How safe is the Jabiru?

[dazza 38]

I am still trying to work out where Bunderburg is.

[j230]

It's a thread dredge. Nearly 6 years old. Nev

It was I follow roads

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

My Jabiru costs nothing to run. My wife pays the club bills, which include avgas. She manages our money. I do have to ignore her occasional grumbles and conveniently forget the other costs like oil and spark plugs and stuff. And I don't insure because I don't reckon I could ever make them pay up if I had a claim. So far its gone 13 years of flying like this. Luckily my maintenance time comes free.

 

 

[jakej]

Maybe he meant I Follow Roads ifr or I Follow Railways ifr and maybe the horrific weather was afternoon turbulence with a few scattered showers:freaked:Because no one would be silly enough to post about illegal things that they do. Big brother is watching:typing:

Please don't make assumptions, I know of a Jabby that is IFR capable (& VH registered). I personally wouldn't fly behind anything other than Lycosaurus, at this stage, but the Jabby is more efficient & quicker than the Pipers/Cessnas that some got their IF Ratings in.

 

 

[turboplanner]

No assumptions when the Avatar shows an RAA registration......which is later blanked out after a pathetic I follow roads excuse - he deserves what he gets

 

 

[jakej]

No assumptions when the Avatar shows an RAA registration......which is later blanked out after a pathetic I follow roads excuse - he deserves what he gets

Maybe I have something to learn about Avatars but I could not see or find what it was before

 

 

[SDQDI]

Please don't make assumptions, I know of a Jabby that is IFR capable (& VH registered). I personally wouldn't fly behind anything other than Lycosaurus, at this stage, but the Jabby is more efficient & quicker than the Pipers/Cessnas that some got their IF Ratings in.

Yep pretty well what turbo said.

 

Anyway we've made our point so probably time to put it to rest

 

 

 

[SDQDI]

Maybe I have something to learn about Avatars but I could not see or find what it was before

Alls good seems to have been corrected/removed since posting no offence taken, hopefully I haven't caused too much either:thumb up:

 

 

[highwing]

Whats the saftey record like of a Jabiru? Besides pilot error, and maybe... non-factory kit builds.. what is it's saftey record like here in Australia? They look very light and flimbsy, but I'm sure they aren't. I've never seen one up close.Also, I may have misunderstood, but I think I heard the running costs sit at $50/hour inc Maint. Could that be right? That's like a car!

3800]Whats the saftey record like of a Jabiru? Besides pilot error, and maybe... non-factory kit builds.. what is it's saftey record like here in Australia? They look very light and flimbsy, but I'm sure they aren't. I've never seen one up close.

 

Also, I may have misunderstood, but I think I heard the running costs sit at $50/hour inc Maint. Could that be right? That's like a car!

 

For a j160 on mogas it's closer to $60/hr but this is only the operational cost. When you inlcude fixed costs, the rate is similar to hiring the same a/c. But if you are only flying 1hr per week, it's cheaper to hire.

 

 

[anjum_jabiru]

Besides human error / mechanical failure has anyone wondered that the fatalities in a Jabiru could have been due to a medical emergency or cardiac arrest while the pilot was flying. It is quite possible that the pilot would have collapsed or died at the controls which led to the crash, as most pilots who died were very senior (and elderly) pilots. I guess Jabiru despite its bad name for the engine failures is one of the safest ultralight to date.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

The safety feature of all RAAus planes has never been the reliability of the single engine, it has always been the low stall speed in the landing configuration. That is what defines the aircraft we are allowed to use.

 

Now the Jabiru, being fibreglass, has a great deal more energy absorbing capacity than metal or carbon airframes.

 

It is hard to think of a situation where an engine-out could hurt you in a Jabiru if you didn't panic. All you need to do is to keep flying and aim the fuselage between the trees or whatever.

 

At least in Australia, you will walk away.... in South Africa, the first people on the scene of your forced landing could well be murderers and that is why they have got a 2 engined Jabiru.

