Another Jab engine failure...

[UnderneathTheRadar]

Much excitement on the Wagga CTAF this afternoon - Qantas ramp ops on the CTAF calling the inbound 2 x Rex, 1 x qlink that the council had had a phone call of an aircraft "possibly a jabiru" in a paddock.

Well done to all 3 and the tecnam who launched to go looking - good coordination and thoughtfulness from the last 2 arrivals to slow down and keep out the way whilst searching was organised.

Last we heard was that the Jab was safely down and the pilot walking to a road for help.

Another failure!

UTR

[Capn Bloggs]

good coordination and thoughtfulness from the last 2 arrivals to slow down and keep out the way whilst searching was organised.

Cooperative Regional Airline pilots...Leadsled will be surprised... :}

[The name is Porter]

If a Jab has an engine failure and lands in a paddock is the paddock worth more or less than it was before the Jab landed in it?

[Sunfish]

Q: What do you call a paddock with a Jabiru in it??

A; A rubbish tip.

[onetrack]

All the Jab owner has to do, is walk to the next paddock to find another Jab engine. As one infamous PPRUNE contributor noted, every paddock contains at least one Jab engine. :)

[Squawk7700]

Q: What do you call a paddock with a Jabiru in it??

A; A rubbish tip.

What do you call a Zenith half kit built aircraft in GK's hangar with a Rotax 912is with no manifold pressure information in the flight manual and a prop that has to be reco'ed before it can be used ?

[OZBUSDRIVER]

A nadir?......just sayin:}

[R755]

I would like to place on record that this incident can, in no respect, be blamed on the Jabiru engine. The engine continued to run smoothly until on the ground.
The aircraft had undergone work on items including fuel pump, carby and associated plumbing. The flight was a post maintenance check, and followed successful ground running.
On climb out, the engine rapidly, and without herald, powered down to approx. zero thrust. It continued to run smoothly. Accepting the inevitable, I landed in one of the areas off 05 that had always looked useable. Happily, it was.
For my sin, I got to walk through 500 metres of brown snake infested, long grass.
Jabiru seven eight is now back on the aerodrome. Jabiru 160s have a "road legal" tailplane span. Simply pop the wings off and roll onto a car trailer.
All that remains, is to find our error. Feel free to hate us for that.
Jabiru bashing is so, so out of fashion these days. This incident is not a suitable vehicle, for those, still so inclined.
Cheers to all. Fred

[tail wheel]

With that user name Fred, you must know something about engines, even if it is big round ones!! :ok:

[Squawk7700]

Thanks Fred, it's always good to hear the other side of the story :-)

[Sunfish]

First of all I apologise unreservedly to jabiru owners for my previous post, I was presented with an opportunity to be flippant and rude and I took it.

Secondly I apologise to Fred. Loss of power is no laughing matter and congratulations for handling it so well. I would be interested to know the cause when you find it in the hope that I and others can prevent the same thing happening to us.

[Band a Lot]

"I would like to place on record that this incident can, in no respect, be blamed on the Jabiru engine".

Bold statement unless cause is known. As a rule I never count anything out during an investigation.

[The name is Porter]

I don't apologise, I made a joke and reserve the right to continue to joke.

[Squawk7700]

I don't apologise, I made a joke and reserve the right to continue to joke.

If an RV10 lands in a paddock.... what's the next bit, something about glass houses?

[Munz]

How can the engine be running perfectly and be completely faultless, if it "powered down to approximately zero thrust"?

[Band a Lot]

Munz I would say if the throttle cable became "disconnected" the engine would be completely faultless. Therefore should not be recorded as a engine "mishap".

But I am wondering is why fuel pump (assume EDP) carby and plumbing had work done on them! or was it extra to routine maintenance? these 3 items certainly are "engine" so if one was responsible it is in effect a Jabiru engine failure regardless if it is maintenance induced. (Maintenance induced could be lack of data or other)

Not here to pro or con said motor, just facts.

