kgwilson

I've made plenty of short approaches as requested by ATC & sometimes that meant turning onto base when almost parallel to the threshold. No different to a simulated engine failure while downwind other than having power. I really enjoyed them as it made you think & work hard.

 

 

Doubt heavy things would be sucked out of the cockpit. Maps and paper work maybe. Ersa and radio?

I thought the same but if he had some sort of parcel shelf like I do then the items would only have to be blown around sideways & just fall out.

 

 

Very strange. Given the altitude, wind direction & strength it is not surprising that the things from the cockpit were found where they were. If the canopy was covered in oil perhaps it was slid back so the pilot could try to see where he was going & everything got sucked out. The report on the engine will be interesting to see.

 

 

I prefer the system as it is now. I feel it is useful to know if someone agrees with your point or finds it informative or helpful or indeed funny especially if posting in the Laughter forum. Personally I don't use Creative, Optimistic or Friendly and it seems these like types get used in an odd way at times sometimes prompting the "Poster" to ask the "Liker" why. I can't remember ever using "Winner" either but then that is not to say I won't in the future

 

 

I agree that the harm has already been done by the heavy handed process from CASA. It was handled in a very pompous manner and then they tried to justify the process with a further 2 page explanation. This is the CASA culture in operation and may change once the new director comes on board but I imagine this will be slow and may be painful for some current staff who will resist any change. On the other hand CASA may continue to ignore the Forsyth report.

 

One thing I believe will be a certainty, is if the draft instrument is implemented without modification, there will be action (possibly legal challenges and/or a class action) taken by home builders in RA & GA as it effectively denies the builder the right to install an engine of their choice, a right which has existed since the 80s.

 

 

Airborne were around a long time before any of the other trike manufacturers existed so I reckon they have the IP on the name. Anyway call it what you like so long as you don't confuse it with any other part.

 

 

One of our guys here just came back from Archerfield and told us that apparently over 30 aircraft have been damaged. Some were well tied down & had their tails ripped off. others were tied down in wall-less hangars and got thrashed around hitting the pillars & posts. Some hangars were destroyed. Also there were aircraft completely undamaged only a few metres from others that were trashed.

 

 

Yeah, got to love the GA spark plug extracts - just what every rotax and jabiru doesn't have, and the heart bolt is a fun one - yes its an example of reading a manufacturers schedule ... but could we have chosen a term for a critical bolt in a trike that was not manufacturer specific? Only airbourne call them heart bolts - the rest of the trike world know then officially as hang bolts - unofficial names abound ;-)

The term "Heart Bolt" came from the Hang Glider world which is what trikes were developed from and Airborne was one of the original Hang Glider manufacturers. If it fails your heart stops not very long afterwards. It is the original and correct name.

 

 

HAVE YOU EVER BEEN GUILTY OF LOOKING AT OTHERS YOUR OWN AGE AND THINKING,

 

SURELY I CAN'T LOOK THAT OLD? WELL....

 

MY NAME IS ALICE SMITH AND I WAS SITTING IN THE WAITING ROOM FOR MY FIRST

 

APPOINTMENT WITH A NEW DENTIST. I NOTICED HIS DENTAL DEGREE, WHICH BORE

 

HIS FULL NAME. SUDDENLY, I REMEMBERED A TALL, HANDSOME, DARK-HAIRED BOY WITH THE SAME NAME HAD BEEN IN MY SECONDARY SCHOOL CLASS SOME 30-ODD YEARS AGO. COULD HE BE THE SAME GUY THAT I HAD A SECRET CRUSH ON, WAY BACK THEN? UPON SEEING HIM, HOWEVER, I QUICKLY DISCARDED ANY SUCH THOUGHT. THIS BALDING, GREY HAIRED MAN WITH THE DEEPLY LINED FACE WAS FAR TOO OLD TO HAVE BEEN MY CLASSMATE.

 

AFTER HE EXAMINED MY TEETH, I ASKED HIM IF HE HAD ATTENDED MORGAN PARK SECONDARY SCHOOL .'YES, YES I DID.. I'M A MORGANNER!' HE BEAMED WITH PRIDE.

 

'WHEN DID YOU LEAVE TO GO TO COLLEGE?' I ASKED.HE ANSWERED, 'IN 1965.. WHY DO YOU ASK?'

 

'YOU WERE IN MY CLASS!' I EXCLAIMED.

 

HE LOOKED AT ME CLOSELY.

 

THEN THE UGLY,

 

OLD,

 

BALD,

 

WRINKLED,

 

FAT-ARXED,

 

GREY-HAIRED,

 

DECREPIT,

 

BASTARD

 

ASKED....

