Firefighting plane down in NSW

[Lantern10]

Only just happened, crews rushing to the scene. Just hope he survived.

Aircraft fighting NSW bushfire crashes (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/aircraft-fighting-nsw-bushfire-crashes-20131024-2w2qw.html)

[fenland787]

Looks like he did not survive, confirmed dead at the scene according toreports.
Tragic news for his family.

[yr right]

-12 Dromader is what lost the wing.
This loss of life should never have happened CASA has been warned repeatedly of the years that over weight with the turbine modification is dangerous this is the second know accident with wing seperation from the airframe. CASA you have now no where to run. I hope you will now go to his wife and kids and expain your selfs and how sorry you are. But i bet you dont you hide in your castles and beat your ******* chest and say how good you all are well you cant hide this on away.
last transmission from aircraft
may day mayday mayday wings off.

now his wife and 3 kids have to live with what is left my heart gose out tho them after growing up in the industry i feel for you all at this time of need.
RIP David.

[Conductor]

Terrible news. RIP.

[ozaub]

ATSB report on previous wing failure is at http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/3532975/ao2008084.pdf (http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/3532975/ao2008084.pdf) . Sad anyway but so much worse if this proves to be an avoidable rerun.

[skurgler]

The Skull should be charged with manslaughter

[wild goose]

What type of aircraft was it?

[Don_Apron]

Yes very sad indeed. RIP

We are talking about affordable risk here. Can CASA afford not to let these aircraft operate in times of emergency?? All the bomber pilots are aware of the stress put on firebombing aircraft to a certain extent I am sure. There is also the severe turbulence in and around fires and hill country especially in strong to gale force winds. Not to mention the strain and aerodynamic buffeting a bomber is subject to, when dispensing material at jettison rates. Surely this is a national emergency for Australia, so get the water and retardant on. What does need looking at is the remuneration for pilots.

Grab a piece of metal and bend it long enough and often enough it will break. We all know this. The trick of course, is the determine where it will break, before it does.

What I want to know, is where are the DC10's and B747's and other heavy bombers are, the Americans use? Surely these should have been hired in. I think light aircraft and helicopters is weeing in the wind trying to fight fires on this scale.

The Dromader is an old Eastern block design, originally fitted with a 1000hp "iron" engine. Used to carry 2500 liters then IIRC. Since then some have put been fitted with turbine engines, God knows what they are carrying?

[500N]

"I think light aircraft and helicopters is weeing in the wind trying to fight fires on this scale."

It certainly looked like that on the news with some of the footage.

You could see the water work where it hit but the fire / flames were
so large either side, not sure what effect it had after 5 minutes.


Very sad. Nice words said on the news.

[Up-into-the-air]

The following was the SR following the 2008 structural failure (http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/3532975/ao2008084.pdf):

Action taken by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority

On 17 November 2011, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) informed the ATSB, ...that CASA has written to the registered operators of all Australian registered M18 Dromader aircraft type to verify that, where applicable, they have procedures for recording aircraft time in service conducting overweight operations, and for the proper factoring of overweight flight time for calculation of the airframe service life.

Responses have been received and assessed and, where necessary, CASA has conducted follow-up with particular operators.

Further verification of operator procedures is expected to occur in accordance with CASA’s surveillance program.

ATSB assessment of response

The ATSB is satisfied that the action taken by CASA adequately addresses the safety issue.AND:

Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Exemptions for overweight operations

Significant Safety issue

Operation of the M-18A in accordance with Civil Aviation Safety Authority exemptions EX56/07 and EX09/07 at weights in excess of the basic aircraft flight manual maximum take-off weight (MTOW), and up to the MTOW listed on the Type Certificate Data Sheet, may not provide the same level of safety intended by the manufacturer when including that weight on the Type Certificate.

Action taken by the CASA

On 2 December 2011, CASA advised that it would inform all M18A operators other than those that have a supplemental type certificate permitting operation to 6,600 kg, that the exemptions do not permit agricultural operations in the restricted category above 4,700 kg MTOW. CASA also advised that they will be revising the exemptions to ensure that the intended interpretation is clear to operators.

ATSB assessment of response/action

The ATSB is satisfied that, when completed, the action taken by CASA will adequately addresses the safety issue.

Is this another case of SR's not being properly surveilled by casa??

AND:

Safety fears flagged earlier over make of plane in death crash (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/safety-fears-flagged-earlier-over-make-of-plane-in-death-crash-20131024-2w4ew.html)

[Super VC-10]

What type of aircraft was it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-18_Dromader

[Sarcs]

Quote from SMH article Safety fears flagged earlier over make of plane in death crash (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/safety-fears-flagged-earlier-over-make-of-plane-in-death-crash-20131024-2w4ew.html):
The aircraft that crashed on the NSW south coast while fighting bushfires is the same make of plane aviation investigators had raised safety concerns about seven months ago.

The plane's 43-year-old pilot, David Black, died on Thursday morning when his fixed-wing aircraft crashed in rugged terrain while water-bombing a bushfire about 40 kilometres west of Ulladulla. The husband and father of three young children was from Trangie in central NSW.

It is the fourth fatal accident in Australia involving an M18 Dromader aircraft since 2006. Of those four, it is the second to have crashed while fighting bushfires.

Narromine mayor Bill McAnally said the small Trangie community of 1000 people would feel the loss immensely. ''He was trying to do the right thing, fighting the fires and for something like this to happen - it's just tragic,'' he said. ''We really feel for his family.''

He described Mr Black as a decent, hard-working family man with a big heart. ''It's a great loss to our area because he was a real community man,'' he said.

Following the spate of accidents, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau released a report in April that found a range of safety issues arose when Dromader aircraft were flown at take-off weights above 4.2 tonnes.

''The investigation identified several safety issues indirectly arising from the operation of the M18 aircraft at increased weights,'' the bureau's report in April said.

''Though some of these issues were minor in isolation, collectively the increase in risk was more significant.''

The M18 Dromader involved in the latest crash was operated by Rebel Ag in Trangie, and had been contracted to the Rural Fire Service for firefighting efforts.

As a result of the investigation earlier this year, Rebel Ag told the bureau it would make a raft of modifications to its aircraft, including fitting vortex generators on their wings. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority subsequently approved the changes.

The manager of Rebel Aerial declined to comment on Thursday.

Dromader planes are commonly used for crop dusting but are often pressed into fighting bushfires during summer.

A bureau spokesman said on Thursday it was important not to pre-judge the accident despite the findings of its report in April. A team of three investigators, including an avionics engineer, were expected to reach the scene of the crash in bushland by early Friday. Condolences to the family and friends, may DB R.I.P. Boy that RFS Fire Chief wear's his heart on his sleeve...true blue Aussie that bloke!:ok: On the crash let's not prejudge and let the bureau get in and do their job:D

[growahead]

About time we invested in at least half a dozen cl415's. It surely couldn't be that hard to attach them to a herc squadron. We're going to see lots more of these fires, and likely to occur in distant locations at the same time. Crikey, Greece can even afford them.