[Squawk7700]

If hypothetically someone pulls apart a mechanical fuel pump and puts it back together incorrectly, it's hardly the engine manufacturers fault...

FYI - If the throttle was "disconnected" the spring would take it to full power.

[Band a Lot]

"FYI - If the throttle was "disconnected" the spring would take it to full power."

Is this fact for installation? I know many not a fact, Cessna 206 - I certainly know if bolt detaches - no such spring exists.

[The name is Porter]

If an RV10 lands in a paddock.... what's the next bit, something about glass houses?

Would I whinge if someone made a joke about the 10 landing in a paddock? Doubt it. ;)

Joke away...............

[Band a Lot]

On CSU aircraft yes a spring - if detach goes to full fine.

Not many have a full power on throttle spring, if any!

[The name is Porter]

I wouldn't joke about a VFR experimental aircraft flying in cloud with an ipad for a 6 pack :cool:

[Squawk7700]

"FYI - If the throttle was "disconnected" the spring would take it to full power."

Is this fact for installation? I know many not a fact, Cessna 206 - I certainly know if bolt detaches - no such spring exists.

Depends on what becomes disconnected. If the throttle cable disconnect from a Jabiru Bing carby, it would go full throttle. If the rotating part fell off the side of the carby, then all bets are off. I am not familiar with a 210 configuration myself. Rotaxes often have a spring which would be interesting to see in such an event because of the twin carbies as there is a spring on each one.

[Squawk7700]

I wouldn't joke about a VFR experimental aircraft flying in cloud with an ipad for a 6 pack :cool:

If you are referring to the iLevil iPad hardware and associated application, then attempting an IFR flight on such a device would be suicidal at best.

The unit that I use and have posted pictures of on here before, is terribly unreliable and inaccurate and I wouldn't use it for anything other than perhaps the G-meter. Not a good investment, but it wasn't a big one so it doesn't really hurt much anyway.

[rutan around]

How can the engine be running perfectly and be completely faultless, if it "powered down to approximately zero thrust"? One possibility immediately comes to mind. A partially blocked fuel vent line when Mr Wasp has not quite finished the job. There are plenty of others.

I wish some people commenting wouldn't be so gleefully trying to trash the reputation of one of the few successful all Australian aircraft companies before they even know what caused this forced landing.

It is a credit to Jabiru that no one has ever been killed in one of their aircraft in a controlled forced landing. It should also be noted that most of the previous engine problems were due to owner / operators ignoring proper maintenance procedures.

[Aussie Bob]

It should also be noted that most of the previous engine problems were due to owner / operators ignoring proper maintenance procedures.

So the factory would have you believe. The enormous number of through bolt failures we are now told, were apparently caused by harmonics. How does this relate to owners?

[rutan around]

The comparison with Cessna 172s is interesting.



Click here (http://jabiru.net.au/images/Comparison_of_Aircraft_Manufacturer_.pdf) for Comparison of Aircraft Manufacturers vs Number of Fatalities.

[rutan around]

How does this relate to owners? Short answer is quotes from some owners.
1 I just use the torque specifications as a rough guide.
2 I just tighten the through bolt nut till it goes loose and then back off 1/2 a turn.
3 Wot's a torque wrench?http://cdn.pprune.org/images/smilies/boohoo.gif

[waren9]

The comparison with Cessna 172s is interesting.



Click here (http://jabiru.net.au/images/Comparison_of_Aircraft_Manufacturer_.pdf) for Comparison of Aircraft Manufacturers vs Number of Fatalities.
interesting perhaps, but statistically meaningless i thought.

number of aircraft currently registered? total number ever registered would be more relevant (how many 172's have come and gone over the years?), or prangs/1000hrs would be better yet.

what would those numbers look like?

[Band a Lot]

I agree flying hours at a minimum need to be included for such stats (total pax carried would also change numbers a lot).

