What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Draft Safety Proposal For Jabiru Owners in Oz

DaleB said:
Wow... no kidding. Harsh. Is the failure rate really that bad?
Click to expand...

Yes. Look up the For Sale ads for Jabaru aircraft. Almost everyone will list something like, "400 hrs airframe, 100 hrs SMOH or STHO".
 
Last edited:
Second time this week I have said this: So glad I'm building an RV and hanging a Lycoming (or very close approximation) on it.
 
None of the LSAs built by Jabiru USA (close to 200 aircraft, counting Arion Lightning) have crashed because of engine failure, according to the NTSB. There are Jabiru aircraft here in the US with well over 1000 hours in flight schools with no problems.
 
N941WR said:
Yes. Look up the For Sale ads for Jabaru aircraft. Almost everyone will list something like, "400 hrs airframe, 100 hrs SMOH ot STHO".
Click to expand...

Routine top overhauls are recommended at 1000 hours. You also need to consider the effect of prop strikes on numbers like that.
 
Whoa!

That's going to be a SERIOUS threat to the survival of the Australian company, in my opinion*! Those are some very stiff rules and prohibited actions. Makes me REALLY glad I sold mine before installation :rolleyes:

* IF the draft becomes a reality.
 
Last edited:
Ouch!

Having talked to Pete about previously reported CASA (Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority) Jabiru engine failure issues, it will interesting comparing Pete's assessment to the investigative findings of CASA.

Improper maintenance, harsh operating conditions, not monitoring operating limitations of engine, and improper propeller match to engine are some of the factors.

This hurts but then again I am thankful there is an investigative body to report such issues.

It's a good thing I got out of Dallas the other day before the issue of these limitations, otherwise I might have had to taxi the -12 home via I-20.:D
 
Last edited:
KatieB said:
None of the LSAs built by Jabiru USA (close to 200 aircraft, counting Arion Lightning) have crashed because of engine failure, according to the NTSB. There are Jabiru aircraft here in the US with well over 1000 hours in flight schools with no problems.
Click to expand...

Is that really the case for Jabiru engines?

The Oz document uses the term "'Jabiru powered aircraft'"...

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/GenPDF.aspx?id=ERA13LA405&rpt=fi

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/GenPDF.aspx?id=ERA12TA542&rpt=fi

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/GenPDF.aspx?id=CEN12FA217&rpt=fi

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/GenPDF.aspx?id=CEN11LA618&rpt=fi

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/GenPDF.aspx?id=ERA11FA374&rpt=fi

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/GenPDF.aspx?id=ERA09LA329&rpt=fi

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/GenPDF.aspx?id=ATL05CA130&rpt=fi
 
Last edited:
az_gila said:
Is that really the case for Jabiru engines?

The Oz document uses the term "'Jabiru powered aircraft'"...

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/GenPDF.aspx?id=ERA13LA405&rpt=fi
]
Click to expand...

Well the first failure on your list was caused by an electronic fuel injection system. That is an aftermarket system that is not even approved by Jabiru.

I was talking about aircraft built by Jabiru USA, by people who know how to install and properly test and maintain the engines. They have a good safety record.
 
KatieB said:
Well the first failure on your list was caused by an electronic fuel injection system. That is an aftermarket system that is not even approved by Jabiru.

I was talking about aircraft built by Jabiru USA, by people who know how to install and properly test and maintain the engines. They have a good safety record.
Click to expand...

OK, but the Oz document covers all "Jabiru powered aircraft" and would seem to include those with add-on equipment.

A more general question.

US ADs created by the FAA are usually accepted in other countries, including Australia under joint agreements.

Is there a chance this document will almost automatically become an AD in the US?
 
az_gila said:
OK, but the Oz document covers all "Jabiru powered aircraft" and would seem to include those with add-on equipment.

A more general question.

US ADs created by the FAA are usually accepted in other countries, including Australia under joint agreements.

Is there a chance this document will almost automatically become an AD in the US?
Click to expand...

I doubt it would happen here, since it's not a certified engine in the US.

In cases with add-on equipment, I just think it's unfair to blame the original manufacturer or lump those accidents into the data pool when discussing the issue. That would be the same as blaming Van's for a Subaru-related accident. But yeah, it sounds like it would cover all of them.

I guess it will be best to see what the outcome will be with the proposal in Australia and go from there. Our speculation won't help.
 