[bankrunner]

Montenegro, with its population of 600,000 and air force of 10 aircraft in total can afford two dedicated firefighting aircraft. Why can't we? If cash is that tight, fund it with an insurance levy in high bushfire risk areas.

In the past, at least in NSW, this was more because Koperberg doesn't like aircraft than because aircraft were actually unaffordable.

Problem I see with the 215/415 is a lack of lakes to scoop water from, and and in many cases long distances from the coast to the fireground.

Despite the smaller capacity of something like an AT-802F compared with a CL-415, given that you'd need to fill the aircraft on the ground 99% of the time anyway, wouldn't the turnaround time be lot faster on an AT-802? There is also already plenty of qualified aircrew for that type. You can also buy several 802F's for the price of a CL-415.

[601]

This is an extract from a Canadair document published when the aircraft was demonstrated in Oz


QI2 Could It Be Useful In Australia ?

Australian bush fire fighters will not begin to appreciate the support and increased personal safety the SuperScooper will provide until they work a fire with the planes overhead.

Aerial firefighting for bush fires has largely been confined to fixed-wing agricultural aircraft and helicopters, both of which have an important continuing role to play in the fight against bush fires. These aircraft have some very real advantages, but they also have some very real disadvantages, which include limited payload, ground-based operations and flying weather restrictions.

While the most effective way to utilize the punch of the SuperScooper is by early detection and rapid response - hitting the fire with a massive drop of Class A fire fighting foam to allow fire fighters direct access to the fire - the aircraft will continue to operate effectively when fire intensity and extreme weather have grounded all other aircraft.

The greatest fire threat facing Australia is not amongst the valuable forest plantations scattered around the States, but from the burgeoning urban I bush interface sprawl which was exposed in no uncertain terms during the NSW fires recently. Once the risk was confined to the Adelaide Hills, the Dandenong Ranges, and the Blue Mountains, but it has now become apparent that no urban bush land settlement, whether it be in outskirts of Perth or Brisbane, or in Lane Cove, is exempt from the risk of a high intensity and devastatingly fierce bush fire.

Arguments that all aircraft would be grounded during a fire of "Ash Wednesday" intensity are incorrect; extreme weather conditions and high intensity fires are certainly the order of the day, but there are many windows of opportunity during firefighting operations in extreme conditions where the sheer ruggedness of the purpose-built aerial fire fighter enables it to fly and fight. Fire fighters on the ground do not all go home just because the fire intensity is beyond 3OOOkW/m where it is assumed ground forces are ineffective. During the Ash Wednesday fires in South Australia in 1983, Canadair aircraft could have been flying almost continuously- after all, Resue 1, the State Rescue Helicopter, a Bell205, flew around the Adelaide Hills throughout the worst periods.
 
In any event the fundamental purpose of the SuperScooper is to put out bush fires before they rage out of control

One of the biggest criticisms of the aircraft is the supposed lack of water sources suitable for scooping. The fact is that there is more scoopable water adjacent to high risk areas (see attached maps) than the detractors would have you believe. In many, many cases, a quick survey of your fire district will indicate that scooping water is available.

The combined national firefighting forces which responded to the New South Wales fires could have been very effectively supported by Canadair aircraft. For example, the fire which almost destroyed Winmalee in the Blue Mountains could have been controlled two days before the fire reached the urban area. Scooping from the Nepean river, and with a flying distance of23 kilometers to Mt. Wilson, 2 CL-215's could have dropped at least 188,000 liters of firefighting foam on the fire before nightfall on Thursday, leaving fire crews to trek in to the fire site the next morning to black out the fire completely. Instead, nearly three days passed, with a very risky backburn conducted, before the fire hit Winmalee with terrifying force.

To the north, in the Banyabba Nature Reserve, Bush Fire units had to drive for
four hours before reaching the fire front whereas two CL-215's could have dropped a conservative 288,000 liters of fire fighting foam per day on the fire.

Firefighting in urban fringe areas and in national parks frequently means that fire fighters cannot attack the fire front with safety because it is located in dangerously inaccessible terrain. They are forced to light backburns, which are a big risk in themselves, or wait until it reaches roads and tracks, at which time the intensity is well beyond the ability of ground forces to control. The advantage of initial attack is lost because of the inability to access the fire, and fire fighters watch in frustration and growing fear as the fire approaches homes and threatens lives.

It is in these circumstances that the SuperScooper can provide its greatest support; rapid attack with huge quantities of fire suppressant long before the fire threatens lives and properties, enabling fire fighters to extinguish the fire without extreme personal risk.

Annex F gives some indication as to the issues that need to be addressed in the event that authorities wish to trial the SuperScooper in Australia.


Maybe the CL412 could have helped in the case of the fire in the Army range and now in areas where the fire has been left to its own devices.

[growahead]

Dear Bankrunner;

I'm no expert in purchasing aircraft, it may well be that the cl415 is not the best choice. But you agree, I think, it is time to have dedicated aircraft for bushfire fighting. It seems obvious to me that the Air Force should be running this group. Regarding scooping; there would be precious few areas in Tasmania unsuitable. Second, the current aircraft have to be filled on land, and the cl415 is amphibious. The cl415 has a payload of around twice the Airtractor, it's purpose built, for durability etc, has sufficient power for tight situations. Herc drivers could be endorsed on the aircraft, and integrate the flying missions with their other flying duties. I'm sure the crews would be keen to operate these missions.

[Baccalaris]

Boeing Frontiers Online (http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2003/august/i_ids4.html)

[Don_Apron]

Great stuff!! Like all inventions, necessity is the mother. This seems a brilliant idea, in it's simplicity and adaptability alone. :D

"If it ain't Boeing, I'm not going."

[Frank Arouet]

Wasn't Col Pay killed while experimenting with a water scoop on an AG aircraft on Lake Liddell. I wonder where this work went, or is someone still carrying on with it?

Re DC10 and bigger fire bombers: Wouldn't their speed cut their time down from the fire to the lake. I'm thinking of The big Lake...Pacific Ocean or Botany bay for the Sydney region being discussed in these fires. I guess you need somewhere for it to stand while a big pump fills it up.

The Boeing idea appears sound. a C130 could utilize this idea.

[yr right]

RFS dont like aircraft cause they work its not a shinny red fire truck wake up smell the roses RFS is a mini emprire building place where the super heros live, sorry guys sad but true and once again im in the know here.:ugh:

[xxgoldxx]

the 415's would be great, but why would you want/need the military to operate them.. Canada and the US as well as others (spain etc..) all run them as a civil operation.. are we not that capable..?

