Incident that could have dwarfed lockhart river

[Dick Smith]

Over a week ago, Thorn Bird put on a post with words to the effect, that an incident “could have dwarfed Lockhart River”. No information seemed to have come out about this, can anyone give some details, I believe it’s very important we know what actually went on. Has this been put on the ATSB website or has it been kept a secret?

[onetrack]

It's easy enough to produce hints of incidents that could have been disasters - but failing to provide details does nothing for the posters credibility.
If the OP really has serious concerns about another pilot whose attitude to safety and adherence to regulations is highly suspect, then the obligation is on them to ensure that they make notes and report their concerns to authorities.
If the OP is referring to ATC failure events that could have ended in major disaster, then the ATSB lists numerous of these events, all of which have no doubt led to improvements and recognition of the failures that led to those events.
The fact the reported ATC failures did not lead to any major disaster indicates that the robust back-ups designed to address ATC failures worked as designed - and to offer up alarmist statements that one of these events could have "dwarfed Lockhart River", is on a par with some of the worst gutter journalism that regularly assaults us.

[Frank Arouet]

Has this got something to do with a coal loader at Newcastle? If so it could well have dwarfed LHR.

[Jabawocky]

There was a Rex SAAB that tried to land there visually one night not long back if my prune memory is working. No doubt an ATSB report on that.

What else has happened?

[no_one]

are you talking about this one?

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2015/03/13/rex-turbo-prop-confused-coal-loader-for-airport-in-newcastle-stuff-up/

[Ilikeflying]

Emirates out of Melbourne and Virgin into Mildura?

[Lookleft]

Dick I actually asked Thorn Bird to back that statement up with a bit more detail and unsurprisingly he went very quiet. Like a lot of what TB posts its usually emotive and lacking any substance. He is probably in his version of aviation Nirvana and setting up an airline in NZ.:ok:

[Chronic Snoozer]

Anyone know why it took two years and four months to produce the final report on the REX incident into Newcastle? Just saying.

[Frank Arouet]

Ask the National Party executive.

[Dick Smith]

I think we are looking for an incident which happened in the last 10 days or so.

[Lookleft]

Why don't you PM Thorn Bird Dick? He sees to be the only person who knows anything about it and has gone MIA.

[Dick Smith]

I have done this. I note that many pilots are very concerned about making statements about safety issues .

Many phone me with info but are concerned about having any link to the information.

A bit like the old USSR.

[Lookleft]

So did you get an answer Dick and in your opinion is it something that could have dwarfed Lockhart River? I think the incident that could have dwarfed LR was the 737 effectively autolanding in the fog at MIA, but that is very much in the public domain.

There is a difference between making statements about safety issues and not reporting an incident that has the potential to "dwarf Lockhart River". The original statement made by TB was either hyperbole or BS.

[Dick Smith]

Lockhart River was 15 deaths. So " dwarfing" means a lot more.

Suggest look at The Australian tomorrow morning.

[Lookleft]

In the old USSR Dick you would have been sent to the gulag for being a capitalist pig and the Australian would not exist. All this intrigue is puerile. I thought that you weren't afraid to state things as they are but I can see you just want to play the same stupid games you accuse others of playing.:=

[Dick Smith]

Sunny. Possibly the newspaper report could encourage those in CASA or AsA to address an important safety issue .

As you would know both have resisted using our existing radar to provide class E separation and MSA services when in IMC at non tower airports.

Many have said we will need an accident killing a large number of people before such changes are made.

It would be great for Australia if we could make the changes before too many more deaths like the ones at Benalla and Mount Hotham.

[cbradio]

The tiny bit of relevance The Australian had disappeared on Monday night ...

[tyler_durden_80]

Hi Dick

A minor point, but enroute controllers cannot use a MSA unless an aircraft is on a published ATS route.

In CTA, ATC are responsible for terrain clearance.That means that if you are in IMC, and not on a published route, you will Not be getting a descent clearance below the grid LSALT.

[Dick Smith]

Yes. No doubt what happens in Australia. Why not copy the safer North American system where IFR are in controlled airspace.

