Hello Bill, the restrictions were imposed on jabiru due to an increased rate of engine failures. When CASA did their preliminary investigations and nobody knows the real background information there were something like six times more engine failures in jabiru engines than there were in Rotax engines (including the two strokes) and there were something like five times the amount of Rotax engines in service than there are jabiru engines. (if my memory serves me correctly because this was almost 4 months ago)

This really made the failure rate absolutely lopsided against jabiru. I personally feel that the majority of this situation and the restrictions could have been knocked on the head at the very beginning if the engine manufacturer would have cooperated with the different regulators but they chose to basically ignore them based on their Facebook site

The RAA statement is here...


As most people are aware, CASA published a draft instrument on 13 November 2014 which would have the effect of restricting the operations of aircraft with a Jabiru powerplant. This would affect more than 1000 RA-Aus registered aircraft and have an adverse impact on some two thirds of our flight training facilities.

Since the publication of this draft instrument RA-Aus has been working hard to understand the justification for these restrictions. We have, for some time, known that Jabiru engines have a higher tendency for failure than their Rotax counterpart and welcome any appropriate changes that would improve their reliability. We would also welcome any measures that result in improved reliability and safety of any aspect of our fleet. Having said this we are troubled by the process employed by CASA and especially the lack of transparency in terms of the implementation of these proposed measures.

RA-Aus has repeatedly requested the information used to justify statements made by CASA that claim the failure rate is increasing. We have also requested the analysis of said data in order to assess the veracity of these claims.

On 17 December 2014, almost five weeks after the draft instrument was published, RA-Aus received the data and was provided one, yes one, working day to respond. As one would expect we would have liked much more time to assess the data, understand the analysis and then form an opinion on the suitability of the proposed measures, however, regardless of taking some five weeks to provide the data, CASA allowed one day. In light of this our response was somewhat rushed.

Despite this, RA-Aus was able to note that the data provided to CASA on Jabiru engine failures only covered one partial year. The only time series data made available to us (although not provided to us) was via the ATSB. That is, no engine failure data beyond the beginning of 2014 was used by CASA to justify their position and they left us to infer what data the ATSB had provided.

With reference to the latter, RA-Aus has contested the validity of the ATSB data on the basis that it shows a decline in the hours flown by the RA-Aus fleet. This is in direct contrast to Government published figures which show a doubling in the number of hours flown since 2000.

This led us to a simple conclusion CASA has not undertaken robust analysis on reliable data to establish with any degree of accuracy that the failure rate of Jabiru engines is increasing over time. This is despite their statement that they have found statistically significant evidence in support of their claims.

RA-Aus position is, as stated above, that the failure rate of Jabiru engines is greater than that of Rotax engines but that it is not worsening as per the unsubstantiated statement made by CASA.

In light of this RA-Aus responded to CASA, within their incredibly tight and unrealistic timeframe, to state that we oppose their draft instrument and suggested an alternative approach to addressing the real concerns. While CASA acknowledged that our response had merit within 24 hours of receipt they proceeded with the restrictions without due consideration of our arguments.

While the restrictions imposed on our members are less stringent than those originally proposed, our opinion is that they are still inappropriate. Furthermore, CASA has remained evasive in terms of providing information relating to what rate of failures would be deemed acceptable and so we remain uninformed as to what point the restrictions will be lifted other than the statement on the CASA website regarding a review by CASA early in the New Year and the six month validity of the proposed Instrument. We will continue to work with CASA and Jabiru in an attempt to address these issues, however, we cant provide further information at this point.

Bill Maxwell wrmaxwell@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] wrote, On 27/03/2015 9:35 AM:

Geoffrey, it's a long and complex story that really does require considerable reading and research to get any reasonable understanding. I could give you my interpretation of the background it would only be my view. I suggest you take a look at the material available on - the RAAust being our self-administration body that covers the bulk of the Jabiru fleet in Australia - the yahoo jairuengines group and elsewhere. A google search should throw up heaps more.

