A timely reminder given the wet season is upon us

[Capt Claret]

From the ATSB web site. http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2005/AAIR/aair200506780.aspx
At approximately 1620 CST1 on 17 December 2005, a Fokker 100 series aircraft, registered VH-FWI, with 14 passengers and a crew of 5 was returning to Darwin on a charter flight from the Indonesian port of Kupang.

On approach to Darwin, the crew were instructed by air traffic control to hold approximately 50 NM to the south of Darwin due to thunderstorms at the airport. The crew reported that, while holding in instrument meteorological conditions at approximately 16,000 ft above ground level, and between 6 and 8 NM from any storm cells, the aircraft was stuck by lightning.

While the aircraft was still holding, approximately 20 minutes after the lighting strike, the number-2 hydraulic system low quantity warning light illuminated and the number-1 hydraulic system quantity was observed to be reducing. The aircraft was then immediately tracked for a landing on runway 29 at Darwin.

The number-1 hydraulic system low quantity warning light illuminated when the crew selected the landing gear and flap, early on final approach to land. The landing was continued and the aircraft was able to be taxied to the gate.

An engineering examination found that two of the hydraulic return lines to the elevator boost unit and a hydraulic union and attaching line were damaged, due to electrical arcing as a result of the lightning strike. The examination also found at least two strike holes to the forward and mid-section of the aircraft fuselage. There were approximately 90 other strike related damage zones along the underside of the fuselage, landing gear doors and on the trailing edges of the wings and tailplane.

During subsequent scheduled maintenance, further melting damage was found to the elevator flight control cables.

The aircraft operator reported that the aircraft was repaired and returned to service.

And http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2005/AAIR/pdf/aair200506780_001.pdf for the full report (PDF)

[gaunty]

Capt Claret:ok:

Now that was a strike, the report didn't say whether they had to use tyre levers to get the Capt off of his seat.? :\

I knew there was a reason you insist on wearing one of those spiky alfoil hats earthed to the airframe in the wet. :E

[Centaurus]

On an allied subject, I was talking to several Metro night freight pilots that I meet as part of my job and was told the state of their weather radar on their aircraft is generally appalling. Cracked radomes, leaks in radomes allowing water entry which degrades radar efficiency, inefficient radar range, spoking and completely inoperative weather radar in many cases - all add up to a potentially dangerous situation in flight in the northern wet season as well as the risk of hitting a killer CB down south. These monster CB's do occur as witness the loss of two GA aircraft in thunderstorms in the past two years.

In most cases I am advised the crews of the Metros either do not report the unserviceable weather radar for fear of losing their jobs ( a very real possibility as there is no shortage of willing volunteers to take their place to build up turbo-prop time) - or shrug their shoulders and bash through storms knowing that GA will never change its generally poor safety culture in Australia (of course there are exceptions but precious few).

And does CASA give a stuff? Fine words but little effective action except to enforce more words into Operations Manuals about safety measures.

[Capn Bloggs]

approximately 16,000 ft above ground level, and between 6 and 8 NM from any storm cells
That wouldn't happen in your outfit would it Claret?

[Capt Claret]

'Course not Bloggs. You'd ask for the OM-2 requirements, I'd dive into the overfull box, wade through the plethora of white vinyl A5 manuals until I found OM-2, flip to page 8-4 and tell you, oops, remind you, that above A100 we should be a minimum of 10nm from a TS, but if possible 15-20nm away.

[Kanga767]

It's interesting to look at the archived BOM radar for that day and time. It was probably difficult to get any more than 8nm away from any cell...

K

[PLovett]

Capt Claret

As a matter of interest, what are your restrictions on taking off when various assorted nasties are inhabiting the same airspace?

I ask as one of your monstrous twin hair dryers was due to depart Alice Springs for Darwin the other day when there were cells to the left, cells to the right and more especially cells on track to Darwin.

Said aircraft did spend some time on blocks with engines running while the preceeding dust storm went through followed by the gallons of water and then taxied out and sat for a few minutes more before departing.

I wasn't able to follow the departure path but thought a substantial diversion was in order because of said cells on track to Darwin. The cells were over the MacDonnell Range at the time so quite close to the airport.

[Capt Claret]

PLovett

There is no specific takeoff guidance, such as if a T/S is within x nm, thou shall not depart

The guidance we have, is to avoid T/S that shows as a red radar return with auto gain by 5nm if at or below A100, 10nm above A100, and avoid by 15-20nm if possible.

The flight you mention departed on 12, after about 3 RWY changes. Fortunately a low GW with decreassing temp made a 10kt TWC departure possible, though the reported DW at takeoff was less than 5kts. The aircraft then tracked to the SSE to about 15DME, then WNW crossing the Western McDonald ranges some 30+nm AS, thence SCOTI J251.

T'was certainly a wild and woolie afternoon.

[PLovett]

Thank you for that. Yes, I expect that even the leg from Perth exercised the grey matter that afternoon. :ok:

[Capt Claret]

The inbound leg exercised the grey matter in that we knew a departure to the NW was not going to be viable. Otherwise it was a straight forward arrival ('cept for having to keep away from P229 :p ).

[tinpis]

Too many toys:p

Think of the poor old buggers in Connellan days
Which runway?...um the one that faces the way Im goin ta.

http://www.airwaysmuseum.com/aircraft%20images/DH89%20Connellan%20on%20strip.jpg

[tinpis]

Hay! Plovett old Bluey the man in the tower there long ago usda be a bookie still kickin somewhere ya know?

[podbreak]

cent, metro radars aren't fantastic at the best of times. Every sewerpipe driver has his own theory about how to best tilt em! :}

[Counter-rotation]

"melting damage was found to the elevator flight control cables" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:uhoh:
CR.

[tinpis]

yeh....F100 got cables?:confused:

[18-Wheeler]

On an allied subject, I was talking to several Metro night freight pilots that I meet as part of my job and was told the state of their weather radar on their aircraft is generally appalling. Cracked radomes, leaks in radomes allowing water entry which degrades radar efficiency, inefficient radar range, spoking and completely inoperative weather radar in many cases - all add up to a potentially dangerous situation in flight in the northern wet season as well as the risk of hitting a killer CB down south. These monster CB's do occur as witness the loss of two GA aircraft in thunderstorms in the past two years.
In most cases I am advised the crews of the Metros either do not report the unserviceable weather radar for fear of losing their jobs ( a very real possibility as there is no shortage of willing volunteers to take their place to build up turbo-prop time) - or shrug their shoulders and bash through storms knowing that GA will never change its generally poor safety culture in Australia (of course there are exceptions but precious few).
And does CASA give a stuff? Fine words but little effective action except to enforce more words into Operations Manuals about safety measures.
Got a couple of thousand hours in Metro's and I have to agree totally with that. They rarely work, and when they do they're pretty crappy.
I pretty much planned on not having one available, but when it was I didn't want to use it, as I knew it'd just fail earlier. I'd only use it when I really had to.
And I got caught out, too (http://www.billzilla.org/flying1.html).

[Kanga767]

F100 got cables

Yup, sure have.

K