J170D Production

[CAV0K]

Just seen on Jabirus website the J170D is no longer in production. 
 

When did this happen and will they return to production?

 

I couldn’t find any specific information on their website or Facebook other than the main page saying it’s currently not in production. 

 

https://jabiru.net.au/aircraft/j170-d/

Edited April 29, 2023 by CAV0K

[Bruce Tuncks]

And the J230?

 

[pmccarthy]

I understand they are only producing the J230 with a long delivery time ( more than a year).

[trailer]

What was the LSA55 pricetag new back in the 90s'. $170k for the 230 with kit is getting expensive.

[cosmicray]

I bought a new LSA55 2J in 1994. The price then was $50K.

[waraton]

The 120c had a price tag of around $54k in about 2008 as I recall.

[kgwilson]

The J230 has proven far and away the most popular Jabiru and the 3300A engine is about to or maybe already has become the most plentful engine produced as well. When the demand for one model outstrips your ability to produce that, why keep producing another less popular model and increase the lead time on the more popular one. Add to that you have to be pretty brave to incease production capability in the Aviation market unless you have an investor with deep pockets and no concern about getting it back. The industry is littered with aircraft manufacturing crash and burns.

[kgwilson]

It wasn't that long ago that the base model J230 was around 120k. All the flash glass stuff on the panel comes with a pretty hefty price tag.

[RFguy]

Jabiru will need to get costs in check I think if they want to remain competitive.  The J170 as a flying school machine now pricing provides for many options from other mfrs in that price range. you might as well buy a used foxbat or brumby  for training. There are alot of J160/J170s in the marketplace, its possible that the market is saturated. Jabiru airframes tend to last forever (even if pranged and repaired ) so maybe there are simply enough J170s in flying schools and flyingn schools are peaked.

 

The J230 is the only genuine, fast-ish , well CG behaved load carrier in RAaus class... hence its attractiveness.  Now if they'd offer a 912 / 914 power plant, that would be a killer. and sell twice as many. 

 

[kgwilson]

Then the price would be over 200k.

[waraton]

12 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

Then the price would be over 200k.

Still competitive with what else is around, at about $132k USD a 430/230 is in a class of its own. A great aircraft to fly as well.

[skippydiesel]

On 01/05/2023 at 8:53 AM, waraton said:

Still competitive with what else is around, at about $132k USD a 430/230 is in a class of its own. A great aircraft to fly as well.

Hard to beat the Jabs on price, rugged/durable airframe, predictable handling BUT "great aircraft to fly"  - what are you comparing it/them to ??

[coljones]

21 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

Hard to beat the Jabs on price, rugged/durable airframe, predictable handling BUT "great aircraft to fly"  - what are you comparing it/them to ??

apart from the limitations on MTOW, "great aircraft to fly" !!

[kgwilson]

The J230D is one of the best high wing recreational aircraft available. Great performance, a ton of room, easy predictable handling, easy to get in/out of, one of the strongest airframes available and an excellent tourer with plenty of fuel available. It isn't STOL but doesn't pretend to be. 

 

Personally I prefer the sports car style seating of a low wing and also better cross wind landing characteristics but other than that the 230 is up there with the best.

[facthunter]

Why is a low wing better at crosswind landings than a high wing?   In general I would consider the opposite  because of banking limits. Nev.

[skippydiesel]

As I said "hard to beat" on the stated characteristics BUT I still question the "great to fly" statement, which sounds to me, to be comparative (with what?).

 

I think of something that is "great to fly" as being fun, manoeuvrable, (use ailerons AND rudder) great TO /cruise performance (for available hp), etc etc Sorry but I dint find Jabs (Yawn) to be so.

 

[Blueadventures]

46 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

As I said "hard to beat" on the stated characteristics BUT I still question the "great to fly" statement, which sounds to me, to be comparative (with what?).

 

I think of something that is "great to fly" as being fun, manoeuvrable, (use ailerons AND rudder) great TO /cruise performance (for available hp), etc etc Sorry but I dint find Jabs (Yawn) to be so.

 

How many hours and on what type of Jabs? local flights or xc?  My flight in a Jab was good a 160, just not STOL enough before you are very competent with them.  I did email the factory to ask if they had a more draggy wing in the pipeline (performance like a Foxbat A22 I asked; shorter T/off and landing and slower cruise of course)  Answer was "No".  

[RFguy]

IMO the jab wing doesnt lend itself to STOL ops. sort of the opposite... Will glide forever right down to the bitter end. Buy a Thruster, Ninjya, Sav , Zenith, Rans etc etc etc if you need STOL. want and need two different things.

