turboplanner

Found a few interesting threads:

http://saturdaymechanic.com/ethanol-issues-varnish-vs-gum-and-using-the-right-additive/

http://www.toledoblade.com/Energy/2011/07/12/Engine-issues-nag-boaters.html

http://www.crisfield.com/gold/Ethanol%20web%20ready.pdf

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25936782/ns/business-consumer_news/t/mechanics-see-ethanol-damaging-small-engines/#.VIsyJiuUfz4

My point from the beginning has been IF you use this argument against Jabiru do you go after all the other engines that are not as good as Rotax 912?. Nev

If you see one risk, it can be a random risk.

If you see a cluster of similar risks, and you don't want to lose the farm or be prosecuted, the safest cation is to remove the risk immediately.

So in answer to your question, you go after all the engines which have a cluster of similar risks.

Where a known fault was occurring, such as bearing failure at 250 hours, you can schedule in bearing replacements every 250 hours.

Where there is a random issue which can strike some engines at 2 hours, others at 400 hours, others at 1100 hours and most not at all, it's like measuring a jelly.

However the one that counts is the one which goes down and injures or kills someone, then everyone looks back into history as to what action should have been taken and what action was taken........and the evidence is there on the ground.

When the Rotax 912 came out it set new standards of reliability. It was hailed as the MOST reliable piston engine in aviation. ANY engine you compare with it will perform worse in reliability. That was the 80HP version.Later models are not as reliable, it appears, so do we ban them or wait till they are as reliable (which may never happen).

However, CASA's action is based on CASA's statistics, not ours

Worse still it shows up the technical naivety of the powers that be.

More scrutiny from a different body, interesting politics.

It's meaning was changed forever for Australians on the beach at Gallipoli.

What about CCT, the most critical of all which will melt pistons and cause seizures????????????

To just take this a tad further while we are all waiting for CASA's next tome on the J issue(s), the definition that I can find in the Regs states that "Cruising Level" is "A level maintained during a significant portion of a flight". 

 

How big is "significant" in aviation cruise level terms?

 

 

 

By my dictionary "significant" appears to mean "having or expressing a meaning; indicative, having a covert or implied meaning; suggestive". or probably more relevantly "important, notable, or momentous".

 

 

 

And if you level off at any time to avoid traffic is it significant, important, notable or momentous and are you therefore then in "Cruise"?

 

 

 

And by extension are you therefore likely to be considered by some forum members to be at a "Cruising Level" whenever you are not climbing or descending?

.......taunting grumpy old Harriet.

It was getting close to the time for the next meeting of Circus Maximus, and.............

.....welding Rotax exhausts for $50.00 a throw, which has made him a millionaire, and allowed him to..................

...or....or.. ..BRUTUS! who has bullet holes in his tail fin, a ring through his nose, and teeth like a Great White, and who..............

The result after Turbo unleashed the 357 magnum after Brutus criticised his engine............

........toga.

Now most people don't know it, but Hatso once did a stint as Emperor of Rome itself, making the trains run on time, setting minimum standards for the wine, and directing that a new car company be set up - he called it Ferrari after his favourite cat.

He never got credit for any of this, but that's life, and............

Here's a clip from one of his Board Meetings ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K8_jgiNqUc

Why would I argue with that beautiful double negative, when you and your followers have cooked your own goose?

...and on......and on.......and on, with fresh new invective, and tall stories.

"I own a Roman Candle boxer 4" said Harriet, "and my mates own two others. We've had them for a week now, and they've never let us down once"

"That's because you've never started them" said Salty. "Why I was flying over the mulga at 13,000 feet and..................."

".....wild gyrations."

"You should see me on the dance floor" replied Turbo, but the BPP had become engrossed in the latest news, where Mr T was bitterly complaining about fellow Instructor, and Academic, Professor Avatar, and was suggesting that before instructors started instructing it might be a good idea if they knew how to fly. This was gaining acceptance with 15% percent agreeing the idea had merit.

Madge hadn't been idle either, announcing he would fly down south (probably to Rockhampton), not only with no coolant in the Rotair, but no oil as well, just to make it difficult.

"These are reliable.............."

Sounds like you need one of these Phil - Navistar MRAP - 9.3 litre engine up to 280 kW, Allison auto trans, 17.65 tonnes, beefed up to drive over land mines, then IED's sitting on top of stone walls at window height, drive on aluminium rim inserts, then a completely suspended crew compartment to minimise injuries from the shock of a bomb blast, and that tended to leave only the driver injured by the steering wheel as the module lurched, and last I heard they were working on that.

....had an extra 330 seconds, but now I find he has one of those Tiger Moth thingys that does loop the loops, and makes a lot of noise.

In fact Turbo actually had a 300L, but we won't be pedants or we'd be here all day correcting Ratso's spelling mistakes, grammar, syntax, nomenclature and hair style.

It's not surprising that he got the model designation wrong, because he had the ride of his life last weekend, losing his teeth in a hair raising experience in the 300L.

Turbo decided to take him up for a gentle run in the 300L and here's a clip showing how the dirty little rate tried to take control on takeoff, and how a brave Pitts pilot tried to help Turbo, who finished up....................

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Us36sVK9DDY

Just to inform us - who has been asking you to give them advice on how good it was? Verifiable numbers of supplicants, please, with the evidence of same, scrupulously applying your own criteria for reports on CAMit engines .Oh, and which hoses? the inlet tract SCAT tubes, the oil cooler hoses, or the fuel delivery hose? None of which are CAMit products nor a part of the engine.

Having just read the words again, I think the words themselves inform you.

As for the hose, well you can take your pick or I could make it the finning in the vicinity of the No 1 spark plug if that meets your definition of "part of the engine."

It doesn't make any difference.

My point was that unless I had some supernatural powers, a look at the engine and a bit of chewing the fat cannot determine reliability and life cycle of an engine.

CASA has to work within ICAO regulations.

Where FAA is compliant with ICAO that shouldn't be a problem (and the last time I did some searching FAA was complying with ICAO on the subject I was researching.)

You actually gagged an interesting discussion on engines gandaph to insist on getting back to the topic. [umm... moderated..].

It wasn't "sort of" - the thread is "Camit engines - anyone got one?"

If you are referring to my post "...............just outrageous promotion which didn't ring true with my past experience at all.", my past experience actually being employed in an Industry where I have to make contractual commitments to very large fleets on the predicted life cycle of engines, commit to the performance of those engines, arbitrate where there are problems, find solutions and meet the requirements of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, and in my spare time build race engines where I work on the engines with my own hands, and have wonderful plans for the new designs.

The thread is not about Jabiru engines produced by a supplier; it's time to P!ss or get off the Pot, and start talking about actual numbers of genuine engines.

So straight back off topic again.........................

Get an Auster

And therein lies the problem. If I came and looked at it, I'd see the outside of the engine, a few hoses, listen to your story, and be in no position to give anyone any advice on how good it was in terms of a repeatable life cycle for them.

I wish you every success with it. I think you've done a very smart thing with that aircraft.

However let's go back to the thread title.