I can say with absolute authority that the legislative instrument that imposed the limitations has an automatic sunset clause. It will cease to have effect on the. nominated June date, as a matter of Australian law. Whether it is replaced by another remains to be seen but I have to observe that introducing such a major set of restrictions for just a 7 month period seems in itself an inadequate resonse to a situation if the severity of concern was sufficient to justify the restrictions in the first instance.

Bill

On 27/03/2015 9:54 AM, Geoffrey gbgartshore@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] wrote:

What does that mean? Have fixes been identified? Or will amended restrictions be identified?

Geoff Gartshore

On Mar 26, 2015, at 6:52 PM, Bill Maxwell wrmaxwell@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] <X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft@...> wrote:

But in total fairness you should also read up on the background to the making of those restrictions and note that they expire automatically in June this year.

On 27/03/2015 8:05 AM, Michael Coates mcoates@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] wrote:

Hello all, on paper the jabiru is a great engine but in the field it does have other issues.

Many of you in other parts of the world may not be aware of the very heavy restrictions put in place for the engine operations and manufacture by the CAA in Australia just before Christmas. If you are not already aware of these problems could I suggest a quick Internet search to pull up the relevant details

M Capon wannagoflying@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] wrote, On 27/03/2015 6:29 AM:

I use the Jab 2200 on my Hawk. Works great just make sure you keep it cool have good airflow

-------- Original message --------

From: "drice003@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft]"

Date:03-26-2015 5:13 PM (GMT-04:00)

To: X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft@...

Subject: Re: X-Air Ultralight Aircraft Re: Falcon or Standard HELP !!!!

read here two guys pointing out best of best
Ray
You didn't mention........no gear box ,no oil cooler, running at 2x the rpms, more gas all is more weight , not to mention 76 hose connections to support the systems, then there is the 100's of updated rotax issuses. I am sure I missed some pluses also , and we all realize ,each has his own thoughts
Love the combo T & J
Dave

I love my Tornado, especially with the Jabiru. I believe they are a perfect match. The Jab only burns about 3gph, no oil mixing, no radiator, runs very strong. I have worked on both my Jabirus and they are great for the wrench head with some experience who wants to save bundles doing his own work. The work I did was a re-ring job on both engines due to cylinder corrosion from improper storage and lack of use. You have to run them or at least turn the prop every week.

My T-II is a great handling plane, can turn on a dime, climbs great, and is very forgiving of crappy landings. Only downside is they are very pitch sensitive and can scare the crapola out of you on landing if you have not flown one before.

I had the engine quit due to a previous owner using silicone in the fuel tank and landed in a VERY muddy farm field and the plane was completely undamaged, except for needing a thourough cleaning.

I built my T-S because I got a great deal and wanted the extra room and the bells and whistles that came with it.

The only thing I do not like is the tandem seating, because I think passengers are more at ease when next to you.

Ray Henrie T-II 9079R T-S 1776E
4TN9

I've had a standard on a 582 for 4 years and have very much enjoyed it. Very stable and a great climber. A bit frustrated in a headwind now and the 2 stroke limitations on distance. Has anyone advice for me on converting it to a Jabiru or 912? Is it worth it or a waste of time and effort?

Gwyn

On 26/03/2015 09:29, avia1or01@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] wrote:

I've been flying a 912 Falcon for a year and am loving it.

When buying I was advised that the flaps are a waste of time and I should get a standard, however when a 912 Falcon came on the market I had to have it.

Supposedly the F is slightly faster but if you want fast this is completely the wrong plane as both tootle along at 50 to 60 knots.

I have never used the flaps, there seems to be no point in them. It leaps of the ground like an excited puppy so I don't need them for take off and it lands in a very short space so I don't need them for landing. I guess they would be handy if I was trying to do an emergency landing in somebodies garden.

If I was buying I would ignore whether its an Falcon or a standard and concentrate on more important things such as the engine and condition. Either aircraft is a fantastic machine, very safe and predictable. They are als o by aeroplane standards very easy and cheap to maintain. I bought the whole aircraft for less than our group Cessna cost for its annual.

Do take a test flight and get the aircraft checked over before buying it.



Regards,

Jon

With regards,    Michael Coates
Company Director X-Air Australia
Gold Coast, Australia.

