turboplanner

....my alter ego "DeltaMichCharleen", who will respond "...................."

When you say "none of Garrys aircraft with Jab engines have had problems" - you didn't read Bigglesworth's comments?

Its pretty funny how old love had to get confirmation that you where telling her the truth. But she obviously didn't get confirmation previously when she called it a Cessna.

Since we haven't seen any CASA decision yet, which could range quite widely or cold be exactly what people want, this is a little premature, but one consideration is that it could save your life, your partner or friend's life and a great big lawsuit, for the sake of still flying, but going quietly until there is a fix.

".........was doing rather well until I posted a photo of my instrument panel with its neat little registration label for all to see, and had to delete 274 posts in one night, particularly the ones where I was a Boeing Captain, but I did get to send a nasty PM to the Prime Minister infering that I knew where he lived, and..............."

I think they'll love that Bruce, and the MP will appreciate that detail.

Of course he might misunderstand, and ask the Minister to restrict pilots with less than your experience and special knowledge, or who are foolish, from flying those aircraft.

......flexing his fingers to quietly write a post in Een's friendly forums.

"Who can I be tonight?" he thought running his finger down the list of his "posters", all with different names, sexes, and personalities.

On some occasions he could get five of them into a thread, all helpfully supporting his argument, and have two more spitting and writing nasty PMs to anyone who dared offer a genuine opinion.

"I think I'll be Martin Boeing, and ...................."

Good Morning 01rmbVery good points more of us should take this medical thing on board as a lot of us could get grounded and the only fun we will have --- pushing a wheel barrow for the rest of our lives.

As this everyone thread is on to statistics:- How many incidents have been attributed to?? " unhealthy people with dodgy tickers.

 

Another interesting point those with "dodgy tickers" are heavily monitored that is -- they have thorough examinations on a very regular basis just to monitor/identify looming problems and when identified immediate remedial action can be commenced.

 

It is the people who are not monitored just wandering about thinking all is OK and not aware of what is sneaking up on them, these pore folk do not get a lot of warning.

 

Regards

 

KP.

Keith, looks like you missed my earlier posts in which I covered this:

"However, there's no evidence supporting excessive incidents or fatalities in this category, and never has been throughout the history of aviation, so this is just a red herring.

If a trend did develop, then CASA would be bound to act, and would probably do what they did with Angel Flight and Jabiru engines - suggest a path to reduce the risk, invite commentary,

and then make a decision to reduce the potential injuries and loss of life.

CASA, and the Politicians are likely to have received many colourful hypotheticals like this, but all they serve to do is get people asking questions about whether RA operations are safe, and ensure some close attention for a while. This probably won't do any harm, flushing out people flying for commercial use, aerobatics, beat ups, fuel exhaustions etc."

If there is any evidence, then yes it's time to think about groundings, but let's not have thought bubbles about things for which there are no trends.

Well you have my sympathy; that's not what we want when we set out with our dreams of flying.

To some extent, this is similar to racing where you can have a joint liability.

In Australia you may have recourse through the State Tribunals, not sure about NZ

For those that feel it is CASA's duty to uphold safety, no matter the consequences, on the basis that CASA's actions relate to saving lives - Will the same people that support these current actions to restrict aircraft operations take the same position if next week, CASA determines that the current RA-Aus medical requirements are too lax and that everyone that flies needs to complete the CASA Recreational Aviation Medical Practitioner’s Certificate or Class 2 medical before their next flight to eliminate the threat of old unhealthy people with dodgy tickers flying around with passengers over populated areas? Probably just as much or more evidence against letting people fly who can't satisfy the Class 2 medical requirements as there is against the failure rate of Jabiru engines...

However, there's no evidence supporting excessive incidents or fatalities in this category, and never has been throughout the history of aviation, so this is just a red herring.

If a trend did develop, then CASA would be bound to act, and would probably do what they did with Angel Flight and Jabiru engines - suggest a path to reduce the risk, invite commentary,

and then make a decision to reduce the potential injuries and loss of life.

CASA, and the Politicians are likely to have received many colourful hypotheticals like this, but all they serve to do is get people asking questions about whether RA operations are safe, and ensure some close attention for a while. This probably won't do any harm, flushing out people flying for commercial use, aerobatics, beat ups, fuel exhaustions etc.

OK, is there anywhere a summary of where this is up to is available to read?

Not sure what RA statistics are, but Paul Craig in his book "The Killing Zone" said the student phase is the safest until about 500<700 hours, in the US, and I'm sure I've read the same thing here in GA.

The main reason is the amount of supervision of both the aircraft and the student, and the student tending to be at his/her most compliant in operating the aircraft strictly by his instructor, and flying regularly. Once out of the clutches of his instructor slackness and over-confidence can seep in, and recency can become an issue.

He lists his "killing zone" as from about 40 hours to about 320 for Private and Student Pilots.

Bigger.............

....or it could be that a lot of people are repeating what a lot of other people are saying, and just confusing everyone.

Best to not overthink this based on little public data, but to talk to your instructor.

http://www.rich-phillips.com.au/MediaCentre/PortfolioPressReleases/Aviation/tabid/102/ID/1497/Coalition-Government-provides-100000-for-St-Arnaud-Airport-upgrades.aspx

His Government is behind in the polls for this Saturday's Victorian election.