What's wrong with Cessna 172 pilots? - Air Facts Journal (http://airfactsjournal.com/2016/07/whats-wrong-cessna-172-pilots/)

[Band a Lot]

Squawk, the Cessna 100 & 200 series have the throttle cable with friction lock, the pilots can check themselves. Fully back off the friction nut, push throttle in and pull it out. A small cone shaped thing should be on shaft (this clamps on to the shaft to obviously create friction) the cable should now be very free to move and it will not progress to full power - it will stay where it is left (or will vibrate to when running/flying). FYI.

Rutan, yes I too thought that possible (air vent) but would have hope to see on ground run and more a gradual power loss. Also a fully blocked vent (part fuel in tank) and ground run was part of the timing of power loss. I don't know that much about Jabiru other than they use different ignition to normal mags - certain partial failures of ignition system is an other possible cause. Again if muffler is baffled type and collapses is another reason for smooth rapid power loss.

[mcoates]

"It is a credit to Jabiru that no one has ever been killed in one of their aircraft in a controlled forced landing."

What a load of utter rubbish. Spend 3 minutes on Google before making yourself look stupid.

[Squawk7700]

"It is a credit to Jabiru that no one has ever been killed in one of their aircraft in a controlled forced landing."

What a load of utter rubbish. Spend 3 minutes on Google before making yourself look stupid.

Maybe true for Australia, but certainly not for outside of it.

[rutan around]

"It is a credit to Jabiru that no one has ever been killed in one of their aircraft in a controlled forced landing."

What a load of utter rubbish. Spend 3 minutes on Google before making yourself look stupid.

Perhaps Mcoates can provide a list of Jabiru accidents where someone was killed due to engine failure in Australia. I don't mean engine failure due to granite ingestion as a result of flying in cloud or ones where the aircraft ran out of fuel. Just ones where a Jabiru engine power loss caused the forced landing.

[mcoates]

Spend 3 minutes on Google before making yourself look stupid. AGAIN

[Band a Lot]

Here is some stats (hrs inc)

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

[Squawk7700]

Why does it have to be a fatality in Australia to make it valid?

There was a recent one in South Africa where the prop was clearly not spinning.

[rutan around]

Mcoates I just spent 1/2 an hour searching the web for fatal Jabiru accidents where engine failure was established as the cause. I found plenty of fatal accidents but not one where an engine fault was the cause. Perhaps, as I'm sure you don't think yourself stupid, you will be so kind as to direct me to a few of those specific sites that after proper investigation, attribute fatal Jabiru accidents to engine failure.

The extract below is worth reading for those too time poor to read the whole article. The whole article can be found at the address shown after the extract.

