Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
jabiru phil in my opinion that is the start of your engine about to stretch the through bolts I personally would only start on one mag but I don't know nothing neil

You have lost me I thought Jab Phil said his engine stopped due to being too rich and havn't seen any mention of1 or 2 mag starts. CAn you explain further?

 

 

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

what in the hell

 

pages 8 73-00-00 august 01/2012 clearly stated that all 912 rotax will have a return line to the fuel tank to eliminate pressure from fuel pump plus vapour lock

 

as bert flood RIP old mate pointed out to me since 1997 as far as he could find out I can tell you that since 2003 to2014 is in documentation in my files neil

 

 

Posted
Is this still a requirement, foxbat for 1 no longer fit return lines to their latest aircraft .

I know of one fox bat that no one rushes to fly as fuel vapor locks are there time to time . Know of a different foxbat lost its windscreen in flight no warning I bet RAA has not even told all owners of this? after it,s been reported with photos . Safety ??? what would be unsafe about losing your wrind screen at 85 knots doors blowing off why would let owners know that might scare them wouldn,t make sence to keep owners in the loop . If it was the raaf all off type would be grounded until all check in place? any one agree ?

I think there would only be 10 percent of people report there jabiru engine problems we been there and done that and moved on some one else can be a test rig .

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Winner 3
Posted
On taxiing out you are supposed to do an idle check. Close the throttle fully and the idle should be in the range and the engine not be likely to stop. IF it did stop you are supposed to have it rectified before the next flight

if the engine stopped on this test, which I do every pre-flight, I wouldn't go out at all

 

 

  • Agree 4
Posted
I know of one fox bat that no one rushes to fly as fuel vapor locks are there time to time . Know of a different foxbat lost its windscreen in flight no warning I bet RAA has not even told all owners of this? after it,s been reported with photos . Safety ??? what would be unsafe about losing your wrind screen at 85 knots doors blowing off why would let owners know that might scare them wouldn,t make sence to keep owners in the loop . If it was the raaf all off type would be grounded until all check in place? any one agree ?I think there would only be 10 percent of people report there jabiru engine problems we been there and done that and moved on some one else can be a test rig .

I haven't heard of this at all but there is nothing unusual about the windscreens in foxbats I've had 2 and no problem I think u have a bit of bat envy
Posted
I haven't heard of this at all but there is nothing unusual about the windscreens in foxbats I've had 2 and no problem I think u have a bit of bat envy. Reply

Well Brace your self ozbear It happened to a friend the had a student on board when it let go his head sets blew off doors blew out then wraped around struts. It pitched nose down had to use full back stick with engine idle just to maintain a glide . Had a forced landing hard in paddock as no more back stick to flare with . So sorry you can have your bat envy let me know how you get on if it happens again to some poor guy . Sorry we don't learn anything in this sport from near death counts .

  • Informative 1
Posted

If it was a fault with the aircraft all owners would and should be notified unless it is a very late occurance but it sounds like a maintanence problem to me it should have given some warning such as cracks loose rivets etc to be picked up on daily inspection

 

 

  • Agree 1
Posted

That's handy I reckon if my windscreen failed I would be telling the world especially if it wrecked my aircraft and endangered life and limb sounds to be more to it than a fault with the aircraft please provide some constructive follow up so this doesn't catch somebody else who might not be so lucky

 

 

  • Agree 1
Posted

If it's LSA then it's up to manufacturer or importer to notify owners

 

Without reporting they can easily say it hasn't happened

 

Data is the key to making solid decisions

 

Filtering through that info to make decisions is a secondary problem but the info needs to be there

 

There's nothing to say Jabiru problems are more or less reported than anything else. If you think just 10% of problems are reported then. REc flying is incredibly dangerous.

 

 

  • Agree 2
Posted

Thank you dan that windscreen peeled up from the bottom other wise the pilot would not have a head

 

Bloody lack of good governance of maitanance

 

Failure of reporting that if I am right the owner should be sent a very nasty letter and not to fly that aircraft Neil

 

 

Posted

Storchy, does this return line go from the carby , the chamber on top of the float-valve, back to the fuel tank? And two lines, one for each of the carbys?

 

 

Posted

fair dinkim you blokes if you want to know if it has been reported just have a look on the RAA website ...took about 5 minutes

 

image.png.bd08304e78c7b4062a89589e974c332b.png

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
  • Helpful 1
Posted

It plainly states pre existing cracks as to how bad they were is open for conjecture are you neglecting giving us that part of the information on purpose to soil the name of a good aircraft or are you ignorant of that fact Dan

 

 

Posted
Thank you dan that windscreen peeled up from the bottom other wise the pilot would not have a headBloody lack of good governance of maitanance

Failure of reporting that if I am right the owner should be sent a very nasty letter and not to fly that aircraft Neil

It's like this storchy Things do get reported then they go into Black file file the same one one that lost all the rego info , now when a aircraft lands in a Ferris wheel for a ride with out paying mind you . Mr CASA has quick check and starts kicking bums . What has changed since then .? They wouldn't think just to let owns of type a quick email just to check items as reports come in .

 

 

  • Informative 1
Posted
Pre existing cracks. Classic example of "normalisation of deviance" it seems.

Would suggest operating that aircraft is a willing deviance from a regulation or at the very least a safe practice. This is absolutely not the case ! The Tech Dept response to this 'closed case' is contradictory . The report reads ' The small holes were stop drilled which is an acceptable practise. ' also '(that were not addressed with a replacement of the screen)' . The FACTS are this , when the aircraft was new and still under warranty very small cracks were noticed within days of taking delivery of the aircraft, the importer was notified , in a relatively short time the cracks had grown but still very small , again the importer was notified , advise was given and the L2 who does the regular service and maintenance of the fleet then stop drilled them IAW the current foxbat maintenance manual. there is no 'normalisation of deviance' going on here.

 

The Owner was never happy with this and even though the cracks had stabilized, the aircraft had a booking the very next day to have the windscreen replaced, but obvious a day too late .

 

ozbear , Dan is well aware of the facts and the report has been on the RAA website since a few days after the incident date 05/06/16.

 

Jim G

 

 

Posted

If you go to any fly in you see a lot worse then this even in GA air craft . Yes screen show small craze in corners plane was under two years old . How ever with the design there no support in the middle centre tubes going down like a lot of aircraft so screen is like a car just held around edge . So under big stress a weakness any where and all over red rover with only 2mm poly carbonate . Craze also folks can happen any time any where so there is no redunency in design .

 

image.jpeg.b2e3b901192f0c4b4617240eb20fafbf.jpeg

 

 

Posted

I would suggest that cracks in a new windscreen is far from "normal" and would be considered a deviance. The resulting failure certainly leads one to think the stop drilling was a bandaid that did not work.

 

Normalization of deviance is not only applied to the operator, but the manufacturer also if they were prepared to allow stop drilling in a new windscreen as a means.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Posted

I agree with your comments Dan. The important thing is to get the message out to the people who need to know, not officials. By all means tell them later if you trust them to handle the information sensibly.

 

What they ( owners and officials) should all do do is check this site. I reckon some officials probably do, but they are very shy about introducing themselves.

 

With regard to windscreens, the fact is that perspex is a really bad material for crack propagation. Any tiny cracks need stop-drilling as soon as they are noticed, or they will grow.

 

 

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...