It's where most safe aircraft come from!

[Jabawocky]

When we can get VHF and surveillance in that E you might get some support. In means inside all of the E for all IFR aircraft.

Hervey Bay, right in the middle of the ministers electorate has not got it. My last RNAV, into YNRM ….I have to cancel IFR between the FAF and MAP because thats where the VHF runs out. Hardly in the GAFA in both of those places. Cant get a departure IFR once on the ground.

[Dick Smith]

For at least the 50th time class E terminal airspace to 700 agl does not require VHF or Radar coverage in North America.

Every instrument approach is in a minimum of class E and it would not be possible considering the huge size of the USA and the many valleys and mountains to have coverage down to 700 agl at every one of these airports.

But after 24 years of repeating this myth I suppose it becomes as factual as Bigfoot.

Resist resist resist change in every way you can. Wait for the Royal Commission after lots more uneccessary deaths like Benalla

[Dick Smith]

Front page of The Australian today. A King Air blundering around in IMC at Mt Hotham with a faulty GPS comes close to another King Air.

Full radar coverage but no radar service provided. 18 could be dead.

The aircraft with the faulty GPS then appears out of cloud at 100' above the trees well away from the normal approach path.

Full radar coverage on your iPhone but no way class E could be provided!

[Dick Smith]

I believe five aircraft were approaching Mt Hotham at that time.

Can someone advise how many frequencies are also coupled to 120.75 at about 9am on a weekday morning.

Are there any "control" frequencies or are they all advisory?

[Lookleft]

A King Air blundering around in IMC at Mt Hotham with a faulty GPS comes close to another King Air.

If it was "blundering around" that suggests the flight crew were not up to the job. When did it become apparent that the GPS was faulty and did the unit have a history of faults.

18 could be dead.

Is that number based on the carrying capacity of 2 King Airs or on how many people were actually in the aircraft at the time?

The aircraft with the faulty GPS then appears out of cloud at 100' above the trees well away from the normal approach path.

I doubt the aircraft was doing an RNP so why was it anywhere near the ground if it was conducting an instrument approach at YHOT?

Was this incident reported to the ATSB by the flight crew as they are legally required to? If not why not?

I don't disagree with the premise that if the radar is available then it should be used to its full extent; but the way this incident has been described has been akin to the more sensationalist reporting about aviation we see in the media.

[skkm]

The article is behind a paywall apart from the graphic, which states that the pilot reported GPS issues well before arriving at YHOT. Since the pilot knew they had a faulty GPS, why on earth did they use it to carry out an approach and not divert somewhere with a ground-aid-based approach?!

[porch monkey]

If that is true, then an excellent question.

[onetrack]

Other media have picked up the story, and it reads as a typical media beat-up.

Close call for 18 passengers on plane bound for Mt Hotham (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/close-call-for-18-passengers-on-plane-bound-for-mt-hotham/story-fnii5smt-1227531460939)

[no_one]

The prelim ATSB description differs somewhat from the media description

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2015/aair/ao-2015-108.aspx

[megle2]

After reading the Aus story it is indeed a bad show ( shows Flightaware tracking Sept 03 )
The Essendon KA all over the place
I'd be very upset too if I was the other KA driver from Bankstown

[CaptainMidnight]

Sensationalist articles like that are poison for GA.

After reading that, who from the public would want to fly in anything other than that flown by the big end of town?

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

"the GPS data card was out of tolerance for the GPS based instrument (RNAV) approach"

Huh! Please explain?

Dr :8

[Dick Smith]

If the ATSB quotes such rubbish surely you should accept it as factual!

[onetrack]

The only thing missing from the media reports is "pilots fighting with the controls, while passengers screamed in terror". No, there weren't 18 people on the one aircraft as the media tries to make it appear.
One pilot whose navigation competency is highly suspect makes some serious errors and gets lost - so that translates to "a major incident that could have dwarfed Lockhart". The entire beat-up hinges on "could have".
It is no more newsworthy an event than the dozen other incidents over the last few years, where someone screwed up, and a potential mid-air was possible.
I trust this King Air bloke gets his competency reviewed, it sounds like he barely scraped over the line when his licence was first issued.

