PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Virgin Aircraft 'Emergency' Landing
View Single Post
Old 19th Dec 2013, 01:56
  #823 (permalink)  
Sarcs
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,733
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs down "From the sublime to the ridiculous???"

Has Beaker taken his politically correct, penny pinching mantra to a whole new level??

Hmm..so instead of a serious, series of "please explain" Safety Recommendations equally distributed across the various DIPs to this incident..Beaker recommends a 'love in'...FFS!

Here's Ben's take on it all :
Are the Mildura fog incident warnings being ignored?
Ben Sandilands | Dec 19, 2013 1:03PM

There is not a word in the ATSB report about inquiring into the greedy, stupid and dangerous situation that regulatory failure in terms of fuel requirements for Australian domestic flights gives rise to, and which exposed Qantas and Virgin 737s to such a dangerous situation as the one that arose at Mildura this last winter.


Some very serious questions arose about fuel regulations and inaccurate weather forecasts affecting flights in Australia in June this year when Qantas and Virgin Australia 787s heading for Adelaide were forced to divert to Mildura and make below minimum conditions landings in dense and unforecast fog.

The sequence of events and the issues arising were reported here, and are reported again, in even more detail, in this morning’s release by the ATSB of an interim report into the incidents.

But in summary, the Qantas flight, which had originated in Sydney, with 152 people on board, landed at Mildura on its first attempt with 2100 kgs of fuel remaining in its tanks.

The Virgin Australia flight, which began in Brisbane, with 91 people on board, engaged in a more prolonged but futile wait for the fog to lift, aborted its first landing attempt, and came to a halt after its second and successful attempt with only 535 kgs of fuel remaining, which would have been insufficient for a third attempt.

The cabin was prepared for a possible crash landing, with the crew calling BRACE, BRACE, BRACE on touch down under extenuating circumstances detailed in both of these ATSB reports.

There were two things in common to each flight.

They were caught out by incorrect weather forecasting, not just at Adelaide, but at Mildura, to which they diverted on the basis of a fog free forecast.

And they were, incredibly for a developed first world country like Australia, allowed to fly without fuel for an alternative airport between Australian cities, which was arguably an even bigger regulatory failure than the pathetic oceanic fuel rules that applied with such excellent effect to the Pel-Air air ambulance flight which was ditched in the sea near Norfolk Island in 2009.

Today’s ATSB interim report into the Mildura fog events is mainly about its saying it “is planning to convene a safety forum in respect of the provision of operational information to the flight crews in this occurrence, and more generally.

“This forum is planned to include representatives from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, Airservices Australia, the Bureau of Meteorology, the operators of VH-YIR and VH-VYK, and other relevant parties.”

The ATSB will also launch a research study into the unreliability of aviation meteorological forecasts.
Comment..FFS!

Addendum: wildsky comment-
wildsky
Posted December 19, 2013 at 1:52 pm | Permalink
I guess this “safety forum in respect of the provision of operational information to the flight crews in this occurrence, and more generally” and the “research study into the unreliability of aviation meteorological forecasts” will be rolled out eventually as the Government response to:
“Recommendation 24
9.106 The committee recommends that the relevant agencies investigate appropriate methods to ensure that information about the incidence of, and variable weather conditions at, Norfolk Island is available to assist flight crews and operators managing risk that may result from unforseen weather events.”
Despite the Chief Commissioner selectively quoting the Bureau of Met’s Norfolk forecasting reliability data to disguise the real and identified risk levels, the reality was that all of the clues were presented to the ATSB and CASA that we had, and still have, a significant operational problem. Mildura, or many other mainland aerodromes, do have lower risks of forecasting errors than remote islands – but the risk still exists and the Mildura event showed just how quickly things can change from risk to actual danger to life and limb.
Safety forums and research studies are what you do when you don’t really want to do anything – they are nice shows of interest but have no weight in achieving change.
Makes me so glad every time I hear “safety is our number one priority”…

Last edited by Sarcs; 19th Dec 2013 at 07:41.
Sarcs is offline