game which could be the entire RAA community.

 

Pretty scary really..:(

 

 

[facthunter]

I wouldn't put much importance on the rapid "thank you". Many of these responses are computer generated. (Even some quite long ones). Nev

 

 

[Oscar]

Nev, that is undoubtedly correct.

 

I think, in this case, we can have a wee bit more confidence that the Senator's office is handling this with some interest: after all, he started the action - so we are (collectively) backing him up, rather than trying to force him into the corral on an issue on which he has little primary interest. And I have every confidence that what has been sent is intelligible, cogent support - not just the 'let's all jump on this bandwagon' of popular media stream manufacture.

 

It's interesting to me, from the videos of the Senate Estimates Committee hearing of the 9th. that Heffernan is most obviously well up on his GA aircraft: comments such as 'was this a 210 or a 310?' in relation to the SIDS question suggests that he well and truly knows his Cessnas, at least. We may all thank John Lyon, who died recently (very sadly from an inoperable and virulent brain cancer), who was working very hard with Heffernan and a couple of others during the Forsyth Review) for part of that, but I suspect that Heffernan's apparent ease in all of this comes from some depth of knowledge of GA.

 

We should never underestimate the value of having 'friends at Court'. And the Senate - particularly through the mechanism of the Senate Estimates Committee - has a long, long history of being a ferocious auditor of Departmental performance.

 

 

[Roscoe]

Nev, that is undoubtedly correct.I think, in this case, we can have a wee bit more confidence that the Senator's office is handling this with some interest: after all, he started the action - so we are (collectively) backing him up, rather than trying to force him into the corral on an issue on which he has little primary interest. And I have every confidence that what has been sent is intelligible, cogent support - not just the 'let's all jump on this bandwagon' of popular media stream manufacture.

 

It's interesting to me, from the videos of the Senate Estimates Committee hearing of the 9th. that Heffernan is most obviously well up on his GA aircraft: comments such as 'was this a 210 or a 310?' in relation to the SIDS question suggests that he well and truly knows his Cessnas, at least. We may all thank John Lyon, who died recently (very sadly from an inoperable and virulent brain cancer), who was working very hard with Heffernan and a couple of others during the Forsyth Review) for part of that, but I suspect that Heffernan's apparent ease in all of this comes from some depth of knowledge of GA.

 

We should never underestimate the value of having 'friends at Court'. And the Senate - particularly through the mechanism of the Senate Estimates Committee - has a long, long history of being a ferocious auditor of Departmental performance.

Ive just received an acknowlegement from the senators Office Manager conf

 

 

[Roscoe]

Ive just received an acknowlegement from the senators Office Manager conf

unfinished sentence - confirming what others on this thread have said

 

 

[Jabiru Phil]

A very interesting discussion here.

 

Being a Jab owner for the past 10 years.

 

One point I think that could have been asked by the Senator, "What does Jabiru have to do to get the instrument removed"?

 

They, CASA acknowledged that the latest work done on the problems are some 900 hours of operation.

 

How many hours do they want? Need?

 

PHIL.

 

 

[facthunter]

They have created a situation they can't easily extricate themselves from. This was obvious at the beginning for people who are familiar with how these things work.

 

Also, IF they have detailed knowledge of a hazard relating to the motor not generally known about they MUST tell all affected users. They would be derelict in their duty otherwise. The incorrect data would have been an opportunity but with the passage of time it's no longer useful. Yes I do have considerable optimism this may be advanced by the senators intervention. Nev

 

 

[jetjr]

Im pretty sure the new tech manual has been/is being approved by CASA. Its quite possible its release is being held up by them.

 

Some of the issues we expect to be a problem are not

 

The online L1 training was viewed favourably by CASA and no one else. RAA want to do something more tangible and useful than a box ticking exercise.

 

They - CASA - are far more concerned that people THINK they are managing safety than formulating real outcomes.

 

Several people have tried to discuss this with SASAO office with no reply or result, saying just to ring up Lee is absurd. He has had significant battles with Jabiru over years I believe, as have others.

 

A cloud of butt covering documents will no doubt fly from CASA SASAO office shortly id suggest.