 

'AND WHAT SUBJECT DID YOU TEACH?'

 

 

I have a brand new Jab 3300 in my Sierra which has yet to have its first start. I bought it with the knowledge that there were issues with Jab engines. I downloaded and read the NASA 3405 report on "Aerodynamics and cooling of horizontally opposed aircraft engine installation", 152 pages of extremely detailed and thorough analysis completed in 1981 and I have taken a very pragmatic approach to the cooling system using Garry Morgans intake ducts, a separate NACA duct intake for the large 7 row oil cooler mounted at the bottom of the firewall and a 60mm diameter intake in line with the top of the sump. I also have Garrys Cobra head with a separation vane in front of the carb intake which allows easy change by bending it one way or the other if the left side runs hotter than the right or vice versa. The airflow is smooth from intake to exhaust which is over 1 metre wide & 100mm deep with a 20mm suction lip.

 

It is my opinion that most of the issues have their root cause in overheating. I have flown Garry's aircraft and they do run cool. There are none in flying schools but it seems that none of Garrys aircraft with Jab engines have had problems. The oldest Jab at our airfield has one of the thick finned head 3300 engines but does not have the Jabiru "fence" in front of the cylinders which turbulates the inflow and has a very large exhaust with suction lip and has more than 950 trouble free hours on the clock.

 

I voted for option 2. There are issues and they need to be dealt with. CASA in its proposal is way over the top when they did not have any data on which to base their decision (still don't to my knowledge) & they have proposed to contravene the rights of home builders to install an engine of their choice.

 

 

I think a new thread entitled "Rotax 912/914 series engine maintenance" should be started. That seems to be what the last few pages of this thread have been about.

 

 

Thanks for the replies, everyone.

Not sure how I can apply for a number & get the plane inspected within 90 days - it might not be finished! Maybe I'll wait a bit longer to apply for a number.

 

Incidentally, I can't find the regulations that specify the size of the numbers to be displayed, or whether the ones on the fuse can go on the fin. Can anyone point me in the right direction for this?

 

Thanks again

 

Bruce

Don't apply for the rego number until your build is ready to fly. The Technical manual says the details are in the Operations Manual but I can't find them there. Ask someone at RA-Aus. When you apply for the rego number they probably specify details when they allocate you the number.

 

 

The only mandatory things you must do are to apply for a Rego No & inspect the completed aircraft within 90 days of being issued the number or you forfeit the fee. The inspection must be carried out under the supervision of a current L4. There are weight & balance forms, test flight forms, aircraft data sheets, the POH & other documentation all to be completed before final registration. You are also required to maintain a complete build log and encouraged to keep a photographic log of the build although this is not mandatory. All the other intention to build and notifications etc are recommendations and not totally mandatory if you are building under 95.55. My advice is to keep a full daily build log with a photographic log fully cross referenced.

 

I have done this and also have 2 x L2s have a look every now & then & luckily have a L4 who has had a check occasionally or when I have a question during the build as well. I am painting the airframe at present. All the documentation ( the worst part of the build process) is yet to come.

 

 

It seems like half the aerodromes in NZ have Maori names that most foreigners have the utmost difficulty in pronouncing, even the larger ones like Whangarei, Whanganui, & of course the alternate airport for Wellington, Paraparaumu. Generally if you pronounce them as they look you will be understood, although you may get some muffled laughter from the other end.

 

The worst seemed to be foreign students who had a hard enough time being able to pronounce English and be understood. Then you throw Maori aerodrome names at them which often had absolutely hilarious results. Other than the hilarity it was often not pleasant to be in the same controlled airspace as a foreign student as you could not understand their calls. It frustrated the hell out of the controllers as well.

 

 

So how many fatal accidents in the last say 3 years have been attributable to failed forced landings due to engine failure?

 

 

Thank you for your email responding to the invitation for comments on operational limitations being proposed by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) for aircraft fitted with Jabiru engines.

The proposed measures are precautionary and intended to reduce the potential risk of harm or injury resulting from possible Jabiru engine occurrences, until the causes of these occurrences have been identified and addressed. CASA has circulated the consultation draft to provide operators and other interested persons with notice of the actions CASA is proposing to take, noting that no action has been taken yet, as well as an opportunity to comment on those proposals, and offer any suggested alternatives.

 

CASA has been looking at data and reports about Jabiru piston-engine failures for some time. In the course of that review, problems related to Jabiru engines that have stood out range from full and partial power loss and in-flight engine shutdowns, to rough running and oil leaks. CASA has identified more than 40 Jabiru engine problems and events that have occurred in 2014 alone.

