At no point was the PIC given the actual weather at RIC according to conversations between ATC and the pilot. It was only during the preliminary investigation that it was brought up by an air traffic controller who was on duty at the time. All the PIC would have had available to him was the TAF’s, Metars and what he could see outside, all of which indicated fog. The pilot even reported his in-flight conditions as “visual on top” indicating to me what he saw or thought he saw was more that just “shallow fog” because above shallow fog the ground is quite visible. This would have played a major part in his decision making process especially if he thought that the other engine was OK. If and when he discovered he may have had a problem with the second engine is anyone’s guess. Did he try and see what performance was available from the good engine? From the preliminary report it would appear not.
Weather information
Aerodrome forecasts
The Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) issued an aerodrome forecast (TAF) for Bankstown Aerodrome at 0244 on 15 June 2010 with a local time validity period from 0400 to 2200 on 15 June, which encompassed the aircraft’s planned takeoff and climb in the Bankstown area. The forecast wind was variable in direction at 3 kts, the visibility was forecast to be greater than 10 km with 1 – 2 oktas of cloud at 3,500 ft above the aerodrome elevation, the outside air temperature (OAT) was forecast to be 4º C and the QNH 1032 hPa.
The BoM also issued a TAF for Richmond Aerodrome at 0303 on 15 June with local time validity period from 0400 to 2200 on 15 June. The forecast wind was variable in direction at 3 kts, the visibility was forecast to be 400 m in fog until 0900, the OAT 2º C and QNH 1032 hPa.
Actual weather information
The BoM Automatic Weather Station (AWS) located at Bankstown Aerodrome generated routine aerodrome weather reports (METAR). The METAR issued at 0800 indicated that the wind was from 340º true at 4 kts, the OAT was 6º C, the dewpoint was 5º C, the visibility was 8 km with no cloud detected and the QNH was 1033 hPa.
The Bankstown Aerodrome automatic terminal information service (ATIS) ‘Bravo’ was broadcast during the period encompassing the aircraft’s departure and subsequent return flight towards Bankstown. The ATIS information included a variable wind of 5 kts, an OAT of 6º C, CAVOK and a QNH of 1033 hPa. The pilot reported that he had received ’Bravo’ when contacting the Bankstown Surface Movement Controller at 0734, 6 minutes prior to departure.
An AWS was also located at Richmond Aerodrome and the METAR issued at 0800 indicated that the wind was calm, the OAT 4º C, the dewpoint was 4º C, the visibility was 200 m with vertical visibility information being unavailable, and the QNH was 1033 hPa. An air traffic controller who was on duty in Richmond control tower later stated that the weather conditions at the aerodrome when the aircraft was flying over the Richmond area included a clear sky with a shallow fog that reduced visibility at ground level to 300 m.