My spies tell me Jabiru has been sold

[onetrack]

6 hours ago, kgwilson said:

If the article in the latest Sportpilot written by Michael Halloran, the new CEO of Jabiru aircraft is how the future of Jabiru pans out, then the business is in safe hands. Whether Rod and Sue have any shareholding in the company is not stated but Michael has been associated with Jabiru and Rod since the 1990s. There is a photo of him with a Jabiru taken in 1994.

Oooh! It looks like he might be keen to develop the Jabiru fighter aircraft, with his track record! A Jabiru Jet?? 

 

https://scgroup-global.com/about-us/meet-the-team/michael-halloran/

[skippydiesel]

Sport Pilot - Risen - who said you cant have a slow(ish)stall 38 knots & a fast wing 175 knots (?)

 

VH - SGS  Sonerai II /Robin Austin  (Australia)  beet Risen to this sort of performance 

[Bruce Tuncks]

IF you are comparing a Jabiru with a carbon non-strut wing then of course the carbon wing will be faster, but it will also cost about twice as much. And as has been correctly pointed out, be far less repairable.

Jabiru went for the cheapest options and so they sold a lot. Personally, I reckon we were lucky to have an Australian manufacturer.

I bet Rotax are rubbing their hands together and working out how much they can hike their price when they get closer to a monopoly.

[Area-51]

4 minutes ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

IF you are comparing a Jabiru with a carbon non-strut wing then of course the carbon wing will be faster, but it will also cost about twice as much. And as has been correctly pointed out, be far less repairable.

Jabiru went for the cheapest options and so they sold a lot. Personally, I reckon we were lucky to have an Australian manufacturer.

I bet Rotax are rubbing their hands together and working out how much they can hike their price when they get closer to a monopoly.

A risen cannot fly through buildings and keep flying 🤷🏼‍♂️ Legends are born, not fabricated ✊

[RFguy]

Jabiru's are readily repairable by those moderately competent with fibreglass. 

Carbon fibre is NOT, it requires specific layups and (usually) ovenized, resin cures , and an non factory repair likely requires a ultimate load stress test. 

You dont get something for nothing  (IE super light weight for no down side ) 

 

and just remember, for a given load factor, the slower the stall speed, the slower you need to fly in anything but super smooth air.

A 140 kts indicated aircraft is not much practical use if it needs to slow down to 72 kts in moderate turbulence. 

[facthunter]

With your heart in your mouth till you get there, ( the target speed)  and  it's often still with fluctuations due rough air. Nev

Edited November 2, 2023 by facthunter

[kasper]

TANSTAAFL lives!

There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

 

Every aircraft is a set of compromises to achieve a set of acceptable design outcomes.

 

Speed - low and top end

Performance - To/Landing distances, climb rates etc

Range - pax vs luggage vs fuel

Carry capacity - pax vs luggage vs fuel

Cost - acquire, maintain, repair

 

A simple low cost airframe to build/acquire/maintain/repair is more likely to have restricted range, speed and capacity over a very expensive aircraft that may give spectacular range, speed and capacity.

 

You make your choices and thats what you have to live with.

 

Sort of explains why I have airframes that cost peanuts and have low performance and airframes that cost more and do more.

Also explains why I have still not designed and built my "perfect aircraft" which is single seat, 150kt cruise with 8hr endurance burning 10LPH and lets me take a suitcase of luggage and land on rough ground in the back paddock ... 

[sfGnome]

18 minutes ago, kasper said:

Also explains why I have still not designed and built my "perfect aircraft" which is single seat, 150kt cruise with 8hr endurance burning 10LPH and lets me take a suitcase of luggage and land on rough ground in the back paddock ... 

Well, get on with it! We’re waiting… 😛😁

[onetrack]

Back to the original question - did anyone actually verify that Jabiru has been sold?

Or is the story just a Friday night bar rumour that got amplified into, "Oh yes, I know a bloke who knows a bloke, who knows for sure, that Jabiru has been sold, but it's all hush-hush...."

[FlyBoy1960]

Ring them up and ask !   Simples.

[kgwilson]

There is new CEO. It was all explained in the last Sportpilot.

[djpacro]

On 21/8/2023 at 4:58 PM, RFguy said:

I might add on the Va thing, while its accepted Va can calculated by taking the clean stall speed multiplied by the squareroot of the load factor, ….. HOWEVER If the aircraft did not break say until 8g, then the designer might use that value in the calculation of Va (but the FAA might not like it) . ….

From the FAA's AC on light aircraft certification. AC23-19.