[GADRIVR]

Yr right...... Closer to the mark than what you think brother. Apparently one can't say those sort of things in our culture though!!!!!

[growahead]

xxgoldxx

Civil crews would be fine. One issue is that the demand is quite seasonal, which is why I think crewing with existing Air Force crews would be a solution. Under RAAF umbrella, you could get a lot of resources and training for not a lot more expense. What ever it takes. The whole bushfire defence requires a variety of weapons, depending on the situation, which means helicopters, fixed wing, and innovative ideas like the Boeing example. Why don't we at least trial the CL415s for just one season? Like yr right suggests, I fear there are vested interests playing against the national good.

[welkin71]

Thanks 601 for the text extract re Canadair CL-415 -
Any chance you have a date for that report and is there an online source for the full document ?

[Kharon]

Why we don't make more use of our military resources has intrigued me for a long while and has certainly created some interesting discussion. For instance here we have a need for the services of a highly specialised group of pilots and aircraft in this bush fire prone land and we have very little of either. The notion that the Army and/or RAAF could support a few dedicated specialist aircraft is no more outré than the Navy being the 'bees knees' for serious SAR (and FDR recovery). Real life training benefits for engineers, operations, logistics, pilots and ground crew are there. Always seems a bit potty to me, that our highly skilled, ready to go folk are parked on the sidelines at a time of serious national need.

Not even an economists bootlace, but I reckon a honest cost /benefit analysis would come down to a gross saving for the country – overall. Anyway – just my two bob's worth...

[Wunwing]

I'm surprised that by this length of thread the usual suspects haven't started the big aircraft don't work in Australia chant.Its happened everytime this subject has been mentioned.They then add that they have been trialed here and were no good and we have no water anyway.

To answer the latter first. To the best of my knowledge, we have trialed one Conair DC6B, 2 Conair CV580s and a DC10 at different times.All have been here after a bad fire season and had no real work to do in the next.In all cases there were not enough aircraft or crews to prove anything.From what I can see everyone else in the world uses these aircraft as an initial attack on fire startups as the PRIMARY function.The list of countries who use large aircraft is extensive, including many that we would class as 3rd world.

The other opinion that they dont work here is because "there is not enough water". In the recent fires there was the Richmond RAAF base and the Hawkesbury river and Warragamba Dam within the fire zone.There was certainly enough water for these fires.With the Picton area fires, there were 3dams withing the fire zone

I was on Hawkesbury Road Springwood only minutes after the fire started.At that stage it was not all that big and could have been knocked down or at least slowed by drops from a few large aircraft, say based at Richmond or even Bankstown.I watched as a lone helicopter with a bucket carried out what was obviously a futile task which may have saved individual properties but has no effect in the overall fire front.By that stage the whole of Springwood was in traffic gridlock and the emergency vehicles couldnt get through. I watched the buses tasked with evacuating the schools turn back because of the gridlock.Clearly one major benefit of large water drops is instant access when situations like this occur.

I was there again yesterday returning evacuated family members.There were at least 2, possibly more, Bell Longrangers running a shuttle from the Springwood Golf Course lake to a valley a short distance away. I was there for about 2 hours and they were doing about a 5 minute sequence each.I dont know the hourly operating cost of a Longranger but I suspect that 4 to 6hours of their operation would exceed dramatically a couple of drops from a CV 580.

Unfortunately I agree with other posters on this site. This argument is not about facts, its about politics at all 3 government levels. Unfortunately after this no one will be game to take of RFS because of there deserved hero status so the situation won't change.

Wunwing

[BPA]

When the NSCA was around and used Bell 205, 212 and 412 fire bombing helicopters, they would send some of their fleet overseas once the fire season had finished in Australia. From memory the choppers went to Spain and Canada for the Northern summer. The same could be done if we had a large firebomber aircraft.

[500N]

Following on from BPA, why not use / Import the Northern Hemisphere aircraft for our summer like the Elvis ?

As opposed to us buying.

[Wunwing]

Even in those days a lot of the helos were from Canada.I often saw them coming and going on B747 Combis that I crewed then.I suspect the Bells that I saw yesterday are also recent northern based arrivals

The same could be done both ways for large fixed wing aircraft.Of note is that 3 of the 4 aircraft that I have already noted were Conair from Canada.
I'm sure that the Airspray L188s (1 originally an Australian aircraft) are more than capable of making it here with little problem.

It seems that if we are to do this properly, lining up with a type used in Canada would be a good move for both technical backup and Northern/Southern seasonal movement.The Canadians seem to be the ones who are the leaders here.I suspect that they dont have the CIA "baggage" that some of the old US companies did.

We can live in hope but I doubt anyone is listening.

Wunwing

[Harry Cooper]

The Air National Guard in the U.S has modular units that can be fitted to their C130's for fighting fires, why not here. We just retired the C130H fleet, perhaps not best idea to start putting firefighting stresses onto the older airframes, but why not the J model's. Richmond would of been the ideal staging point for this recently. Earlier this week I heard 4 or 5 C130's operating in formation around Mudgee, would that money not have been better spent putting them to a different operational use?

[601]

Dash 27:ok:


Any chance you have a date for that report and is there an online source for the full document

welkin71, PM me.

Early 90s from what I recall. The trail was "sponsored" by National Jet Systems. As I recall two 214s came here.

http://www.pprune.org/dunnunda-godzone-pacific/21738-canada-air-waterbombers.html#post221828

I think I have the same document that Ozoilfield alludes to. Most of what is said in Oz's post I concur with as I recall the same type of conversations.

Probably same from the same source:=

[Flying Binghi]

...We live in a fire zone, and our eyes are closed because every year people loose their properties, their lives because of our apparent fix that could be a whole lot better...

Before we bankrupt the country with expensive 'fixes' we should first look at why we have these massive infernos...

" ...There are three simple lessons which could be learned: First, the current approach to bushfire management is not working. Second, the current approach has been tried before and it didn’t work then either. And third, there are still a lot of people around who know all this, from whose first-hand experience much could be learned.

...those who do not study history are condemned to repeat it.

Sadly, when it comes to bushfire management in Australia, I see history repeating itself continuously, and even worse, because of recent changes in our forest management environment, the outlook is for more of the same... "

continues - Jennifer Marohasy » Bushfire Management in Australian Forests: A Note from Roger Underwood (http://jennifermarohasy.com/2013/10/bushfire-management-in-australian-forests-a-note-from-roger-underwood-2/)











.

