As alluded to by Capt Bloggs the Foxtrot waypoint is a potentially dangerous waypoint when conducting GPSNPAs.
In my opinion the original design criteria were put down by people with no experience in human factors as they apply to these circumstances...let alone significant experience of flying IAL procedures in general.
The characterisation of the PIC and the manner in which he was flying the approach in question is a disgrace...how can anyone not on board know
how he was flying the approach?
It is my opinion that this characterisation is blame shifting on the part of ATSB and CASA because they feel VERY exposed given the less than optimal design of GPS approaches that they have certified as acceptable in Australia.
Given the two alternative ways this accident could have occurred;
1/. The PIC was an unstable personality conducting an approach in an essentially suicidal manner or,
2/. The PIC was confused about where he was on the approach in relation to the terrain and runway, possibly because of input from a non qualified 'co pilot',
I know which I think is the more likely accurate one.
What might have stopped this accident from happening?
1/. A suitably qualified copilot...but that doesn't mittagate for single pilot ops.
2/. A $20000 moving map display. Hardly an acceptable response.
3/. A final approach phase that is referenced to a single point in space as is the case with every other IAL procedure ever published in the history of IAL procedures.
You chose.
