motzartmerv

Almost ALL correspondence I have received from the RAA has have the disclaimer attached to the bottom. NSO: Disclaimer This message has been issued by Recreational Aviation Australia Inc. The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify Recreational Aviation Australia Inc (02) 6280-4700 and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.

No sorry oscar, I didn't have anything on it. It wasnt with my school when either of these prangs occurred so im only going on hearsay. But donnie (the CFI) said jab found it a very odd failure as wel and they replaced the wing as part of the repairs. The insurance company gave them stick over it, but I think it was eventually sorted. The pic was taken after it had been skull dragged up the bank.

The prelim report for the tiger that pranged a few months back is out now. More fuel to CASA's aging aircraft fire..:(

Thats the one Oscar. Im 90% sure it was the right wing that subsequently failed during the forced landing. The left wing broke both front and rear spa connections. I think. It was a few years ago and i never saw the wreck. So dont quote me.

Oscar I will see if I can dig the pics up from the original accident. Not that much can be seen, but i cant recall if the rear spar connection failed or not. I dont think it did.

Not in my experience nev. Highly wing loded yes, so if flown properly they asre still controllable, all beit it with a high rate of descent. You just cant 'cessna' them around..

Yes very true. Its mass times velocity Squared. So if you double the velocity, you quadruple the energy involved. If you halve the velocity, you quadruple the energy saving in the event of an impact. Oscar. Be carefull with that wing. One of the school jabs in Gundy had an accident when a young lady flipped it into an evaporation pond. It was repaired by jab back to its former glory and returned to service. About a year later it suffered an engine failure and was put down in a paddock. The paddock was a bit rough and the nosewheel collapsed. No other impact was involved BUT..The right wing snapped right down the middle. It seemed (from what I was told, I never saw it) that the crack propagated out from the fuel tank hole and cracked off beautifully in an apparent shearing load. It was assumed that the impact of the forced landing was not enough to cause the snapping of the wing, so therefor must have been an undetected issue from the previous accident. Im sure Jab would have some records on this incident if you want to check out what became of it. Im not sure myself as the satellite school have now gone on their own way.. Cheers

Glad hes ok. Thats a prang alright..

Good luck mate. i picked this thread up late, but i would have been able to tell you they would rake you through the coals for this. The first one will be the difficult one, then (if they issue) it will be a report at every renewal etc. I have a calaceal divasticulem (wrong spelling) which is basically a kidney stone. I have a class 1 medical, and every year, without fail, i have to under go a CT scan of the entire area.. Several doctors have commented that this is incredibly un healthy for someone my age, to be 'radiated' at such high doses every year. But CASA keep replying, well if you want te medical, you have to have the scans. Even though, and this is my favourite part, the urologist I use is one of the best in the country and he is adamant that it poses no problem. HE recommended that I only need an ultrasound..But the CASA doctors (a GP) over rides the specialist decision. Recently a firnd of mine (22 years old) had a heart anomaly found. A leading (st vnicent hospital) heart specialist reported zero significant factors for a pilot. CASA over rode him and forced her through a battery of tests. She lost her medical for 6 months,. EVEN THO the specialist said there was NO issue.. Why do these CASA doctors think they know better then a leading professor in the field?

The ground??

Lol. Who dug this 6 year old thread up?

Yea it's hard to watch, waiting for it to go woof. And the noise if that turbine racing ... Man... Good in those guys for jumpin straight in to help him out. Ig u slow it down the pilot almost goes right out and back in through the wind screen. Incredible!!

Thats an old one, but shows the violence involved when you convert all that energy..

Thanks for the advice jim, but I'm starting to learn how the raa works( only taken me 15 years) and I think keeping my head down is a Better course of action. My objection to anonymity doesn't do me any favors me thinks. Cheers

The board is a separate issue. They need to be able to squabble and swear at each other in order to run things . We don't need to hear or see these discussions. What we do need is transparency at the top, ie, when the gm write me a letter directly, and I respond to him with questions, I expect some form of response. Silence is not acceptable in this situation. The board keep each other in check, that how the system works.