I don't have a horse in this race and in fact we sell quite a number of EFI systems for these engines and have been for over 15 years (not the the system that failed on the 5100 BTW) so we would not like to see flight restrictions placed on these engines.

I also want to say that many certified engines have had design and QC issues over the years- Lycoming, Continetal, Rotax etc. This being said, Jabiru is no different and many owners of Jabiru engines have often voiced that Jabiru has been slow, less than cooperative and transparent in dealing with some of these issues.

To be fair, most of these issues have not resulted in hard, catastrophic failures but the owner is often on the hook to fix what Jabiru didn't get right the first, second or even third times.

As Katie points out, it's unfair to blame "failures" on non-approved mods or the engine where improper or poor maintenance procedures have been applied.

CASA does not publish a document like this with no reason however. They want the flying public to be aware and as safe as possible. We'll have to see where this goes.
 
Last edited:
There are a few very vocal jabiru knockers posting on the internet in Australia. To read what they say you would think that jabs are falling out of the sky every day. It has go to the stage that CASA cannot sit and do nothing, they have to be seen to be doing something, so that is what is happening. I have heard that there were 27 incidents with Jabs. I don't know how many of them involved engine failure, but at least one has been attributed to running out of fuel.
I run a Jab 2200 engine in a Corby starlet and the only problem i ever had was when i couldn't get avgas and used mogas which turned out to be dodgy. I got some detonation, no failure in flight, but one piston was damaged.
Now i fly an RV4 as well as the Corby. They both fly in a similar fashion, but the RV is not so good at sideslipping.
 
New Link?

The link in the OP doesn't seem to work - I saved the same link yesterday when I got this through another source - and it doesn't work either.

Any Aussies out there that can re-direct us to the draft proposal? Or did it go away for a reason?
 
Jabiru Response to Meeting w/CASA

Jabiru Aircraft Pty Ltd
PO Box 5792
Bundaberg West QLD 4670 Australia
E-mail: [email protected]

To Whom it May Concern,
Phone: (07) 4155 1778
Fax: (07) 4155 2669
International Ph: + 64 7 4155 1778 International Fax: +64 7 4155 2669
A.B.N. 17 010 910 07

The basis of the meeting with CASA was in essence to say that our engine incident rate was higher than Rotax based on flying hours and this was the sole basis for punitive action.
CASA refused to recognise our overall safety in regard to fatalities and serious injury where we have an outstanding record. We tabled statistics from the United States which showed us to be the safest LSA aircraft in the United States. This was disregarded. You may see these statistics at the following link. http://flightdesign.com/files/Media/The Aviation Consumer - %20LSA%20Accidents.pdf= Similar statistics don’t seem to be collected in Australia or they are being withheld.
CASA stated that they had not researched the engine failure rates in any details to ascertain if the failures were the result of operational, maintenance, or design related factors. They did not release to Jabiru the actual statistics they had on hand of engine failure rates. There is no international standard for the reliability of piston aero engines and to compare one manufacturer with another is without precedent. CASA also stated that there had been a spike in the incident rates on Jabiru engines. This statement was refuted by the RAA who had on hand data that showed there was no spike and this was tabled at the meeting. The fact that CASA states that Rotax statistics are better than Jabiru statistics is not a point of law and cannot be enforced under law.
Our own research indicates two failure modes, through bolt failures and valve train failures which are the major contributors to the statistics. Our research and statistics also reflected that the majority of these failures occurred in hard working flying schools using 2200 engines. Engines used for private applications have virtually no through bolt failures on our records. Our latest research and statistics tell us that the introduction of roller cams has to date eliminated valve train failures and the introduction of 7/16 through bolts in production engines has to date
Australia’s Own – Light Sport Aircraft

eliminated through bolt failures. We have also introduced valve relief pistons which do not allow a stuck valve to impact the piston. These pistons are now standard and have been used on all overhauls and repairs since August 2013 and were introduced to production in October 2013. We are also upgrading engines to the current spec at owners request at major service intervals such as top end overhaul. CASA were intently interested in our analysis and research which justified the introduction of the latest modifications. To this end they have agreed to come to Bundaberg and review our engineering development. We welcome this move.
The problem is getting smaller by the day. It should be put in to perspective that the incident rate quoted by the RAA has been 0.03% in some 90,000 movements of Jabiru Aircraft which is a very low number and translates to 1 in 3,300 take offs. Our own research and statistics establish that if we eliminate through bolt and valve train failures the statistics may very well be more favourable than Rotax.
Our engineering efforts over the last three years have been to address predominately these two failure modes that developed after years in the field. Several Service Bulletins have been issued however we have no way of knowing the take up rate of these Service Bulletins.
We are in the process of implementing contacting every flying school to ascertain the configuration status of each Jabiru engine they operate. We will then suggest individually a preventative program.

