Merged: Pel-Air Westwind Ditching off NLK

[Car RAMROD]

A Pel-Air Westwind on an aeromed flight from Apia-Norfolk has ditched.


Word from the island is fuel exhaustion after 3 approach attempts.

All 6 POB rescued alive by local boat and are in the NLK hospital.

No other information yet.


Ditching at night, yikes.

[krankin]

:eek: Wow, that is incredible!! :eek:

[Hipster]

Wow, the weather can sure get bad out there. They are very lucky. Why go to NLK when Noumea is a closer ILS equipped airport??? When I used to run RPT out to NLK we were always wary of the wx, and needed plenty of gas. How will REX manage this stuff up?

[Wally Mk2]

This will indeed be an accident that I shall have a keen interest in. I too have found myself some years ago now in similair situations, out in the Pacific at night in less that ideal wx conditions wishing I was home in bed.
The stress would have been high for the crew, Aero-Med work has it's challenges at times like no other.
As long as everyone walks (swims in this case) away then we can all learn from it hopefully.:ok:


Wmk2

[Kenneth]

I'm glad all survived unharmed.

From the Rex website:



CareFlight/Pel-Air Medical Evacuation Incident - Samoa to MelbourneThursday, 19 November 2009


A CareFlight medical evacuation flight operated by Pel-Air Aviation from Apia (Western Samoa) to Melbourne was scheduled to land at Norfolk Island for a planned fuel stop on Wednesday evening when it encountered deteriorating weather conditions.

After several unsuccessful approaches and with diminishing fuel, the pilot-in-command, Captain Dominic James, made the decision to carry out a controlled landing onto the water off the coast of Norfolk Island.

The aircraft, a specially-equipped medical retrieval Westwind jet carried out a successful landing on the water and the patient, accompanying spouse and two medical crew as well as the pilots evacuated safely. They were rescued by boat and brought to the local Norfolk Island hospital for observation. The Captain reported that all passengers and crew did not have any apparent injuries.

John Sharp, Chairman of Pel-Air Aviation said that he was very proud of the Captain and the First Officer. “They performed an intricate landing on water in darkness resulting in the evacuation of everyone safely and quickly. The training of both the Pel-Air and CareFlight crew came to the fore as everyone kept together and remained calm. Their professionalism stood out on the day and made a substantial difference to the outcome.”

“I also want to thank the rescue team and the local authorities for their prompt action and dedication which resulted in a speedy rescue and evacuation to the hospital.”

CareFlight Chief Executive Officer, Derek Colenbrander, said the successful outcome was testimony to the skill and training of the pilots, the prompt action of local authorities and the efforts of the medical team in continuing to care for their patient.

Arrangements are being made for the patient to be repatriated to Australia.

[mates rates]

NLK is not a place you want to be operating into without alternate fuel, regardless of what the forecast says.You can be visual over the sea but have to climb up into the cloud to make the runway !!

[74world]

So they went to Norfolk WITHOUT fuel for an alternate????? :eek:

[ozbiggles]

Don't get too worked up .... its only an 'Incident'
I had to go to the Rex site to make sure this wasn't a wind up.
Hats off to the crew for making a safe 'landing'.
I'm sure there will be many factors in this but the main thing is all are safe and the person who wrote that press release will get a job with the PM s office

[breakfastburrito]

Top effort from the crew to salvage a diabolical situation.
However, I have to ask the question is this an why such an operation is permitted in the first place? I have never operated into Norfolk Island, however anecdotally I believe that it is a difficult destination due WX & its remote location.
I find it difficult to believe that to operate into a isolated aerodrome without an alternate is an appropriate for commercial operation, given that other possibilities exist (larger aircraft with greater fuel capacity).
Questions need to be asked of the operator & the regulator.

Here are the METAR's (http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/YSNF/2009/11/18/DailyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA&theprefset=SHOWMETAR&theprefvalue=1) for the 18th November.

[Altimeters]

Well done to the crew for a successful ditching! :ok: Will be interesting to read the ATSB report on this one.

[beaver_rotate]

So will questions be raised with regards PelAir taking over the RFDS contracts in 2011 (can't remember the locations)??

Can't believe REX named their pilot, is that kosher?

Well done to him and his crew anyway, hard as it gets yeah?

[olderairhead]

Just wondering if the approaches were conducted during the times of the following metars/speci, if so would not the right place to be without alternate fuel:

METAR YSNF 181030Z AUTO 16009KT 3000NDV // OVC002 19/18 Q1013

SPECI YSNF 181053Z AUTO 16009KT 5000NDV // BKN002 BKN009 OVC014 18/18 Q1014

METAR YSNF 181100Z 14008KT 5000 -SHRA BR BKN005 BKN014 18/18 Q1014

SPECI YSNF 181111Z AUTO 15006KT 3200NDV // SCT003 BKN008 OVC014 19/18 Q1014

SPECI YSNF 181128Z AUTO 15008KT 7000NDV // SCT005 BKN012 OVC017 19/18 Q1014

SPECI YSNF 181134Z 15008KT 8000 FEW006 BKN015 19/17 Q1014 RMK BR

[UnderneathTheRadar]

Not sure when the ditching took place, but here's a weather snapshot of a longer time period. (is there ANYTHING the iPhone can't do??)

Apart from stopping people wasting bandwidth with information already provided by a link by others?

METARs are interesting but can anyone provide the TAFs (and the times they were issued)? That's what'll determine the rights and wrongs of the situation.

UTR

[Dances With Dingoes]

According to Welcome to Weather Underground : Weather Underground (http://www.wunderground.com)

Temp range 18-23,
Due point 19.
Max humidity 100%
Temp at or below dew point from 8 pm local.

Anyone got a copy of the TAF???

Long range cruise charts, alternate requirements,,,,,,,, ?????,,,,,,,

Dom well done on getting everyone out alive. That is the thing to take away from this.

[VH-XXX]

Wouldn't it be the case that the majority of aircraft that operate into there WOULDN'T have enough fuel for an alternate given the distances involved?

[ZEEBEE]

Wow! Not a decision I would like to have made :eek:

Remember going in their a few years ago where the dew point and reported temps were fast closing.

By the time I got there, the cloud base was too low to even think of commencing an approach, but plenty of clear areas over the water, so short of diverting to Noumea, only alternative was to descend over the water to do a vis approach.
The approach was below cliff height with a climb to the threshold of the rwy.

The FSO recounted of a coastwatch Shrike that almost had to ditch under similar circumstances the day before. I felt for him.

Great job to pull off a ditching at night with quick Jet and recover all persons :ok:

[Transition Layer]

Some more info...

Rescue plane sinks after ditching
November 19, 2009 - 12:26PM
Six people including a sick woman have been rescued after a medical evacuation plane was forced to ditch in the sea off Norfolk Island.

The CareFlight plane was taking a critically ill patient from Samoa to Melbourne and was attempting to make a refuelling stop at Norfolk Island, the Seven Network reports.

Bad weather thwarted three attempts at landing, so the pilot peeled away from the island and put the plane down in the sea about two nautical miles offshore.

The crew and the patient were all able to get safely off the plane before it sank three minutes later.

All six people were forced to tread water, only three of them wearing lifejackets, for about 90 minutes before they were rescued by boat.

All were in shock and suffering from hypothermia but no one suffered major injuries.

AAP

[Captain707]

Good to see crew and pax ok!

Pilot Dominic James ditches medical evacuation jet in ocean off Norfolk Island | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/pilot-dominic-james-ditches-medical-evacuation-jet-in-ocean-off-norfolk-island/story-e6frg95x-1225799708551)

[Altimeters]

Already here (http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-aviation-questions/396269-pel-air-westwind-ditching-off-nlk.html) mate... :ok:

[40Deg STH]

Will be very interesting reading when the report comes out.

[Wally Mk2]

........sure will be interesting reading when the report comes out...........in Ch 9's TV BS!!! Already Ch 9 have started to paint a 'hollywood' story from it to milk it for all it's worth:ugh: Cloe Bachelor hero pilot is now the leading headline !! FFS!




Wmk2

[Fluke]

Could be lots of issues here, especially planning considerations. That said, well done to the Captain for deciding on a gutsy plan and carrying it out successfully. Must have been awful tense after the 3rd missed approach !

[PA39]

Gee, Mmmm. Sometimes you can only plan for 1 approach. From experience Norfolk and LHI can mean you only get one chance then off to the mainland or other alternate. Fuel critical situations can be very testing. Our remote islands are the only time we have ever needed CP and PNR calcs.

[tinpis]

I take it there is no precision app. aid at Norfolk?

[40Deg STH]

Tinpis, no there isn't and its up on top of a cliff too, so very condusive to fog and cloud. AKL is the normal alternate carried for a jet.
Once I came in from Tahiti into there and could not descend and preserve my AKL alternate until VFR was confirmed from the FSU. The weather there can turn bad fast when Temp and dew point is close together.

Pleased to hear all walked away.

[A1322]

For those interested, just a few hours earlier, a RAAF 737 carrying the Governor-General had to divert back to Sydney, after not being able to land in Norfolk Island due to the bad weather conditions..

G-G's plane aborts landing, turns back | National Breaking News | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,,25953035-29277,00.html)

[Weapons_Hot]

Most poster are correct - NLK can go down to the MNM irrespective of the TTF.

However, to make 3 (alleged) approaches (all unsuccessful) to NLK and (assumedly) burning ALTN fuel resulting in:
a. a zero option approach (3rd attempt = must land);
b. a ditching, however successful (result of zero option approach);
c. a allusion of "hero" status.

Facts: unsuccessful approaches (3); controlled aircraft ditching due exhaustion of contingencies/fuel.

Forget "stress" and subjective mitigators; to reiterate - min fuel = min options; zero fuel = zero options.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT PICTURE?

[Cessna Capt]

Doesn't surprise me that the media are using the Cleo Bachelor thing.

Media outlets will try to differeniate themselves from each other and find an exclusive angle on a story. This sometimes just adds to the dumbing down and sensationalising of stories which in Aviation i always hate to see. Now i'll proberly have to field questions from punters about ditching, if i knew him and if i have applied to Cleo.

[mjbow2]

I wonder, if we had adopted the FAA requirements some 15 years ago when regulatory reform began, whether this accident would have been prevented.

Requirement to carry an alternate:

1 hour before to 1 hour after ETA-

Vis <2sm (3.2km)
cig <3000ft

The FAA also does not allow charter or RPT aircraft to attempt an instrument approach unless the Wx is reporting above the landing minimums at the time of the intended approach.

If we had this rule in operation here, would the decision to divert to Noumea have been made well in advance of the first approach attempt?

[40Deg STH]

Weapons Hot,

I think we agree on the picture.

[Dances With Dingoes]

So far REX share price pretty much unaffected from yesterdays close.

Is this the same guy that was a SO with Qantas for a short time?

[skol]

It'll be an interesting report, never been there but flown plenty around the Pacific a few years back, standard fuel for no alternate was 2 hrs island reserve.

[Critical Reynolds No]

and they are throwing in:

performed his version of the remarkable Hudson River ditching of Captain Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger III.

[YBRM]

In reply to MJBow2, from memory it is stated in the CAR's (just escapes me where rite now), that an instrument approach shall not be commenced unless conditions are above landing minima....... it's one of those regs that you can never find it when your looking for it! :hmm:

[mig3]

I take it there is no precision app. aid at Norfolk?
Ahh but there is a precision approach at SNF!
...too bad no-one has the equipment to do SCAT approaches though...

[Jet_A_Knight]

Ask them how many life jackets they had on board.

[Boeing_captain]

Weapons_Hot, mate exactly what I was thinking. The report im sure will explain alot but I also have to ask:

1. There may have been panic, but why did only 3 people have life jackets?
2. The flight must have had a PNR and CP so if he got current weather at that time and saw the weather was OVC002 why did he not divert?

But on a positive note...my hat off to the pilot for ditching safely at night with it overcast meaning no moonlight.

Thank goodness no one was seriously hurt.

[Bring Back The Biff]

So, let's get this straight - they set up for a controlled ditching, but only three of them had time to get their lifejackets on?

What about the dinghy packs also carried?

Don't get me wrong - glad all worked out well; but as for 'well trained, and professional'....

I remember some years ago picking up a Westwind for an overwater flight and for some reason checking the lifejacket situation.....none found!

Looks like Pelair have again proven they deserve their 'reputation'.

[tail wheel]

John Sharp, Chairman of Pel-Air Aviation.....

Is that the same John Sharp, originally Qantas, then CEO Air Pacific and General Manager, TAA, immediately prior to TAA amalgamation with Qantas??

[weido_salt]

Hats off to the crew for the successful ditching.

However, just because the operation was "legal" does not make it safe, as has been demonstrated in this case. "Island hold" or whatever they call it is not on IMHO. Like playing Russian roulette. "On route alternates" or a decision at the PNR/Cps are another one, I will not entertain.

I don't give a damn what the bean counters think but to me "fuel in the tanks is money in the bank."

It is not a crime to have an accident but to run out of fuel, whatever the reason, is criminal. I hope someone can come up with a good reason why this "incident" came to be.

[Rudder]

Nope,

The John Sharp ex Australian Minister for Transport and all things aviation.

[aussie027]

Terrible situation to be in. As to how they got there will be determined.
I think I would rather have attempted an on airport landing by descending on the VOR appch from a calculated VDP on the 3* appch path to below minimums to a lit runway as a last resort rather than attempt a night ditching in pitch black conditions in bad weather.
Assuming that is the type of appch they were doing???
Pelair's aircraft are not equipped to do the SCAT 1 appch???
Great to see all survived :ok:

[redned]

After dozens of approaches (and a few diversions)into Norfolk,my rule generally was one go and divert.Not a place to try and out guess the weather.

[Anthill]

I am disturbed at the direction that this thread could be taking and I would suggest that people deal only in facts and not speculate at this stage.

It is good that no one has been badly hurt.

It is cataclysmic that an aeroplane has been lost.

Proper investigation will determine the whys and wherefores.

NLK is a diabolic destination in that the WX is often appalling with low cloud, low visibility and windshear. There is no precision approach. A typical 'bad' day will has a TAF that reads like: 160/20-30G45 3000RASH BKN 300 OVC 1200 TEMPO 180/35G50 1000XXSH OVC200'.

YBNF is not a place for sissies. Over the years, there must have been hundreds of briefings with the island clearly visible at TOPD for arrival into NF expecting a VMC approch that culminated in just getting visual at the minima-yes, the wx at NF is THAT changable!


I refer to CAO 82.0:

1 Application
1.1 This Part applies to Air Operators’ Certificates authorising aerial work
operations, charter operations and regular public transport operations and sets out conditions to which such certificates are subject for the purposes of...

and:


remote island means:

(a) Christmas Island; or

(b) Lord Howe Island; or

(c) Norfolk Island.

and:


2.3 The minimum safe fuel for an aeroplane undertaking a flight to a remote

island is:


(a) the minimum amount of fuel that the aeroplane should carry on that

flight, according to the operations manual of the aeroplane’s operator,

revised (if applicable) as directed by CASA to ensure that an adequate
amount of fuel is carried on such flights; or



(b) if the operations manual does not make provision for the calculation of
that amount or has not been revised as directed by CASA — whichever

of the amounts of fuel mentioned in paragraph 2.4 is the greater.