PIPISTREL AIRCRAFT DEALER OF THE YEAR 2012
Winner of the EAA August Raspet Award 2012

mailto:mcoates@...

skype name:   xcomavionics

Please note: because of the volume of e-mail we are now receiving our replies are done using voice recognition software in an effort to speed up the reply process.  Sometimes the voice recognition program inserts silly words or doesn't actually do what it is meant to do.  Occasionally these mistakes get through our quick proofreading of each e-mail sent, so please accept my apologies if the odd mistake gets through.

Main Web Site:  
XCOM Web Site:  
Pipistrel Web Site:  

Legal Notice: The information contained in this email is confidential and intended only to be read by the person(s) to whom it is addressed.
No one is authorized to copy, use, disclose, distribute or rely on this information for any purpose whatsoever. If this communication has been sent to you in error, please email the sender and delete the message.

"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you long to return."

With regards,    Michael Coates
Company Director X-Air Australia
Gold Coast, Australia.

PIPISTREL AIRCRAFT DEALER OF THE YEAR 2012
Winner of the EAA August Raspet Award 2012

mailto:mcoates@...

skype name:   xcomavionics

Please note: because of the volume of e-mail we are now receiving our replies are done using voice recognition software in an effort to speed up the reply process.  Sometimes the voice recognition program inserts silly words or doesn't actually do what it is meant to do.  Occasionally these mistakes get through our quick proofreading of each e-mail sent, so please accept my apologies if the odd mistake gets through.

Main Web Site:  
XCOM Web Site:  
Pipistrel Web Site:  

Legal Notice: The information contained in this email is confidential and intended only to be read by the person(s) to whom it is addressed.
No one is authorized to copy, use, disclose, distribute or rely on this information for any purpose whatsoever. If this communication has been sent to you in error, please email the sender and delete the message.

"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you long to return."

No argument from me that Jabiru's historical generally un-co-operative attitude has been a large factor in the present situation, Michael although I also understand that their airframe and engine plants are regularly audited by CASA inspectors, so CASA can hardly claim its hands are totally clean either.

My principle concern, based on 38 year's experiernce and expertise in administrative law, is that the process followed by CASA in this instance is fundamentally flawed.

I don't think we should continue to tie up this group with this discussion. You have alerted the group to the issue, I have merely attempted to balance the coverage. We will see what happens in June.

Bill

On 27/03/2015 10:42 AM, Michael Coates mcoates@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] wrote:

Hello Bill, the restrictions were imposed on jabiru due to an increased rate of engine failures. When CASA did their preliminary investigations and nobody knows the real background information there were something like six times more engine failures in jabiru engines than there were in Rotax engines (including the two strokes) and there were something like five times the amount of Rotax engines in service than there are jabiru engines. (if my memory serves me correctly because this was almost 4 months ago)

This really made the failure rate absolutely lopsided against jabiru. I personally feel that the majority of this situation and the restrictions could have been knocked on the head at the very beginning if the engine manufacturer would have cooperated with the different regulators but they chose to basically ignore them based on their Facebook site

The RAA statement is here...


As most people are aware, CASA published a draft instrument on 13 November 2014 which would have the effect of restricting the operations of aircraft with a Jabiru powerplant. This would affect more than 1000 RA-Aus registered aircraft and have an adverse impact on some two thirds of our flight training facilities.

Since the publication of this draft instrument RA-Aus has been working hard to understand the justification for these restrictions. We have, for some time, known that Jabiru engines have a higher tendency for failure than their Rotax counterpart and welcome any appropriate changes that would improve their reliability. We would also welcome any measures that result in improved reliability and safety of any aspect of our fleet. Having said this we are troubled by the process employed by CASA and especially the lack of transparency in terms of the implementation of these proposed measures.

RA-Aus has repeatedly requested the information used to justify statements made by CASA that claim the failure rate is increasing. We have also requested the analysis of said data in order to assess the veracity of these claims.

On 17 December 2014, almost five weeks after the draft instrument was published, RA-Aus received the data and was provided one, yes one, working day to respond. As one would expect we would have liked much more time to assess the data, understand the analysis and then form an opinion on the suitability of the proposed measures, however, regardless of taking some five weeks to provide the data, CASA allowed one day. In light of this our response was somewhat rushed.

