Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Accidents and Close Calls
Reload this Page >

Loss of separation between A330 VH-EBK & 787 G-ZBKF near Sydney 28 Sept 2022

Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

Loss of separation between A330 VH-EBK & 787 G-ZBKF near Sydney 28 Sept 2022

Old 7th Mar 2023, 01:35
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 287
Received 39 Likes on 31 Posts
Loss of separation between A330 VH-EBK & 787 G-ZBKF near Sydney 28 Sept 2022

I couldn't find this Loss of Separation incident reported elsewhere on PPRuNe, hence started this thread. I can delete again if advised it is discussed elsewhere.

Became aware of the incident via Australian Aviation on-line article:

British Airways 787 and Qantas A330 fly too close – Australian Aviation

The recently released ATSB final report can be found at:

Loss of separation involving Airbus A330, VH-EBK, and Boeing 787, G-ZBKF near Sydney Airport, New South Wales on 28 September 2022 | ATSB

While I haven't read the actual report, Adam Thorn appears to provide a good summary of it in his article. The worry is what he wrote at the end of his article:
The ATSB final report notes that, in the last decade in Australia, there has been eight loss of separation occurrences involving aircraft cleared on a SID, where a following aircraft has climbed faster than the preceding aircraft.... Of these, six were at Sydney, and five involved the DEENA 7 SID.
“Airservices Australia has advised the DEENA 7 SID has been redesigned to remove the two conditional requirements of the procedure,” Macleod said.
“The changes are planned to be part of the first implementation package for Western Sydney International Airport, but as the timeframe for this implementation is unknown, the ATSB will continue to actively monitor this open safety issue.”
So why would a departure process be re-designed (presumably in light of safety issues having been identified) but seemingly then not introduced swiftly? I would hate to think ASTB now needs to 'actively monitor' this issue until there is an actual collision rather than 'only' the loss of separation between aircraft (already 6 of them for this particular departure route)!


helispotter is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2023, 10:01
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: I would tell you, but my GPS keeps getting jammed
Posts: 166
Received 48 Likes on 19 Posts
Why did the controller think that an A330 on a 3-hour flight was going to weight like a 787 on an 8-hour flight?
Originally Posted by helispotter
So why would a departure process be re-designed (presumably in light of safety issues having been identified) but seemingly then not introduced swiftly? I would hate to think ASTB now needs to 'actively monitor' this issue until there is an actual collision rather than 'only' the loss of separation between aircraft (already 6 of them for this particular departure route)!
It's a valid question. They quickly redesigned and introduced the G/A procedure for 34R after a QF 737 and A330 almost flew into each other over Mascot, and the final report isn't even out yet.
VHOED191006 is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2023, 11:01
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... It's Permanent!
Posts: 4,261
Received 154 Likes on 77 Posts
Regardless of aircraft type, GAs due to a departing aircraft on the same runway are problematic.

Airbuses are not renowned for their climb performance!

Capt Fathom is online now  
Old 7th Mar 2023, 13:42
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Age: 46
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Capt Fathom
Airbuses are not renowned for their climb performance!
As on most twin engine aircraft the required thrust is dictated by single engine out climb rate at max take off weight, climb rates with both engines working will be very similar between manufacturers depending on take off weight. Four engine aircraft are a different story, as single engine out is not as limiting.
procede is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2023, 22:44
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,754
Received 178 Likes on 85 Posts
Originally Posted by procede
As on most twin engine aircraft the required thrust is dictated by single engine out climb rate at max take off weight, climb rates with both engines working will be very similar between manufacturers depending on take off weight.
Sounds like you've never seen a 757 taking off.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2023, 06:57
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Age: 46
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
Sounds like you've never seen a 757 taking off.
Indeed a bit of an exception, as they are designed for short take off. But then they aren't exactly efficient...
procede is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2023, 00:09
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: britain
Posts: 672
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by procede
Indeed a bit of an exception, as they are designed for short take off. But then they aren't exactly efficient...
If they are''nt efficient. Why are they still in service after 40 years?
bean is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2023, 00:36
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Western Europe
Posts: 292
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Point is the SID was conditional on reaching an altitude. Different weights, different climb rates equals different turn points. Bear in mind this happened in Austronaut land where everything aviation has already been worked out. Maybe a delaying vector would have helped, maybe no system is perfect, total risk probably low here and also manageable with speed control. In any case closest distance is relative to stage of flight and local conditions and restrictions otherwise we would never have parallel ops or vfr ops on secondary runways.
Consol is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2023, 05:41
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: britain
Posts: 672
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by Capt Fathom
Regardless of aircraft type, GAs due to a departing aircraft on the same runway are problematic.

Airbuses are not renowned for their climb performance!
This was not a go around. Read the report
bean is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2023, 05:49
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... It's Permanent!
Posts: 4,261
Received 154 Likes on 77 Posts
Originally Posted by bean
Read the report
I have read the report.
Someone else bought up a GA incident which I added to!
Capt Fathom is online now  
Old 13th Mar 2023, 17:01
  #11 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by VHOED191006
Why did the controller think that an A330 on a 3-hour flight was going to weight like a 787 on an 8-hour flight?.
Never been in a TWR I guess. And how will we know this in advance ? t he A330 could have been at MTOW tankering fuel ( a rather usual situation nowadays) and the 787 empty on a ferry flight , and the performance reversed. We do not have this info on the strips. The design of the SID appears to be wrong in this case , and that is not made by controllers..
ATC Watcher is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.