 

I bet the 2 engined Jabiru would be banned in Australia by our misnamed "safety" authority. That's the same lot that force us to fly lower than prudent over houses and stuff. Gosh if you could just glide ( and the Jabiru has quite a good glide) to a landing place then there wouldn't even be any damage.

 

 

[K-man]

Besides human error / mechanical failure has anyone wondered that the fatalities in a Jabiru could have been due to a medical emergency or cardiac arrest while the pilot was flying. It is quite possible that the pilot would have collapsed or died at the controls which led to the crash, as most pilots who died were very senior (and elderly) pilots. I guess Jabiru despite its bad name for the engine failures is one of the safest ultralight to date.

I think if you look at American statistics which relate to the relevence of flying medicals you might find comparatively few pilots experience medical emergencies while flying. So, unless you are suggesting Jabiru pilots are, as a group, older and more infirm than the general flying population, I would suggest you are way off line. CASA took action against Jabiru because there were a lot of engine failures that may have been preventable if correct action was taken earlier. FWIW I think the Jabiru is safer than a lot of other aircraft out there and hopefully they have addressed the engine issues.

[anjum_jabiru]

No, what i am saying is that the pilots who unfortunately died in a Jabiru were very elderly pilots. Jabiru i believe are the best ultralights and are flown by all ages alike. It is the only ultralight aircraft that I trust. Fatalaties in younger pilots using the Jabiru are very rare, hence younger pilots flying the Jabiru mostly walk away with minimal injuries.

 

Given that fatalities are rare in younger Jabiru pilots, it makes one wonder that the pilots who succumbed could have been due to death or incapacity at the controls resulting in a crash, rather than the crash resulting in death.

 

 

[Mick]

I bet the 2 engined Jabiru would be banned in Australia by our misnamed "safety" authority.

Actually there has been a twin Jab flying around Bundy for the last couple of months. I am surprised there has been no mention of it here.

 

 

[K-man]

You are making a lot of unsubstantiated statements. Where did you access the age details of Jabiru pilots who have died? The only research I have seen (not Jabiru) was that conducted in the US which showed nothing to substantiate your claim that older pilots are more likely to experience medical issues while flying. In fact very few pilots experience health issues while flying possibly because we are all aware of that danger and would not fly if we thought we were likely to have a heart attack or other problem.

 

You believe Jabiru are the best ultralights and you are entitled to your opinion. I would suggest that Jabiru aircraft are popular because they are affordable, not because they are the best. I have quite a few hours in J160s and never had an issue. I have a number of friends who built their own J160s and again they haven't any problems, except of course they are all 'old' people. Unfortunately for Jabiru and Jabiru owners there have been many documented engine failures and the fallout from that had not been handled well from the manufacturer's end, nothing to do with the age of the pilots.

 

 

[K-man]

Just for interest, I've come across this article detailing crashes of LSA in the US. Health issues don't rate a mention. Mind you, Jabiru had no fatalities in this survey. Perhaps they are all younger Jabi pilots over there.

 

http://jabiru.net.au/images/The%20Aviation%20Consumer%20-%20LSA%20Accidents.pdf

 

 

[anjum_jabiru]

Ok then. May be I am wrong. I was just stating my opinion. I am not making a claim or stating any facts. It is just a hypothesis based on death of Rodney Hay (80) and Rob Pavan (60). If you know of any other fatal Jabiru accidents here in Australia in pilots aged under 60 years in the last 10 years then please let me know.

 

Again it is my own opinion that Jabiru being made of carbon fibre composite material have a tough but somewhat flexible frame. This helps to absorb the impact better. The accidents that I have studied seem to suggest that the construction is such that the parts of the aircraft such as the undercarriage, wings, fuselage break off or suffer substantial damage before the impact reaches the pilot, like the crumple zone in a car. This ensures maximum safety to the pilot. But again may be there are better and more reliable ultralights out there with a better design, construction and safety features. The point I am trying to make is although the Jabiru are more affordable they have not compromised on quality / pilot safety.