 

The warmth of the torch from Senators will be magnified and passed downwards.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Im pretty sure the new tech manual has been/is being approved by CASA. Its quite possible its release is being held up by them.Some of the issues we expect to be a problem are not

The online L1 training was viewed favourably by CASA and no one else. RAA want to do something more tangible and useful than a box ticking exercise.

As stated earlier, the on-line component of the L1 training was phase 1 of a 3 phase program. The principle of phase 1 was to establish whether maintainers understood their responsibilities and could find very basic information in reference manuals. This was to be followed by a hands on phase - choice of attending a workshop or completing your aircrafts annual inspection under the guidance of a suitably qualified maintainer. The final phase spot checks, which were directed by the Qld Coroner's office and normal practice in any SMS. For whatever reason RAAus didnt proceed as planned and committed to do so with CASA.

 

 

[coljones]

1. CASA in my opinion completely overreacted on Jabiru and even operated illogically and in conflict to how they treat other engine manufacturers ... why for example would a 4 cylinder and 6 cylinder engine from 1 manufactuer be grouped for analysis and subject to the same restrictions? equally why are certified 2200 and ATSM 2200 and uncertified 2200 all grouped together? Can you imagine the 'fun' from the GA end of town that wwould ensue if CASA did the equivalent ans said ALL Lycomings have to restricted because there is a trend in failures across all engines from Mssr Lycoming ... oh and we can't tell you how we determined the trend, the data is not available (really?, how did you reach your determination then?) and we are not required to say WHAT is wrong or needs fixing?2. the four dot points absolutely accept as being standard educational model - establish existing level (first two dots) identify required improvement and then address through training the identified weakness ... my point is that the training to pilot certificate level should cover (and used to cover) basic engine operations and daily tasks eg mixing fuels for two strokes, checking oils and radiators for others and the fact that teh engien manufacturer has a schedule of maintenance that should be followed. The past behaviour 9and I still see it) is that people self assess that they can do the daily line maintenance BUT are often uncomfy with scheduled maintenance ... and hence the L2s and others in 'clubs' what can do this and are prepared to do it.

What I dislike is that drift towards saying that RAA pilots should not be allowed to do the scheduled maintenance ... this is drift to GA ... and YES I understand that many people who have come DOWN from GA are appalled at the concept of taking responsibility for their own aircraft ... but that is the fundamental basis of RAA aircraft ... of ultralight aircraft ... and if you do not like that why are you here?

Taking responsibility for your own aircraft might mean handing the maintenance of it over to someone qualified to do it properly. There are some who cannot walk and chew gum at the same time who should be barred from being within 500 metres of a plane. Care and feeding is not a trivial matter and unless an owner or pilot is 100% sure of what they are doing then they should hand the maintenance over. RAA is not child's play and shouldn't be treated as such.

 

 

[frank marriott]

How many times can the goal posts change?

 

I only want to maintain my L1 to work on my own aircraft. So far apart from maintaining my aircraft for the past 8 years I have completed

 

1. A l1 maintenance course sponsored by CASA and run by RAA ($100) (certificate issued)

 

2. The first on line course (certificate issue )

 

3. A 4 day maintenance course run by the manufacturer (not recognised by RAA) (certificate issued)

 

How many changes are acceptable - every time someone gets a brainwave we just invent a new requirement, about time some realism gets addressed.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

How many changes are acceptable - every time someone gets a brainwave we just invent a new requirement, about time some realism gets addressed.

The problem is, none of these measures were ever finalised. The only place they have legal standing is in the Tech Manual. As it stands now, all RPC holders are considered to be L1s.

Until the Tech Manual is amended or an Airworthiness Notice issued, the current Tech Manual statement stands.

 

 

[Geoff13]

The problem is, none of these measures were ever finalised. The only place they have legal standing is in the Tech Manual. As it stands now, all RPC holders are considered to be L1s.Until the Tech Manual is amended or an Airworthiness Notice issued, the current Tech Manual statement stands.

And that is the basics, we can only go by what is written and approved for use. What might be and what will be means nothing here and now.

 

 

[rankamateur]

Heffernan is most obviously well up on his GA aircraft: comments such as 'was this a 210 or a 310?'

But takes the the discussion away from the point trying to recall what he may once have known. His interest is obvious, but poorly informed, reminiscing about his Victa flying days was hardly relevant to the point.