[Up-into-the-air]

Try this:

http://i1324.photobucket.com/albums/u608/vocasupport/RFSPhotoOctober2013_zps1e227f86.png

[500N]

Flying Binghi

Here is a general observation about "forest management environment,"

They declare a National Park or State park or buy a property for "Conservation". They lock it up as they don't have the staff to manage it and do what needs doing. Greenies in Gov't, Councils Gov't agencies hinder or stop outright people's ability to burn off and Gov't staff have to toe the line re this. End result is across all of Aus we get huge build ups of fuel.

We then get these huge fires.

Anyway, that's my HO.


And then we put people in harms warm, on the ground and in the air
and the sad results have been seen. If they did not need to do it, all
the better.

[lowstandard]

Bombardier planes in Cali - YouTube

Good video of how the 415 can scoop out of some tight areas in pretty rough conditions.

[slow n low]

The fact is the military will struggle to come to terms with an aerial fire fighting role as opposed to a relief or evacuation role in support of the local services.
Military aircrew (generally speaking) do not posses the skills and corporate knowledge to operate anywhere near the efficiency and effectively as the guys and girls currently doing the job. After speaking to the crews directly has I have been left with no doubt that this job requires a great deal of experience and corporate knowledge. The required finesse and awareness for this has been developed over years of constant operations. The close supervision of the newer crews by the older hands is quite impressive. This seems to be a job not to be tackled by “part timer’s”
The corporate governance that would come with this new role would be breathtaking. There would be Training Management Plans to be written, SOP’s and DI’s to write, aircrew to train, then new aircrew currencies to maintain and expend hours on. All of which would eat into an already lean flight hours allocation. The self-appointed subject matter experts would “corner the market” and then make themselves indispensable, stifling capability and building their own little empire. :rolleyes:
Then there is the equipment, which the ADF would no doubt raise a SOR which would take years to fulfil through the DMO and be very costly. Then would modify it to meet ADF needs, then integrate it to the fleet(s) with another costly “Australian” mod. It would require constant (read more than required) maintenance with no guarantee it will be available when we need it.
The ADF is very good at warfighting ops, with command structures that have evolved to do just that. I suspect the only way to deal with the dynamic and high tempo nature of fire ops would be to have a permanent C2 node ready to go, tailored for that function, creating another burden on the system. For civilian emergency management, its bread and butter stuff.
The risk assessments alone would restrain effectiveness. ADF image would sustain a massive hit if it were to lose a strategic asset (fixed wing or rotary) in local fire fighting ops. I suspect ADF members would gladly join the fight, sadly the truckload of considerations that go with it leads me to believe that this will not happen anytime soon without a major re-think.

[Fflatlander]

Another thread stated that an AT802 was 1/15th the cost of the Canadair but delivered just over 1/2 the payload. If this is true, bang for buck? Correct, shiny red fire trucks don't put out fires - firefighters doing the hard slog on the ground do that. Regardless, it's a dangerous occupation for all involved and the stakes are high when things go wrong. A tragic event and an unimaginable loss for those directly affected.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Yes very sad indeed. RIP

We are talking about affordable risk here. Can CASA afford not to let these aircraft operate in times of emergency?? All the bomber pilots are aware of the stress put on firebombing aircraft to a certain extent I am sure. There is also the severe turbulence in and around fires and hill country especially in strong to gale force winds. Not to mention the strain and aerodynamic buffeting a bomber is subject to, when dispensing material at jettison rates. Surely this is a national emergency for Australia, so get the water and retardant on. What does need looking at is the remuneration for pilots.



I have to say that your comments are a total load of crap. I have 15 years experience in fixed winged fire fighting ops in Canada. back in the bad old days of the late 60's and 70's we used to lose a least a crew a year with many years having multiple fatal accidents. In the early 1980's the customer (the provincial forest services), said ENOUGH. They insisted on proper SOP's, airplanes fit for services and companies/provincial aviation departments that were committed to safe operations. Since then over a 100 fixed wing fire fighting aircraft are operated in Canada every year with only 2 fatal accidents in the last 10 years.

It seems to me it is time that Australia go big or go home. Going big means a serious national effort to fund a standing fleet of aircraft with the associated ground support infrastructure and an effective operational control system.

[TTY]

Whats wrong with the American MAFFS they use in the C130. I would imagine you could fit 4 of them in a C17 to get them out here and there,s plenty of C130s sitting around Richmond and they hold about 3000us gals.

[Don_Apron]

BPF

That's fair comment. You are entitled to your opinion just like I am.

You would also disagree, that it was a sad event and Fire Bomber pilots should be paid more??

I see now.

[601]

Can someone enlighten me how the MTOW for the Dromader is higher when doing firefighting than when doing ag work.

I would have thought that the unforeseen g loadings could/would be higher during firefighting than during ag work, event allowing for the reduced angle of bank during turns.

[enginair]

Can anybody please give me a link to the official grounding of the Dromaders

[plucka]

601, seems a little strange doesn't it? I know the 802 has a spar life of 20000hrs if it only does bombing work. If you do Ag work as well, the spar life is reduced to 9000hrs.... I guess the theory is during Ag it's heavier for longer and makes a lot of max rate turns while heavy.


Engineer, I can't find anything on casa website about the grounding of the turbine droms, but it is the weekend. I wonder wether casa has grounded them or NAFC has grounded the ones on contract to them. Either way I believe they should be grounded, at least until this latest incident has been investigated.

[yr right]

im not sure about the exact spar lifes for Air tractors but the orginal fire bombing designed doors on the 802 are electric controled with with g meters etc which varies the door openings during the drop. I do know that not everyone here uses them, hence why did the manufacture make them that way to start with, reason to protect the airframe from excesive g stress.
but hey what dose the manufacture know !!!!!!!! :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[yr right]

it seams the other thread is closed so i do wont to make this clear. the reason for my comments is simple this is NOT new accident. It has been known about and no one stepped up to the mark ( well some people did and they squashed) well sorry this time i had to let it be known. people in the industry have known about this for so long and we have had another passing i was not going to let it go. CASA has grounded the aircraft so its now no longer hidden.
sad part is we lost another person to it.

[enginair]

Yr right , would you like to show me where the Turbine Drom is grounded by CASA , ours is still flying and as a LAME , how am I supposed to know if there is nothing on the the CASA home page or in the PZL AD's

[mickjoebill]

I understand that the weather in the blue mountains last week was blustery, with reports from those on ground of the wind suddenly gusting, veering or abating.
This is not unusual on a bad fire day. There was a report that at one point helicopters stopped working as bambi buckets were being adversely affected by the wind.

Is it possible to compare the airframe stresses of the fixed wing fire bombing low level flights over rugged terrain in blustery weather to normal ops in the ag role?

Is it likely that a patch of very severe turbulence was encountered that would have taken down any light aircraft?