[Lookleft]

No, there weren't 18 people on the one aircraft as the media tries to make it appear.

Where do you think the media got this figure from? How about this posted earlier by Dick:

Full radar coverage but no radar service provided. 18 could be dead.

As for the GPS data being out of tolerance, that bit of info was provided by the operator so thats what the ATSB will investigate. I can sense a certain amount of hysteria permeating the postings.

After reading that, who from the public would want to fly in anything other than that flown by the big end of town?

If a fatal accident at YHOT didn't put people off flying there why would this change their minds?

[The name is Porter]

Full radar coverage but no radar service provided.

There is NOT 'full radar coverage' there. Simple, there isn't so no need to say there is to emphasise a point.

I haven't read the newspaper article but on 3AW this morning Ross & John were having quite a bit of 'fun' with this. They stated that the passengers on the aircraft out of Essendon refused to take the same aircraft back if the same pilot was flying. They stated that another pilot had to be flown up to Mount Hotham to bring them and the aircraft back. Is this what the newspaper article stated as well?

They were making the pilot out to be an incompetent idiot.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

As for the GPS data being out of tolerance, that bit of info was provided by the operator so thats what the ATSB will investigate. I can sense a certain amount of hysteria permeating the postings.No hysteria here Lookleft!

As one who has flown lots of GPS approaches, I was simply wondering how GPS data on a data card gets to be "out of tolerance"!

Dr :8

[megle2]

The 35 minute flight took about 1.3 hours, the Flightaware record is no longer available but there is still a photo of the track image on the front page of the Aus

[Going Nowhere]

VH-OWN ? 03-Sep-2015 ? YMEN / MEB - YHOT / MHU ? FlightAware (http://flightaware.com/live/flight/VHOWN/history/20150902/2140Z/YMEN/YHOT)

Can't find the one ex YSBK

[Lookleft]

Sorry Forky if you thought I was directing that comment at you, it was the bloke under yours!

[Jabawocky]

Dick,
For at least the 50th time class E terminal airspace to 700 agl does not require VHF or Radar coverage in North America.For at least the 50th time class E terminal airspace to 700 agl does not require VHF or Radar coverage in North America.

How do I operate IFR in C,E,G without VHF coms to ATC. I ant do it in VMC without cancelling IFR and proceeding VFR, like when I went to Cunnamulla recently, or to Blackall (@A060 due winds).

Then once in IMC at say 700AGL, how do I blast through all that E without a clearance, say 7000' at YBCK or YCMU? Is there some dispensation I am not aware of that allows flight in controlled airspace without a clearance?

I may be wrong, but nobody has ever pulled me up on this topic.

And then in IMC how do you do separation IFR from IFR without SSR/ADSB?

Happy to have E with the gear to back it up.

[le Pingouin]

Dick seems to believe US controllers have miracle "modern" sep standards that allow them to do it but has singularly failed to produce any evidence.

[drunk_pilot]

My money is on the receiver being a Trimble 2000. They're potentially a death trap. I've seen it indicate being on-track when in actual fact was 20+ miles off-track. It was also the same unit fitted to the aircraft in the Benalla CFIT..

[The name is Porter]

My money is on the receiver being a Trimble 2000.

In a BE20??

It was also the same unit fitted to the aircraft in the Benalla CFIT

It was the ATC's fault, not the GPS :cool:

[OZBUSDRIVER]

TNIP....WRT BLA...care to expand on your view it was ATC fault?

[IFEZ]

Absolutely sensationalist piece of journalism in this mornings Melbourne Herald Sun about it. Headline said aircraft came within 90m of each other. Then later in the article it says they came within 1NM (1.8KM) horizontally & 90m VERTICALLY. Also crapped on about how passengers refused to fly back with same pilot and they had to fly another one in. Really..? Or did they have to fly another one in cos the GPS was U/S in the 1st A/C and couldn't fly out safely in the conditions..?
They also named the pilot with a nice photo of him for all to see (presumably copied from company website). Article made him sound like an incompetent bumbling idiot. Pretty unfair until the full FACTS are known. Its not as if he's some newby who just got his instrument rating. Very experienced and well regarded operator prior to this incident. All very strange.