Despite this, RA-Aus was able to note that the data provided to CASA on Jabiru engine failures only covered one partial year. The only time series data made available to us (although not provided to us) was via the ATSB. That is, no engine failure data beyond the beginning of 2014 was used by CASA to justify their position and they left us to infer what data the ATSB had provided.

With reference to the latter, RA-Aus has contested the validity of the ATSB data on the basis that it shows a decline in the hours flown by the RA-Aus fleet. This is in direct contrast to Government published figures which show a doubling in the number of hours flown since 2000.

This led us to a simple conclusion CASA has not undertaken robust analysis on reliable data to establish with any degree of accuracy that the failure rate of Jabiru engines is increasing over time. This is despite their statement that they have found statistically significant evidence in support of their claims.

RA-Aus position is, as stated above, that the failure rate of Jabiru engines is greater than that of Rotax engines but that it is not worsening as per the unsubstantiated statement made by CASA.

In light of this RA-Aus responded to CASA, within their incredibly tight and unrealistic timeframe, to state that we oppose their draft instrument and suggested an alternative approach to addressing the real concerns. While CASA acknowledged that our response had merit within 24 hours of receipt they proceeded with the restrictions without due consideration of our arguments.

While the restrictions imposed on our members are less stringent than those originally proposed, our opinion is that they are still inappropriate. Furthermore, CASA has remained evasive in terms of providing information relating to what rate of failures would be deemed acceptable and so we remain uninformed as to what point the restrictions will be lifted other than the statement on the CASA website regarding a review by CASA early in the New Year and the six month validity of the proposed Instrument. We will continue to work with CASA and Jabiru in an attempt to address these issues, however, we cant provide further information at this point.

Bill Maxwell wrmaxwell@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] wrote, On 27/03/2015 9:35 AM:

Geoffrey, it's a long and complex story that really does require considerable reading and research to get any reasonable understanding. I could give you my interpretation of the background it would only be my view. I suggest you take a look at the material available on - the RAAust being our self-administration body that covers the bulk of the Jabiru fleet in Australia - the yahoo jairuengines group and elsewhere. A google search should throw up heaps more.

I can say with absolute authority that the legislative instrument that imposed the limitations has an automatic sunset clause. It will cease to have effect on the. nominated June date, as a matter of Australian law. Whether it is replaced by another remains to be seen but I have to observe that introducing such a major set of restrictions for just a 7 month period seems in itself an inadequate resonse to a situation if the severity of concern was sufficient to justify the restrictions in the first instance.

Bill

On 27/03/2015 9:54 AM, Geoffrey gbgartshore@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] wrote:

What does that mean? Have fixes been identified? Or will amended restrictions be identified?

Geoff Gartshore

On Mar 26, 2015, at 6:52 PM, Bill Maxwell wrmaxwell@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] <X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft@...> wrote:

But in total fairness you should also read up on the background to the making of those restrictions and note that they expire automatically in June this year.

On 27/03/2015 8:05 AM, Michael Coates mcoates@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] wrote:

Hello all, on paper the jabiru is a great engine but in the field it does have other issues.

Many of you in other parts of the world may not be aware of the very heavy restrictions put in place for the engine operations and manufacture by the CAA in Australia just before Christmas. If you are not already aware of these problems could I suggest a quick Internet search to pull up the relevant details

M Capon wannagoflying@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] wrote, On 27/03/2015 6:29 AM:

I use the Jab 2200 on my Hawk. Works great just make sure you keep it cool have good airflow

-------- Original message --------

From: "drice003@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft]"

Date:03-26-2015 5:13 PM (GMT-04:00)

To: X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft@...

Subject: Re: X-Air Ultralight Aircraft Re: Falcon or Standard HELP !!!!

read here two guys pointing out best of best
Ray
You didn't mention........no gear box ,no oil cooler, running at 2x the rpms, more gas all is more weight , not to mention 76 hose connections to support the systems, then there is the 100's of updated rotax issuses. I am sure I missed some pluses also , and we all realize ,each has his own thoughts
Love the combo T & J
Dave

I love my Tornado, especially with the Jabiru. I believe they are a perfect match. The Jab only burns about 3gph, no oil mixing, no radiator, runs very strong. I have worked on both my Jabirus and they are great for the wrench head with some experience who wants to save bundles doing his own work. The work I did was a re-ring job on both engines due to cylinder corrosion from improper storage and lack of use. You have to run them or at least turn the prop every week.