2.4 For the purposes of subparagraph 2.3 (b), the amounts of fuel are:

(a) the minimum amount of fuel that will, whatever the weather conditions, enable the aeroplane to fly, with all its engines operating, to the remote island and then from the remote island to the aerodrome that is, for that flight, the alternate aerodrome for the aircraft, together with any reservefuel requirements for the aircraft; and


(b) the minimum amount of fuel that would, if the failure of an engine or a
loss of pressurisation were to occur during the flight, enable the

aeroplane:

(i) to fly to its destination aerodrome or to its alternate aerodrome for the flight; and
(ii) to fly for 15 minutes at holding speed at 1 500 feet above that aerodrome under standard temperature conditions; and

(iii) to land at that aerodrome.

[puff]

Norfolk has and always will be a dicey place especially when the WX turns bad. Ask any of the operators that have done the RPT runs out there and it ends up turning very expensive with 2 trips and 2 diversions not being out of the ordinary.

Norfolk was also the scene of another near incident years ago when a 'RPT PA31' operated by Kenti-Link left LHI for NLK - didn't get the most current TAF halfway thru the flight and ended up at NLK and couldn't get in. He was talked down by the airport manager and him and pax lived to fight another day. It was the end of RPT from LHI in pistons when the report came out due to the recommendations.

Sure is going to be an interesting report this time around as well!

A3211 that mentioned the GGs flight in the RAAF BBJ that diverted out of NLK - check the date - that happened in August !

[Anthill]

Also waiting for the report into the Ozjet B737 that lost some flap during a go around in bad wx and diverted to Tontuta in December 2007.


Thursday, 28 February 2008
Oz Jet’s old and scary jets come under question

Ben Sandilands writes:
Significant question marks over the use of old and scary jets by charter airline Oz Jet are apparent in preliminary air safety investigation reports into the carrier’s two headline making Christmas holiday emergencies.
On 29 December one of its 32-year-old Boeing 737-200s suffered a flap failure that saw passengers on a flight from Brisbane to Norfolk Island wearing their life vests in case the flight was forced to ditch into the ocean as it diverted to Noumea.
On 31 December another similarly aged Oz Jet 737-200 that had departed Port Moresby for Brisbane made a Mayday distress call and a quick return to the airport after a part of a crucial control surface near its tail broke off.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau describes how the first flight experienced high frequency vibrations after flaps failed to retract properly when the pilots aborted an attempt to land at Norfolk Island in low cloud and driving rain.
The problem caused the jet to pull 40 degrees to the left of its intended course and suffer continued buffeting and roll and “yaw” (or nose wagging) for much of the diversion to Noumea, the nearest alternative airport.
Because of doubts about whether the jet would make Noumea, full emergency drills were carried out in the cabin with passengers putting on uninflated life vests and preparing for the worst.
In the Port Moresby incident, the ancient 737 suffered vibration so severe the pilots reported the jet was difficult to control. A section of the right elevator tab in the tail of the jet had broken off.
This component is of crucial importance to the controllability of all 737s old or new. The ATSB notes that Oz Jet had complied fully with a special service bulletin mandating close inspections of this part.
In both cases the safety investigator is now looking in more detail into how such old jets are serviced.
Its findings will have global relevance, as 737-200s are widely used by third world carriers because they can be cheaply acquired for close to scrap value. This model of the 737 figures disproportionately in crash statistics, particularly in Africa and Indonesia.
Oz Jet is sometimes described within the industry as having among the best of pilots and cabin crew but flying the worst of aircraft

[Capt Fathom]

Can't wait to see the quotes in the media, sourced from the Professional Pilots Rumour Network!

There's some doozies here to choose from! :mad:

The general public has a largely jaundiced view of aviation as it is, without us adding too it!

[zube]

It would be great if CH9 and the rest of the media held off going with the Hero Pilot caper until more is known.

The bloke did a good job by the sounds of it, and may well deserve the hero tag, but until an investigation finds out why the situation occured its a bit premature to speculate.

Many years ago a TAA F27 out of MEL had its rudder come adrift. The Melbourne media named and hailed the Captain as a hero after he elected to circle around MEL for a long time, burning off fuel to a minimum, before making a perfectly normal landing..

Only problem was TAA management didn't think he was a hero. They called him in and reamed him out for not landing ASAP. Had an engine failed while endlessly circling around , the lack of a rudder would have seen them go in like a dart. A point lost on your average media hacks.

It pays to get the full story before creating media heroes.

[tinpis]

This Dominic? (http://www.cleo.com.au/bachelor09_profile_cleobachelor09_dom_james.htm)

[Tiger35]

"I think I would rather have attempted an on airport landing by descending on the VOR appch from a calculated VDP on the 3* appch path to below minimums to a lit runway as a last resort rather than attempt a night ditching in pitch black conditions in bad weather." - AUSSIE 027

Hey Aussie027 are you seriously suggesting that you would bust the MDA in a terrain rich environment in IMC conditions that are below the MDA and risk a CFIT into stratogranitus rather than a "controlled" contact with the water as a REAL OPTION?:(

Do YOU know why CASA PROHIBIT instrument approach commencement when the weather is below stated criteria?

It is to save the life of the passengers who have to sit behind pilots who are all too willing to make the type of decision that you seem so willing to not only carry out, but to encourage others to do it as well.:=

Yours is one of the most dangerous comments I have ever read on PPRUNE or anywhere else.

Do YOU understand that NAVIGATION TOLERANCES do not guarantee tracking over a particular piece of ground?

Do YOU understand anything about the way that Instrument Approach procedures are designed to be flown?

[notmyC150v2]

Didn't think that would be your sort of publication tinny.

You really are full of surprises! :}

[RPG]

Done Good Pilot !
To get a jet onto the ocean in one piece then evacuate all on board to safety {with a med patient as well), took courage and one hell of a steady hand.
In that moment you looked death in the face and prevailed.
You've done your fellow aviators proud,
Well Done.

[TKFS]

Dominic James Ditches Plane | Norfolk Island | CareFlight, Medivac (http://www.theage.com.au/national/hero-pilot-ditches-plane-off-norfolk-island-20091119-inr1.html)

Apparently all this for a "walk on" patient.

[skol]

Have you given some thought to the fact that pilots are not supposed to run out of fuel?

[truth boy]

Agree with anthill

FACT Life vests on board ( enough for all )
FACT Life raft on Board

some here seem to be impliying otherwise.

[Bo777]

A hero ... :hmm: wait for the report. Releasing his name ... :ugh: Noumea is the closest alternate. I'm just wondering what will happen to a payout for the aircraft from insurance IF the fuel calculations weren't IAW CAO 82.0 or company procedures, if anybody cares to enlighten me. Why were there only 3 wearing life jackets? The media :ugh:

[NAMPS]

I also agree with Anthill

FACT- Former Bachelor of the year nominee:}

[XanaduX]

So when did this happen?

[Cougar]

I would think it prudent to sit on this one until the facts come out.

Potential scenario:

TAF is all good and well for NF on dep. from Samoa

At PNR, crew gets updated WX and TAF still good.

Crew press beyond PNR as fuel is all good at this point.

Wx closes in when aircraft past PNR.

Aircraft cannot make it to any other divert (not aware of RPT NF rules, so assuming they legally don't need to hold Tontouta based on good TAF for NF on dep. Samoa?)

Crew has no option but to land at (or next to) NF.

[aero979]

good work to the co-pilot also, no doubt they would have been workin to buggery also!

[truth boy]

She did very well but is not getting much air time

[hongkongfooey]

Would like to know the full story, but according to the paper he made several attempts at landing, before running out of fuel.
I am sure CASA will be interested in this as risking 6 peoples lives by running out of fuel, at night, in the middle of the ocean, may not meet the requirements of a mercy flight, assuming that is what they will claim it was when asked why they ran out of fuel.

5.1 A mercy flight may only be declared when a pilot is unable to conduct a compliant
flight within the time available, or lacks the time to seek an exemption from relevant
provisions of the regulations. Notwithstanding the declaration of a mercy flight, normal
flight rules apply to the maximum extent possible in the circumstances.
5.2 Pilots should be aware that stress generated by the urgency of a mercy flight may
compromise their decision making ability. Coupled with a contravention of normal flight
rules, poor risk analysis may result in poor quality decisions.
5.3 A pilot should declare a mercy fight only after evaluating all known factors and
assessing the risks that are likely to be encountered during the flight. He or she must be
satisfied that although the flight will involve a breach of regulations, the flight can
nevertheless be conducted without significantly increased level of risk. Although CASR
91.170 authorises the declaration of a mercy flight, the pilot and operator remain bound by
Civil Aviation Act Section 20A, which prohibits careless or reckless operations.

I don't think he has complied with 5.3, you tell me :confused:
( PS, it's an oldish draft, not sure if anything has changed )

[Spikey21]

RPG, you would have to be ****head to make a statement like this You've done your fellow aviators proud,
Well Done.

Endangering the life of passengers due to not carrying enough fuel, I would never want to be associated with anyone who thinks this idiot has done anyone proud.
:=

[hongkongfooey]

You're right Spikey, but we should wait for all the facts first, I am assuming the only " facts " we currently have are from the papers ?

I am not so sure CASA ( and Pelair ) will see him as a hero :hmm:

[Captain Kellogs]

The Westwind with full fuel should be able to make it to Norfolk from Apia with enough fuel to get to Noumea in normal enroute wind conditions, with 1 approach.

the fact that the TAF was showing such bad weather there and that the METARS for the entire day were crap, would have had me planning via Noumea to melbourne instead of norfolk.

Noumea has an ILS, and good alternates around were norfolk doesnt have either!

I wonder whether pelair has given the pilots any planning software yet or whether you still have to provide your own (most of us had plans made on excel for standard routes and amended them if you were going somewhere different which really eats up your 2 hrs callout time) something like web based jetplan that the crew had access to (if they still dont) would have given the crew more time to look over weather and also allow them to run plans via NWWW to check alternate routings, for info its only 80nm further to go to melbourne via noumea which is the way I would be going!

I hope they do have planning software by now but if they dont I hope that they realise the potential saving of a few hundred bucks a year.

Good work for carrying out a successful ditching, but your a bloody idiot getting yourself in that position, especially if you were getting metars on the way and elected to continue there instead of diverting to NWWW, and if you weren't getting metars then you should hand in your wings.

Hero Pilot? I dont think so, lucky Pilot is a better call, you put the plane in the situation where you had no options! you are lucky to have got out with your lives.

[Bo777]

Cougar
I would think it prudent to sit on this one until the facts come out.
then gives a potential scenario :ugh:

Crew press beyond PNR as fuel is all good at this point.

Wx closes in when aircraft past PNR.

Sorry correct me if I'm wrong, but the worst case scenario for Norfolk (being a remote island) would be depressurized. So the fuel calculations would be based on a point of safe diversion based on being depressurized. The PSD should therefore be beyond the island, if not try LR cruise, recalculate fuel, if not (a possible fuel leak) piss off to the nearest non-remote island/mainland (your alternate ... in this case Noumea).

[Tony Flynn]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article6922654.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=797093

Sophie Tedmanson in Sydney

A pilot has been hailed as a hero for safely ditching his plane into the sea off Australia and saving the lives of all on board.

The medical plane, which was transporting a patient and five others from Samoa to Melbourne, began to run out of fuel as it approached Norfolk Island,
a small island in the Pacific off the east coast of Australia, on Wednesday night.

Captain Dominic James, a former nominee for ‘bachelor of the year’ in an Australian magazine, was praised for his “amazing” skill
at bringing the plane down in the dark and saving the lives of his passengers.

In an accident which bore similarities to the Hudson River plane crash in New York in January, Captain James decided to make a controlled landing onto the sea off the island, and landed the Westwind jet safely on the water.

The plane sank within minutes, but the patient, her husband, two medical crew and the two pilots evacuated safely. The six people clung to each other, treading water under the moonlight for 90 minutes because only three had time to grab life jackets.

They were eventually rescued by boat and taken to the island where they were treated for shock, but remarkably none were injured.

Pel-Air Aviation chairman John Sharp said he was very proud of Captain James and the first officer.

“Their professionalism stood out on the day and made a substantial difference to the outcome,” he said.

“They executed what would have to be described as a perfect landing on water. The pilots ensured that the aircraft landed close to the coast, close to rescue.

“They landed at night, approximately we think about 9.30pm (10.30am GMT) local time, and as a result of the skill of the pilots the aircraft landed in the water and none of the passengers were injured.”

Norfolk Island airport manager Glenn Robinson said the passengers were shaken up by their ordeal.

“They were extremely lucky and believe me, they all know it,” he told and Australian radio station.

“Full credit to the pilot. It was just an amazing effort by him.”

In January US Airways pilot Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger was hailed a hero for safely ditching an Airbus 320 into the Hudson River in New York, saving all 155 passengers and crew on board.

[MyNameIsIs]

more info here in the australian section of Prune:

http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-aviation-questions/396269-pel-air-westwind-ditching-off-nlk.html

[ironbutt57]

no fuel?? no alternate airport?? or sudeen unforcast weather deterioration??

[Love_joy]

Captain Dominic James, a former nominee for ‘bachelor of the year’ in an Australian magazine, was praised for his “amazing” skill

A hugely impressive feat, I really hope I never end up in a similar situation.

However, and not meaning to detract from their "amazing skill"; surely they should not have been in that situation in the first place? Obviously we do not have all the facts here, but how was it that they did not have enough fuel for destination, or a suitable alternate?

I remember some wise words imparted during my initial training that went something along the lines of; "a superior pilot uses his superior intellect to ensure that he never has to rely on his superior skill"...

[Hipster]

Pel Air had some trouble in Noumea apparently - failed ramp checks due fuel policy, crew quals etc. Don't seem to plan there at all now??
Left Apia without TAF, and not much gas anyway.
Where's the regulator? Hello CASA??? If this was USA, any operator who ditched for 'fuel exhaustion' would be grounded.

[henry crun]

"ditching plane at sea"......... where else ?

[Captain Kellogs]

Just one more question......... Why was the life raft in the boot??????????

no wonder no one got into it!

[cadidalhopper]

River. Hudson comes to mind. :ugh:

[henry crun]

At Norfolk Island ?

[Mungo Man]

"ditching plane at sea"......... where else ?

Or lake, fjord, reservoir, swamp, pond, lagoon, estuary...

[green granite]

I seem to remember a Britannia(?) doing a forced landing in the UK on it's way back from Spain due to running out of fuel, the press called him a hero etc, but he still got blamed for not dipping the tanks as his fuel gauges were us and the refuellers had cocked it up.

[eckhard]

Alidair Viscount at Ottery St. Mary (Exeter)

Air Accidents Investigation: 9/1981 G-ARBY (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/formal_reports/9_1981_g_arby.cfm)

[aussie027]

Tiger 35.
I am not encouraging anyone to break regs under any normal circumstances. This was not normal circumstances.
I am familiar with nav tolerances etc.
I am not familiar with Norfolks approaches or terrain specifically/ personally but I know there is high terrain to N of airport.
In a final, last chance situation, I only suggest that a controlled appch /landing onto a lit runway or a runway strip area on the flat ground of an airport may be a safer option with a better chance of survival than a so called "controlled" impact with the moving surface of the ocean in presumably rough conditions and pitch black due to the overcast.
Obviously one has to avoid running into terrain on the final descent from MDA to the field. The final 3* descent from the VDP should keep you clear of the terrain IF you are within tolerances on the approach as this final 4-500 feet would normally be flown visually with the runway in sight if you were in the clear at MDA.
Not here to get into a debate.

[Dances With Dingoes]

Hipster

If this was USA, any operator who ditched for 'fuel exhaustion' would be grounded.

I think that may be why a senior westwind pilot was told to get out of Guam and never come back recently.

See some of my past posts over the last few months.

I have seen CASA shut companies down for far less than this but somehow PA seem to be able to crash 3 (I think )westwinds and still be operating.

WTF?

[Black Maria]

A touch of topic but a reply to Anthill's who made mention of a previous NLK incident....