[drunk_pilot]

In a BE20??

My word. I've flown one with a TNL 2000 :O


OZBUSDRIVER, I'm guessing he intended sarcasm with regards to the Benalla ATC comment.

[Squawk7700]

My money is on the receiver being a Trimble 2000. They're potentially a death trap. I've seen it indicate being on-track when in actual fact was 20+ miles off-track. It was also the same unit fitted to the aircraft in the Benalla CFIT..

What made it worse was that the Benalla aircraft was a week out from a full avionics upgrade.

[UnderneathTheRadar]

My word. I've flown one with a TNL 2000

Unless it's been upgraded recently, the aircraft in question has a Garmin 155XL. Haven't seen the Hun but if the pilot is who I think it is, he's NOT a bumbling fool....

[buckshot1777]

Sounds like an enquiry independent of the ATSB, seeking contact from parties involved; audio here:

Mid-air scare prompts calls for change (http://www.3aw.com.au/news/midair-scare-prompts-calls-for-change-20150917-gjol39.html)

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Currently, airspace above 18,000 feet is uncontrolled, leaving to pilots to communicate between themselves in a "1930s" way

Gotta luv the medja!

[Jabawocky]

TNIP....WRT BLA...care to expand on your view it was ATC fault?

Ozbus, that was Tongue FIRMLY planted in cheek :ok:

[The name is Porter]

In a BE20??
My word. I've flown one with a TNL 2000

That's embarrassing

OZBUSDRIVER, I'm guessing he intended sarcasm with regards to the Benalla ATC comment.

Yes.

[Lookleft]

Interesting that despite the sensationalist reporting of the Australian and the inaccurate reporting of 3AW this incident still is not serious enough for all media outlets to pick up on it. I have been listening to the ABC all day and all they are interested in is growing your own vege patch and federal politics. They are even quoting what happened on Sydney radio rather than Dick Smith on Melbourne radio. If the two aircraft had hit however then that would have been newsworthy. BTW where is Thorn Bird in all this, he started the ball rolling. He either was the other pilot or knows the other pilot quite well.

[Stationair8]

It was in the Herald-Sun today.

[Lookleft]

With Hawthorn playing Adelaide pretty sure it will be back to the usual news fodder tomorrow. If it was also in the SMH,DT, CM,WA,NTNews,CT,AA, HM then I would agree that mainstream media is suddenly taking an interest in aviation matters.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Ozbus, that was Tongue FIRMLY planted in cheek

:ugh::ugh::ugh:...must write out ten times...:ugh:

[The name is Porter]

Unless it's been upgraded recently, the aircraft in question has a Garmin 155XL.

mmmm, just as embarrassing as a Trimble

[Old Akro]

Nothing wrong with the Garmin 155XL. I think it has the same GPS engine as the Garmin GNS430 (not 430W). Unless the aircraft has recently had its ADSB upgrade, it looks like its coupled with an Avidyne MFD in this aircraft.

There are plenty of jets still using the 155XL.

The pilot (assuming its the normal pilot for that aircraft) is very competent and has been flying this aircraft for 10 years or more. You've got to assume that 90% of us would have had the same issue in the same circumstances.

This incident shares with the old Benalla incident that radar data on the aircraft's flight path, but Airservices Australia did not provide any advice. In a first world country we should expect better than this.

Before the ATC guys jump in and complain, these comments are directed at the system, not the controllers.

The other issue it raises is the adequacy of the "backup" network of ground based navaids that we are going to be left with. If the Mt Livingstone NDB and / or VOR was still operating or the Eildon Weir VOR, then the pilot would have had a cross check. But the system that AsA are unilaterally leaving us with does not provide this.