Extract

Michael Monck, President of the RAA, has already sent a separate document to CASA which Mr Stiff describes as “very forthright.” (See previous article, Get on with it!)
The most serious aspect of the entire CASA action was the distortion CASA applied to the raw information from RA-Aus, says Mr Stiff: “We vetted the whole RA-Aus list when we finally got hold of it. CASA actually asked RA-Aus for their numbers after they had drafted the instrument – they didn’t have anything until I asked RA-Aus and they sent them their unedited list of incidents which included everything and listed 40 engine failures, so that’s where CASA’s magic 40 figure came from.
“Jabiru had addressed most of the identified problems over three years ago. I believe CASA has been negligent because they never consulted with us before they introduced the consultation draft, and they pulled the rug out from under us while we were on the plane on the way down. They couldn’t wait another day to talk about the issue, which really tells you what the intent was; the intent was obviously to damage us to the point where we couldn’t survive.
“When we finally worked that out with RA-Aus we spent a whole weekend going through the 40 events, comparing it with our list of failures, and working out which were just maintenance items like leaking fuel pumps, or simply running out of fuel, which were all on the CASA list. When we’d tidied it up we actually added some to the CASA list and when that was sorted out there were 12 actual in-flight engine failures which led to genuine forced landings. But that was in 93,000 flights, and 43,000 flying hours. And it was mainly flying schools because Jabirus are such popular training aircraft. We already had corrective measures in place for almost all of those 12, and had implemented them since 2011.”
In earlier discussions, Jabiru had offered CASA information from a detailed survey of light sport aircraft safety in the United States, conducted by Aviation Consumer magazine, which placed Jabiru’s safety record in the top three of over a dozen types along with Cessna 152 and Cessna Skycatcher in three categories:
• Overall accident rate per 100,000 hours of flight (Jabiru was second only to Cessna 152);
• Fatal accident rate (Jabiru’s score was zero in USA); and
• Accidents per hundred aeroplanes registered (Jabiru was second only to Cessna 152 and Skycatcher.
“Of a claimed 40 Jabiru ‘engine failures’, the actual number of genuine failures is only 12 out of over 1500 aircraft. And there has not been a single fatality, and very few injuries.”
“Jabiru has settled CASAs concerns. We are looking forward to Mr. Higgins from CASA coming to Bundaberg as he has said, to see these outcomes. For example, Jabiru has not had a recorded through-bolt failure in any engine produced since 2011.
“The evidence available to Jabiru shows there have been no deaths in Jabiru aircraft arising from engine stoppage. That is the case internationally. Between January 2013 and November 2014 there have been a number of deaths in light sport aircraft in Australia in other aircraft than Jabiru. CASA ought to be addressing that matter.
“CASA should also be looking elsewhere for more serious air safety issues in light sport aviation. If 19 deaths did occur and none was in Jabiru aircraft, then CASA ought to be attending to those issues, and not attacking this company without notice.
“Turning to the substance of the response demanded by the CASA, the issues of Jabiru engine operation to which it relates have effectively been resolved. There was no need for the world-wide denigration of Jabiru.Full Article 'Indecent Haste'

Indecent haste | Pro Aviation (http://proaviation.com.au/2014/11/28/indecent-haste/)

[Squawk7700]

These took me 30 seconds to find...

http://m.ewn.co.za/2016/05/12/1-man-killed-1-injured-after-aircraft-crash-in-Pretoria

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2012/05/family-can-pursue-suit-over-plane.html?m=1

[Lead Balloon]

Where do those reports say there was a defect in the engine, as opposed to - say - the owner not having bolted the propeller on properly or having run out of fuel?

[rutan around]

These took me 30 seconds to find...Yair Squawk and it shows what rushing a job does........

First one does not identify the aircraft type (though it looks like a Jab) and there is absolutely no information on the cause of the accident. Did it stall on short final with engine at idle? If you hang Jabiru with such miniscule information then I hope you are never on any jury trying me.http://cdn.pprune.org/images/smilies/boohoo.gif

The second one is not even a Jabiru for gawd's sake. The discussion is about how survivable Jabs are even when they lose an engine. If you still want to trash Jab you need to know if the non standard prop extension bolts were torqued correctly and checked. Was the torque wrench calibrated recently (ever)? People damming Jabiru on such flimsy evidence would scream blue murder if it happened to them.

[Band a Lot]

The hurry up and find out report.


http://www.transport.gov.za/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=H5BhQx-ltpM%3D&tabid=644&mid=1598

[rutan around]

Band a lot, could you re-post the link please? Doesn't want to work for me. It could be my lack of computer skills. :ugh:

[Squawk7700]

To suggest that a Jabiru is a great aircraft because it survives well in an accident if and or when the engine fails is laughable, particularly if it fails more often.

The logic is flawed. Which is the better aircraft? - if you will probably die when the engine stops in a Lancair, then the Jabiru is safer because if the engine stops and you crash you probably won't die !! ??

PS I own a Jabiru and think it's a great aircraft, however the "for" arguments I hear about the engines and perceived airframe safety are laughable at best.

Here is the link:
http://www.transport.gov.za/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=H5BhQx-ltpM%3D&tabid=644&mid=1598

The aircraft in the article is clearly a Jabiru.

[Band a Lot]

Sorry, need to copy and paste into browser to open.


Or use squawks link!

[Lead Balloon]

What's "laughable" is your "logic", Squawk.