It would be a pity if they lose and this is the last we see of what has been a good programme to refresh Victoria's airfields.

Thanks for the effort Gordon!

Hitting terrain at high speed often occurs as a result of either flying in cloud, or falling out of cloud, unauthorised aerobatics, component failure etc. they mainly relate to complying with the law.

For performance and handling, you would take the advice of your Instructor, as to any quirks.

In RA I can only comment on Jabiru handling, and again, if you were looking at an alternative aircraft, your Instructor, if he has flown both types is the person to go to for an accurate comparison. I always go up with an instructor on a different aircraft and ask him to grade me harshly, then make notes of any likely screw ups.

It's CASA's job to weigh up the statistics RAA have given them and minimise the risk to you.

Fortunately the fatal accident volume is still low enough that very few airframes period have been involved in fatal accidents.

Weight for weight, fibreglass reinforced plastic is stronger than aluminium, as a material.

Fibreglass has some advantage in that it can be moulded into compound curves and rippled adding to strength

Where a foam core and double skin construction is used it goes up to sandwich panel strength, which you can see around town in today's refrigerated vans

I too would say the Jabiru monococque design is a very strong one.

On the other hand, when a skilled person designs a space frame, and clads it in aluminium it can be made equally bullet proof, since the aluminium is just keeping the rain out.

Fibreglass has a memory, so in a crash, although it may have been massively deformed, it springs back into place and looks as if there has been very little damage, and that sometimes leads to exaggerated comments as to its strength. The memory means that the damaged parts can just be cut out and replacement mouldings laminated to the original using a lap joint which adds very slightly to weight, as against, in some cases a write off or jig rebuild of a space frame or monococque aluminium aircraft.

Most fatalities are due to dropping from altitude or hitting terrain at high speed, and in both cases you would expect to see a pile of shattered and bent wreckage, so the type of construction is not going to make much difference.

In the case of an engine failure, if we look at two aspects:

(a) We have flown over a forest, and although we have the aircraft in a glide, the most probably scenario is localised impact damage similar to a car hitting a pole, with a fatal being the most likely outcome for either of the constructions.

(b) We panic and forget to set the aircraft into a glide and it either spins in or breaks up. The most likely scenario is a fatal for both constructions.

Where we successfully pull off a forced landing and get the aircraft on the ground around its normal landing speed, the strength of the construction plays a bigger part.

Both types of construction have their pluses and minuses, with space frame having an advantage with localised impacts, like a post, or small tree, but mononocques doing better against a concrete wall, and of monocoques or equal weight, fibreglass doing better than aluminium.

Once you touch the ground many different forces come into play:

I read a report once where the pilot of a Jab got it down OK but saw the fence coming up and ground looped it, sliding sideways into the fence with the lightweight doors taking the impact, and he got a broken arm (which is still a good outcome)

I saw a photo just a few weeks ago were a Jab made a forced landing on a ploughed paddock, and it looked to me as if the furrows started a vibration which too out the windscreen pillars, dropping the dash and engine into the dirt, so the pilot and passenger would have become the new nose of the moving aircraft if it had kept going. So in that case there was potential for a worse outcome, but the repair looked to be quite an easy one.

We've also seen quite a few photos of bent and distorted fuselages in space frame and monocoque aircraft.

The point I'm getting at here is that Jabiru has a very good fuselage, but it concerns me that some people are over-selling it, leading to over-confidence in pilots.

For example, in recent times there have been photos showing an intact prop, intact fuse and intact undercarriage, in other words none of those areas hit in the event, yet the claim has been how strong the frame was. That is just misleading.

Or it might be better if we hit the CASA site, looked at the regulations, learnt about the process, realised how many CASA people might be involved in it, and worked out a way to correct the damage done by writing to politicians with a message which more or less said "Regardless of the number of engine failures, forced landings and potential for injuries and fatalities, we want to keep our toys" (which BTW carries no weight at all in a safety matter.)

.............had front teeth which allowed him to each a cabbage through wire netting, and so he was always kept in the prompter's pit during shows where..............

This thread is about a very serious technical situation, not about one upmanship on the gossip circuit.

.....

(a) A four cylinder outboard motor running as it should

(b) The fifth piston, which Turbo fitted "just in case" arcing up over the star Sirius

Salty pondered "I wonder if this could be the solution to.................."

"Baited" breath indeed Doc, although I think the word is "bated", short for "abated"

And his nickname is "Major" rather that "Marje"

Ross and I have clashed on many occasions, but I have a lot of respect for him, and I've been watching fascinated as he seems to have been copping it post after post, for a Draft Proposal by CASA, which we have seen is a routine action by the Safety Authority.

Believe me, Ross can't outgun them, and, you might not believe this, but if, after calling for comments from the whole industry, they decide to go ahead with an instrument, it is likely to be based on sound statistical evidence rather than something Ross said at a function.

Turbs,Quite a few of those RIP's have been from sheer stupidity, Trike flying from Temora to Cootamundra in the dark hitting a tree & a windmill killing 2, Pioneer near Kerang or there abouts doing a beat up collecting a swer wire between a shed and a house killing 2, (30 odd hrs experience in that pilot but the deceased's brother in law said he was safe (yeah right), the sting near Goulburn was an engine failure but the pilot drove it in to the paddock,.

 

Yes there have been a few but there aren't too many associated with Jabiru after an engine failure.

 

Alf