Anthill,

with regards to the Ozjet NLK incident you mention, the OJ 737 diverted from NLK and landed at the planned alternate (NOU) with statutory reserves, even with the problems the aircraft carried.

OJ always planned, and always dispatched, to NLK with fuel to go elsewhere no matter how good the TAF was, be it AKL, NOU, BNE, OOL, SYD etc, etc.

[ozbiggles]

The Australian internet news has a sound link with one of the 'rescuers' from Norfolk.
Verrry interesting indeed.

[flying-spike]

Just running this up the flagpole. If the Wx enroute via NF was dodgy, wouldn't tracking via Nandi then Noumea be more prudent given the availability of better navaids? Keen to hear other's thoughts not bagging the crew concerned. Are there reasons why you wouldn't consider that scenario?

[remoak]

"ditching plane at sea"......... where else ?

As happened recently in Hamilton, NZ... into a sewerage treatment pond... :D

I'm not sure how you can be called a hero for causing your own ditching, at least Sully had a good excuse! These guys ditched a perfectly serviceable aeroplane, simply because they ran out of fuel. Hardly hero activity. What kind of fuel planning is that?:ugh:

[The Guru]

John Sharp (former Federal Transport Minister, and now CEO of PelAir) interviewed on ABC radio this afternoon. Paraphrased comments because I had both hands on the wheel, and my jaw in my lap:

"...the company are now conducting an investigation and expect to change their company flight planning policy so that a point of no return (PNR) is calculated before flight...":eek:

They are not my words...they are his!:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Despite the obvious causal factors, and underlying factors, that have appeared to cause this accident, it is still be prudent to wait for the facts and read the ATSB report, before hanging the poor bastard.

The G

PS: Congrats for not killing anyone.

[Bigmouth]

A Westwind, in the dark, and everybody got out. I don't care if or what kind of mistakes he may or may not have made prior.
That is amazing skill (or luck beyond comprehension).

[Capt Fathom]

These guys ditched a perfectly serviceable aeroplane, simply because they ran out of fuel. Hardly hero activity. What kind of fuel planning is that?

That statement is more befitting the D&G Forum and it's henchmen! Trial by Pprune at it's worst!

Talk about a bunch of gossiping girls! It's embarrassing!

[Ramrod2]

I agree aussie027. It was not "normal circumstances"

[flying-spike]

No PNR required? How did they get/keep an AOC let alone an aeromed contract specialising in long distance retrievals?

[Captain Kellogs]

Ahhh Billy sex crime,

Yes I have seen a life raft all bagged up, and have intimate knowledge of the westwind too, and the rafts that pelair use for that matter! I assure you every time I did a trip it would fit in the cabin. and if it wouldnt I would make room for it,(it never had to sit in the aisle) with all the overwater flying pelair does the life raft was very important and I always wanted it to be the first thing thrown out the door should we need to ditch, Luckily I never needed to use it but I assure you before ditching I would have had the lanyard attached to the base of the front chair and the raft secured there too so it would be ready to go. a ditching should be a planned procedure when needed and things like life jackets and life raft positioning before the final approach to ditch are very important. flying the procedure is only a very small part of ditching

And no you cant access the baggage compartment from the cabin, which is why I couldn't believe they would put it in there.

[Gnd Power]

History repeats itself......

Very interesting Read....


ATSB RECOMMENDATION : R20000040

Recommendation. Recommendation issued to: Bureau Of Meteorology. 22 February 2000. SUBJECT - RELIABILITY OF NORFOLK ISLAND FORECASTS. SAFETY DEFICIENCY. The meteorological forecasts for Norfolk Island are not sufficiently reliable on some occasions to prevent pilots having to carry out unplanned ...

At website

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/recommendations/2000/r20000040.aspx

[mates rates]

even if he had the 2 hours island holding BS in lieu of an alternate that may be allowed under the the company SOP's NLK is not the place to apply this rule.The METAR's that existed that night can last for days at a time.

[John Citizen]

http://http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2009/11/19/lets-get-real-about-the-norfolk-island-ditching/


Let’s get real about the Norfolk Island ditching
November 19, 2009 – 8:34 pm, by Ben Sandilands
Last night’s ditching of a Pel-Air CareFlight medivac Westwind jet is being turned into a media circus by the airline and some very susceptible reporters.

First reported in the Crikey subscriber email today, the incident which left six people, half of them without life jackets, in the sea for at least 60 minutes awaiting rescue after their jet ran out of fuel, has even been compared to the actions of heroic Captain Chesley Sullenberger in landing the US Airways A320 on the Hudson River last January.

What a load of weak minded idiotic drivel.

And John Sharp, a former aviation minister, put up this ridiculous statement this morning as chairman of Pel-Air Aviation, which is owned by REX, the regional carrier.

John Sharp, Chairman of Pel-Air Aviation said that he was very proud of the Captain and the First Officer. “They performed an intricate landing on water in darkness resulting in the evacuation of everyone safely and quickly. The training of both the Pel-Air and CareFlight crew came to the fore as everyone kept together and remained calm. Their professionalism stood out on the day and made a substantial difference to the outcome.”

The nonsense words we have highlighted are ‘very proud’ and ‘professionalism’.

The pilot, Captain Dominic James, ditched a plane carrying passengers in the sea in the dark because he ran out of fuel. That isn’t professionalism.

Where exactly is the professionalism in Pel-Air when it operates a flight that is inadequately fuelled for a worst case diversion, such as depressurisation, or a closed airport, and has no where to go but into the drink, instead of having the juice to divert to the nearest airport in New Zealand or New Caledonia.

For John Sharp to say he is ‘very proud’ of this situation suggests he has forgotten everything he ever knew about aviation and flight standards, or has no knowledge of or respect for the regulations as set out later in this post.

On the ABC tonight Sharp says there was no Plan B if the weather turned nasty.But the weather had been nasty for quite some time on Norfolk island yesterday. One of the principles of safe airline operation is to always have a Plan B, and the fuel to carry it out.

If it turns out that this flight was operated in accordance with the companies operating manual, which is one of the requirements of its AOC or air operator certificate, then CASA is in serious trouble for lack of diligence in approving it. It the flight wasn’t carried out in accordance with the regulations CASA must surely serve a show cause notice in relation to the potential cancellation of its AOC and prosecute the owners and board of the company, who have very serious responsibilities in aviation law.

And even if the conduct of the flight met the conditions required by the company, what sort of a company are we dealing with when this sort of crash is, as Sharp’s comment imply, a consequence of deliberately flying with only a Plan A?

Here is the relevant extract from the regulation CAO 82.0 concerning the Pel-Air flight:

1 Application
1.1 This Part applies to Air Operators’ Certificates authorising aerial work
operations, charter operations and regular public transport operations and sets out conditions to which such certificates are subject for the purposes of…
and:
remote island means:

(a) Christmas Island; or
(b) Lord Howe Island; or
(c) Norfolk Island.

and:
2.3 The minimum safe fuel for an aeroplane undertaking a flight to a remote
island is:
(a) the minimum amount of fuel that the aeroplane should carry on that

flight, according to the operations manual of the aeroplane’s operator,

revised (if applicable) as directed by CASA to ensure that an adequate

amount of fuel is carried on such flights; or
(b) if the operations manual does not make provision for the calculation of
that amount or has not been revised as directed by CASA — whichever

of the amounts of fuel mentioned in paragraph 2.4 is the greater.
2.4 For the purposes of subparagraph 2.3 (b), the amounts of fuel are:

(a) the minimum amount of fuel that will, whatever the weather conditions, enable the aeroplane to fly, with all its engines operating, to the remote island and then from the remote island to the aerodrome that is, for that flight, the alternate aerodrome for the aircraft, together with any reservefuel requirements for the aircraft; and
(b) the minimum amount of fuel that would, if the failure of an engine or a
loss of pressurisation were to occur during the flight, enable the

aeroplane:
(i) to fly to its destination aerodrome or to its alternate aerodrome for the flight; and
(ii) to fly for 15 minutes at holding speed at 1 500 feet above that aerodrome under standard temperature conditions; and

(iii) to land at that aerodrome.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Suggestion: CASA should act immediately in relation to these prima facie violations of CAO 82.0 (subsection 2.4) and prosecute the owners and board of the airline for multiple offences.


CASA should also conduct a full audit and review of every aspect of Pel-Air’s operations and its fitness to hold its AOC, with particular regard to its fuel reserve policies.

[GADRIVR]

How about a bit of kudos being thrown his way boys and girls?:D
Noboby knows what the circumstances behind the ditching are.
Jeez.....there are some real pieces of work on this thread.:ugh:

[Hipster]

I can't watch any more telly, the 'Hero' thing is killing me! John Sharp should face the music, and step down. Pollies (even ex) can spin better than a chipmunk, and once the truth is revealed, the public will have lost interest and moved on. Poor RFDS, meet your enemy! Unscrupulous, uncaring, uncompliant, unstoppable.:ugh:

[KABOY]

Everyday I operate in an environment where the only constant is change, I go to work with that in mind and ensure that I never have my back to the wall. You operate into that environment you always have an escape.

There are serious flaws in this, maybe we can learn from the reason model. Mr. Sharp has no doubt utilised his media contacts to put a different spin on this, but it is quite possible the buck could end up with him after the investigation.

[Capt Coco]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is it not a requirement for you to carry an alternate for NLK now, no matter what the TAF says.
From memory this was done/changed in 1999 or early 2000, that's why all the commercial piston operators stopped flying there back then because they couldn't carry the gas. From what we were led to believe you were not allowed to plan to a PNR for NLK, you needed fuel for an alternate.

[Sonny Hammond]

Oh man!, no plan B!

Who has no plan B!!!!

Who admits there was no plan B to the press??????

What is going on??????????????
There is going to be some battered ego's by the time this one plays out....

[chewi]

I worked for Pelair for years and you always had to carry min fuel where ever you went, the uplift was the main priority.The crew did a great job and should be praised, but Pelair need to be investigated.

[carpe_jugulum]

GADRIVR - kudos where it is due for sure, however:

Having operated Norfolk, Noumea, Auckland - remote location, poor WX reported - Always carry ALT (see Crikey CAO ref) and divert before eating into ALT Fuel. F28 had to turn back before TOD if wx was close to Min.
3 approaches before diverting is ridiculous in this part of world.

If the pax can tread water for 60 - 90 mins, they can't be that sick - so shouldn't be a mercy flight as suggested earlier.:suspect:

Only 3 wearing jackets - that isn't a well prepared ditching.

But this is all speculation, and importantly, with the pedigree of the CEO, I suggest CASA will have difficulty prosecuting the matter fully:E

[Diatryma]

Anyone know the rego please?

Di

[Checkboard]

So what do we know?

The aircraft flew to a remote Island, carried out three approaches, then ditched. Island reserve should at least be two hours - which should be more than three approaches, and they should have had variable and fixed reserve on top of that.

The interview with the Airport Manager, who rescued them from the sea stated that they had no idea at what time they ditched, or where they were. He stated that they were found in the water about and hour and a half after the accident, by one of the boat crew managing to catch sight of a life jacket emergency light bobbing about about two kilometres off shore. Only three of the six were wearing life jackets - the two pilots, and the patient were the ones who had to go without.

So - if there isn't a question or two in that lot, I don't know what else people need! You have to at least question how "prepared" this ditching was! :hmm:

[tio540]

To those involved, we are glad to hear you are OK, well done.

The experts will investigate for many months, anything else is school yard speculation and has no place here.

[MyNameIsIs]

Checkboard, re "prepared ditching"...

Would it not be unreasonable to presume that whilst trying to 'get under' the weather and then pop it up onto NLKs runway, that the aircraft may have impacted the water; thus not quite being a 'prepared ditching' ? ? ?

Whilst it is being a bit speculative, the reliable reports of only 50% of the occupants wearing lifejackets and no raft deployed do throw a few interesting questions to the mix.


Whatever has happened, it is good that all occupants got out alive and are ok. Could have been worse, thankful that it isnt.


Have they left the Island, and if so, who with??

[tio540]

Have they left the Island, and if so, who with?

They do have other WW1124's left you know.

[601]

The experts will investigate for many months, anything else is school yard speculation and has no place here.

One thing we know for sure, the trip was not planned in accordance with the requirements of CAO 82.0. If the flight had been planned iaw 82.0, this event would not have happened.

The provisions of CAO 82.0 relating to "Remote Islands" were created specifically to prevent this sort of event from happening. The forecast weather conditions at the island do not come into the planning requirements of the CAO. It applies "whatever the weather conditions"

Simply, there should be enough fuel to fly from the departure point to Norfolk and onto an alternate that is not itself located on a remote island.

[Trash 'n' Navs]

Tio,
anything else is school yard speculation and has no place here

Don't fortget this is a forum for discussion about aviation issues. Just like in the crew room or instructors room at any flying organisation anywhere in the world, pilots tend to talk about other pilots' experiences in order to learn and develop their skills. Pprune is simply a virtual variation. If you'd prefer not to be involved in the discussion, there's news sites that will give you information without the discussion.



Having listened to the Airport Manager's interview, I agree with Checkboard - they were either the longest approaches ever made to NLK or he didn't have the 2 hrs reserves.

Another aspect that puzzles me is that if he had time to shoot 3 approaches, why didn't he take time to brief those on the island what his intentions were? After all, they're the ones who would come out to get him.

Finally, for such a long overwater flight, I'd have made damn sure I had my lifejacket within arms reach (if not on) - that goes for the rest of the crew & pax too. No good having them in the back - it's like fuel in the bowser.

There's no doubt he made the very best of a bad situation - keeping the pax together etc. But how did he end up in that situation to begin with? Was it Pel-Air's SOPs that let him down, px from base (perceived or otherwise), was it other outside agencies giving him duff gen or was it his command decisions?

Any of which will provide learning points for all of us.

I await the ATSB report with keen interest.


Edited addition: The Airport Manager also mentioned they did not hear a MayDay call. How planned was the ditching?

[Feline]

Well, I for one would still like to know why he ran out of fuel...

[Outbound090]

He'll get straight into QF now.

[Captain Kellogs]

I think you will find it is the careflight crew that kept the passengers together not the pelair crew, and the survival training that Careflight crew are given in regard to water survival, rotating the survivors through the middle to keep body temperatures up. Maybe if pelair manage to keep the medivac contract they will now send their crew for water survival training........ but I doubt it

As for 3 approaches, my rumor mill (its a good sources) tells me more like 5 approaches before ditching. I have always lived by the rule give it a second go then head off, unless you have a very good reason for doing the 3rd attempt but no more than 3, its funny because I learnt that rule at pelair.

for the comment about accidental ditching trying to get below the cloud and pop up onto Norfolk from beneath the hills, you do realise it was at night with and overcast cloud base dont you, if thats how it happened the aircrew should be grounded for ever.

Out of all this the real heros, that no one has mentioned are the poor careflight crew who have been thrust into this situation, most probably did most of the work in the evacuation of the aircraft and kept the patient alive for 90 minutes in the water, and kept everyones body temperature reduction to a minimum. Great work guys, you deserve an award for your efforts and an apology for being put in this situation through no fault of your own. you are the true stars of this horrible situation.


Once again good work careflight crew you guys are the unsung heros once again

As for the comment about min fuel being carried, that was the freight fleet not the medivac Westwind fleet, going to the pacific you always carried as much fuel as you decided you wanted, in any case min fuel would have been full fuel which should have given NWWW as an alternate!