If lots of Jabirus are involved in forced landings and there are fatalities during those landings, the questions as to whether this indicates an "unsafe" aircraft depends on the number of aircraft in the fleet, the number hours flown and the cause of the forced landings.

If most of the forced landings are precipitated by engine failures due to poor maintenance or operational procedures, and most of the fatalities during forced landings are caused by poor handling during the forced landing, I'm not sure why that's the manufacturer's problem.

[gerry111]

Squawk7700,

You say that you own a Jabiru and reckon that it's a great aircraft.

"PS I own a Jabiru and think it's a great aircraft, however the "for" arguments I hear about the engines and perceived airframe safety are laughable at best."

(I've only had one flight in a Jabiru, owned by a friend at YGAW. And from the right hand seat. I found the aircraft to be easy to fly and very stable. The centre stick was a new thing for me. But the aircraft is completely benign, if flown within its operating parameters.)

I'm clearly missing something here?? :confused:

So how do you dare fly your Jabiru with what you know? :E

[Squawk7700]

You're starting to confuse me... long story short....

It seems that many don't care about an unreliable engine regardless of the reason for the fault causing the failure, because the airframe is "safe" so it doesn't matter if you crash as you aren't likely to die.


They are not really amazingly easy to fly, they have a few idiosyncrasies of their own, but mainly around takeoff, landing, nose wheel and crosswind operations. Compared to perhaps a more benign Tecnam or Foxbat or similar.

[Jetjr]

Not all Jabirus have Jabiru engines

[gerry111]

True. The one that I flew in has a Rotax.

[rutan around]

It seems that many don't care about an unreliable engine regardless of the reason for the fault causing the failureThere are 3 issues here.
First is Jabiru engine reliability. Statistics show that when properly compared with other engines is just as good or better.

The second issue is the accusation that many don't care about unreliability regardless of the cause. I think the cause is highly important because most of the causes of Jab engine failures were not the manufactures fault and therefore avoidable. Of the 40 engine incidents CASA cited to virtually ground Jabiru 28 were avoidable and had nothing to do with the manufacturer.
I am happy to not run out of fuel, not hit powerlines , not stall close to the ground , to do thorough pre flights , to carry out proper maintenance including upgrades and to follow operating recommendations.

The third issue is that of survivability should something beyond my control happen (as it can with any aircraft) The track record for Jabiru would suggest that it is very well built and more survivable than many others in the same category.

Mcoates are you finding it easier to make lazy, broad, damming statements than it is to present actual facts from qualified investigators reports.

I'm probably 'Stupid' but I'm still waiting for your numerous properly documented examples of fatalities in Jabiru aircraft due to engine failure caused by the manufacturer.

[Squawk7700]

are you finding it easier to make lazy, broad, damming statements than it is to present actual facts from qualified investigators reports.


It's a bit hard when the investigations are not all complete, whilst often taking years to be published, if at all (if history is anything to go by). There are currently Jab powered Raaus investigations under way. Some of us may know the cause in advance.... some of us may not.... just sayin'

[rutan around]

It's a bit hard when the investigations are not all complete, whilst often taking years to be published, if at allYou are quite correct Squawk. It is also very unfair. It is unfair to potential buyers and current owners who don't know what really happened in any given accident. Owners wonder if they should keep flying and potential buyers hold off until the facts are known.

It is also highly unfair to the manufacturer. Long delays in accident reports mean they have to suffer the effect of every half baked theory put out in the blogosphere based usually on hearsay coupled with little or no engineering knowledge.
If it turns out that there is a factory problem long delays in accident reports mean it takes longer before the problem is addressed. Again unfair to both customer and manufacturer.

[spinex]

Yep, of course you are quite correct. The aviation community around Aus woke up one sunny morning and decided "today we're going to trash Jabiru" and promptly made up a whole series of bs stories and spread them far and wide. Jab of course has suffered a horrendous run of poor luck and every one that ended up having an unplanned nap in a paddock somewhere, is perfectly justifiable thanks to the bunch of grubby oiks that somehow choose to fly/maintain Jabs and do truly horrible things to make them break, but don't do the same to other types of engines. Or of course one could resort to the good old bush philosopher's position of "if it walks like a duck ....etc".