 
Last edited:
26 Nov Jabiru Update

26th November 2014

Hello Jabiru Fleet

As you are aware CASA has issued a draft proposal to place operational limitations on Jabiru Aircraft. At a regulatory level Jabiru are communicating with CASA management and the Minister. CASA?s proposed document is virtually unprecedented in content and approach. We have sent our response. In summary: ?The proposed instrument concerning operating limitations for Jabiru powered aircraft should be withdrawn immediately and without reservation.?

At an operational level we are having regular talks with CASA and the RA-Aus to improve communications and develop better methods and processes for managing the relationship between Regulator, Administrator and Manufacturer. At heart we all want a vibrant, active and safe recreational aviation sector and Jabiru are committed to doing what we can to achieve this.

At a technical level Jabiru?s engineers and staff are liaising with their CASA contacts and are making steady progress working through the items on the technical agenda. For many obvious reasons Jabiru does not conduct R&D in public nor publish every internal engineering report, however in the last 12 months 153 drawing revisions have been made along with revisions to many operating, maintenance, technical and overhaul manuals. 3 Service Letters or Bulletins (or their LSA category equivalents) have been published and 25 people have visited Jabiru for maintenance training. All of this work has been carried out with the one goal of improving the reliability and ultimately the safety of our products.

At a grass-roots level we have contacted many operating flying schools, asking them for information which will help us gather essential data to assess the currency of their configuration. This information will form a very important tool for us and we strongly urge people to take the time to provide the information as fully as possible. We are also appealing to people to keep flying and enjoying their aircraft!

Overall, Jabiru is moving forward and embarking on a program of positive changes. You will see regular technical and engineering updates for engines and airframes. Jabiru conducts engine maintenance courses and we will run more courses, more often. Communications at all levels will be improved.
In accordance with the CASA website the consultation period on the proposed instrument has been extended until 27 November 2014 and all submissions should be forwarded to [email protected] - Only 1 day left!

While Jabiru and the RA-Aus work on the formal agenda with CASA we encourage members, businesses, owners and operators to contact federal and local members of parliament to provide input regarding the CASA imposed restrictions, detailing potential financial impacts or distress, loss of potential customers, negative effects on employment, reputational damage, etc. Your federal member details can be found at www.aph.gov.au with state and local details available at the relevant government website.

Finally, some food for thought: Records given to CASA for this year indicated 40 engine incidents. Of these incidents there have been twelve engine stoppages in flight resulting in forced landings. No serious injuries or fatalities were recorded. Nearly 41,800 hours were flown in Jabirus in Australia in that time with 92,700 flights.

It has been a very difficult and stressful time for Jabiru and it?s not over yet. However, as we drove to work today we saw a 20-year-old Jabiru LSA flying circuits and training its latest pilot. It helps to know that that little plane has probably trained at least 200 people in its life so far, that there are plenty of Jabirus in schools worldwide and there are a lot of smiles per hour happening because of Jabiru. That?s what we?re here for.

 
A few opinions on all this mess.

I believe CASA should have contacted Jabiru privately with their concerns and proposals so as not to impact the product perception and marketplace value of existing engines and aircraft powered by Jabiru engines. CASA's response seems pretty heavy handed in my view. If Jabiru failed to respond after private contact, then the present action might be warranted. Remember though, this was a proposal for possible action after consultation, albeit on very short notice, not something that was written in stone. Right or wrong, it got everyone's attention.

The rate of failure quoted above using these figures though is nothing to be proud of, about one failure leading to a forced landing every 3500 hours. If Lycomings were that bad, flight schools would be in big trouble over here and so would Lycoming. A more detailed study of accidents and incidents is probably needed to see where the true figure lies. Hopefully this data will be forthcoming.

"There are plenty of Jabirus in schools worldwide and there are a lot of smiles per hour happening because of Jabiru." You can put a positive spin on anything if you want but there are 2 sides to every coin. There are plenty of frowns to go along with those smiles, especially in the first 10 years with regards to reliability of these engines and with how Jabiru Australia related to and treated customers.