[Cheechos]

I have a quick question...anyone can answer..
Firstly well done to the crew for performing so well in the face of adversity...
BUT
why is it that Mr Sharp finds it necessary to praise the actions of the pilot after a suspected double flame out due to fuel exhaustion, my understanding is that there were 3 MApp's. but not sure. And at the same time Rex find it appropriate to silently crucify their own crew after every incident no matter what the outcome (usually a good one).:ugh: hmmmmmm.....sounds like someones in damage control
???????????????????? And personally I couldnt give a rats if the guy was Cleo whatever of the year....DONT STRAY FROM THE REAL ISSUE HERE....fuel exhaustion !!

[Dont Hang Up]

Well, I for one would still like to know why he ran out of fuel...

Well indeed. But the possible reasons are many and varied. A fuel leak for example.

In the meantime the successful ditching is a matter of public record.

[testpanel]

A fuel leak for example

Ever heard of "fuel-checks"?

"We" are not driving a car down the road, and when we endup without fuel we call the........

"We" (normally) do not continue flying untill our tanks dried up!

"We" always (should) have a plan B or even C!

Calling this socalled Capt a "Hero" is b.s.

He AND his crew scr...up!

Lucky all survived!!

[VH-XXX]

A real hero would have landed the aircrafton the first attempt.

I must be the greatest hero ever as i have never run out of fuel and have thus far never had to land anywhere but on a runway.

[Casper]

Why did the aircraft arrive at NLK (at night) without an alternate?

[Transition Layer]

The online media seem to have gone very quiet on this. Nothing on the front pages of SMH, news.com.au or ninemsn.

Maybe they've realised it's best to sit and wait and see how they ended up in that predicament in the first place before any more 'hero' claims.

[XanaduX]

Wonder whether this incident will affect PelAir's future air ambulance contract in Victoria or has that contract been signed and sealed?

[Trash 'n' Navs]

Capt K,

Any info fm your sources as to what they think happened?

Not enugh fuel loaded at origin, fuel leak, mechanical/electric problem with fuel pumps??

Before I get howled down, can I say that I'm very aware of the investigation process and presumption of innocence etc. I'm just trying to get my head around how an aircraft on such an important task can end up ditching at night in rough seas due to fuel starvation and for the airfield staff not to know about a planned ditch. I say planned because it wasn't the result of catastrophic failure so he had time to at least get a mayday out.
:confused:

[UnderneathTheRadar]

There has been talk here of a mercy flight - can anyone confirm that it was (or wasn't) a declared mercy flight?

Anyone had any luck finding the TAFs for the period?

UTR

[triadic]

Anyone had any luck finding the TAFs for the period?

you will find them early in this thread!!

[UnderneathTheRadar]

Hi Triadic,

Lot's of METARs and SPECIs earlier in the thread but unless I'm losing it completely (which is possible), I can't see any TAFs.

UTR.

[VH-XXX]

You guys are all just jealous because the pilot was formerly Cleo batchelor of the year :)

[satmstr]

Ha i thought it was every pilots dream to be Cleo batchelor of the year :}:D

[Transition Layer]

Ah XXX, no he wasn't.

He was/is in the Top 50 finalists. If you hang around the right bars with the right people you'd probably get a look in too.

[Captain Kellogs]

Why would you declare a mercy flight and plan to YSNF when you have NWWW 400nm away, and in the scheme of things bugger all out of the way for a flight to Melbourne. why not just plan via there where you have alternates close by in the first place?

If pelair stopped going there due to failing ramp checks as someone has said in an earlier post, maybe they should have fixed the things they were getting pinged on instead of not using NWWW (if it is true that is) and if it was fuel policies they were getting in trouble for then maybe NWWW had the right idea getting up them!

I know nothing about them not using NWWW for this purpose other than what I have read in here, and just for info.

It will be interesting to see what comes out of the CVR if they find them and recover them.

Swiss cheese effect at play here.

[C-change]

WW24 Ditching Checklist:

-Trim for best glide?

-Gear up?

-Awesome photo ready to send to the news?


http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200911/r472603_2370875.jpg (http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200911/r472603_2370880.jpg)

[MyNameIsIs]

Capt. K, yes I do realise it was at night.
I should have added that a 'dropping low then popping up' attempt was maybe because the Captain was resigned to the fact that he couldn't get in, couldn't go anywhere else, and this was his only other option prior to ditching.

Like I said in my earlier post, a bit speculative but the no mayday, few lifejackets and no raft thing gets the cogs working.


tio540, what are WW1142's, are they the Pel Westwinds???
Wonder if the people pulled from the water would be getting back onto one of those things? Plenty out there say "I'm not flying with them again" in relation to other operators for much more trivial reasons!

[Capt Fathom]

Anyone had any luck finding the TAFs for the period?


And they were not the least bit interesting.....:E


"I call it feeding the chooks."

[Tiger35]

RAMROD2:
"I agree aussie027. It was not "normal circumstances"

Another "pilot" prepared to bust the MDA??????:ugh:

There are NO CIRCUMSTANCES, in any civilian flying opsor non-tactical military operationsworth busting the MDA or DA for.

These are not the "old and bold" days of the past when "herioc" pilots died regularly testing the system to see what worked and what didn't.

The tested and proven system is in place and PROHIBITS flight below the MDA/DA, etc in IMC, at all times..... for good reason.

Some parts of the aviation system will need updating as time passes but the proof about the dangers involved with IFR flight below the MDA is proven.

[Cactus Jak]

Operated to NLK out of LHI for many years in turbo props. two occasions spring to mind when heading out there. Both times, divert times to noumea and LHI were within minutes of each other. Ended up holding off the island past the noumea time and comfortably headed back to LHI. We only got to NLK on these occasions because loads were light and we could carry the fuel. Otherwise PNR return. Some times we wouldn't even bother leaving LHI.

Approaches are useless out there as the problem is fog and you could quite reasonably sit in a hold just off the island on a beautiful blue sky day staring at a mound of white fluffy stuff completely covering it. waiting for a hole or your divert time.

Often our PNR would be just short of the island and we could asses the conditions visually usually prior to top of drop, aswell as having the friendly ATO guy talking to us on the way in.

Bare in mind, alternate fuel was not always required, only in the past 10 years or so.

Would often hear the AN F28s and ANZ 737s turning back at there PNRs.

The weather at NLK can change very quickly and anyone with any experience out there can see it coming well in advance from trends on the actual reports.

I think the question of why this aircraft ended up in the water is a valid one.

The other question? Will this affect PAs current and near future Aero Med contracts?

[John Citizen]

The tested and proven system is in place and PROHIBITS flight below the MDA/DA, etc in IMC, at all times..... for good reason


I disagree. I believe you can go below the minima (MDA, DA/DH) in IMC during an emergency. :ok:

[ZEEBEE]

There are NO CIRCUMSTANCES, in any civilian flying opsor non-tactical military operationsworth busting the MDA or DA for.

These are not the "old and bold" days of the past when "herioc" pilots died regularly testing the system to see what worked and what didn't.

The tested and proven system is in place and PROHIBITS flight below the MDA/DA, etc in IMC, at all times..... for good reason.

Some parts of the aviation system will need updating as time passes but the proof about the dangers involved with IFR flight below the MDA is proven.

Tiger35

What a useless comment !

Anyone who's flown IFR for more than ten minutes understands what you're saying and MUST plan to never have to do it....but in this case the pilot painted himself into a corner.
What was he going to do ????? Stay up there ????

Do you have some marvelous tool to keep a Westwind in the air sans fuel ??

If you were in his position, what would you have done ??

Please don't say you wouldn't be in that position, because that's not what it's about, we assume that as a responsible IFR pilot you wouldn't be.

[puff]

I think more than anything lots of us just have lots of questions ! Another thing with NLK is because the coastline is so rugged barely any boats are left in the water and have to be launched.(especially most ocean capable one anyway) By the sounds of it wasn't even discussed with the manager?

Again surely ditching procedures would have made everyone pop on a vest before impact, and where was the raft ?

One would hope that both the crew and pel-air had read and used all of these recommendations which date back 9 or so years ago now, I remember being told about reading of the mistakes of others to learn from the mistakes of others because you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

Another thing mentioned in the past was that Auckland was always a prefered diversion port rather than Noumea due to higher landing fees or costs, that along with Pel-airs rumoured problems with authorites there may have influenced decisions.

RECOMMENDATION : R20000040 (http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/recommendations/2000/r20000040.aspx)

SUBJECT - RELIABILITY OF NORFOLK ISLAND FORECASTS

SAFETY DEFICIENCY

The meteorological forecasts for Norfolk Island are not sufficiently reliable on some occasions to prevent pilots having to carry out unplanned diversions or holding.

FACTUAL INFORMATION

Related Occurrences

During the period 1 January 1998 to 31 March 1999, occurrences involving unforecast or rapidly changing conditions at Norfolk Island reported to the Bureau included the following:


199801482

A British Aerospace 146 (BAe146) aircraft was conducting a regular public transport (RPT) passenger service from Sydney to Norfolk Island. The terminal area forecast (TAF) for Norfolk Island indicated that cloud cover would be 3 octas with a cloud base of 2,000 ft. Approaching Norfolk Island, the crew found that the area was completely overcast. After conducting an instrument approach, they determined that the cloud base was 600 ft, which was less than the alternate minima. Fuel for diversion to an alternate airfield was not carried on the flight because the forecast had not indicated any requirement.


199802796

Before a Piper Navajo Chieftain aircraft departed for an RPT passenger service from Lord Howe Island to Norfolk Island, the TAF for Norfolk Island did not require the carriage of additional fuel for holding or for diversion to an alternate airfield. Subsequently, the TAF was amended to require 30 minutes holding and then 60 minutes of holding. The pilot later advised that he became aware of the deteriorating weather at his destination only after he had passed the planned point of no return (PNR). However, the aircraft was carrying sufficient fuel to allow it to hold at Norfolk Island for 60 minutes. When the aircraft arrived in the Norfolk Island circuit area, the pilot assessed the conditions as unsuitable to land due to low cloud and rainshowers. After approximately 45 minutes of holding, the weather conditions improved sufficiently for the pilot to make a visual approach and landing.


199804317

A BAe146 aircraft was conducting an RPT passenger service from Brisbane to Norfolk Island. When the crew were planning the flight, the Norfolk Island TAF included a steady wind of 10 kt and thunderstorm conditions for periods of up to 60 minutes. Approximately 30 minutes after the aircraft departed, the TAF was amended to indicate a mean wind speed of 20 kt with gusts to 35 kt. As the aircraft approached its destination, the Unicom operator reported the wind as 36 kt with gusts to 45 kt. The crew attempted two approaches to runway 04 but conducted a go-around on each occasion because of mechanical turbulence and windshear. The pilot in command then elected to divert the aircraft to Auckland. The wind gusts at Norfolk Island did not decrease below 20 kt for a further 3 hours.


199900604

While flight planning for an RPT passenger service from Lord Howe Island to Norfolk Island, the pilot of a Piper Navajo Chieftain found that the TAF required the carriage of fuel sufficient for a diversion to an alternate aerodrome. As the aircraft was unable to carry sufficient fuel for the flight to Norfolk Island and then to an alternate aerodrome, the flight was postponed. Later in the day, the forecast was amended to require the carriage of 60 minutes of holding fuel and the flight departed carrying the additional fuel. Approximately 20 minutes after the aircraft departed Lord Howe Island and more than one hour before it reached its point of no return (PNR), the TAF was amended again to require the carriage of alternate fuel. The pilot did not request or receive this amended forecast and so continued the flight.

Following the flight's arrival overhead Norfolk Island, the pilot conducted a number of instrument approaches but was unable to land the aircraft due to the poor visibility. After being advised of further deteriorations in conditions, the pilot made an approach below the landing minima and landed in foggy conditions with a visibility of 800m. Subsequent investigation determined that the actual conditions at Norfolk Island were continuously below alternate minima for the period from 2.5 hours before the aircraft departed from Lord Howe Island until 6 hours after the aircraft landed.


Meteorological information

The Norfolk Island Meteorological Observing Office, which is staffed by four observers, normally operates every day from 0400 until 2400 Norfolk Island time. When one or more observers are on leave, the hours are reduced to 0700 until 2400 daily. Hourly surface observations by the observers, or by an automatic weather station when the office is unmanned, are transmitted to the Sydney Forecasting Office where they are used as the basis for the production and amendment of TAFs and other forecasts.

Weather conditions are assessed by instrument measurements, for example, wind strength, temperature and rainfall, or by visual observation when observers are on duty, for example, cloud cover and visibility. There is no weather-watch radar to allow the detection and tracking of showers, thunderstorms and frontal systems in the vicinity of the island. The wind-finding radar on Norfolk Island is used to track weather balloons to determine upper level winds six-hourly when observers are on duty. It cannot detect thunderstorms or rainshowers.

Pilots in the Norfolk Island area can contact the Met Office staff on a discrete frequency for information about the current weather conditions.

The reliability of meteorological forecasts is a factor in determining the fuel requirements. As forecasts cannot be 100% reliable, some additional fuel must be carried to cover deviations from forecast conditions.

A delay of one hour or more can exist between a change occurring in the weather conditions and advice of that change reaching a pilot. The change has to be detected by the observer or automatic weather station and the information passed to the Forecasting Office. After some analysis of the new information in conjunction with information from other sources, the forecaster may decide to amend the forecast. The new forecast is then issued to Airservices Australia and disseminated to the Air Traffic Services (ATS) staff who are in radio contact with the pilot. It is then the pilot's responsibility to request the latest forecast from ATS.


Alternate minima

Alternate minima are a set of cloud base and visibility conditions which are published for each airfield that has a published instrument approach procedure. The alternate minima are based on the minimum descent altitude and minimum visibility of each of the available instrument approaches. When the forecast or actual conditions at an airfield decrease below the alternate minima, aircraft flying to that airfield must either carry fuel for flight to an alternate airfield or fuel to allow the aircraft to remain airborne until the weather improves sufficiently for a safe landing to be conducted.

A pilot flying an aircraft that arrives at a destination without alternate or holding fuel and then finds that the weather is below landing and alternate minima is potentially in a hazardous situation. The options available are:

1. to hold until the weather improves; however, the fuel may be exhausted before the conditions improve sufficiently to enable a safe landing to be made;

2. to ditch or force-land the aircraft away from the aerodrome in a area of improved weather conditions, if one exists; or

3. attempt to land in poor weather conditions.

All of these options have an unacceptable level of risk for public transport operations. (my bolding)


The alternate minima for Norfolk Island are:

1. cloud base at or above 1,069 ft above mean sea level (AMSL) and visibility greater than 4.4 km for category A and B aircraft; and

2. cloud base at or above 1,169 ft AMSL and visibility greater than 6 km for category C aircraft.

The available alternate aerodromes for Norfolk Island are La Tontouta in Noumea (431 NM to the north), Lord Howe Island (484 NM to the south-west) and Auckland NZ (690 NM to the south-east). Lord Howe Island may not be suitable for many aircraft due to its short runway. Flight from Norfolk Island to an alternate aerodrome requires a large amount of fuel, which may not be carried unless required by forecast conditions or by regulations.


Australian regulations

Prior to 1991, the then Civil Aviation Authority published specific requirements for flights to island destinations. For example, flights to Lord Howe Island were required to carry fuel for flight to an alternate aerodrome on the mainland Australia, and flights to Norfolk Island and Cocos Island, where no alternate aerodromes were available, were required to carry a minimum of 2 hours of holding fuel.

In 1991, Civil Aviation Regulation (CAR) 234 was enacted. This regulation provided that an aircraft would not commence a flight unless the pilot in command and the operator had taken reasonable steps to ensure that the aircraft was carrying sufficient fuel and oil to enable the proposed flight to be undertaken in safety. The regulation did not specify the method for determining what was sufficient fuel in any particular case. Civil Aviation Advisory Publication (CAAP) 234-1(0) dated March 1991, provided guidelines which set out one method that could be used to calculate fuel requirements that would satisfy CAR 234. CAAP 234-1 did not contain any special considerations or requirements when planning a flight to an island destination.