After the criticisms of the ATSB over the diligence of the investigation of the Benalla incident and the Lockhart river incident. Plus the criticisms of the collusion between CASA & the ATSB over the Pelair incident, this will be a very interesting report.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

I agree that there is nothing wrong with the Garmin 155XL GPS. Not as nice as the G430/530 or later, but still capable of doing the job.

Incidents like this, and Benalla, and even Lockhart R say something for my "belt and braces" practice of always having at least two GPSs operating in the aeroplane even if the other unit is a portable. Having spent many hours in front of a G430W in the panel and a G496 on the yoke, I can't recall them ever being in disagreement on my position for any length of time, although I have had one or the other drop out for a period.

As I recall, the Lockhart R aircraft was scheduled to have terrain warning installed and the Benella aircraft was to have an avionic upgrade including GPS. A Garmin 496 with the terrain warning turned on may have saved both.

Dr :8

[The name is Porter]

There are plenty of jets still using the 155XL.

Even more embarrassing-er.

[Centaurus]

My first thoughts on seeing the media picture of the Melbourne Kingair's track in the Mt Hotham area, was why on earth didn't he immediately divert to a suitable alternate if his GPS was playing up, rather than chase his tail around the sky in cloud and risk running into other aircraft in the area.

[IFEZ]

Centaurus, that is a very good question. I guess there's only one person who knows the answer to that.
Also Old Akro's point about the Mt Livingstone Navaids had me wondering as well. So have they been decommissioned..? Would have been handy to obtain a positive fix overhead the aid to confirm how bad his GPS problem was.

[buckshot1777]

LVG aids are on the decommissioning list; whether they have been or not I don't know.

However FWIW each regional RAPAC have been consulted and agreement obtained re each individual navaid proposed to be decommissioned along with local operators and AD owner/local Shire, where relevant.

I understand all proposed were offered to the relevant AD owner/Shire to take over, but as far as I am aware, none took up the offer.

[Squawk7700]

The next thing will be a call for co-pilots...

[Old Akro]

However FWIW each regional RAPAC have been consulted and agreement obtained re each individual navaid proposed to be decommissioned along with local operators and AD owner/local Shire, where relevant.

No No No No No.

eg. CWS, YWE, WON

The Victorian RAPAC has been calling for a plan to retain Navaids in the Melbourne basin for currency & training which is clearly being ignored.

[Torres]

The Australian newspaper article:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v315/Woomera/PPRuNe/The%20Australian_zpsqrqwvntd.jpg


Too close for comfort.

Source: The Australian

An “unsafe” close encounter ¬between two planes near Mount Hotham Airport in Victoria allegedly placed up to 18 lives at risk, fuelling demands for better use of radar at Australia’s regional airports.

According to an incident ¬report obtained by The Australian, two Beechcraft B200 King Air planes on private charters from different companies — one from Essendon in Melbourne and one from Bankstown in Sydney — were vertically within 300ft (90m) of each other on September 3.

It appeared the Essendon-based pilot, struggling with a faulty GPS in heavy morning cloud and poor weather, did not know where he was and reported being in vastly different locations, varying by up to 20 nautical miles, within a short period of time.
Radar traces of this plane, chartered from small Essendon-based operator Seidler Properties, show an apparently erratic path at times, and that the scheduled 38- minute flight took an hour and 27 minutes.

The Essendon plane came within one nautical mile (1.8km) of the other aircraft and eventually landed at Mount Hotham, in the Victorian Alps northeast of Melbourne, but only after what the report by the other pilot ¬described as an “unsafe” approach from the “wrong direction”. There were three other aircraft also en route to the airport at the time.

The report, titled “breakdown of separation”, says passengers on the Essendon-based plane were so shaken they refused to return with the same pilot later that day, ¬requiring another to be flown to Mount Hotham to pick them up.

In a report being investigated by the Australian Transport ¬Safety Bureau, the pilot of the Bankstown-originating aircraft — a senior pilot at a major charter firm — describes the situation as “not safe”.