Mickjoebill

[yr right]

this just released
Investigation: AO-2013-187 - In-flight breakup involving PZL Mielec M18A Dromader aircraft, VH-TZJ, 37 km west of Ulladulla, NSW on 24 October 2013 (http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2013/aair/ao-2013-187.aspx)

[Ultralights]

for the ATSB, thats quick!

[yr right]

no standard just a pre report plus with electronic media can get it to more and more quickly.
plus with the wing separation it very clear what happened and look at the wing fitting failure,
just sad

[Big Pistons Forever]

BPF



You would also disagree, that it was a sad event and Fire Bomber pilots should be paid more??

.

You can't spend the extra salary when you are dead. Compared to Canada, aerial forest fire suppression ops in Australia are a total goat rope.

From my POV the whole system is broken and the disproportionate number of accidents are one symptom.

FYI Dromaders, especially the piston ones, are not used by any jurisdiction in Canada. They were looked at on several occasions and were deemed unsuitable, so why are they working in Australia ?

[601]

I knew I had read an ATSB report on operating the M18 Dromader aircraft at take-off weights above 4,200 kg.

Investigation: AI-2011-150 - Operation of the PZL-Mielec M18 Turbine Dromader at take-off weights above 4,200 kg (http://agencysearch.australia.gov.au/search/click.cgi?rank=1&collection=agencies&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.atsb.gov.au%2Fpublications%2Finvestigat ion_reports%2F2011%2Faair%2Fai-2011-150.aspx&index_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.atsb.gov.au%2Fpublications%2Finve stigation_reports%2F2011%2Faair%2Fai-2011-150.aspx&auth=sMBUsHv3hthrir72g99I9w&search_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.atsb.gov.au%2F&query=M18%20Dromader%20aircraft%20at%20take-off%20weights%20above%204%2C200%20kg.&profile=atsb&identifier=1383451354.3244)

[yr right]

well to my knowledge there no radial droms on fire work. the accident was a modified turbine drom. the radial drom is actually a terrific aeroplane on fires, a little slower than a turbine to and from the zone but over the drop zone it is more precise the lord give with one hand a take with the other.
if you trend any aircraft it will be as reliable as any other aircraft it is a myth that turbines are more reliable. rfs think that piston engine aircraft arnt reliable can you see a pattern forming yet ?

[Neville Nobody]

Vic has been using a mixture of AT's, turbine and radial Droms on fires up till now. As far as being more precise I disagree, it's the finger on the button that makes for a good drop. Going to be interesting this fire season in Victoria if the Droms remain grounded.

[Rotor Work]

From ABC News

CASA grounds Dromader firefighting planes after fatal crash - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-06/casa-grounds-dromader-firefighting-planes-after-fatal-crash/5072762)


The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has announced it has grounded all Dromader aircraft, one of Australia's key firefighting planes.

Pilot David Black, 43, was killed when his Dromader plane crashed two weeks ago at Wirritin, in Budawang National Park, near Ulladulla while fighting the New South Wales bushfires.

Reports said one wing fell off before the plane plummeted to the ground.

The Dromaders are used widely for crop dusting and for water bombing during the fire season.

A total of 30 planes, including eight in Victoria, have been grounded.

CASA says the grounding is to allow work to continue on safety issues relating to maintenance inspections and the operation of the aircraft.

"CASA is obtaining maintenance data and information from the Dromader operators. This will be carefully analysed before Dromader flights resume," the organisation said in a statement.

An Australian Transport Safety Bureau report in April highlighted safety concerns with the planes when they carry loads of more than 4.2 tonnes.

[Neville Nobody]

Don't they mean with a take off weight of over 4.2 tons?

[Up-into-the-air]

This goes into some of the issues in this.

Dromader fleet grounded Why this long?? | Assistance to the Aviation Industry (http://vocasupport.com/?p=2331)

I feel for families when the regulator just get's it wrong, the loss of family members businesses and other avoidable effects.

[duncan_g]

This is probably a dumb question, but can someone please advise what the regulatory mechanism is that CASA has used to ground these planes?

I don't see any media release on the CASA website, nor any recent ADs published that appear to be applicable - I'm obviously looking in the wrong spot?? (Presumably the grounded aircraft have previously been complying with AD/PZL/5?? )

[enginair]

Duncan g
I understand your question , we received a Direction from CASA grounding our aircraft , as yet the AD doesn't apply to our aircraft as it is below 2500 hours . You would think by now there would be an AD or something from CASA advising the rest of us the aircraft is grounded , otherwise how would I know as a LAME know the aircraft is grounded

[601]

would I know as a LAME know the aircraft is grounded

I believe CASA would notify the Registered Operator of the aircraft, not an individual LAME.

The RO would then notify the appropriate staff and maintenance providers via the HAAMC.

[duncan_g]

Its still not clear to me what the regulatory mechanism is. Surely if the grounding were achieved via a legislative direction or instrument, then that is a matter for the public record and needs to be published on comlaw along with all the other instruments and directions??

[Sunfish]

Speaking as someone who worked on the behaviour of metals under strain, the problem for is that "hrs" are merely an approximation of the life of the component.

What really determines the life is "seconds at x kg loading (and perhaps at temperature T deg mas well)" ,called the strain history, and that will give a finite life to identical components - in aluminium anyway. steel gets complicated by the existence of a yield point.

now fudge for manufacturing differences and defects and corrosion, apply a rule of thumb or Two, do some testing of ultimate loads and voila! We convince ourselves that there is a 99.95 percent chance that the component will last "x" thousand hours.

Obviously in the case of the Dromader either the assumptions were wrong or the "allowable "strain history of the components was exceeded.

[Up-into-the-air]

This has just popped up [1.01PM 15/11/2013]:

PZL M18 Dromader Series Aeroplanes (http://casa.grapevine.com.au/lists/lt.php?id=f0UDBg0MAAwHVx9VAgAHTA0IBQgE)


AD/PZL/5 Amdt 1 (http://casa.grapevine.com.au/lists/lt.php?id=f0UDBg0MAAwHVh9VAgAHTA0IBQgE) - Centre Wing to Outboard Wing Attachment Joints


requiring specific inspections.

[North Shore]

the 415's would be great, but why would you want/need the military to operate them.. Canada and the US as well as others (spain etc..) all run them as a civil operation.. are we not that capable..?

Not exactly true...across Canada, the Cl 415 fleets are civilian operated, but State-owned, due to the high acquisition costs of the airframes. In the USA, the first 415 has just gone into private hands, but I believe that the company has a multi-year contract from the USFS, which will help persuade bankers to loosen the purse-strings for a loan..

On the operational side of things, scoopers are great if you've got suitable water (~ 1 mile of water) close to the fire. Obviously, the further away from the fire, the longer your circuit time, and the less effective you are..it's all about gallons per hour..