My T-II is a great handling plane, can turn on a dime, climbs great, and is very forgiving of crappy landings. Only downside is they are very pitch sensitive and can scare the crapola out of you on landing if you have not flown one before.

I had the engine quit due to a previous owner using silicone in the fuel tank and landed in a VERY muddy farm field and the plane was completely undamaged, except for needing a thourough cleaning.

I built my T-S because I got a great deal and wanted the extra room and the bells and whistles that came with it.

The only thing I do not like is the tandem seating, because I think passengers are more at ease when next to you.

Ray Henrie T-II 9079R T-S 1776E
4TN9

I've had a standard on a 582 for 4 years and have very much enjoyed it. Very stable and a great climber. A bit frustrated in a headwind now and the 2 stroke limitations on distance. Has anyone advice for me on converting it to a Jabiru or 912? Is it worth it or a waste of time and effort?

Gwyn

On 26/03/2015 09:29, avia1or01@... [X-Air_Ultralight_Aircraft] wrote:

I've been flying a 912 Falcon for a year and am loving it.

When buying I was advised that the flaps are a waste of time and I should get a standard, however when a 912 Falcon came on the market I had to have it.

Supposedly the F is slightly faster but if you want fast this is completely the wrong plane as both tootle along at 50 to 60 knots.

I have never used the flaps, there seems to be no point in them. It leaps of the ground like an excited puppy so I don't need them for take off and it lands in a very short space so I don't need them for landing. I guess they would be handy if I was trying to do an emergency landing in somebodies garden.

If I was buying I would ignore whether its an Falcon or a standard and concentrate on more important things such as the engine and condition. Either aircraft is a fantastic machine, very safe and predictable. They are als o by aeroplane standards very easy and cheap to maintain. I bought the whole aircraft for less than our group Cessna cost for its annual.

Do take a test flight and get the aircraft checked over before buying it.



Regards,

Jon

With regards,    Michael Coates
Company Director X-Air Australia
Gold Coast, Australia.

PIPISTREL AIRCRAFT DEALER OF THE YEAR 2012
Winner of the EAA August Raspet Award 2012

mailto:mcoates@...

skype name:   xcomavionics

Please note: because of the volume of e-mail we are now receiving our replies are done using voice recognition software in an effort to speed up the reply process.  Sometimes the voice recognition program inserts silly words or doesn't actually do what it is meant to do.  Occasionally these mistakes get through our quick proofreading of each e-mail sent, so please accept my apologies if the odd mistake gets through.

Main Web Site:  
XCOM Web Site:  
Pipistrel Web Site:  

Legal Notice: The information contained in this email is confidential and intended only to be read by the person(s) to whom it is addressed.
No one is authorized to copy, use, disclose, distribute or rely on this information for any purpose whatsoever. If this communication has been sent to you in error, please email the sender and delete the message.

"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you long to return."

With regards,    Michael Coates
Company Director X-Air Australia
Gold Coast, Australia.

PIPISTREL AIRCRAFT DEALER OF THE YEAR 2012
Winner of the EAA August Raspet Award 2012

mailto:mcoates@...

skype name:   xcomavionics

Please note: because of the volume of e-mail we are now receiving our replies are done using voice recognition software in an effort to speed up the reply process.  Sometimes the voice recognition program inserts silly words or doesn't actually do what it is meant to do.  Occasionally these mistakes get through our quick proofreading of each e-mail sent, so please accept my apologies if the odd mistake gets through.

Main Web Site:  
XCOM Web Site:  
Pipistrel Web Site:  

Legal Notice: The information contained in this email is confidential and intended only to be read by the person(s) to whom it is addressed.
No one is authorized to copy, use, disclose, distribute or rely on this information for any purpose whatsoever. If this communication has been sent to you in error, please email the sender and delete the message.

"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you long to return."