He suggests he is making the report not to attack the Essendon-based pilot, but rather to highlight an ongoing risk of tragedy in the absence of a safety back-up in cases of pilot error at uncontrolled regional airports.

“If this event did result in a midair collision, two aircraft would have been destroyed and 18 people would have been killed,” says the Bankstown-originating pilot in the report, sent to the ATSB two days ago.

“As a chief pilot, I am significantly concerned with the breakdown of (aircraft) separation caused by this incident. This is not a standard of operation that I would tolerate from my pilots and I do not accept that his event goes without investigation.

“Two high-performance aircraft with 300ft separation (vertic¬ally), within one nautical mile of each other (horizontally), in IMC (instrument meteorological conditions), is not safe.”
The incident has further highlighted the lack of radar control of aircraft to low altitudes at ¬regional airports in Australia, which The Australian has documented in the series of articles over the past two months.

In uncontrolled airspace, ¬pilots must communicate with each other by radio to ensure they remain safely separated, with no support from an air traffic controller monitoring them on radar or providing co-ordination.

At Mount Hotham, radar-based separation of aircraft ends at 18,000ft, below which pilots must self-separate, despite radar being available to a far lower altit¬ude.

Veteran aviator Dick Smith told The Australian the latest Mount Hotham incident highlighted the need to make full use of radar coverage at regional airports to improve safety.

“If they were using the existing radar for control at Mount Hotham, neither of these things (the -alleged mid-air near collision and subsequent alleged dangerous ¬approach) would have happened, because the controller would have told the pilot what was happening,” Mr Smith said.

He said it was particularly frustrating the existing radar was not being used to control aircraft to low altitude at Mount Hotham, given the deaths of three people in a crash there in 2005 and of six people in an accident at Benalla, about 150km from Mount Hotham, in 2004. He believed both crashes could have been averted had radar control close to ground level been provided.

“How many more frightening incidents like this before there are more unnecessary deaths?” Mr Smith said.

He said all that was needed to make use of existing radar for separation control to low altitudes at regional airports was for Airservic¬es Australia to provide more training to controllers at its Melbourne and Brisbane radar centres.

Airservices insist the air traffic system is safe and that levels of control around the country are appropriate for local traffic volumes and types.

An ATSB spokesman said the latest Mount Hotham incidents were being investigated.

However, an official statement on the bureau’s website refers only to the “unstable approach” to the runway; not the earlier alleged close encounter. Seidler Properties suggested it was unaware of any investigation and declined to comment.

[alphacentauri]

The Victorian RAPAC has been calling for a plan to retain Navaids in the Melbourne basin for currency & training which is clearly being ignored.

Really? Can you please point me to the set of Vic RAPAC minutes that show where this occured?

I have just had a quick scan of the last 3 years worth of RAPAC minutes and non of them reflect what you just stated.

[Old Akro]

At the time of the CWS closure there was significant discussion about the need to have navaids in the Melbourne basin for training & currency, which has pretty much been ignored by AsA.

There was also a significant discrepancy between AsA policy and statements made by the AsA rep to the RAPAC meetings at the time of the CWS procedure deletion. RAPAC was told that a training procedure was on the worklist, but it never was.

The decision to not repair YWE after damage by vandals was made unilaterally by AsA. If you trace the RAPAC minutes at that time it was an open agenda item for a year or more before AsA declaring that sending a repair crew to a National park within 1 hours drive of Melbourne was an unacceptable OH&S risk.

[buckshot1777]

I assume you aren't an industry association rep actually attending the Victorian RAPAC.

The OH&S issue you cite but don't elaborate on was that the YWE VOR was out of service due to ongoing vandalism by rifle fire, which was clearly a safety issue for attending technical personnel. In any case, because the navaid didn't form part of the backup navaid network and was scheduled for decommissioning in 2016 anyway, it was considered not worthwhile repairing so with RAPAC and CASA OAR agreement, it was decommissioned early.

There has not been any ongoing call for a plan by the Victorian RAPAC for retaining navaids for training purposes.