 

 

[Oscar]

I think that is fair comment, to a degree - but at least if we get to a Senate Inquiry and Heffernan is involved, quite possibly as the Chair, then we will have someone who is 'flying literate', and in reasonably comparable sort of aircraft. That might hopefully get past the sort of hurdles where people get stuck on the idea that (for instance), when an engine stops, the aircraft does not automatically: a) burst into flames; b) plunge vertically down out of control with the occupants screaming their last breaths away, and c) explode into a fireball the size of the USS Arizona under attack, leaving a swathe of destruction half the area of Hiroshima.

 

IF this gets to a Senate Inquiry (and I do think that CASA will pull out the stops to try to head that one off ) then a goodly part of that is going to involve CASA trying to justify its suspect action on the general grounds that 'this is risk management - maybe we didn't do it quite as well as we should, but we did it in good faith because of the terrible risks involved'. That's an argument that would get considerable resonance with an audience that is already disposed to believe the risk is genuinely great - but it's not going to have such resonance with an audience that has a reasonable appreciation of the real nature of the risk.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Yes I agree Oscar, I thought Heffernan showed more competence that the two CASA guys. You would hope that their enormous powers would be matched by enormous competence, but alas they seemed to be fairly ordinary blokes to me. I think that the chief is ex airforce, and his sidekick appeared to be a lawyer from America. Not much in the way of engineering expertise in either of them I thought. Yet here they are wielding great power and deciding on engineering matters.

 

 

[Oscar]

Fair enough. But if they are confidential why do you keep dropping hints about them? Turbs, It smacks of a primary school age boy shouting "I've got a secret but I'm not going to tell you what it is" with a strong " Nya Nah Nah Nah Nah Nah!, with tongue poked out" component. It doesn't further the discussion.

Turbs, let me assure you that I am not sitting back and waiting. Your sources have mislead you.

 

As for ringing Lee at CASA. Thank you for that advice but, sadly, I don't have any confidence that he would give me other than the company line if I contacted him at his desk and I wouldn't want to put him in a compromising position by contacting him privately.

Turbs has just discovered information that some of us have known - and been working with - for at least eight months. Give him a break - he's been pushing his barrow within the fog of no actual information and myopia for a vast amount of time, while the reality train has long since disappeared into the distance.

 

 

[Ron5335]

I think that is fair comment, to a degree - but at least if we get to a Senate Inquiry and Heffernan is involved, quite possibly as the Chair, then we will have someone who is 'flying literate', and in reasonably comparable sort of aircraft.

Oscar, I shared your view until I watched the Senate Inquiry dealing with the SIDS.

 

In that exchange, there was just as many comparable (Ridiculous) scenarios as there were in the Jabiru issue, such as You told us $16K but it's actually $60K, aviators in North America have not even heard of this,

 

then a clanger came with CASA announcing that they are chasing Piper to get then to put a SIDS package together too.

 

So these Senators, after hearing that most Cesnna's are going to be "Parked up" and soon to be followed by Beech (Cesnna's subsiduary) and due to the pro activeness of CASA, Piper.... So around 70% of the GA fleet..... did not show any concern for the industry, but a simple "Looks like there gone" remark from the Chair.

 

The smiles on the faces of the remaining 30% who are not effected will be short lived, because who is going to be left in the industry to carry out the required maintenance, repairs, and inspections, so they too will be "Parked up"

 

Is it any wonder the current Govt is spending $18m of our money to seek out Innovators with ideas, because what I saw in that inquiry leads me to believe that a great proportion of the Govt members, and a lot of their Depts. are totally Brain Dead. or at best As long as it's not our fault, we don't care !!

 

The Treasurer is talking himself hoarse, telling everybody that we need this great complex changing of tax to help the workers of the country to avoid the dreaded "Bracket Creep". Now if that's the truth, then Why not just lift the thresholds...

 

AW......GEEEZ.....Skip !!!!!!!!!!

 

How about this..... As the SIDS is a one off......and labor intensive. Why not train up some of the unemployed in a work for the dole scheme to assist the LAME's. This would bring the cost down dramatically and keep the industry going.