"The design maneuvering speed is a value chosen by the applicant. It may not be less than Vs√ n and need not be greater than Vc, but it could be greater if the applicant chose the higher value. The loads resulting from full control surface deflections at VA are used to design the empennage and ailerons in part 23, §§ 23.423, 23.441, and 23.455."

That is an important point - the engineering purpose of VA is to design the tail and the ailerons - NOT the wing!

"VA should not be interpreted as a speed that would permit the pilot unrestricted flight-control movement without exceeding airplane structural limits, nor should it be interpreted as a gust penetration speed."

Pilots - please note this.

"Only if VA = Vs √n will the airplane stall in a nose-up pitching maneuver at, or near, limit load factor. For airplanes where VA>VS√n, the pilot would have to check the maneuver; otherwise the airplane would exceed the limit load factor.”

Yep, what a surprise to pilots, VA can be more than VS√n ! Do the arithmetic on the airplane that you fly to check what you have. Don't forget to use CAS.

"Amendment 23-45 added the operating maneuvering speed, VO, in § 23.1507.
VO is established not greater than VS√n, and it is a speed where the airplane will stall in a nose-up pitching maneuver before exceeding the airplane structural limits."

Yep, but you will only see that in new airplanes designed recently.

Edited November 3, 2023 by djpacro

[facthunter]

What sort of pilot would use full control deflection other than flick manoeuvres or when 3 pointing  or sideslipping? Certainly should not be done in rough air.  Can you explain why nose up comes into it? (serious question)?.  Flying in severe turbulence may involve GENTLE control applications to loosely maintain the  desired airspeed (range) as it's often going to be fluctuating about your chosen figure. If you don't touch the Power holding a certain pitch attitude will achieve that end. A lot of heavy stuff has only a 3.5 positive "G" ultimate load factor. You''ll pull about 2.5 "G"minimum pulling out of the dive part of a spin recovery, it you do it well. and have the height available.  Nev 

[robinsm]

for those of us not getting sport pilot, WHO is the new CEO and HAVE THEY BEEN SOLD>>>  Its a simple question without going all over the paddock...

 

[djpacro]

On 23/8/2023 at 9:03 AM, onetrack said:

Oooh! It looks like he might be keen to develop the Jabiru fighter aircraft, with his track record! 

Mick is eminently sensible and an excellent businessman.

[RFguy]

but.. if they permitted rotax engines in their airframes, they'd sell more airframes than they could build.... and apparently there will be no changes. So, perhaps he's not fully informed.

[Blueadventures]

17 minutes ago, RFguy said:

but.. if they permitted rotax engines in their airframes, they'd sell more airframes than they could build.... and apparently there will be no changes. So, perhaps he's not fully informed.

Maybe doesn't want to add any extra Kg's as 230's seem to only have about 130kgs for pilot, pax and cargo after full fuel at 600kg MTOW.

[onetrack]

I may be wrong, but I'd guess that Jabiru would prefer to sell a lot more engines than airframes, so they could grab a large slice of the market that Rotax already has.

[RFguy]

Mike,  it gets lighter with the rotax.... can have some ballast removed from the tail...

[Blueadventures]

8 minutes ago, RFguy said:

Mike,  it gets lighter with the rotax.... can have some ballast removed from the tail...

That's a plus, thanks for info.

[leslloyd]

So Gen 4 still can't match Rotax in overall terms i gather,i sold a 230 because of the constant verbal crap associated with ownership,

pity as it was a joy to fly otherwise.

 

[BrendAn]

2 hours ago, leslloyd said:

So Gen 4 still can't match Rotax in overall terms i gather,i sold a 230 because of the constant verbal crap associated with ownership,

pity as it was a joy to fly otherwise.

 

That is the dumbest reason for selling a plane I have ever heard.

[facthunter]

Have you experienced the "heaping on" many Jabiru operators get..?   This game is supposed to be for fun.  There's plenty of Jabiru-bashing here. too.  Nev

[BrendAn]

30 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Have you experienced the "heaping on" many Jabiru operators get..?   This game is supposed to be for fun.  There's plenty of Jabiru-bashing here. too.  Nev

 who cares what other people think. i have bashed jabs too but i still reckon they are a good aircraft and i will end up with another one in the future when i have more experience.

Edited November 6, 2023 by BrendAn

[facthunter]

I don't agree that what one says is  of no consequence and it's a bit much when it just goes on and  on, like if you have freckles or something. It's just another form of bullying. . Be a boring world if we all thought the same as "...". It doesn't kill you to be friendly.  Nev