For someone who has deep engine background experience and followed all this from pretty much day one 20 years ago, there were clearly fundamental design issues, insufficient testing and a lack of transparency. Yes, the engines have improved considerably in those 20 years and many things are done differently today than they were back then. I do believe from the feedback I hear and see in my business from Jabiru customers, that the modern engines are much better than the early examples.

We can understand the reluctance of Jabiru to admit to multiple design or QC issues which might sink their business if they had to cough up new parts for existing customers who had problems but by doing this, you undermine customer confidence and reputation in the future. You can pay now or later as they say and you make your own bed with regards to the repercussions of those actions.

There are always problems in a manufacturing business like this- ask Rotax, Lycoming, Continental or even Toyota for that matter. If you intend to be around long term, you might as well own up, develop a proper fix and supply the new parts under warranty or for a good price to the customer. The customer might not be happy there was a problem in the first place but they will always remember how they were treated in resolving the issue. Every customer has friends and friends talk if you see where I am going here... We've seen other engine vendors go down similar paths and it hasn't turned out so well for many of them.

CASA's mandate is not to smooth over customer relations with the parent company however, it's to make things as safe as possible within the certified products that they oversee. We do have to remember that while some of these engines are certified in Australia, most examples flying there and worldwide are not certified nor in certified aircraft. CASA has no direct jurisdiction and we all take the same risks flying non-certified engines and aircraft and whether that risk is acceptable.

In the end, no matter how this was introduced and what actions are taken by CASA and Jabiru there is a serious dialogue now and customers will hopefully be the winners and I think ultimately, in the long term, it will be better for Jabiru as well. Choices in the marketplace are good IMO.
 
Last edited:
CASA's intervention has created a lot of debate among Jabiru owners and others in the flying community over here, and from my reading I think Ross's comments accurately summarise the majority view on the various issues.
 
Ignition said:
New update, this time from the ATSB.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2013/ar-2013-107.aspx
Click to expand...

Interesting chart in that document -

ar-2013-107_fig2_497x355.jpg


Oz total flying hours are falling rapidly, and the Rotax failure rate is climbing. Perhaps the Rotax engines are getting older?
 
Reading the whole report Gil, the hours are falling, but maybe not as dramatically as the chart indicates because they said they don't have all of the 2013 data included yet. Sort of like the FAA/NTSB data is only really valid up through 2011 (ish).
 
It will be interesting to see what percentage of the engine failures were related to improper use of auto fuels (e.g. the use of stale, contaminated, or improper grade), or to detonation issues related to such.
 
Last edited:
Ironflight said:
Reading the whole report Gil, the hours are falling, but maybe not as dramatically as the chart indicates because they said they don't have all of the 2013 data included yet. Sort of like the FAA/NTSB data is only really valid up through 2011 (ish).
Click to expand...

Yes... but it still shows a 30+% drop in total hours over the 3 years that have full data.
 
az_gila said:
Perhaps the Rotax engines are getting older?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the report doesn't differentiate between the 2-stroke and 4-stroke Rotax engines, which makes meaningful comparison with the Jabiru engines more difficult.
 
UPDATE

New Update from CASA: They WILL be placing limitations on Jabiru Powered Aircraft.

However, in a strange turn of events, it is actually a very sensible approach that I would expect in New Zealand and not Australia, in that we will be allowed to accept the risk and take personal responsibility for our choice to fly in a Jabiru powered aircraft, knowing the risks, whilst having safety measures in place to both minimize the risk and assist Jabiru in improving the reliability of their products.

All I can say is I am impressed and believe CASA have made the right decision.

More here:
http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_102352
 
No more flying Jabiru-powered aircraft from Archerfield. Morabbin. Jandakot. Bankstown. And presumably a couple of dozen more airports around the country.

For Sydney-siders it excludes Warnervale and presumably Wedderburn due to the trees on the departure end. Maybe even Camden but its years since I flew over there. Somersby is also out, so what does that leave?

Pretty onerous restrictions if you ask me and I foresee a swag of Jabiru for sale in the not too distant future.

Maybe I can get a cheap J430 and stick a Rotax 914 in it? :D

Tell you what though - I'm glad I didn't install a Jab 3300 in my -9!!
 