 

Mechanical problems that have been identified by Jabiru include through bolt, valve and cylinder, and fly-wheel bolt failures. The contribution of particular kinds of operations (for example, student training) and maintenance-related factors to some of these failures has yet to be determined.

 

Jabiru, as the manufacturer of these engines, has certain obligations under the relevant International Standards, and civil aviation safety legislation in terms of the identification and rectification of such engine problems irrespective of when they occurred or what may have caused them, and CASA is working with Jabiru to arrive at a solution.

 

CASA will consider all comments received on the consultation draft and the discussions held with Jabiru (which are ongoing) before making a final decision on any operating limitations that may need to be imposed, as a precautionary measure in the interests of safety.

 

In the expectation we will receive constructive and informative input, CASA has extended the consultation period by an additional 7 days to 27 November 2014. At the conclusion of that period, CASA will assess the information we have received, in conjunction with other information available to us, and act in accordance with our obligations under the Civil Aviation Act.

 

Your input will be considered in the process of determining the nature and scope of such operating limitations as CASA may ultimately decide need to be imposed in the interests of safety.

 

CASA fully appreciates that the imposition of any operational limitations will affect Jabiru and the many owners and operators of aircraft fitted with Jabiru engines. As an Australian-manufactured engine, CASA has special obligations in relation to Jabiru. CASA’s intention is to help ensure that safety-related problems associated with Jabiru engines—mechanical, operational or maintenance-related—are identified and addressed as quickly and effectively as possible.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Steve Neal

 

Office of the Director of Aviation Safety.........................

This appears to be the standard response email sent to all who made comments via email to Lee Ungermann. At the top of the Email it has UNOFFICIAL in upper case and the subject is "Jabiru [sEC=UNOFFICIAL]". Presumably this is CASA arse covering. It is a reasonable interim statement IMHO but it is interesting that it is signed not by Lee Ungermann who was the individual to whom comments were required to be directed to, but has been escalated up to the Office of the Director & signed by Steve Neal who I presume is a PA of the acting director Terry Farquharson.

 

 

Fascinating.

 

Thanks for posting.

 

 

This thread is in the wrong Forum type. It is witty & funny but I don't really think it has a lot to do with Student pilots & further learning. Very clever as well though.

 

 

I just went back into the Change.org site. There are now 583 signatures and the same number of positive comments about Jabiru and its engines. Even if you don't want to sign the petition just have a look at the comments made by owners, pilots etc from many parts of the globe. You may be surprised.

 

 

Signed last week, and No I haven't been inundated by emails from Change.org as many people predicted.

 

 

The rain was pouring and there was a big puddle in front of the pub.

 

A ragged old man was standing there with a rod and hanging a string into the puddle.

 

A tipsy- looking, curious gentleman came over to him and asked what he was doing.

 

'Fishing,' the old man said simply.

 

'Poor old fool,' the gentleman thought and he invited the ragged old man to a drink in the pub.

 

As he felt he should start some conversation while they were sipping their whiskey, the gentleman asked,

 

'And how many have you caught?'

 

‘You're the eighth,' the old man answered.

 

 

So. "Who,s.? Rutherford of NewZealand" always thought he did it !.spacesailor

Lord Ernest Rutherford was a NZ born British Physicist who is credited with splitting the atom in 1917. He also discovered and named the proton. There is an excellent and informative monument to him at Brightwater near Nelson, NZ where he was born.

 

 

I have just read the RA-Aus submission to CASA and the Minister & I totally agree with the content. Michael has certainly climbed into CASA for taking scant notice of the Forsyth report and as a person who used to deal closely with a collaborative Civil Aviation Authority I believe he is right on the money.

 

The real issue is will it have any effect or will they just close ranks. I am hoping that the Minister will get involved and the whole Aviation Industry needs to support the RA-Aus stance. Heads will have to roll but will they? They may end up being as defiant as Eddie Obeid although everyone is convinced of their guilt. This is not just about Jabiru. The current heavy handed process is what needs to be changed but seemingly not one blind bit of notice has been taken by CASA since the end of May when the report was released.

 

 

This idea was used in WWII with a full wing of Pilot bike riders so they could get used to close formations and radio procedures etc.

 

 

The idea has been around for a long time. The problem has always been being able to harness the energy and maintain the heat required to effect fusion. Generally to date it has only been for a few seconds or minutes. If this can be harnessed and controlled it is possibly the answer to humanities energy requirements.