Mention has been made from time to time, but always conceded that no-one (e.g. none of the flying schools) was prepared to pay for any for their ongoing upkeep and end of life replacement, and that there are alternative navaids available although not necessarily quite so convenient.

[Di_Vosh]

The OH&S issue you cite but don't elaborate on was that the YWE VOR was out of service due to ongoing vandalism by rifle fire, which was clearly a safety issue for attending technical personnel.

You can't be serious? :rolleyes:

Was the concern that they would be shot at while repairing the facility????

DIVOSH!

[alphacentauri]

Di_VOSH,

That's correct

[thorn bird]

Shot at by who? Islamic terrorists?


OH&S will be the death of this country.

[Di_Vosh]

So let me understand this correctly:

1. The aid was damaged by someone shooting at it.

2. There was a concern that if it were to be repaired, the repair crew would be shot at. This is a State Forest roughly an hours drive from Melbourne we're talking about here, not downtown Kabul or Baghdad.

I don't recall any news items over the past year or two saying that anyone was being shot at while repairing a Navigation aid (I'd be thinking I'd remember news like that).

Anyone?

DIOVSH!

[theclocker1]

Di,

I'm sure the techs would be more than happy for you to service YWE

[le Pingouin]

It's not that the techs would be deliberately shot at but that the equipment would be shot at from some distance while the techs were attending.

It's a large target so pot shots could easily be taken from 1000m away. Would you like to be inside a thin skinned building where there's a known history of people taking pot shots?

[CaptainMidnight]

Shot at by who? Islamic terrorists?No, other idiots.

Same mentality as those who used to shoot out the nav lights when there was a lane of entry, and probably the same who shoot out road signs.

It is an isolated area, and said to be an ongoing problem at YWE, explained at RAPAC. Understandably it was unacceptable to expect techs to work inside the antenna housing to repair the antenna with the potential for the problem to happen again whilst doing so.

Like many things, publicity can result in an increase in occurrences including elsewhere.

Anyway, thread drift - back to the topic.

[Di_Vosh]

Sorry about the thread drift, but if you could indulge me a bit further...

It's not that the techs would be deliberately shot at but that the equipment would be shot at from some distance while the techs were attending.

It's a large target so pot shots could easily be taken from 1000m away. Would you like to be inside a thin skinned building where there's a known history of people taking pot shots?

What I'm trying to get my head around is that the response was an OH&S issue instead of a police issue.

I'm really struggling with the concept that if you'd gone to VICPOL and explained the issue as you've explained here that their response would have been nothing?

DIVOSH!

[IFEZ]

I'm with you on this Divosh. If people are taking potshots at the facility then what should happen is the police should be involved, track down the perpetrators and lock them up. The aid should then be repaired. It's all a bit too convenient to just say it's too dangerous so let's just shut it down. I mean what are these idiots going to target next?? Peoples houses??
The aids at YWE and CWS should not be decommissioned. They are important for training and currency as others have said. Surely fewer aids available for these purposes is only going to add an increased cost burden, and possibly decrease safety if there are multiple aircraft practicing in the same area OCTA. Or am I over estimating how many people will be wanting to use them given the deteriorating state of GA..?

[Di_Vosh]

IFEZ cheers,

It's one thing to shoot at road signs, unattended buildings, etc. But it is another thing entirely if:

but that the equipment would be shot at from some distance while the techs were attending.

(my bolding)

This either happened or it did not!

If it did, I simply cannot believe that VICPOL didn't act further, or that this wouldn't have been nationwide news at the time.

So my question to people who are in the know (and there appear to be some on this thread): Were shots fired at the facility when techs were present?

DIVOSH!

[le Pingouin]

What exactly would you expect the police to do? It's out in the middle of bloody nowhere.

Why the hell wouldn't it be an OH&S issue as well? As far as I know no-one was actually there when shots were fired but if you can't see the potential......

[thorn bird]

I think the development sharks have found a perfect excuse to shutdown Bankstown airport.
The streets around Bankstown are a virtual war zone these days. The police seem ambivalent to that to.