Compared to the high wings I am yet to get as 'enthusiastic' on wing down with the Archer mainly because I am not quite sure yet (insufficient time on type) to exactly how close the wing gets to the ground. BUT I suspect with the very wide stance of the Archer's mains, I expect the main will contact way before any crazy angle is reached on roll. 

 

 IE in the Jab, Brumby etc, in a wing down X wind landing, I can see exactly where my main gear and wing I am putting down is. It's (educated) guess work in the low wing.  did 5 circuits today (Archer) with 15 kts all Xwind.....

 

 

Edited May 8, 2023 by RFguy

[Blueadventures]

3 minutes ago, RFguy said:

IMO the jab wing doesnt lend itself to STOL ops. sort of the opposite... Will glide forever right down to the bitter end. Buy a Thruster, Ninjya, Sav , Zenith, Rans etc etc etc if you need STOL. want and need two different things.

Compared to the high wings I am yet to get as 'enthusiastic' on wing down with the Archer mainly because I am not quite sure yet (insufficient time on type) to exactly how close the wing gets to the ground. BUT I suspect with the very wide stance of the Archer's mains, I expect the main will contact way before any crazy angle is reached on roll. 

 

 IE in the Jab, Brumby etc, in a wing down X wind landing, I can see exactly where my main gear and wing I am putting down is. It's (educated) guess work in the low wing.  did 5 circuits today with 15 kts all Xwind.....

 

 

Agree, I know Jab owners who can land them on as short a strip as safe.  They are very experienced and competent pilots.  MY email about 8 years ago was asking about any planned additional wing profile becoming available.  Thier aero engineer Dan replied no.  I asked as I was deciding what to build. I have meet Dan and his Dad as Dan used to fly a factory Jab back to Mackay regularly as his family was south of Mackay and he landed at Palmyra.  I recon availability of a wing with more lift would sell.

[RFguy]

Jab- IMO in helpful / benign  conditions, if the minimum airspeed is nailed (experienced pilot with experience in aircraft)) then that can be landed 'STOL'. but if the conditions vary from helpful, (IMO) there is no way you can hold that required minimum airspeed during final approach  for the short landing without hazard.

Generally the aircraft (J230) is going to want at least 37 kts when in the flare, stall horn blaring, nose up steep.... so, compared to an aircraft that prefers to land at 25 to 30 kts, you are behind the ball.......

That's the book method, anyway. I guess another STOL method might be a steep descent at idle in a full flap slip with a rather abrupt , well timed and critical performed energy exchange flare, (sounds more like a helicopter autorotation landing) but that's a precision bit of work, also.  

(getting them to finally stop is another thing with the average brakes)  

Edited May 8, 2023 by RFguy

[skippydiesel]

The technology & practical examples, exist today, to have a 2 seat aircraft stall at 27 knots and high speed cruise at 135 knots ,with an empty weight of 300kg and a (current) Max TO of 600 kg all on 100 hp.  Don't ask me how clever the wing profile is, I don't have the knowledge but one factor is obvious  - Fowler flaps (or very similar) which retract, to an almost seamless integration, with the wing itself, greatly enhancing slow speed performance and with it safety.

 

Jab have ahead start, in their composite airframe. Surely they could improve on the current simple Plain flaps giving a rather underwhelming stall and for class fast (long) landings.

 

While they are at it, do something to improve the "feel" of the flight surfaces (junk the pull-me-push-yous) and may be for the 2+2 seater (J230 & variants?) they might consider the Rotax 915 with optional CS prop - now we might be moving towards a "great flying" aircraft

[kgwilson]

3 hours ago, facthunter said:

Why is a low wing better at crosswind landings than a high wing?   In general I would consider the opposite  because of banking limits. Nev.

I use wing down in strong crosswind combined with crab on final but when close to the ground keep the wings level & crab only, kick the rudder to plonk it down straight ahead on both mains. Friction reduces the windspeed close to the ground & my wing is only about a metre off the deck on touchdown. I can't do this in the 230 & need the wing down & touchdown on 1 wheel. This is not as positive as I would like hence my preference statement.

[skippydiesel]

I think that pilots of both high/low wing aircraft develop cross wind landing techniques to meet the challenge of their aircraft approaching the ground in a less than optimal wind direction. 

 

For pilots transitioning from one configuration to the other, lack of familiarity makes them feel that the last aircraft was somehow better - its all in the mind. 

[Thruster88]

The biggest competitor to the 170D are the low hour,  always hangared, as new used 170's. There is one for sale now, about 400 hours for $70k. Hard to compete with that. 

[Kenlsa]

There are a couple of “STOL” Jabs around, though 19 built.
The SP 470/500 fuse with the 450kg UL wings, powered by the 3300.  

We had one on our airfield for years. With the 35kt stall it was ok in the relatively short field landing phase and with the 3300 took off like a rocket.

 

”19” is a great category 

 

Ken