gandalph

And these fatalities you keep trotting out Ross ... were they the result of engine failures? Can you tell us how many there were? Has anyone got figures on either the rate (or even raw numbers) of engine related fatalities in Jabiru aircraft compared to RAA aircraft powered by other makes of engine? Yes, I know the accident/incident summaries are available on the RAA website, and yes I am going through them to see if I can answer my own question, but I thought I'd ask it here to see if anyone had collated the numbers.

Right. So the ASTB figures don't suit your purposes and so they are useless? You're a hard man to please!

C'mon Merv! Someone said on the forum that "out of 2000 jabiru engines in service only 500 reached TBO" So it stands to reason that if I post here that out of 2000 jab engines in service 75% reach TBO my figures would be believed and be quoted as fact somewhere down the line? Really? Why not? My rumour is just like the other one i.e Useless and without a shred of credibility p.s. Wanna buy a good used Harbour bridge?

TP you'll just have to work that one out for yourself. To quote you "you can forget about me doing your work for you."

I think Daz covered that earlier

Yes TP. You're shouting again. Saying the same thing over and over but louder and louder does NOT add credibility to the message Have you thought of using simple division of the figures provided by the ATSB to get figures that are more "useful"? 10,000/50 = 200. So dividing 3.9 by 200 gives an incident rate of 0.0195 per 50 hours. Are those figures more useful to you as a recreational tool?

Well I'd have to ask the question Where did those figures come from. I'd be surprised if someone went to the trouble of contacting all 2000 owners. If the figure can't be substantiated then it is heresay, rumour, speculation and has no value.

No. Wrong again.

I don't know. Perhaps you could ask TP. He reckons he has the stats

Excerpt. A link to the full report is at the bottom of this post. Research investigation into the reliability of light sport aeroplane engines The information contained in this web update is released in accordance with section 25 of the Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 and is derived from the initial analysis of the occurrence data. Readers are cautioned that new data will become available as the investigation progresses that will enhance the ATSB's understanding of the engine failure rates as outlined in this web update. Updated: 10 December 2014 Also shown in Figure 1 are the proportions of engine failures or malfunctions that have been recorded as incidents, serious incidents or accidents. [/url][/url][2] Although the accident rate for Jabiru powered aircraft was only slightly higher than for Rotax powered aircraft, both the serious incident rate and incident rate were about double that for Rotax. Figure 1: Five year average rates of engine failures or malfunctions for aeroplanes: VH-registered private operations [3] , the whole RA-Aus fleet, Jabiru-engine and RA-Aus registered, and Rotax-engine and RA-Aus registered. Figure 2 shows the individual yearly rates over the five year study period for the RA-Aus aeroplane fleet as well as Jabiru and Rotax-powered aircraft. The rates shown are for all engine failure or malfunction occurrences (accidents, incidents and serious incidents). Additionally, the hours flown per year for each group are also plotted as lines with the scale on the right side. The rates for all three groups appear to be quite similar in 2009, however, since then the rates for Jabiru-powered aircraft have been consistently higher than both Rotax-powered aircraft and the RA-Aus fleet as a whole. The rate for entire RA-Aus aeroplane fleet has risen to a similar rate as for Jabiru engine aeroplanes in 2013. The hours flown each year appear to be decreasing over the study period for all groups and, particularly for Rotax engines, decreased in 2013. This may be due to the nature of the recording method, with RA-Aus hours flown data being collected at the time of registration renewal, there may still be some lag in the uptake of 2013 hours. These reduced hours may in turn be responsible for the apparent rise in the Rotax rate in 2013. Figure 2: Annual rates of engine failure or malfunction occurrences for the whole RA-Aus aeroplane fleet, and Jabiru and Rotax-engine RA-Aus registered aircraft. These preliminary data indicate that there may be a slightly higher rate of engine failures or malfunction in the RA-Aus fleet as a whole when compared to VH-registered private aircraft. Additionally, within the RA-Aus fleet there appears to be significant differences in the reliability of different engine types. In particular, aeroplanes with Jabiru engines have higher rates of occurrences involving engine failures or malfunctions. http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2013/ar-2013-107.aspx Merv, Stats for Incident rates and incident numbers are two different fish. The graphs in the ATSB report show that Jabiru stats stink but that Rotax stats are getting pretty smelly too.

Sorry you see it that way. Snake oil is an expression that originally referred to fraudulent health products or unproven medicine but has come to refer to any product with questionable or unverifiable quality or benefit. By extension, a snake oil salesman is someone who knowingly sells fraudulent goods or who is himself or herself a fraud, quack, charlatan, or the like.

Daz, Not at all worried. Worth can be determined in many ways. It's not always about money. But thanks for your concern.

OK. can you point us to the post where you posted those stats? That could be helpful to many here in this forum. Not sure who you aimed you comment about anti-safety snipers etc at but if it was a response to my polite request for those stats then you are, once again, very wide of the mark. I don't see how asking for information you say you have which might improve our understanding of what's going on can been seen as splitting hairs or anti-safety sniping. But if that's how you see it then that's your problem not ours. If you chose not to provide either the stats or the link to your earlier posts then that's your choice, but you can't then expect people here to take you seriously.

I think you had it last.....

Turbop, perhaps you could publish in their raw form, the statistics you have seen, with sources, so that people here might have a better understanding of your position? Simply saying something like: 'I have the statistics that you don't have, and I know what the problem is' damages your credibility. It could put you in the same basket as those who are seemingly always about to make a major announcement but never do.

Which part Daz? Or is tinnie time and open season on anything Oscar says? Perhaps he's getting old as well and that's why he SHOUTS.

Merv, Baching. Very punny, I like it. But continuing the musical theme; the question remains: Who let the dogs out?

And there she is. According to Mr Goodall's comprehensive records, she is flying still.

As a kid I my Dad used to take me out to Bankstown where I would sit on the top of a fence stump while Dad talked to Sid Marshall about whatever. Sid used to run joy flights from the Milperra Road corner of the field using a DH84 Dragon and sometimes an Avro Anson. He used to take pity on this kid sitting in the sun and would often say to me "Looks like they'll need some ballast in the back to keep the tail down - better jump aboard." I've lost count of how many times "I've kept the the tail of the Dragon down" but I do remember that there must have been a problem with Sid's W&B calculations because I invariably ended up sitting right behind the pilot. Sid had an awful lot of interesting aircraft in his hanger. Wonder what happened to them?

Don't remind me. I've known that for longer than I can remember, remember what?

Jeez Merv! Your ancestor would be rotating like a Rotax with a ratsh!t reduction unit at that comment. You should know better. Grieg! Must be getting old!

Seems like they're back from the Hall of the Mountain King.

Thanks Andy. The purpose of my post (#352) was to question the accuracy of several responses made by your colleague from FNQ to members regarding the lack of notification that the CASA restriction had been imposed, albeit in a revised form. He implied that members had been notified in the RAA Christmas newsletter when this could not have been the case. I tried to be careful with my language so as not to appear to be making a personal attack or the credibility of another member and thus incur the ire of the Moderators or further upset the Administrator of this valuable site. However, on re-reading my post, I can see that it could be taken as criticism of the CEO. That was not my intention and I accept that my wording was clumsy. I apologise to the RAA CEO for any discomfort my post may have caused him. Re: emails from Board members. I am delighted that you have chosen to respect the privacy of RAA members by not seeking their email addresses from the Assn. Keep up the good work.