[Sarcs]

yr right:
RFS dont like aircraft cause they work its not a shinny red fire truck wake up smell the roses RFS is a mini emprire building place where the super heros live, sorry guys sad but true and once again im in the know here.:ugh:
It would appear that yr right's above comment may be close to the truth and the RFS were definitely part of the causal chain for this tragic accident.:= Yesterday in Senate Estimates the Chair Senator Heffernan started the inquisition of CAsA with a passionate rant, although the Hansard is yet to be released the Murdoch press covered the moment and put out this article:Pilot 'taunted' before fatal crash (http://www.skynews.com.au/topstories/article.aspx?id=925612)
'I'm disgusted as I'm informed that on that day it was pretty rugged weather and ... (pilots) were taunted by the Rural Fire Service because these guys didn't particularly want to fly,' Liberal senator Bill Heffernan told a Senate hearing into operations of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

The NSW senator said another pilot reported that Mr Black was told 'real men and real pilots would be up there'.

Witnesses saw a wing snap off Mr Black's aircraft before it plummeted to the ground.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau is investigating the crash.
Senator Heffernan said the RFS's opinions are 'outside the ambit of safety guidelines of air safety' and asked CASA to clarify its working relationship with the fire authority during emergency operations.

The CASA boss John McCormick said pilots are contracted by the bush fire service during waterbombing.

'We do rely on the expertise of the people who are involved with the firefighting ... I think it's terrible if they gave him intimidation to fly,' Mr McCormick said. Kind of reminds me of a certain SBP email..." toughen up princesses"...hmm Captain 49'er commenting on intimidation is definitely (Mc)Comical!:E

More to follow...:ok:

[grug]

This post now looks a bit odd due to the previous thread it was responding to having been removed after the responce it received....




Its this kind of idiot mentality towards safety that make a difficult job that extra bit harder.

What a great little macho line that was. I hope their conscience haunts them for ever more.

And its this mentality that flows on through to other workmates, family and friends of those touting it. Simply because it is the big man attitude, I'm the hero calling the shots crap.

here are two quotes from the other fire bombing thread on here. Demonstrating how this pathetic attitude towards safety flow on.

decisions (for the fires surrounding Sydney anyway) were being made from Round Corner Dural upstairs HQ during the thick of the melee a few weeks ago. This from an involved family member...

note "involved family member"

and the clincher

and those moaning about being able to get into it early in the day with an aeroplane at that time would you like a cup of cement

People in positions of responsibility need to be active stamping out this behavior. Weeding out the pests that spread the disease.

[HighAndFlighty]

This one is a bit unusual, but he was a professional pilot:


AN experienced waterbombing pilot killed when his plane crashed fighting bushfires was taunted before take-off for voicing his reluctance to fly in poor weather, a parliamentary committee has been told.


David Black, 43, was killed when his fixed-wing Dromader aircraft crashed in Budawang National Park on NSW's south coast on October 24.


"I'm disgusted as I'm informed that on that day it was pretty rugged weather and ... (pilots) were taunted by the Rural Fire Service because these guys didn't particularly want to fly," Liberal senator Bill Heffernan told a Senate hearing into operations of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.


The NSW senator said another pilot reported that Mr Black was told "real men and real pilots would be up there".


Witnesses saw a wing snap off Mr Black's aircraft before it plummeted to the ground.


The Australian Transport Safety Bureau is investigating the crash.
Source: | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/doomed-nsw-bushfire-pilot-david-black-taunted-ahead-of-crash/story-e6frg6nf-1226762687138#sthash.Ju7ZKF5z.dpuf)

[Sunfish]

If the report is true, then there should be no further aerial firefighting in NSW until the culprits are sacked and an apology issued.

[spinex]

Let's not get too precious about this - some pollie is making political capital over an allegation about "taunting" - you can fill in the dots for yourself.

Without knowing what was said and the context, it is a bit rough to be calling "off with their heads" just because the flight ended in tragedy. I'm willing to warrant that there aren't too many professional pilots operating in the GA sector that haven't felt outside pressure to go and do a flight, dealing with that is part and parcel of the job and this pilot wasn't some 200hr hatchling.

Facts first.

[Ascend Charlie]

A politician complaining about taunting??

Pot, meet kettle....

[Capn Bloggs]

a bit more at stake when peoples home (and the people themselves) are going going up in smoke..
They chose to live there...

[tecman]

Charlie, you've got that bit right. Worse for this particular politician I'd have thought, being the one censured by the Senate for peddling untruths about a high court judge.

[Lantern10]

Looks like metal fatigue. RIP David.

Crashed firefighting Dromader aircraft had 'fatigue cracking': report (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/crashed-firefighting-dromader-aircraft-had-fatigue-cracking-report-20131202-2yky2.html)

[Sarcs]

Preliminary report - AO-2013-187 (http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/4469233/ao-2013-187_prelim.pdf)

Excerpts from page 5-6 of that report:

Wing attach fitting maintenance requirements

In 2000, investigations by the US National Transportation Safety Board into a number of US M18 accidents in which the wings separated in-flight discovered severe corrosion and cracking in the wing lower attach fittings, which led to fatigue cracking and failure of the fitting.3

On 3 August 2000, the aircraft manufacturer issued service bulletin (SB) E/02.170/2000, which provided procedures for dealing with corrosion of the centre wing-to-outboard wing attach fittings. The SB included a procedure for inspection of fittings found to be affected by corrosion and stated that:
• ‘the only acceptable inspection method is magnetic cracks detection’4 (original emphasis)
• ‘the critical area of the joints include the lower surfaces of the [main holes] in the wing lower attach joints’
• the inspections did not require outboard wing removal
• any cracked fittings and worn-out expansion mandrels were subject to mandatory replacement.

On 11 September 2000, CASA approved a procedure for inspection of the fittings using eddy-current testing as an alternative to the magnetic particle inspection required by the SB. This procedure provided information on preparing the area for inspection, instrument calibration, and other matters specific to the eddy-current testing method. It did not require wing removal and did not specify any particular critical area for inspection. Being a replacement for the inspection part of the SB, it did not provide repair instructions.

On 19 October 2000, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) issued airworthiness directive (AD) AD/PZL/5. It specified that the centre wing-to-outboard wing attach joints were to be inspected, using magnetic particle methods, for cracks in the lugs, corrosion in the main holes, and ovalisation of the main holes. The inspection was to be carried out in accordance with the manufacturer’s SB and was mandatory for all M18s5 after the fittings accumulated 2,500 hours service. Further inspections were required every 500 airframe hours or every 12 months, whichever came first.6

Aircraft maintenance information

Maintenance records indicated that the main spar attach point fittings on TZJ were installed new in 2004. The aircraft records indicated that since then it had accrued 3,980 flight hours, and 5,784 adjusted hours. A valid maintenance release was found in the wreckage.
The main spar attach fittings were last inspected on 8 August 2013, using the CASA-approved eddy-current procedure. Records indicated that since then, the aircraft had accumulated 120.1 flight hours and 154.7 adjusted hours, not including the accident flight.