I have been monitoring the Jabiru engine discussion group on Yahoo. Very interesting comments follow:

I totally agree with Greg.
Our Jabiru engine fleet of over 90 hyd. 2200's has accumulated more than 15,000 flight hours without any design issues. The issues we encountered, were attributed to maintenance problems. We have engines with more than 3,000 flight hours on them, still in good shape, still giving the same WOT RPM. We follow all instructions carefully to the letter, without cheating, as best as we possibly can. We never see brown oil residue in the rocker chamber, as evidenced in photos posted here, indicating overheating. Etc, etc. Aviation in general, ecpecially engines, are "Terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect". Despite that, many experimenters mess with an engine they don't fully understand to the last bit and washer, with dare consequences. I am fully confident that if installation and maintanance were carried out by a real professional, most of the issues and failures expressed here would not have existed. We never had any of the issues described in these posts.
Naftali Horowitz from ISRAEL.
 
TomVal said:
I have been monitoring the Jabiru engine discussion group on Yahoo. Very interesting comments follow:

I totally agree with Greg.
Our Jabiru engine fleet of over 90 hyd. 2200's has accumulated more than 15,000 flight hours without any design issues. The issues we encountered, were attributed to maintenance problems. We have engines with more than 3,000 flight hours on them, still in good shape, still giving the same WOT RPM. We follow all instructions carefully to the letter, without cheating, as best as we possibly can. We never see brown oil residue in the rocker chamber, as evidenced in photos posted here, indicating overheating. Etc, etc. Aviation in general, ecpecially engines, are "Terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect". Despite that, many experimenters mess with an engine they don't fully understand to the last bit and washer, with dare consequences. I am fully confident that if installation and maintanance were carried out by a real professional, most of the issues and failures expressed here would not have existed. We never had any of the issues described in these posts.
Naftali Horowitz from ISRAEL.
Click to expand...

Interestingly Naftali is a long time user of our EFI systems on these engines...

There is no doubt that improper maintenance and operation contributes to many problems on these engines. It's equally obvious that there were numerous missteps in the design and validation of some parts of these engines. The big difference to users is the reluctance of the manufacturer to admit to problems and offer a well thought out and tested fix in a timely fashion. Lycoming or Rotax issue a SB or AD and say here is the problem, affects these SNs and here is the fix. Done deal, move on.

Nobody likes problems but they are usually part of the real world. It's how they are taken care of which imparts confidence and respect in the marketplace. The route Jabiru chose to take did nothing to help their cause on either front.
 
rv6ejguy said:
...Nobody likes problems but they are usually part of the real world. It's how they are taken care of which imparts confidence and respect in the marketplace. The route Jabiru chose to take did nothing to help their cause on either front.
Click to expand...

Being a small company, hopefully Jabiru will learn from this and perhaps become more proactive with their issues. If not, although it is an expensive alternative, at least Jabiru engine users have a bolt on replacement engine manufactured by CAMIT which is not affected by the CASA instrument.

Once the data collection is complete, it will be interesting to see what percentage of engine failures were due to poor maintenance or operating procedures versus design issues.
 
TomVal said:
Being a small company, hopefully Jabiru will learn from this and perhaps become more proactive with their issues. If not, although it is an expensive alternative, at least Jabiru engine users have a bolt on replacement engine manufactured by CAMIT which is not affected by the CASA instrument.

Once the data collection is complete, it will be interesting to see what percentage of engine failures were due to poor maintenance or operating procedures versus design issues.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It will be good to see the complete data after sifting causal factors.
 
While CAMIT are not affected by the instrument, by sheer good luck that CASA probably did not realise they sold any "black-market" engines, they are the same product for the most part, and CAMIT produce the engine for Jabiru.

Ian Bent at CAMIT has some minor tweaks he thinks will help but thats about it.

Most of the bugs through doing extensive FEA have been designed out, but it will take time to see the results in the field as to whether they improve or not.

My concern is CASA have not mandated the improvements by means of AD, thus the fleet will have varying levels of improvement.
 
Christopher,

The intent of my posting the video was not to renew the Jabiru bashing, but rather to show that Jabiru very likely didn't get a fair shake from CASA in the first place.

As far as engines making TBO, spend some time looking at Barnstormer ads and see just how many certified engines had top overhauls long before TBO.

Tony
 
Last edited:
I'm impressed that you even found out this was going on in our parliament. You're half a world away. I live here and can't keep track of what they're up to. Interesting hearing. Hope it's not too late.
Good work
DaveH
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top