 

Set it up across the nation in regional areas as I'm sure it would be welcomed as the benefits would flow through the local economy. Even if it's not done, the Govt still has to pay the unemployed anyway, but for a bit extra, people get trained, motivated etc.

 

Rant over....But I do feel a bit better

 

 

[Oscar]

Ron - I didn't pay too much attention to the SIDS video, but from what I saw, Senator Williams (??) wouldn't have known a 310 from a 140 - including how many engines.. if they both walked up to him to do a shave and haircut.....

 

And that's a strong reason why we need a Senate Inquiry to have Senators who have some damn knowledge of aviation matters.

 

Trying to 'argue' technical matters before an arbitrator who simply does not have the knowledge to distinguish a spanner from a sandwich is fruitless. In recent times, some Courts have moved from entertaining combative evidence from expert witnesses to having an 'expert witness conference', where both sides can thrash out their differences and a consensus opinion is delivered to the Court. Since there are relatively few 'experts' with decent credentials for Aviation, the 'expert' panel will almost always consist of a small group who have respect for each other, and so 'consensus' is in reality, not too hard to achieve (and that process allows for the reporting to Court of 'dissenting' opinion, in a properly-framed and explained manner).

 

Example, of which I know.

 

In a fairly recent legal action on an Aviation matter (of some notoriety), the expert panel met to discuss their relative opinions. One side presented certain argument; the other side presented its case, on a specific technical matter. Side 'A' presented documents that supported their case: Side 'B' said: 'look at the date of that log entry'. ' Side 'A' looked at it hard, and then said: 'God, you'd think if he was going to forge the log-book, he'd at least have looked at the dates..' - and Side 'A' completely withdrew its submission.

 

My point: if we have a competent 'jury' in a Senate Inquiry, there's a very fair chance the results will be useful.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Ron, here's me, at 70, cleaning up fallen branches from a paddock and thinking wistfully how good it would be if just one of the 300 Newstart recipients in the nearby town could help. They are NOT all lazy and useless. Just becoming so after too many aimless days.

 

Alas, there are two insuperable obstacles... firstly, there is the money. The minimum wage would be a couple of sheep a day, way more than their day's work could be worth to the farm.

 

Secondly, there is the fear of litigation... a new employee hurts his back and goes to lawyers who say that he now needs millions in compo, so you are going to lose the farm.

 

I'm afraid that a few major things have to change before those Newstart can do something useful. It would be great , for them especially, if they could do something useful and learn skills too.

 

 

[Ron5335]

Seems like;- All the chickens are coming home to roost !!

 

 

[coljones]

Yes I agree Oscar, I thought Heffernan showed more competence that the two CASA guys. You would hope that their enormous powers would be matched by enormous competence, but alas they seemed to be fairly ordinary blokes to me. I think that the chief is ex airforce, and his sidekick appeared to be a lawyer from America. Not much in the way of engineering expertise in either of them I thought. Yet here they are wielding great power and deciding on engineering matters.

I think Skidmore has some engineering creds - you don't go test flying without them.

United States Navy Test Pilot School

 

Flight Test, Successfully completed

 

1985 – 1985

 

RAAF Academy

 

BSc, Grad Dip Mil Av

 

1977 – 1980

 

Dr Jonathan Aleck is a lawyer and is Lee Ungermann's boss

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Sorry to be a skeptic Col, but I think we have much more engineering expertise on this forum than those qualifications indicate t0 me.

 

Has Skidmore built a plane, or maintained one, or paid for one to be maintained?

 

 

[coljones]

Ron, here's me, at 70, cleaning up fallen branches from a paddock and thinking wistfully how good it would be if just one of the 300 Newstart recipients in the nearby town could help. They are NOT all lazy and useless. Just becoming so after too many aimless days.Alas, there are two insuperable obstacles... firstly, there is the money. The minimum wage would be a couple of sheep a day, way more than their day's work could be worth to the farm.

Secondly, there is the fear of litigation... a new employee hurts his back and goes to lawyers who say that he now needs millions in compo, so you are going to lose the farm.

 

I'm afraid that a few major things have to change before those Newstart can do something useful. It would be great , for them especially, if they could do something useful and learn skills too.

there is workers comp for workplace injuries.