Wreckage and site information

The on-site examination found that the left wing had separated at the attachment joint between the outboard wing and centre wing sections, about 6 m from the wingtip (Figure 6). Preliminary examination of the attach fittings indicated that the left outboard wing lower attachment lug had fractured through an area of pre-existing fatigue cracking in the lug lower ligament (Figure 7 and Figure 8). The fatigue cracking reduced the structural integrity of the fitting to the point where operational loads produced an overstress fracture of the remaining lug material. The detached section of lug was retained by the centre wing lugs and showed a matching fracture surface (Figure 8).

A number of aircraft components were removed from the accident site for further examination at the ATSB’s Canberra facilities, including:
• both sections of the separated lower main spar lug and the remainder of the lower main spar attach fitting (left wing)
• the entire upper main spar attach fitting (left wing)
• part of the rear spar attach fitting (left wing)
• the entire lower main spar attach fitting (right wing).

[Obidiah]

There is nothing much to like about the Dromader.

I might be wrong but I was led to believe the outer wing section is little more than a reverse engineered Ayers Thrush wing and the attach points are much the same.

If that were the case it would be a big ask to see them in service on an aircraft with significantly higher TOW.

Their original saving grace was that with the 1000hp radial they were under powered (IMO) so had to be flown with a degree of care. They were also extremely heavy on the controls, especially the A models, abrupt or full control deflection was difficult. Basically they flew like a pig.

When the turbine retro fit came along servos were placed on the control surfaces so you could fly the damn things. That then made them fairly light on the controls.

More than one industry wise person has commented over the years that the turbine Dromader is an airframe at the very limits and requires very judicious operation, fire bombing stretches that somewhat.

I don't know what the answer to the Dromader issue is but i would personally like to see them phased out sooner than later.

Surprised the NDT done 120 hours earlier didn't pick an underlying issue on David's machine.

Another very sad loss to the industry, and I feel for his widow who has been close the industry all her life and witnessed this loss and sadness with others many times, now she has to struggle through it.

Nothing much to like about the Dromader.

[Biggles78]

Could we please note that whatever the circumstances of this tragedy, this man, this pilot was a hero; like ALL fire-fighters he put himself in harms way and was unfortunate to have made the ultimate sacrifice as a result. While not glorifying or detracting from what happened, I hope his wife and children can take some comfort that he died trying to protect others.

David Blake, a true HERO! :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

My sincerest condolences to his wife, children, family and friends. I truly wish I could swap places with him.

[Old Akro]

It looks like the pilot was a passenger in this accident. This was an avoidable accident and very, very sad.

The failed attach point shows classic fatigue cracking followed by brittle fracture. I would like to think that this crack was detectable when the inspection was done 120 flight hours earlier. In fact I'm a little surprised it wouldn't have been visible to the naked eye or with simple dye penetrant. I hope CASA's specification of eddy current detection vs the manufacturers recommended magnetic particle inspection gets proper scrutiny.

I don't understand the overload concessions either. The original (radial engine) airframe is rated by the manufacturer for a MTOW of 5,300 kg in "overload operations". Without some sort of mechanical strength augmentation I don't understand how this can be extended by CASA to 6,600 kg., especially since operation at those weights for firefighting by definition involves operation in turbulent air and with significant aircraft manoeuvring.

[Obidiah]

To my way of thinking the AD/PZL/5 should have required the wings were removed for the inspection. It is hard to imagine that crack was not there 120hrs prior when the NDT was carried out, possible but....and there is nothing quite like physically eye balling the components particularly given their history and the overload allowance.

CASA and the manufacturer get around the over weight operation by simply fixing a sticker to the instrument panel stating overweight operation can reduce fatigue life and lead to structural failure.

I often wondered how seriously pilots took this warning and whether many made a conscious effort to modify the way they flew the aircraft.

Aside from the inherent increase in low level turbulence associated with fire bombing consider the lot of the Dromader airframe. It is a budget airframe with a low G envelope it also has a low speed envelope and low Vfe speed. Now combine that with a more aerodynamic engine install, greater power and potential for higher speed and a significant uplift approval lighter control forces and the fact that many likely use first stage flap running into and during the dump while flying very near or at Vfe limit speed, it all sounds like a recipe for a problem. My memory of the Vn envelope with first stage flap was something like +2.5/-0.5 G, not much

If the AAAA hasn't already I see a good case for a very sobering education program for the operators/pilots and engineers of these aircraft.

[Old Akro]

To my way of thinking the AD/PZL/5 should have required the wings were removed for the inspection.

I agree that unless you see the front face of the attach bracket, the chances of picking up a crack are greatly diminished. But I guess it may be possible to unbolt the wing and either slide it outboard 50mm or raise it 50mm to gain access to the attach fitting without technically removing the wing.

Its been many years since I've done eddy current or magnetic particle inspection, but the small amount of refresher reading I did this morning suggests that eddy current is not recommended for detecting cracks within bores (holes).

[ManInJapan]

Any opinions about this?
I would have thought it's the maintenance company and NDT company who should know what inspections are required and allowed.

Julie Black had no reason to worry when the text messages she was sending her husband changed from blue to green, as he flew *towards raging bushfires.

David Black was a highly *experienced, skilled and careful pilot who had been waterbombing for years. He was the co-owner and chief pilot of their aerial crop spraying business, Rebel Ag, in Trangie, an hour northwest of Dubbo, with 9500 flying hours under his belt.

But in the minutes after their final exchange, something in the sky went catastrophically wrong.


The incident has since been the subject of investigations by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau and a NSW Coroner, yet Julie says no one has been held accountable. Next month a NSW Supreme Court judge will decide exactly who – if anyone – is to blame and how to “right their wrongs” in a civil trial that could change aviation safety.

Bushfires blazed along the south coast in the spring of 2013. On Monday, October 21, David and Julie Black started diverting resources from their aviation business to waterbomb south of Sydney for the Rural Fire Service.

At lunchtime David called his wife to say he was heading to the city of Nowra to help. The 43-year-old performed three firebombing runs that afternoon and another six the next day.

When he phoned home on Wednesday night to talk to his wife and three kids, their youngest – seven-year-old Adelaide – proudly told him she’d lost a tooth. uo the next morning – Thursday October 24 – he called early, before school, to ask whether the tooth fairy had visited.

“He quickly spoke to the girls and when he spoke to me I said ‘I’m running late. I’ll give you a ring when I get into the office’,” Julie recalled. Hours later, her business partner, husband and father of her three children was dead.