In August 1999, Civil Aviation Order 82.0 was amended to require all charter passenger-carrying flights to Norfolk Island and other remote islands to carry fuel for the flight to their destination and to an alternate aerodrome. The alternate aerodrome must not be located on a remote island. This requirement to carry additional fuel does not apply to regular public transport flights to a remote island.


European Joint Aviation Regulation

The European Joint Aviation Regulation (Operations) 8.1.7.2 states: "at the planning stage, not all factors which could have an influence on the fuel used to the destination aerodrome can be foreseen. Consequently, contingency fuel is carried to compensate for ... deviations from forecast meteorological conditions."


Traffic levels

In February 2000, approximately 11 regular public transport aircraft land at Norfolk Island every week, including Boeing 737 and Fokker F100 aircraft. An additional 20 instrument flight rules and 12 visual flight rules flights are made to the island every week by a variety of business and general aviation aircraft.


ANALYSIS

Reports to the Bureau, including those detailed in the factual information section above, indicate that the actual weather conditions at Norfolk Island have not been reliably forecast on a number of occasions. Current regulations do not require pilots of regular public transport aircraft to carry fuel reserves other than those dictated by the forecast weather conditions. The safety consequences of an unforecast deterioration in the weather at an isolated aerodrome like Norfolk Island may be serious.

The present level of reliability of meteorological forecasts and the current regulatory requirements are not providing an adequate level of safety for passenger-carrying services to Norfolk Island.


SAFETY ACTION

As a result of these occurrences, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority has commenced a project to review the fuel requirements for flights to remote islands.


Output Text: The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (formerly the Bureau of Air Safety Investigation) recommends that the Bureau of Meteorology should review the methods used and resources allocated to forecasting at Norfolk Island with a view to making the forecasts more reliable.


Response from: Bureau Of Meteorology
Date Received: 27 April 2000
Response Status: Closed - Accepted
Response Text: In response to your letter of 25 February 2000 relating to Air Safety Recommendation 20000040 and the reliability of meteorological forecasts for Norfolk Island, the Bureau of Meteorology has explored a number of possible ways to increase the reliability of forecasts for flights to the Island.

There are several factors which determine the accuracy and reliability of the forecasts. The first is the quality and timeliness of the baseline observational data from Norfolk Island itself. The second is the information base (including both conventional surface observational data and information from meteorological satellites and other sources) in the larger Eastern Australia-Southwest Pacific region. The third is the overall scientific capability of the Bureau's forecast models and systems and, in particular, their skill in forecasting the behaviour of the highly localised influences which can impact on conditions on Norfolk Island. And the fourth relates to the speed and responsiveness with which critical information on changing weather conditions (forecast or observed) can be conveyed to those who need it for immediate decision making.

As you are aware, the Bureau commits significant resources to maintaining its observing program at Norfolk Island. While the primary purpose of those observations is to support the overall large-scale monitoring and modelling of meteorological conditions in the Western Pacific, and the operation of the observing station is funded by the Bureau on that basis, it is staffed by highly trained observers with long experience in support of aviation. As far as is possible with available staff numbers, the observers are rostered to cover arrivals of regular flights and rosters are adjusted to cover the arrival of notified delayed flights.

The Norfolk Island Terminal Aerodrome Forecast (TAF) is produced by experienced professional meteorologists located in the Bureau's New South Wales Regional Forecasting Centre in Sydney. The terminal forecast provides predictions of wind, visibility, cloud amount and base height and weather routinely every six hours. Weather conditions are continuously monitored and the terminal forecast is amended as necessary in line with air safety requirements. The forecasters have full access to all the Bureau's synoptic meteorological data for the region and guidance material from both Australian and overseas prediction models. As part of the forecasting process, they continuously monitor all available information from the region including the observational data from Norfolk Island itself. When consideration of the latest observational data in the context of the overall meteorological situations suggests the need to modify the terminal forecast, amendments are issued as quickly as possible.

Despite the best efforts of the Bureau's observing and forecasting staff, it is clear that it is not always possible to get vital information to the right place as quickly as it is needed and the inherent scientific complexity of weather forecasting means that occasional serious forecast errors will continue to be unavoidable. That said, the Bureau has carefully reviewed the Norfolk Island situation in order to find ways of improving the accuracy and reliability of its forecasts for aviation through a range of short and longer-term means.

As part of its strategic research effort in forecast improvement, the Bureau of Meteorology Research Centre is undertaking a number of projects aimed at increasing scientific knowledge specifically applied to the provision of aviation weather services. Research projects are focussed on the detection and prediction of fog and low cloud and are based on extensive research into the science of numerical weather prediction. However, with the current level of scientific knowledge, the terminal forecasts for Norfolk Island cannot be expected to be reliable 100 percent of the time. Based on figures available for the period January 1998 to March 2000 (some 12 000 forecast hours), the Bureau's TAF verification system shows that for category A and B aircraft when conditions were forecast to be above the minima, the probability of encountering adverse weather conditions at Norfolk Island airport was 0.6%.

As part of its investigations, the Bureau has considered the installation of a weather watch radar facility at Norfolk Island with remote access in the NSW Regional Forecast Centre. Although routine radar coverage would enable the early detection of precipitation in the vicinity of the Island, investigations suggest that the impact of the radar images in improving forecast accuracy would be on the time-scale of one to two hours. This time frame is outside the point of no return for current aircraft servicing the route. It was concluded that the installation of a weather watch radar would be relatively expensive and would only partially address the forecast deficiencies identified in Air Safety Recommendation R20000040. The Bureau will however keep this option under review.

To increase the responsiveness of the terminal forecasts to changes in conditions at Norfolk Island, the Bureau has issued instructions to observing staff to ensure forecasters at the Sydney RFC are notified directly by telephone of any discrepancies between the current forecast and actual conditions. This arrangement will increase the responsiveness of the system particularly during periods of fluctuating conditions. In addition the Bureau has provided the aerodrome manager with access to a display of the latest observations to ensure the most up to date information is relayed to aircraft.

The Bureau is actively participating in the review of fuel requirements for flights to remote islands being undertaken by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

I regret the delay in replying to your letter but the Bureau has felt it important to look carefully at all aspects of the Norfolk Island forecast situation and consider the full range of possibilities for forecast improvement within the resources available to us. We will continue to work on forecast improvement for Norfolk Island as resources permit.

[hongkongfooey]

There is a lot of talk of mercy flights on here, a Mercy flight ( I am fairly sure ) does not allow you to launch to a destination without enough fuel, this ould have to come under the heading of " wreckless " :ok:

A very good point also, how " critically ill " was the patient, since they were able to bob up and down in ther ocean for over an hour and still survive ?

All those who think this guy " done good ", is a " hero " etc, could you please let me know who you fly for, I want to make sure none of my family or friends ever fly with your outfit :ouch:

BTW Tiger 35, you may be alarmed to know that I would sooner bust an MDA by 100' ( with some 5-700 ' terrain clearance ) or a DA ( with 200' terrain clearance, and precise tracking ) than ditch in the water at night.
I fly for a large HK based carrier, just incase you want to avoid me ;)
( not saying that a 100' MDA bust would have got this guy in )

[Horatio Leafblower]

.... given that the aircraft is now a wreck on the floor of the Pacific ocean, there's nothing Wreckless about it.

Reckless, perhaps. :rolleyes:

[frigatebird]

To my thinking, seems to have been a pretty casual approach to fuel and flight planning for this flight operating as it did at night to a remote, rarely visited stop for an ad-hoc charter. Operated day and night RPT, and day and sometimes night ad-hoc charter to a few destinations in the southern Pacific in all weathers (sometimes cyclones), but the companies involved had thorough policies of requireing depress. and single engine CP's and PNR's calculated before flight at the planning stage, and updated as we went along with the latest weather received in flight. Pre-GPS days we had Omega in some aircraft, listened to the Volmet, kept in touch with the Company Operations 24 hours on H.F., sometimes carried 2 hours Island Reserve, talked to the agent from 100 miles out or earlier if in range on VHF for the latest weather before descent. Off-track alternates had to provide the latest weather for ETOPS or we were required to turn back. (sometimes Wallis was a little tardy). Tonga sometimes got fog at the times we went there. What to do in an 'Unlikely Event" was also reinforced during annual training in the pool with jacket and raft inflation practice.
Training for it made sure it didn't happen. Smaller companies standards were not up to that, but were appropriate for where and when they went, if commonsense and self preservation were applied.
Complacency and "she'll be right" didn't get a lookin then..

[Dances With Dingoes]

Just read on Face-Tube.

Thinks a 'Hero' pilot is one that spends a career in aviation and never makes the news. AND NEVER NEVER EVER runs out of fuel. But who am I to judge.

Identity withheld to protect the guilty. :E

DD

[Merlins Magic]

Not being familiar with Medivac policy, but why go to the expense of a private medivac for a walk-on patient who is well enough to be able to tread water for 40 minutes. Why not put them on the next scheduled flight back to Australia?

[Dances With Dingoes]

Why not put them on the next scheduled flight

Welcome to my world :ugh:

[scarediecat]

Thank goodness no fatalities!
So many questions being asked.
Considering the crew are still with us, Im sure the ATSB will relish the opportunity to seek the answers.
In regards to CASA.......:ugh:

[Spudnik]

DD, I feel your pain..

Were the patient intubated, had fractures or was a spinal she would have been very unlikely to survive a ditching.

So how much fuel did they arrive with to shoot 3 approaches and ditch? You're not putting down in the water unless you're about to flame out..

and 2x pilots but no mayday, no CTAF/unicom broadcast "i'm ditching Xnm N/S/E/W of xyz", no "hey crew, get those jackets out and make sure that raft is ready to go" ??!

It doesn't add up, much like the fuel figure I imagine..

[Wiley]

Haven't read the whole seven pages, so apologies if I'm not the first to say it, but in my experience, it's uncanny how often a pilot whose skill and daring are trumpheted in the press (along with that grossly overused 'hero' word) immediately after the incident, when the evidence is compiled and the final report tabled, turns out to be anything but.

Call me an old fart, but in my opinion, a professional pilot doesn't commit to an island destination, especially at night, unless the weather is gin clear.

The boss is backing up his pilot. Some may see that as admirable. Cynics might think that he's doing so while trembling at the thought of the litigation that is almost certainly heading his company's way when the final report comes out, to say nothing of what recommendations the regulator might come up with.

Having said all that, successfully dictching a jet at night in open water without killing or even injuring anyone on board was probably a better effort than many of us, if we were honest with ourselves, would expect we'd be able to do ourselves. I'm very glad I never found myself in such a position.

[boardpig]

quotes in todays SMH from Christopher Newns of Concept Aviation Supplies who has been flying small planes since 1973.(apparently)


"It's unlike the Hudson River [ditching], which was done in good visual conditions, by a very experienced pilot and co-pilot, and they would have had training exercises in a simulator"

Two main differences..they had no engines... and fuel.

"Whether the weather was bad at the time of departure, I don't know, but as they approached Norfolk Island, the weather suddenly turned to custard."

If TAF's had been obtained on the way, you would know that the weather was bad...

"The better option was to have a controlled landing into water rather than an uncontrolled crash at the airfield."

Or divert before you ever get to that situation...

"Regardless of any bad decisions made in getting to that point, in the end he made a decision and got the aircraft down safely."

Regardless?

The great australian media.........

[kellykelpie]

Fantastic job!!!

[tinpis]

Could a Westwind have carried 6 POB and sufficient fuel to fly anywhere else other than Samoa - NFK? :hmm:

[Wally Mk2]

I had a funny feeling the thread/story would accelerate faster than a locomotive.
There are a lot of valid questions being asked here and no doubt some will be answered by the officials (CASA)some day.
But for now I'd like to add some answers in the mean time.

The life raft is often placed in the 'boot' of these small jets as there is no room within the main seating area, besides such an item needs to be stowed well & truly for a ditching, hence it was not accessed due the rapid nature of the A/'C sinking, better to get out with life jackets only than to go down with the hull whilst stuck inside trying to retrieve the bulky raft amongst amongst all the med equipment & believe me at times the plane of full of it!


Mercy flights under extraordinary circumstances can be conducted from at the flight planning stage where there are no other options at hand & it's a life threatening situation, obviously SOP need to be followed for this with any Co.This will be determined am sure whether this applied in this case.

One thing that I have not read here but may have missed is COMMERCIAL PRESSURE. It happens in ALL sectors of aviation. These tasks represent big money & we ALL live by money alone! It would be nice to make all flights perfectly safe but we don't live in a perfect world now do we? Airliners to ultralights crash & will continue to do so, that's the very nature of aviation, it's all about risks, calculated risks. Am not saying that the hapless pilot was under any commercial pressure other than to complete the mission & to stay alive when it went sour or even PelAir where making anybody do anything they didn't want to but now after the event perhaps we can all learn from it. Humans have only ever learnt from making mistakes, I have, we all have in life.
I think under the extreme duress this crew where facing when a ditching was imminent they did a good job but also remember everyone what was going thru their minds as they knew they was running out of fuel must have been terrifying!.
Can you perform yr duties flawlessly under that level of stress when perhaps training wasn't as good as at airline level? And even then that guarantees zip!

As for the Wx forecasts etc? Well half the flights planned to such places wouldn't even leave the ground if they where going strictly by the book without some human interpretation, humans make decisions & sometimes not good ones whether that applies here we or not we shall see.
My most steepest learning curve & most challenging times was when I was doing OS MediVacs, this is an area that few experience.

More to come am sure but lets be objective hey?

Wmk2

[skol]

Read this gushing testimonial from someone called Christopher Newns of Concept aviation supplies.

Norfolk Island crash pilot an instant celebrity | Stuff.co.nz (http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/3083681/Norfolk-Island-crash-pilot-an-instant-celebrity)

[Brian Abraham]

Just wondering out aloud while awaiting the ATSB report. A lot has been said about this being an intention ditching, but might it not be an unfortunate outcome of an attempted duck under, there being no mayday or comms referring to an intentional ditching. Or even a replay of the King Air at Coffs with a worse outcome .Gear position might be an immediate give away.

Anybody else think there is something "Tom Cruise-ish" about his photo? Not a twin? Maybe why he got the Cleo gig.

[Dangly Bits]

If this guy gets Max Markson to represent his interests and to make hundreds of thousands of dollars in endorsements because he put innocent people at risk like this, then it is time for me to shuffle off to another line of work.

[Wing Root]

I am EXTREMELY disappointed this pilot was NAMED in the Pel-Air press release. Leaving aside the opinions of the pilot's actions and decisions what gives the company the right to name him? When did this become OK? :ugh:

[Diatryma]

Anybody else think there is something "Tom Cruise-ish" about his photo?


Maybe he was jumping up on his seat when this happened.............

[sjj]

Tiger35 - you, sir are an idiot. Last time I checked you're fine under normal circumstances to fly under DA. It's a DECISION altitude. You start your go around there (if required). I'm with Hongkongfooey. He's had a shocker to get into that position, but once he's there, it's time to trust the old navaids a little bit more than the rules and tolerences might allow, and take a speculator closer to the runway.

Old mate was very very lucky, and probably doesn't deserve the kudo's. He porked it big time getting in the situation he found himself in. If I were him, I'd be crawling under a rock and hoping people forgot about me as soon as possible, otherwise future employers might remember him for this....