Yes it's very scary. But at least casa reply to emails etc

See the abortion of an email that was sent out by the GM last month RE insurance. What a cluster shag that was. All I asked for was the minutes which would show his contentions were sound. Still no reply. I know exactly what happened (through other means) but I want to hear it from the man who sent me the email.

yea i do. I feed my kids with flying FT. If there is a threat to their dinner then i believe I have a right to know.

Good luck keith. I cant even get the minutes out of the RAA..

On paper the jab smashes it.. Pretty much any jab.Performance, usable load, looks, price.. It's an incredible story whn you think about it. Both the big names in light aircraft failed in the LSA market, and they both took two different approaches. Piper just bought an existing design ( sports cruiser) and Cessna threw millions into development of a new type. Both attempts were unsuccessful. Piper stuffed up through mishandling the chzeck factory and also falling into the same trap that Cessna did, they didn't listen to what the market wanted. They wanted to de option it, make it prett much stick standard with leather, ballistic chute, double glass , choice of 2 paint schemes. And stuck with the weak as p1ss castor ing nose wheel. Cessna made similar mistakes, but in a nutshell, tried to make a little Cessna and it was obvious it wasn't working from the beginning I reckon.

I think I'm safe, he did say aileron and rudder were used together;) I knew not even he would say they aren't.

Yes oscar, the Same aircraft that had the slipping annomoly. I can't shift the sensors around as its type certified and also it's been relocated to tamworth. I must say I've never been too concerned about it, it's a high wing loaded little plane and must be flown accordingly. I've always carried an extra 5 kts on the poh numbers Because it jus feels much more happy there. And it won't float like the other models will if your a bit quicker. Te only time it feels nasty is when it's slow, the lift doesn't drop away all friendly like under 60 kts it goes Into express elevator mode. But it's a much easier problem to manage then the floating issue the bigger wing models seem to give. Thanks for the references daffyd, I'll look into that. Very interesting stuff.

Rudder snatch? Wow. I can understand the ailerons doing it, by what function would cause the rudder to do it? Some form of disturbed air flow buffeting on one side or something. It's an interesting subject. Re the 160 stall speed. I know the poh states 45 kts, I've never managed to duplicate that figure. All though its likely to be kcas problem that relaes to earlier posts from daffyd and bob re calibrated instrumentation for testing purposes. At mtow I've only managed a clean break at about 49 kts ias . Just quietly, I think the 160 is the best acft jab have produced. :)

Aileron snatch!!!!. Now how will I remember that?? Both the aircraft are LSA not type certified (I believe).The difference between the two has always confused me to be honest. Oh that reminds me, you may be able to answer this. For Type certification under 95.55 the VS is meant to be less than 45 kts. The J160 doesn't come close to that figure. Having been involved with Jab production can you explain this? Ive always been curious. Cheers

Thanks dafydd. Thats great information. Having tested several homebuilts I do have an Idea of what your saying. However my original question was about steering with the rudder 'only' when too fast, which Oscar later corrected and said he was too slow. We have done lots of 'ribbon testing' on our aircraft to observe the airflow approaching and during the stall. Almost all have indicated this reverse flow you speak of and is a curious factor that i like to demonstrate, particularly with aifoils that promote :"grabbing" of the aileron at the point of stall. Aircraft like the foxbat, which has a very strong Aileron grab tendency (my term) which bangs the stick hard over at the break. Also the piper sports, which has a very rear cof g at the best of times (33% MAC i think) is another aircraft that tended to misbehave in this fashion. Approaching the stall when the separation point would move forward past the aileron there was a strong pull on the ailerons. The interesting thing is it didn't always pull the same way..Its a feature of that particular aeroplane that I dont like, when you increase the AofA the aileron feedback changes significantly, and you even feel forced feedback (again, not a technical term, my description) which feels like someone else on the controls pulling the aileron into the turn direction..Not nice, I dont like having a ghost on the controls with me.. Ps. Please note, im only a pilot not an engineer so i can only relate what i feel to my limited knowledge of the mechanics. Cheers