David took off in his PZL-Mielec M-18 Dromader from Nowra air base at 9.40am on a firebombing mission about 62km to the southwest. Another firebombing aircraft and a support helicopter went with him.


Rebel Ag had nine aircraft out that day – spraying crops and water bombing – so shortly after her husband lost mobile phone service, Julie sat down at her desk and opened her tracking software to check their pilots’ locations.  “And TracPlus was frozen, which was quite bizarre,” she said. “So then I logged on to the MyRFS and that was also frozen.

“And then I jumped over to Facebook and immediately saw a post from the RFS saying there had been an aircraft accident.” Julie tried to call her husband but could not get through.

“I started contacting all my other pilots but no one knew anything,” she said. “So then I contacted the RFS state air desk but they were not able to give me any information. They were in a complete state of panic.”

Julie roll-called her pilots. “Everyone sent a message back except for David Black.”


It took hours for emergency services to retrieve David’s body from the wreckage on a heavily wooded ridge in an isolated and mountainous section of Budawang National Park, west of Ulladulla.

“I had to battle tooth and nail for them to get Dave’s body,” Julie said. “They were going to leave him there overnight.”

Julie’s brother flew her to Nowra but even once there, no one could confirm anything. “I didn’t get told (it was his plane) until about 3.30pm,” she said.

That afternoon, as the news of her husband’s crash spread, the RFS commissioner, premier and even the prime minister called her.

“As the sun started setting, everyone wanted to go home,” she said. “I told them ‘no one gets to go home and have dinner with their wife and kids until we get my husband’. I was very adamant that he deserved better.”

Eventually, that evening, the navy deployed Sea King helicopters to winch down and retrieve her husband’s body.

“Since that day it’s just been one big long battle,” she said.


Initially the cause of the crash was a mystery. “I couldn’t understand how or why he crashed?” Julie said. In the following days, witnesses from that mission shared what they had seen.

David had been flying 30m above the tree line when the left wing of his aircraft suddenly folded upwards and tore off. The plane immediately rolled to the left *before plummeting to an “unsurvivable impact”.

The ATSB’s final 104-page *report, published in February 2016, found that the outboard left wing had separated at the centre-to-outboard lower wing attachment joint.

It was caused by a fracture in the left outboard wing lower *attachment lug.

The aircraft’s centre-to-outboard wing attachment fittings were last inspected on August 8, 2013, with no defects reported.  The ATSB determined that *issues with the left wing were not detected during that inspection – 11 weeks before the crash – *because an incorrect testing technique, an eddy current inspection method, had been used.

The eddy current inspection method was not approved by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

In late 2000 CASA had issued an airworthiness directive requiring inspections of Dromader wings to be conducted using the magnetic particle method.

“This (incorrect testing) exposed those aircraft to an inspection method that was potentially ineffective at detecting cracks in the wing attachment fittings,” the report said. A coronial inquest a year later also found that the inspection, *maintenance and testing procedures in relation to David’s aircraft, including the wing fittings, were “inadequate”.

The NSW deputy state coroner said David’s plane had been *inspected in August 2013 by two companies – Beal Aircraft Maintenance and Aviation NDT – using the alternative, less sensitive, and unapproved eddy current technique.

Magistrate Derek Lee found that the August 2013 safety *inspection failed to detect both *corrosion pitting and a fatigue crack in the left wing’s lower attachment fitting. Lee said the unapproved testing process combined with the failure to remove the plane’s wings during the safety check “all meant that the August 2013 inspection was inadequate”.

Soon after the inquest, Julie launched civil action against CASA, Beal Aircraft Maintenance and Aviation NDT “because they did not do their jobs properly”.

“I am a big believer in righting wrongs and there’s so many wrongs in this case,” she said.


The 48-year-old said CASA was ultimately responsible for her husband’s death because the safety watchdog failed to realise that Beal Aircraft Maintenance and Aviation NDT Services were using the wrong method to test the wing attachments.

She said CASA should have, after issuing the airworthiness *directive in 2000, checked and *ensured that engineers were conducting maintenance on M18 Dromader aircraft correctly. “How did CASA, as the statutory authority who are overseeing safety, not do any auditing or cross-checking with the operators to ensure they were using the right testing technique for 13 years?” Julie said.

“That’s just one example of their dysfunction.”

There have been multiple failed mediation attempts since 2017. “It’s dragged on because CASA have dragged their feet through the whole matter,” Julie said.

“They don‘t believe they hold any responsibility in this case which then leads me to the question: why are they called the Civil Aviation Safety Authority?

“The buck stops with them.

“There has to be an apportionment of blame.”


After six years of legal wrangling, a civil trial before the judge Robertson Wright has been set down for three weeks from May 1. Barrister Ian Harvey from Wentworth Chambers will represent CASA, while barrister David Lloyd SC of 12 Wentworth Selborne Chambers will represent Julie. Lloyd will be instructed by Mark Gray-Spencer of GSG Legal, an aviation lawyer of 30 years, who has worked with Julie on this case from the start.

From the trial Julie, who has funded her legal battle with *proceeds from selling the family’s *aviation business, is seeking three outcomes.

The widow wants compensation for her losses, an inquiry into CASA’s operations and what she says is a long-overdue apology.

“Well, obviously (an apology) from the aircraft engineers and NDT services that were involved,” she said.

“Most importantly, CASA, but because it’s an organisation, no one is held accountable.

“There’s not one person there who would be losing any sleep over this.

“I’m not even sure that those who are running CASA are aware this matter is coming up for trial.”

The single mother said that *despite the findings of the ATSB and the coroner, no one has expressed *remorse.

“You can see how many different hands played a part in the lead up to this accident and not one of those people has said to me or my children, ‘I’m so sorry’,” she said.

“No one has said ‘I should have done this differently or I should have overseen this differently’.

“A simple heartfelt apology *really does make a difference and would just be a nice way to end it all.”

Julie said she was committed to exposing the “dysfunction” within CASA so that an incident like this never happens again.

“There are still wrongs that need to be righted,” she said.

“Wings don’t just fall off *aircraft.”

A spokesperson for CASA said it would be inappropriate for the agency to comment on matters before the court.

[havick]

Sad story overall indeed, won’t ever forget it. Was there flying a 412 dropping water around the wreckage while the S70 crew did recovery.

[Duck Pilot]

CASA are totally accountable for their failure to provide adequate oversight by allowing this behaviour by certificate holders to take short cuts with critical maintenance, that resulted in a fatality.

Complete lack of oversight and surveillance by CASA on the maintenance organisations involved at the time.

[aeromariner]

See .... N9310R July 12, 2021 in Seiling Dewey County, Oklahoma