[SingleDriver]

Tiger 35 - Have to disagree, im not one who condones breaking rules, in particulars minimas, however to throw down a blanket response such as yours is a big call. Never ever break minimums? If you were caught in a situation and had to choose between a cat III landing in an approved a/c at a non approved airport or ditching would you still not break the cat I DA? Hypothetical and not apllicable to NLK but clearly a situation where breaking the minima is the safer option.

In saying this, have had exp at NLK in the past and it is not a place i would be willing to bust the minimas in blind hope. Each threshold has a steep hill/cliff immediately before it and at the minima the approach spits you out at quite a large angle to the runway requiring a fairly sharp and immediate turn onto RWY HDG (this is often exagerated by unfavourable and strong crosswinds. Any mistakes in the rate of turn or your calculations of the 3 degree profile would be disastorous at best .

As far as trying to duck under and climb up to the threshold...that is definately placing you life (and your PAX's) in the lap of the gods. The elev is about 370', ducking under would involve scud running under cloud at 200', at night, towards a steep cliff with no hope of seeing the RWY lights from your position below the cliffs. If it was this or ditching...id take the water.

As far as places to push your luck, NLK would be one of the worst around.

Fantastic that everone survived and congrats to the careflight crew.

[Dances With Dingoes]

Anybody else think there is something "Tom Cruise-ish" about his photo? Tom Cruise is not cross-eyed.

otherwise future employers might remember him for this.... What, his flying or his modeling? Exactly which one is his day job?

[Mach E Avelli]

In the bad old days, when men were men and barmaids ate their young, it was usual and legal to go out to NLK without an alternate if the weather forecast allowed. We always calculated a PNR to either return to the mainland or divert. By PNR we had to be reasonably assured by the latest weather observations at the island that we had a very good chance of landing. PNR was typically about top of descent. Even so, sometimes it went wrong in the last 30 minutes and, having committed to continue past PNR, we were forced to either land by busting minimums or to divert with less than legal reserves. Those of us that went there often enough probably did one or the other or both at some stage. What we did know was NOT to persist with multiple approaches until a ditching became imminent. Better to miss and go somewhere inconvenient even if it meant arriving with only 20 minutes fuel. Fuel could always be stretched by shutting an engine down in the cruise and relighting it on final (done that).
After a few good frights and close calls, CASA saw the light and the rules changed to always require a suitable alternate for so-called remote islands. The two hours 'island reserve' mentioned elsewhere here no longer became a choice. In any case, two hours would get most aeroplanes to either Auckland or Noumea.
So, either the rules have been broken or there was an un-detected fuel leak. For the 'hero' status of the pilot to remain intact, I hope for his sake that it was the latter.

[hongkongfooey]

Horatio, Touche' ;) however I defy you to find the " wreck " :eek:

I was told ( by a guy who's had a GFPT for 15 years ) that the nearest suitable is 1.5 hrs away, so thats 1 approach and then :mad: off to Noumea, sounds fairly simple, maybe I missed something :confused:

Will be interesting to see if the toothless Tiger, called CASA, bow to media pressure and let this guy ( and Pelair ) off the hook, and not ban him for life like they should.
The comparisons being drawn between this and the Hudson river are :yuk: at best, one guy was faced with the sudden loss of all thrust with absolutely no warning, the other deliberately ran out of fuel after several hours of flight, please explain to me the similarities ( OK, other than both A/C ending up in the drink )

[UnderneathTheRadar]

Channel 7 news Melbourne is currently asking why they ran out of fuel and has made the link to the Air Ambulance contract in Victoria. No mention of last nights story funnily enough nor any comment from PelAir!

[Yon Garde]

Loved the expert opinion from the bloke from the pilot shop. Apparently the shiela that makes the sandwiches at the BK cafe wasn't available for comment to the media:}

[puff]

Channel 10 in Brisbane just ran a story and Jim Davis was interviewed and stated that the flight had the correct fuel loaded. So the next question is was it a mercy flight ? If it was reading the rules of a Mercy flight, did it really qualify? If it did would the patients partner be considered essential? AIP ENR 81.1.6 d. limit the operating crew and other persons carried in the aircraft to the minimum number required to conduct the flight. If not a mercy flight does Pel have a dispo for not carrying of an alternate for NLK?

Norfolk Is news website states as well as Channel 9 who said that the PIC advised that the flight was low on fuel arriving at NLK due to heavier than expected headwinds from APW...The questions keep on coming !

[ozbiggles]

I wouldn't worry too much about the media calling him a hero.
I n 3 days when newspaper sales drop, they will then turn their focus on calling him evil.
The first media organisation to do that will be the one who doesn't get the exclusive.
Then it will be a week of A Current Idiot Vs Today a hero Tonight a villian slagging off at each other.
And it doesn't matter which one you are. The media only care about selling the advertising.

[chimbu warrior]

Going via Nadi would have added 67nm to the trip; going via Nuku'alofa would have added 68nm to the trip; going via Suva would have added only 40nm to the trip (equivalent to less than 2 holding patterns).

[Captain Kellogs]

Nadi as a fuel stop???????

but that would just mean that he would have to run out of fuel on his way to melbourne, you cant plan a flight from norfolk to melbourne with a headwind in a westwind.

there was nothing wrong with using YSNF as a fuel stop, that should not be the focus, the focus should be on the fact that he didnt have enough fuel to make it to NWWW from norfolk!

its all easy in hind site, I have had winds a lot stronger than forecast out in the pacific as well, however with that in mind and the fact that the weather was consistently bad at YSNF for the entire time of the flight, that should have been enough to get the crew to change tack and divert to Noumea earlier.

I still cant believe anyone would continue to YSNF with the metars that were there, especially if they new they wouldnt have the fuel to divert if they didnt get in.

lets just sit back and see what BASI come up with, the preliminary report should be very interesting.

[senshi]

Hopefully the Westwind boys didn't adopt the same approach to "fuel planning" as the Metro drivers.. :}

S

[Mach E Avelli]

Ozbiggles, as well as the media turning, watch Pelair management as they twist in the wind, then eventually turn. At the moment they are obliged to paint the captain a hero as they have contracts to consider and of course their pilots are the greatest gift that God gave to aviation.
But if the investigation starts to uncover dodgy practices at an organisational level, the blame game will be on.

[VH-XXX]

Channel 7 news is reporting tonight that the ex-Cleo Bathelor of the year pilot is to be questioned by authorities as to why the aircraft ran out of fuel in the first place.

It appears that the appropriate questions are already being asked by the appropriate persons.

[Sqwark2000]

NZ's TV3 late news "nightline" just ran an item on the pilot saying "Hero pilot's credentials in question after it was disclosed he had failed his Qantas flight exams".....

Schmucks!!! :ugh: :ugh: Journalists are just useless ****s when it comes to aviation.

S2K

[framer]

Tiger35,
Your view on going below MDA is unbending, unyielding. When you find yourself with an extreme attitude to something, it is usually unbalanced.
There are many many situations I can think of where I would take my jet below MDA /DA without the required visual references rather than ditch it in the sea at night.
I won't say I would have done it in this circumstance because I don't know the met conditions and a/c equipment etc.
My point is, your attitude to MDA's might just be more of a threat to flight safety than that of the people you are denegrating on here for saying they would have considered it.
I definately would have considered it.
Regards,
Framer

[TSIO540]

rotating the survivors through the middle to keep body temperatures up. Maybe if pelair manage to keep the medivac contract they will now send their crew for water survival training........ but I doubt it:yuk:

I used to work for Pelair and this was one of the first things we did before commencing line training! :}

[ozbiggles]

Mach, agree with you 100%.
Companies are working people harder, longer and with as little of the cheapest support as they can get away with until an accident eventually occurs.
And then they will spend money making sure the individual and not the board carries the can.
Lots of sayings in aviation, in my top 5 is
If you think safety is expensive, try having an accident

[dogcharlietree]

its all easy in hind site, I have had winds a lot stronger than forecast out in the pacific as well, however with that in mind and the fact that the weather was consistently bad at YSNF for the entire time of the flight, that should have been enough to get the crew to change tack and divert .... earlier.

Hindsight!!! Holy Moly, it's not hindsight. The crew should have been monitoring the fuel "how goes it" from top of climb. Throw in bad weather at destination and their plastic whizz-wheels should have almost melted. This would have also detected any fuel leak. Fair dinkum, don't these guys learn anything from their SCPL subjects?

What we did know was NOT to persist with multiple approaches
Good post Mach E Avelli.

[Jabawocky]

framer agreed.

If and I mean if it had a colour map GPS..... a GNS430/530W (even a G495) the minima for the RNAV is quite good with DGPS and with a VERY accurate runway aligned and accurate QNH set I would bust the minima a little bit too. Very carefully so long as you were very accurately aligned. Problem is if the fog is thick as custard right to the ground...... :eek:

Now if they only had a NDB and VOR to use, which are not runway aligned approaches, you are stuffed!

How the heck did they get into this situation to begin with? :uhoh:

[Counter-rotation]

Ha i thought it was every pilots dream to be Cleo batchelor of the year

Mate, you're nearly right :E Allow me to correct you:

It's every Cleo Batchelor of the Year's dream to be a pilot!! ;)

I thought of that as a bit of a laugh, we'll see how much truth is in it, in the fullness of time

Judging by the previous post (a bit strong I thought, but I don't personally know those concerned, or the history) hmmm,,,

CR

[Cypher]

Righty.. let see if we can cut thru some of the BS.. from the guy who would happily bust MDA at Norfolk with no Glideslope guidance whatsoever, to the other guy that thinks you can open the back door of the Westwind thru the mid mounted centre fuel tank to get access to the liferaft that was supposedly stowed in the main rear baggage locker....

The aircraft is being listed as VH-NGA, a Westwind 2.

The Westwind 2 can quite happily carry about 9000 lbs of fuel without the additional ferry tank fitted. (give or take a couple of hundred lbs, it's hot in Apia so your not gonna get your full fuel load)

APW-NLK is listed as 1441 nm, great circle routing.

It'll also quite happily fly at 440 kts TAS at altitude.

Fuel burn from memory was roughly 2000 lbs /hr for the first hour (worse case scenario), 1800 lbs/hr for the next and can get as low as 1200 lbs/hr if you hang it off LRC. Holding at S/L for the Westwind according to the QRH is around 1000 lbs an hour at low weights.

So with that in mind, one would think even at full speed ahead (.74 if ISA with EECS fitted), with a full fuel load on the Westwind, at nil wind speeds, you would easily make NLK with roughly 3500 lbs of fuel in the tanks. It's only 3.4 hrs APW-NLK. This is a piece of pi$$ for a WW1124a. Even with a 100 knot headwind over the flight. You'd still get to NLK with 2100 lbs in the tanks.

The longest leg I've flown in a Westwind was 2060 nm long, and we still had enough fuel for a 250 nm divert to alternate with 30 mins fuel overhead.

At around the weights the Westwind would be at, the QRH gives a alternate diversion fuel required at a air distance of 450 nm, as 1800 lbs. That includes a MA, climb, cruise to Alt and descent to alternate.
Even with 2100 lbs in tanks, you'd have enough for ONE shot then off to your nearest alternate, which would be Noumea.

So why is this guy a hero, and why were they swimming?!

[Dances With Dingoes]

OK, 4 Prozac later. I am a little calmed down now, so all I want to know at the moment is why did such a strapping young (crosseyed) lad, run out of fuel?

For tomorrow, I got some really good questions but I am just a bit tired so will save them for then.

CR, me, harsh, wat eva. ;p

DD

[Iron Bar]

double post double post

[Managers Perspective]

Does anyone know which CASA office controls the AOC?

Hopefully not another BATFO one.

MP

[Checkboard]

Having said all that, successfully dictching[sic] a jet at night in open water without killing or even injuring anyone on board was probably a better effort than many of us, if we were honest with ourselves, would expect we'd be able to do ourselves.
Actually, just about every ditching I have heard of has been at least partly successful. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_landing#Survival_rates_of_passenger_plane_water_ditchi ngs) Ditching successfully doesn't require the steely-eyed aviation god most people assume.
I'm very glad I never found myself in such a position.
I'll second that, though!
"It's unlike the Hudson River [ditching], which was done in good visual conditions, by a very experienced pilot and co-pilot, and they would have had training exercises in a simulator"In 12 years and 10,000 hours of airline flying, including about 50 days in the sim, I have never undergone a ditching exercise in the sim! It's an event so rare that precious sim time isn't spent on the exercise. (I have, of course, undergone raft and life jacket training in the pool a few times, and discussed the event.)

[CafeClub]

Don't mean this to be a hijack, but I see that Pel-Air has lost three Westwinds. There are a reasonable number in service globally, is this hull loss ratio unusual?

[Iron Bar]

TAF YSNF 201016Z 2012/2106 09010KT 9999 SCT020 OVC025 FM202300 08012KT 9999 SCT025 BKN030 RMK

TAF YSNF 200404Z 2006/2024 11010KT 9999 SCT020 BKN030 RMK

TAF YSNF 192210Z 2000/2018 11010KT 9999 SCT020 BKN030 RMK

TAF YSNF 191637Z 1918/2012 11010KT 9999 SCT020 BKN030 RMK

TAF YSNF 190427Z 1906/1924 14012KT 9999 SCT020 BKN030 RMK

TAF YSNF 182244Z 1900/1918 14012KT 9999 SCT035 RMK

TAF AMD YSNF 182120Z 1821/1912 14012KT 9999 SCT030 RMK

TAF YSNF 181630Z 1818/1912 16012KT 9999 -SHRA BKN010 FM190200 16012KT 9999 -SHRA BKN020 FM190600 16012KT 9999 SCT030 TEMPO 1818/1824 4000 SHRA BKN005 RMK

TAF TAF YSNF 181030Z 1812/1906 26008KT 9999 -SHRA BKN010 FM181500 16012KT 9999 -SHRA BKN010 FM190200 16012KT 9999 -SHRA BKN020 TEMPO 1812/1824 4000 SHRA BKN005 RMK

TAF AMD YSNF 180958Z 1810/1824 26008KT 9999 -SHRA BKN010 FM181500 16012KT 9999 -SHRA BKN010 TEMPO 1810/1824 4000 SHRA BKN005 RMK

TAF AMD TAF AMD YSNF 180803Z 1808/1824 26008KT 9999 BKN010 FM181500 16012KT 9999 -SHRA BKN010 RMK

TAF YSNF 180437Z 1806/1824 26008KT 9999 SCT020 FM181500 16012KT 9999 -SHRA SCT010 BKN020 RMK

TAF AMD TAF AMD YSNF 180429Z 1804/1818 30012KT 9999 SCT020 FM180600 26008KT 9999 SCT020 RMK

TAF AMD YSNF 172204Z 1722/1818 30015KT 9999 BKN006 FM180600 26008KT 9999 SCT020 RMK

TAF YSNF 171637Z 1718/1812 34010KT 8000 HZ BKN005 FM172200 30015KT 9999 SCT015 FM180600 26008KT 9999 SCT020 RMK

TAF YSNF 171017Z 1712/1806 34010KT 8000 HZ BKN005 FM172200 30015KT 9999 HZ SCT015 RMK

TAF AMD YSNF 170743Z 1707/1724 34015KT 9999 SCT010 FM170900 34010KT 8000 HZ BKN005 FM172200 30015KT 9999 HZ SCT015 RMK

TAF TAF YSNF 170527Z 1706/1724 34015KT 9999 SCT010 BKN025 FM171200 34010KT 9999 HZ BKN005 FM172200 30015KT 9999 HZ SCT015 RMK

TAF YSNF 162304Z 1700/1718 34015KT 9999 SCT010 BKN025 FM171200 34010KT 9999 HZ BKN005 RMK

TAF YSNF 161617Z 1618/1712 31006KT 9999 SCT015 SCT035 FM162300 35015KT 9999 SCT010 SCT030 RMK


Not sure of the actual time of departure but these should cover it.