 

I guess we both are saying that Jabiru makes really good aircrafts that are quite safe.

 

 

[Oscar]

Jabirus are NOT made of carbon fibre composite. They are made of a simple, hand-laid, ambient-temperature curing epoxy and glass fibre composite, which is precisely the reason that they are flexible and extremely impact-tolerant. If you have every seen the result of a serious (double-fatal) crash of a cabon-fibre shell cabin, as I have, you will immediately understand why the occupant-protection capability of the Jabiru is far better than for the carbon-fibre aircraft.

 

 

[anjum_jabiru]

Thanks for the correction :)

 

 

[gandalph]

Jabirus are NOT made of carbon fibre composite. They are made of a simple, hand-laid, ambient-temperature curing epoxy and glass fibre composite, which is precisely the reason that they are flexible and extremely impact-tolerant.

That's also the reason that are relatively easy to repair.

 

 

[Oscar]

Anjum - you're welcome. It IS an important distinction, because it goes to the heart of the Jabiru design and manufacture philosophy, and has implications for the performance as well.

 

Jabs are very simple aircraft, with a very low parts count, and are very tolerant of hard use. They can be repaired simply ( for most things) and reasonably cheaply, by people with good 'glass skills and the requisite knowledge. They don't have that 'edge' in performance of the high-tech machines coming out of Europe, but they do have good, 'solid' performance, and in Australian summer conditions, you will find that they will cruise in safety at a max. rough speed that often exceeds that of the Euros. They bounce well.. and the total cost of operation is one of the major reasons why such a considerable percentage of the RAA training fleet WAS made up of them, prior to the CASA action.

 

 

[anjum_jabiru]

I love Jabirus. I had my eyes set on them for the past 5 years while I was doing dual lessons in a Thruster in England. It was a pleasant surprise to continue my training in a Jabiru after a 5 yr break and having moved to Australia.

 

 

[kgwilson]

I just recently completed my conversion to RA Pilot Cert from GA PPL in a J170. Before this I'd done some time in a Gazelle as well as a Morgan Sierra (reason I built one). I kept hearing the so called "experts" tell me that they are not good training aircraft etc & I should convert in something like a Foxbat. I did have one flight in a Foxbat, easy peasy.

 

My answer to all this is that the Jabiru is a well mannered strong aircraft with predictable handling and makes a very good training aircraft. Cabin ergonomics could be better but most aircraft I've flown have some things in the wrong place. The CASA limitations (which should not even be there) had no effect on me or the training process. Maybe learning from scratch in a Jab may be slightly more difficult but you will gain your certificate as a better pilot IMHO.

 

 

[Oscar]

Anjum - good for you!. I've worked on rebuilding a Thruster - in fact, a family member has about four or five of them - and you won't catch me flying in one, unless bound, gagged and anaesthetised. But, I accept they have their place - preferably, tethered and between your deckchair and the sun. I've been very extensively rebuilding an early, crashed ( and written-off) Jab. over several years now ( it's a hobby..) and that has included quite a bit of 'glass repair work - which is why I am a bit 'hot' on the differences between c/f and a simple 'glass composite structure. I could not have done the work I have done, to the wings and fuselage, had it been c/f - well, at the very least, without the facilities of McConaghy's Yacht factory, that build some of the top racing c/f yachts in the world (Wild Oats, for one).

 

A Jab., operated with due respect to its nature and limitations, is a damn good general-purpose aircraft and a very safe one, both from a structural and an aerodynamic POV. They have no particular (or peculiar) aerodynamic vices, and they are simple to inspect and maintain. They handle Australian conditions very well - including rough strips, hangar rash, being stored outside in conditions from any place in the country, be it wet and humid to dry as a witch's tit. They are most definitely NOT Ferraris, more like Landcruisers. You don't see a lot of Ferraris off the beaten track..