Interesting how this topic always reads like the playbook from a reputation recovery specialist, with one or two vociferous name-callers trying to throw enough dust into the air so as to obscure a self evident truth.

[rutan around]

but don't do the same to other types of engines

Oh really?.

[Lead Balloon]

Cirrus went through an equivalent thing, but at least had the advantage of being bigger and therefore more able to weather the statistical storm.

Lots of accidents and about double the percentage of fatal accidents than comparable aircraft, despite all the 'safety features'.

But then when you analyse the number of them flying and the experience levels of the people flying them, you come to a more objective understanding of the 'safety' of the Cirrus compared to other types. If all those people had bought a Cessna 210 or Bonanza (or Jabiru) instead, there would have been an equivalent spike in the number of accidents and the percentage of fatalities during those accidents.

Would that have 'proved' those other aircraft types to be 'unsafe'? I think not.

[rutan around]

Cirrus went through an equivalent thing,Cirrus became the 21st century 'Doctor Killer' a label formally attached to Cessna 210s and Bonanzas. Funny how the accident rate of all 3 of these aircraft improved markedly with better aircraft specific pilot training.:=

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Cirrus became the 21st century 'Doctor Killer' a label formally attached to Cessna 210s and Bonanzas.

Can't say I have ever heard the "Dr Killer" label applied to the C210.:confused:

Funny how the accident rate of all 3 of these aircraft improved markedly with better aircraft specific pilot training.:=

You mean my three circuits in a 210 were not enough? :E

Dr :8

[rutan around]

You mean my three circuits in a 210 were not enough? http://cdn.pprune.org/images/smilies/evil.gifYou probably learned on the job like most of the rest of us back then. I must say there are safer ways to become very comfortable with a C210 but probably not as memorable.

On a lighter note a pilot that sometimes posts here but will remain nameless (no not me this time) received the usual 3 circuit endorsement and then set off some distance for home at 10k feet. He commenced descent to his sea level home strip at the same spot he always used for a C172. Result. One very red face as he arrived over the top at 6,000feet and had to sneak off away from the circuit and wash off 5,000 unwanted feet. All that was 44 years ago. He and I know a lot more about C210s these days.http://cdn.pprune.org/images/smilies/evil.gif

[Flying Binghi]

Might be some spare parts here...

Offers Invited - Camit/Jabiru Aircraft Engine Components (http://www.graysonline.com/sale/7016083/engineering-and-toolmaking/offers-invited-camit-jabiru-aircraft-engine-components?spr=true)

The manufacturing stuff...

http://www.graysonline.com/sale/7015880/engineering-and-toolmaking/cnc-metal-manufacturing-facility?spr=true

[Sunfish]

No wonder they went broke. Those CNC machines are expensive. I wonder what CAMITS break even sales numbers were?

[Band a Lot]

Looks like 1 CNC per engine!

Could be some good bargains there, and enough time to make a buck before transfer to 3D printing manufacture.

[LeadSled]

Sunnt,
In round figures, about 10 times what CASA reduced them to --- and they once achieved that 10 times.
Camit tried to " go it alone" by certifying a seriously upgraded engine under their own name, but I think they just ran out of money. It was a good engine, it performed well in the certification trials, well above minimum requirements.
Tootle pip!!

[Sunfish]

I guess the lesson here is not to invest in aviation in Australia. CASA takes no account of jobs and investment - quite the reverse from the rest of the world.

I have probably paid US$10,000 in freight costs on. the project so far. Everything has to come from the USA, right down to drill bits, almost all from Spruce. The only easily available stuff is "fastenings" - cheaper than Bunnings from a wonderfully helpful Australian business.

I now understand exactly why Ansett set up its little supply company in Los Angeles all those years ago.