Sourced from Navlost.eu

[CLEAROF]

Your being watched......by entertainment reporters....

TV star Simmone Jade McKinnon pregnant to hero pilot Dominic James | TV | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/story/0,28383,26379680-10229,00.html)

"Online aviation industry forums were rife with questions about whether the aircraft's operator Pel-Air faces sanctions by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

Industry sources were staggered that the aircraft could be left without sufficient fuel to fly to an alternative destination.

Pel-Air would not address allegations it had not met aviation regulations. "The pilot complied with the company operations manual," is all the company said in a statement.


Are those industry sources PPRUNE??

[Checkboard]

If the ditching was at around 1030z, after a 3.5 hour flight and an hour completing approaches, then take-off would have been about 0600z, with briefing an hour to an hour and a half before that - say 0430z (as a scratchpad calculation.)

[Inwithagroundstation]

Of course all you Monday Morning Quarterbacks who are reacting to media reports and speculation would have done it differently.

Hey here is an idea, why don't we express our thoughts and prayers to the Captain, F/O and passengers and let the rest come out in the investigation.

[Iron Bar]

Ok, according to the airport manager Mr Glenn Robinson, the ditching happened about 2130 local. ysnf utc +1130, therefore about 181000Z. time of departure 06 to 0700?? sure the prelim' report will have the actual.

read the last taf first.


TAF AMD YSNF 180958Z 1810/1824 26008KT 9999 -SHRA BKN010 FM181500 16012KT 9999 -SHRA BKN010 TEMPO 1810/1824 4000 SHRA BKN005 RMK

TAF AMD TAF AMD YSNF 180803Z 1808/1824 26008KT 9999 BKN010 FM181500 16012KT 9999 -SHRA BKN010 RMK

TAF YSNF 180437Z 1806/1824 26008KT 9999 SCT020 FM181500 16012KT 9999 -SHRA SCT010 BKN020 RMK

TAF AMD TAF AMD YSNF 180429Z 1804/1818 30012KT 9999 SCT020 FM180600 26008KT 9999 SCT020 RMK

For those with experience flying into this part of the world, what's the legal (cao 82, operator ops manual, jepp or dap) and PRACTICAL alternate min for this aerodrome???????


(Ack to Checkers timings. just posted prior to me)

[Iron Bar]

Would have done it differently???


YES


Carried fuel for an alternate and used it to go there.

[Fantome]

Ah, the time it consumes, reading all 188 posts. So many repetitive. So many puerile, vacuous and typical of proone blather at it's most gruelling.

(Better keeping trap shut and being thought idiot, than opening same, resulting in no doubt whatever.)

[KLN94]

DD

You sound suspiciously like a never-has-been wannabe pilot who is jealous with the angle the media are taking on this particular event.

Your vexatious, purile and unsubstatiated personal observations obviously stem from your irrelevant existence somewhere in the 'western suburbs' where you view persons who live more eastwards from you and who happen to be more physically appealing than you, with jealous contempt.

You purport to be an expert on aviation procedures and privy to some inside information yet you seem to be consumed by a personal vendetta agenda that exposes you as a fraud.

Get back in your hole D**k Head and wait for the true factors of this event to be revealed.

KLN

0900/21 - I see you have deleted your highly defamatory and self serving post - the first evidence of commonsense you have displayed.

[Moniker]

From the news reports of last night, I noted with interest the comments from the patient's husband ..

he was surprised that the ditching itself was not as bad as he expected impact wise, but the cabin filled with water very quickly as the door blew in, and they all escaped through an emergency window.

As for the lady herself being a walk on patient - barely and only with considerable assistance.

[Checkboard]

The opening mechanism for the Westwind door swings it inside about six inches, before then allowing it to swing out. When I heard of the ditching, I was amazed that they were able to open the door against the water pressure - obviously they weren't!

[The Voice]

Guessing here, that as the life raft would have been too big to pass through the escape window, and as there wasn't any hope of opening the door outward due water pressure, that ends the discussion about non deployment of the raft regardless of where it was?

[Cypher]

The liferaft isn't that big, nor the Westwind emergency exit that small...

[bengal tiger]

Dear A1322, that diversion of the GG's RAAF 737 BBJ, happened months before the incident of the PelAir ditching off NLK.
The reason for the GG's diversion was the pilot of the RAAF 737 BBJ had to battle 45+ kts cross winds, and 3 missed approaches. BUT the to the amazement of the RAAF pilots, the RPT Our Airline 737 made 1 approach and successfully landed 5 minutes after the RAAF had diverted. The RAAF pilots couldnt believe that the Our Airline 737 landed on the island.:ok:

[Torres]

I guess we must accept the Board Chairman's explanation, however given a similar set of circumstances - no Mayday call, only three in lifejackets, no life rafts, ditching two miles off shore - I think it would be natural to assume the pilot may have been attempting a home made "precision" approach during which the aircraft unintentionally impacted the sea and the lack of motion lotion may or may not be correct.

[Unregistered_]

“This is right at the gold medal level for aviation … if he’s not a hero already he is well on his way to being one,”


Yeah? We'll see.

[Capt Fathom]

Yeah? We'll see
Brilliant!

Wish I'd thought of it!!

[601]

what's the legal (cao 82, operator ops manual, jepp or dap) and PRACTICAL alternate min for this aerodrome???????

Anywhere within the range of the aircraft providing it is not an aerodrome on a "remote island" which would require an alternate.

[Mork from Ork]

Second hand, but from someone who was onboard the aircraft:

-There was no advance warning of a ditching.
-The main door was opened (not sure by whom), at which point the aircraft began to sink quickly, everyone exited through the emergency exit.
-All occupants well, apart from some seat belt bruising.

[hongkongfooey]

Here ( as predicted by one very wise PPRUNER above :ok: ) is the first sign of a turn in the media :



The pilot hailed a hero for ditching his plane safely off Norfolk Island this week may have been dangerously negligent after reportedly making the journey without enough fuel.
Captain Dominic James was praised for his "amazing" efforts in saving all six people on board the Pel-Air and Careflight jet on Wednesday night after bad weather thwarted several landing attempts on the island.
The medical evacuation plane, on its way from Samoa to Melbourne, was very low on fuel when Captain James safely landed it onto seas off the island.
But a new report has cast doubt the pilot's heroism with claims Captain James may have taken off from Apia with inadequate levels of fuel to make the journey.
The report on the Crikey website said the plane failed "to meet the requirements of the catch-all section of Civil Aviation Order CAO 82.0 (2.4), which relates to fuel reserves".
The claim could have serious consequences for Captain James and Pel-Air's owner REX, which was recently awarded lucrative medical aviation contracts, the report said.
The carrier has previously admitted the pilot ditched the plane into the sea without making a Mayday call, which goes against aviation regulations.
Earlier this week Pel-Air Aviation chairman John Sharp said he was very proud of Captain James — a former Cleo Bachelor of the Year contestant — and first officer.
"Their professionalism stood out on the day and made a substantial difference to the outcome," Mr Sharp said.
"They executed what would have to be described as a perfect landing on water," he told reporters.



Someone suggested praying, yes, I guess you could pray he keeps his licence and Pelair keep their AOC......if they deserve to :confused:

[Captain Sand Dune]

But...but......he's a Cleo Batchelor of the Year!!!

[puff]

TV star Simone Jade McKinnon pregnant to hero pilot Dominic James | The Daily Telegraph (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/entertainment/sydney-confidential/tv-star-simone-jade-mckinnon-pregnant-to-hero-pilot-dominic-james/story-e6frewz0-1225800867734)

THE hero pilot who saved the lives of his five passengers including a critically-injured woman is expecting a baby with his former girlfriend, TV favourite Simone Jade McKinnon.
Dominic James, the 33-year-old former Cleo Bachelor of the Year who on Wednesday was forced to ditch his aircraft in waters off Norfolk Island, only learned of McKinnon's pregnancy shortly after they broke up.

While sources close to the expectant parents declined to comment on the relationship, McKinnon revealed this month there was no doubt the father of her child would play a role in the baby's life.

She starred in Channel 9's McLeod's Daughters and was this year nominated for a Gold Logie.

Australia's Next Top Model mentor Jonathon Pease said that James - his friend of 20 years - was taking the near-death incident "in his stride".

"When I read about the accident, I thought 'That's typical Dom.' He's the man I'd want next to me in a crisis. He's a legend," Pease said.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
Related CoverageToo cool: Hero pilot a magazine pin-up
.End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
His eligible bachelor status was also enshrined, his mate said.

"If he's not the most eligible bachelor after that, I don't know what you've got to do?"

But as his heroics were being praised yesterday, questions were being asked about how the aircraft ran out of fuel while enroute to Melbourne from Samoa.

Online aviation industry forums were rife with questions about whether the aircraft's operator Pel-Air faces sanctions by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

Industry sources were staggered that the aircraft could be left without sufficient fuel to fly to an alternative destination.

Pel-Air would not address allegations it had not met aviation regulations. "The pilot complied with the company operations manual," is all the company said in a statement.

Pel-Air also confirmed the aircraft had been equipped with seven lifejackets, even though only three passengers were able to access them in time. The group was left floating in the water, huddled around those lucky enough to be wearing lifejackets.

There were also two liferafts on board the plane, capable of carrying six people each.

The remaining lifejackets, and both liferafts, sank with the aircraft three minutes after it hit the water.

Mr James has not spoken publicly about the incident since returning to Sydney, but friends said he was taking it in his stride.

The president of the Young Variety Club, which is holding a festive fundraiser next weekend, was quick to tell organisers: "Don't worry, I'll be right to go in the Santa Fun Run".

He has used his celebrity connections in his fundraising, calling on mates like Pease, Laura Csortan and Lizzy Lovette to volunteer their time.

[Capt Kremin]

Wonder if he'll show us..."Magnum"?;)

[Gnd Power]

Was going to suggest that NLK needs a GNSS approach apart from the useless SCAT approach but a check of the AIP shows a GNSS approach for runways 04, 11 and 29.

Higher minima than the VOR but at least the runway 11 approach is now runway aligned, with the missed approach the same heading, (107 degrees). Much better than the runway 11 VOR's 15 degree offset

About time!! (Too many pages to read to see if this have been mentioned before).

The plate is anointed NEW PROC and dated 19 NOV 2009.

Has any mention been made of the type of approaches that were attempted?

[tinpis]

Theres a TV series in this somewhere you know....:rolleyes:

[Checkboard]

An episode of "Big Sky (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118270/)" perhaps. :rolleyes:

Martin Henderson could play Dominic ...

[ozbiggles]

It just shows how lazy and uneducated jurnos are when they use Anon web sites to pad out their inability to do their own research in to stories as well!
I could understand using it as a lead to ask questions but it just shows how easy it would be to use a web site to make them look like the easy to manipulate sheep they are, no doubt as the policticians already know .... gives my evil mind ideas!
Keep it in mind the next time you see a story quoting unnamed sources, it is probably hacks like us chatting under false names on a web forum.

[The Truckie]

Looks like the Pilots and Pel Air will be off to the CASA Office for Orange Frappa Mocha Chinos and bikkies!!

[truth boy]

Westwind aircraft have two storage lockers that are only axcessable from outside the aircraft. Rafts are never stored here. The raft would have been placed near the door. But with the main door opening on ditching. Chances are it would have moved .I would expect the nose would have sunk quick also. 3 minutes to sink indicates to me that the foward cabin area would have been under a lot quicker. Add darkness, wave chop.ending up with a lost raft would not be impossible. My guess is they all would have been told to grab there vests. Some may have missed this in the panick.

Just my 2 cents

[Counter-rotation]

As a passenger, with ANY advance warning of a planned ditching, my panic would be to GET A BLOODY JACKET ON!!

[onetrack]

I would not choose to fly with this pilot. He runs on good luck, good looks, and poor flight planning. The crikey.com.au article by Ben Sandilands covers it all.
I would rather fly with real heroes who never run out of fuel, and who always have carefully-thought-out alternatives in their planning.

[truth boy]

I can't believe some of the crap getting posted here. Why would any of you use his past cleo appearences as judjement for his flying. What the !! Hey if I ever stuff up I hope the media don't drag out my 21st photos. You guys will go crazy.childish arguments boys. That said yes he does have a case to answer but how many of you can say you ditched a jet and lived to tell the tale ? Anyone. I thought a pilot group would be more inclined to defend each other until all facts have been aired. Boy was I wrong.

[Tempo]

Trial by all the 'experts' on Pprune. Not one of you 'mavericks' were there at the flight planning, takeoff, cruise, descent or approach phases of flight. Furthermore, not one of you were there during the approaches and subsequent missed approaches. And most importantly, not one of you were there when the two pilots discussed their options and decided on a course of action. Instead, you watch the media hype, make character assessments on him using his cleo photo and then beautifully armchair fly the sector to perfection, passing on what you would have done.

I am so disgusted by some of the comments on this thread and I am ashamed some of you are actually in the same profession as me.

[601]

Trial by all the 'experts' on PPRuNe.

You do not need to be an expert to read and apply CAO 82.0.

Sadly I have seen pilots I have flown with, pilots I have worked with and pilots who were friends who disregarded the very basic requirements of flying, whether it was flight planning, weather forecasts, fuel requirements, aircraft weight or their own limitations and are no longer with us.

At some stage the fuel would have burned down to what was required for the flight to the alternate plus reserves. At the flight planning stage this alternate fuel may have allowed for one or two approaches to be conducted. If stronger headwinds were encounter, the alternate time/fuel may have been reached at at TOD or even before TOD. This is the time to divert.

Been there done that.

[Spinnerhead]

Harden up Tempo.

[hotnhigh]

I wonder how many times the pilot has had to divert in his career?

[Kingswood]

There are NO CIRCUMSTANCES, in any civilian flying opsor non-tactical military operationsworth busting the MDA or DA for.


Gee a bit rigid there tiger. I can think of several circumstances where I would consider it; Uncontrollable engine fire, catastrophic airframe failure, and certainly fuel exhaustion (whether pilot induced or otherwise:))... One grave risk balanced against another. The pointy end of what we do every day I would have thought...

FWIW I reckon Torres has got the right idea.

[Complete]

however given a similar set of circumstances - no Mayday call, only three in lifejackets, no life rafts, ditching two miles off shore


In regards to only 3 people wearing life jackets and not the pilots I believe.

I know procedures for some companies are to don the life jacket after the aircraft has come to a complete stop. In this case, if the aircraft sunk straight away, then I believe the pilots would be more worried in getting everyone out including themselves, rather then trying to get lifejackets on and risk sinking with the aircraft. This may explain why only 3 people had life jackets on.

[swh]

How many operators have had 3 crashes with the same type of aircraft in Australia ... (Pel-Air have crashed 3 Westwinds, all at night)

Does the organisation have a systemic problem ?

Crews are generally in part at least a reflection of the organisation.

[Captain Kellogs]

My comments are from knowing the aircraft, and what its like to fly one around the pacific.

at full fuel he should have had enough fuel for an approach and diversion to NWWW, and this should have been part of his planning and descent briefing. ie, if we are not visual at the minima, we will comence the missed approach and set course of ??? for our alternate NWWW. I have said exactly that in a briefing there myself.

I know when we use to do trips to AGGH we had a PNR figured out which we updated continuously on the way, I would always brief my FO that if we didnt have an actual weather, that was better than the allternate minima we would divert,(I know someone will comment on why use the alternate minima blah blah blah...... because at this stage we are still planning to go there we aren't there yet, and airports in the pacific especially AGGH always forecast weather to be better than it is. I have got visual well below what was forecast to be there a number of times)

My PNRs were not flexible I would always have stuck to it (PNR usually worked out to be at TOD or just prior), I did have one flight that we didnt get contact with the tower until just prior to our PNR (about 3 mins before) and I had started getting ready for the diversion, and about to action it when we finally got contact. I know fuel isn't something you can play around with!

I have made some decision that pelair didnt like here and there but as soon as you pointed out you weren't comfortable using a certain airfield due to weather or distance of alternates and wouldn't use it for that flight they soon backed down. I diverted after a missed approach from one point to an alternate I chose, had the CP ring me and say why the bloody hell have you gone there, my answer was because I was PIC and thats were I decided to go! the answer from WM was oh ok fair enough.

I would just not be surprised if he didnt get weather up dates or monitor how much fuel he was burning on his way there or recalculating his min safe diversion fuel, which is something I and all the guys I flew with did, if he had been running an as you go graph, that was the norm in pelair when I was there he would have had a better awareness of the situation and doubt he would have screwed around doing approaches rather than diverting after the first one or even diverting before top of descent if he didnt have enough fuel to divert after an approach, especially when the last metar had OVC002.

I know everyone comments on how its easy to look back from the comfort of your armchair, but I have worked in the company in the same aircraft into the pacific many many times, and been in similar situations, but its not rocket science, you monitor your fuel on the way, everywhere in the pacific, you get updated weather every 30mins if it looked at all marginal, which it was. and if you were burning more fuel than planned (due to extra wind, lower level, fuel leak or any other unexplained reason) you would know about it and be able to make the decision as to what you would do i.e get onto HF tell them you were diverting and have them contact the company to get everything set up in your alternate........ the reason I know this is because I have done it when winds were stronger than forecast.... its part of your job, there is no excuse for getting to YSNF with no options left, anyone that says there is shouldn't be a captain on anything let alone an aircraft operating into remote areas of the pacific.

if people are going to use things I have said in previous posts thats fine but please dont take what I have said out of context!

and as for the training on sea survival being done before line training, when did they start doing that??? we did wet drills when I was there which was the standard go for a swim with a jacket. then have a BBQ.

The best thing out of all of this is we now know that you can successfully ditch a westwind.

let the games begin!

[601]

I know procedures for some companies are to don the life jacket after the aircraft has come to a complete stop.

I have never heard of anything so ridiculous.:confused:

You put a life jacket on during the preparation for ditching but do not inflate it.

Looking/feeling around for a life jacket would be the last thing I would want to be doing after ditching. You would need both hands free to go hand over hand to the nearest exit, not one hand holding on the a life jacket and trying to find the exit with the other free hand - especially at night.

[KIWI+PILOT]

Totally agree 601. But also the company I work for says in black and white. Once the aircraft has come to a complete stop, don life jacket but do not inflate.

[tio540]

There are enough experts here we don't need the ATSB.

[Car RAMROD]

Hear the patient travelled on the scheduled NLK Jet service DCT to MEL.

They must not have had much faith in another Pel WW........

[HTFU]

so do they plan on digging this thing up from the ocean bed

[hongkongfooey]

They must not have had much faith in another Pel WW........

It's not that Ram, I think they might be running out of them :uhoh:

[goldypilot]

Jezz I love PRUNE. keeps me entertained everyday with crap like this.

Look a plane ditched.
Its like the second one i know about this year in AUS.
It will happen again and we will still be talking crap on Prune.
Life never changes.

[dogcharlietree]

Not one of you 'mavericks' were there at the flight planning, takeoff, cruise, descent or approach phases of flight. Furthermore, not one of you were there during the approaches and subsequent missed approaches.

Got it in one Tempo. The PROFESSIONAL aviators would not have been there on the "descent and approach phases of flight. Furthermore, not one of you were there during the approaches and subsequent missed approaches. " Hell no. We would have been on the ground at our alternate REFUELLING.

[Checkboard]

goldy - your post should be more in the line of "Why do I put myself through this, clicking on a link to a discussion about an accident, when I know I will waste some internet space myself complaining that people are actually discussing an accident!" :rolleyes:
http://www.abfnet.com/forum/images/smilies/why.gif

Westwind aircraft have two storage lockers that are only axcessable[sic] from outside the aircraft. Rafts are never stored here. The raft would have been placed near the door. But with the main door opening on ditching. Chances are it would have moved .I would expect the nose would have sunk quick also. 3 minutes to sink indicates to me that the foward[sic] cabin area would have been under a lot quicker. Add darkness, wave chop.ending up with a lost raft would not be impossible. My guess is they all would have been told to grab there vests. Some may have missed this in the panick.[sic]
Getting your story straight, "truthboy"? Hope you can get the passengers to go along with it ...
Trial by all the 'experts' on PPRuNe. Not one of you 'mavericks' were there at the flight planning, takeoff, cruise, descent or approach phases of flight. Furthermore, not one of you were there during the approaches and subsequent missed approaches. And most importantly, not one of you were there when the two pilots discussed their options and decided on a course of action. Instead, you watch the media hype, make character assessments on him using his cleo photo and then beautifully armchair fly the sector to perfection, passing on what you would have done.
Actually, yes, I am an 'expert', and would be considered so by any court in the land. I am endorsed, with over 1200 hours on this type, have worked for Pel Air in the past, and have been a professional in the industry for over 20 years with 12,000 hours in jet operations around the world, including long over water legs to remote islands (Christmas and Cocos, not Norfolk). Have to say, I haven't commented on the Cleo thing, but I understand it coming up as it isn't a "paparazzi" shot - but something he obviously posed for - so it does have some relevance to his past. I haven't watched the media hype, because I'm not in country at the moment. :hmm:
Furthermore, not one of you were there during the approaches and subsequent missed approaches.So, that's investigations sorted then - if you weren't flying the aircraft, you don't know what went on. No need for courts either.
"I'm afraid M'lud, we can't discuss this mugging, as my learned friend the prosecutor wasn't actually involved in beating up the old lady hisself!" :rolleyes:

[tio540]

I would expect the nose would have sunk quick also. 3 minutes to sink indicates to me that the foward cabin area would have been under a lot quicker.


This is not a WW1124 but the attitude in the water is important. Without crew they are naturally aft COG.

YouTube - Small Jet over shoots short runway and lands in the water. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlreuXRW95g&feature=PlayList&p=F2542FEDBF11EB2A&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=28)

[Philthy]

This one?

http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l158/Philthy88/IAI-1124A-Westwind-2-VH-NGA-3-8-07.jpg

[Checkboard]

Given the Westwind has mid-mounted wings, and there was a swell running in the ocean, I don't think any valid comparisons can be made.

[John Citizen]

231 replies over 12 pages in less than 3 days. :eek:.........we must be going for the record here

A young Cleo bachelor pilot ditches a jet just off the coast off a remote island.

If only the pilot had a Ron Jeremy moustache (hey, it is Movember isn't it ?), a plane load of playboy bunnies in the back and they didn't ever get rescued. Imagine the controversy then.

I am looking forward to the movie soon :p

[Keg]

Judging by most of the comments on this thread we need to change it from PPRUNE to perhaps APRUNE. I'm not sure if the A stands for 'amateur' or perhaps something anatomically aligned. How quick we are to judge without the facts. How quick we are to slag off journos when the don't get it right (all the time) but how quick we are to latch on to them as pure fact when what they report conforms to our own ignorant picture of the event.

I wasn't there but I'm looking forward to reading the report. Until then the crew get the benefit of the doubt and I'll let the professional investigators do their thing.

I'm with Tempo.

[Iron Bar]

Wonder how the insurance assessor will take it??? Yeah no worries shaggs. Aeroplane with no fuel in tanks at bottom of ocean?? LETS PAY OUT 100% "Med" pax swimming with the sharks. I sense post traumatic stress disorder looming large.

And for once, rightly so.

Cleo dude, you dip me or my mates in the ocean and ruby rose won't save you. Hero bull**** be stuffed. Hope Pel Air has indemnified staff. Big FAT Singapore Target.

[Iron Bar]

The Facts?

APRUNE???

A stands for

Aeroplane . . . .

A deficit of Fuel . . . .

A lucky escape . . . .

An aeroplane on the sea floor . . . .

THE COLD HARD FACTS

[Car RAMROD]

Always liked your photos Philthy, nice work. :ok:
Makes the Westwind look good....


Wonder if there are better locations to make a "planned ditching" off NLK... such as near where the boats get launched.

Had this Capt. flown thru NLK before? If not then maybe he wasn't quite aware as just how ****e the weather can be...



Hongkongfooey, they may be running out of Westwinds, but seeing as though both the replacement WW and the scheduled service went to MEL, would be interesting to know if and why the patient actually travelled on the scheduled service instead.....

[Checkboard]

Given the information in the public domain, perhaps the thread title should be changed to:

"Westwind CFIT off NLK"

:hmm:

[silversaab]

Good pic Philthy

VH-NGA....

Not Going Anywhere

[Wally Mk2]

Question for the WW drivers out there. With gear up what's the A/C's lighting like? As in are the ldg lights on the gear legs as they are in a Lear? Would make for a very scary water ldg with little in the way of head lights!
I wonder how this crew are feeling about now. Can't imagine what they feel like after reading well over 200 posts just here never lone what's being said elsewhere. Must be hard on them at the moment all the same. It will be trial by media, always has always will be in this country. Punishing them to the full extent of the law achieves little, only takes out two pilots from this at times precarious industry of ours it's about the education process that follows from the boffins that has any real effect here on such future incidents.And yes they will keep happening as long as man flies we'll all be back here bouncing off the walls once again next time!
As they say................... "to be continued"...........

Wmk2

[Checkboard]

Landing lights are on the tip tanks - see photo!

[Wally Mk2]

"Check" the lights on the tip tanks maybe the same as the Lear, Recognition lights & from that photo I can't quite see if the Ldg lights are on the U/C legs.

Wmk2

[Cypher]

Yes, tip landing lights, with additional landing lights on the gear when it's put down. Would have easily had power as if I remember correctly, the landing lights will revert back off the main battery. Flaps were also electrically powered.

I also wonder about this report of the main door being opened. The Westwind has two outflow valves under the main door on the bottom of the fuselage which are pneumatically closed. These valves aren't like the airliner door type design and you cannot manually close them. You wouldn't need to open the main door to have water come flooding through the front of the aircraft.

Also the main door has inflatable door seal which when deflated was quite easy to see daylight through...

[tio540]

Also the main door has inflatable door seal which when deflated was quite easy to see daylight through...


Sometimes you could see daylight when inflated.

[tinpis]

Probably dumb question, will there be any attempt to raise it?

Or dive it?

[tio540]

The FDR and CVR must surely be on the top of the list.

[Norfolk Hawk]

Sorry to burst your bubble Tempo, but as a person that lives here on Norfolk Island who watched all 3 missed approaches and listened to all the coms, and pretty well everything else, most people are right on the money with what has happened.

How about a bit more of a plug for the real hero's, being the Norfolk people who risked their lives by putting a fishing boat in the water a night with crap wx. Lucky for local knowledge! Just imagine if the pilot did communicate earlier knowing the circumstances and ask for a bit of "local" knowledge from some of seasoned aviators on island, he might have got in through the gap on 04.

[haroldcool]

Below is direct from CAO...

remote island means:
(a) Christmas Island; or
(b) Lord Howe Island; or
(c) Norfolk Island.

2.3 The minimum safe fuel for an aeroplane undertaking a flight to a remote
island is:
(a) the minimum amount of fuel that the aeroplane should carry on that
flight, according to the operations manual of the aeroplane’s operator,
revised (if applicable) as directed by CASA to ensure that an adequate
amount of fuel is carried on such flights; or
(b) if the operations manual does not make provision for the calculation of
that amount or has not been revised as directed by CASA — whichever
of the amounts of fuel mentioned in paragraph 2.4 is the greater.
2.4 For the purposes of subparagraph 2.3 (b), the amounts of fuel are:
(a) the minimum amount of fuel that will, whatever the weather conditions,
enable the aeroplane to fly, with all its engines operating, to the remote
island and then from the remote island to the aerodrome that is, for that
flight, the alternate aerodrome for the aircraft, together with any reserve
fuel requirements for the aircraft; and
Civil Aviation Order 82.0
5
(b) the minimum amount of fuel that would, if the failure of an engine or a
loss of pressurisation were to occur during the flight, enable the
aeroplane:
(i) to fly to its destination aerodrome or to its alternate aerodrome for the
flight; and
(ii) to fly for 15 minutes at holding speed at 1 500 feet above that
aerodrome under standard temperature conditions; and
(iii) to land at that aerodrome.

[PA39]

I doubt if there was a dispensation approval, but one never knows about "mates rates".

[The Green Goblin]

was writing cheques his body couldn't cash

Well it's almost certain especially as he was working for Pelair, the worst payers in Australian GA!

Metro FOs elsewhere earn more than a Pelair skipper, I'd hate to see what a Westwind wage would be :=

[Marauder]

Ladies and Gents,


3A Conditions for passenger-carrying charter operations to remote
Islands

3A.1

Each certificate authorising charter operations for the carriage of passengers is
subject to the condition that an aeroplane operated under the certificate is to
carry passengers on a flight to a remote island only if:

(a) the aeroplane has more than 1 engine; and

(b) the total amount of fuel carried by the aeroplane at the start of the flight is
not less than the minimum safe fuel for the aeroplane for that flight; and

(c) the alternate aerodrome for the aeroplane for that flight is not an aerodrome located on a remote island.

Has anyone missed something here (hint: read the title)


OK if you missed it the key words are passenger-carrying charter operations


This flight was a medivac or air ambulance, therefore Aerial Work.
Check the CASA website for Pel-Air AOC and you will find that they are approved for Aerial Work- Ambulance Functions- ISRAEL 1124 1124A.


CAO 82 simply does not apply here, with regard to remote islands


Like Keg and others have said, get off of their case, they and their pax are alive, and looks like Capt James and F/O Culpit did an amazing job.

Let the investigation run its proper course. If the crew Pel-Air or CASA or others are subsequently found culpable, then let due process follow, but

It is insulting that those without facts, just hype, media spin, bar room speculation and “knows someone who knows someone” can have such positive conclusions as to what definitely caused this accident.

BTW if you are “knows someone who knows someone” you have a duty to be discussing it with either CASA or ATSB, certainly not here

[spirax]

If the Charter rule does not apply as it was an Aerialwork operation, then I expect CASA might do what they did for the said departure without lights at LST - operating in a reckless manner or somesuch! just have to wait and see I guess. (the LST case goes back to court later this month - what is that 6 or so years after the event!!) The system (what system?) is beyond help.

[zanzibar]

Marauder, how much simpler aviation would be if we could just selectively use the bits of legislation and regulations that suit us on the day. You simply cannot read only bits of CAO 82 but in its entirety. You will find that the paragraph you've selected is complementary to the rest of the Order. The heading for paragraph 2.3 is: "The minimum safe fuel for an aeroplane undertaking a flight to a remote island is:" Don't see that it differentiates between types of operations but is all encompassing. Anyway, by your own words, it was an aerial work operation and therefore the charter paragraph you selected effectively invalidates your own argument .

CAO 82 most DEFINITELY applies.


As to RAMROD's comment and also that of Norfolk Hawk - a bit of communication from the aircraft as to their plight might have resulted in the suggestion they ditch closer to the harbour and in an area where boats were waiting (or at least could get to quickly) rather than in an area unknown to potential searchers and rescuers who found them mainly because of luck which overcame the inadequate planning.