[Stikybeke]

You think? Really?
Stiky

[Old Akro]

It's not that the techs would be deliberately shot at but that the equipment would be shot at from some distance while the techs were attending.

My understanding is that there was only one incidence of bullet damage, not repeated damage.

The facility is in a high traffic state forest, 3k WSW of the town of very nice Western District town of Enfield. For 10 years I event directed rally championship rounds in that forest. In recent years my company has frequently had employees in the area without incident or concern. The beacon is on the border of the Enfield state park and the Enfield state forest. Parks Victoria publishes park notes to encourage recreational visitors to the area. Its near the corner of Incolls Rd and Misery Creek Road. Incolls Road is a well maintained dirt road which links Enfield to some other towns. Its major enough to get Google street view. Anyone can look and make their own assessment. Its clearly visible in a fenced, cleared area on Google Earth.

The Victorian Parks guide is here: http://parkweb.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/313797/Park-note-Enfield-State-Park.pdf

If its so dangerous, how come Parks Victoria staff work there? And how come the Victorian Government encourages a wide range of activities from bushwalking to horse riding?

It looks to me like AsA used this as a convenient excuse to avoid maintaining one of its facilities.

[andrewr]

Putting a green wooden fence around it so it was hard to see from the ground would probably make it less interesting to shoot - doesn't seem too difficult.

Unless there was some suggestion that people were deliberately disabling it to interfere with aircraft operations?

[Di_Vosh]

This gets better:

What exactly would you expect the police to do? It's out in the middle of bloody nowhere.

le Pingouin can you really imagine the following phone conversation:

AsA person: "Hello, Police? I'm repairing a facility and someone is shooting at the building I'm working in."

Police: "Where are you located?"

AsA person: "Yarrowee VOR (gives location)"

Police: "Oh. Sorry mate. That's in the middle of nowhere, we can't really help you. Don't get shot, okay?"

Don't think so.

You should have read the recent VICPOL response to a cranky old hermit who threatened to burn down the Otways (amongst other things). Do you seriously think VICPOL would ignore actual shots being fired?

But you've kind of confirmed what I suspected, in that the facility was shot at when it was unattended. But then you come up with:

no-one was actually there when shots were fired but if you can't see the potential......

I'm sorry, I can't see it.

Old Akro put it much better than I could.

And what about all the other park rangers that regularly patrol, maintain, etc. all the other state forests where various forms of hunting/shooting are regularly carried out? What about the road workers who replace those road signs that have been shot? Do they wear full body armour and require police escorts?

Of course not!

My suspicion is that AsA was looking for reasons to decommission the aid. An opportunity came up when it was vandalised, so they cooked up a very flimsy OH&S case to excuse them from further maintenance.

DIVOSH!

[josephfeatherweight]

I agree with the gentleman above.

[Old Akro]

What exactly would you expect the police to do? It's out in the middle of bloody nowhere.

I let this one slip.

Its 3 km from the town of Enfield, population about 400, with quite a nice Art Gallery and a couple of nice cafe's.
16km from the town of Buninyong, which has 2 wineries and a restaurant that rates the Age "Good Food Guide".
23 km from the centre of Ballarat, which is the 3rd most populous area in Victoria with a population of approx 150,000
25km from the town of Smythesdale
29 km from the town of Scarsdale
137 km from the Melbourne CBD.

Ballarat has a 24 hour Police Station and Buninyong has a normal hours Police Station.
Parks Victoria has an office in Ballarat and a depot in Buninyong.

"Bloody Nowhere" ? Really? You need to get out more.

[alphacentauri]

You guys need to get over it. It's gone.

Excluding the alleged OHS excuse. The navaid would have been decommissioned early anyway. Fact is in most cases these things cost a lot more to repair and keep running than they do to decommission. Surely even you guys wouldn't be able to justify the expense of repairing it and keeping it going only to rip it out of the ground 12 months later?.

I can see the pprune thread running screaming at why AsA spent 'taxpayers' money on fixing a navaid they were going to withdraw.

You guys won't be satisfied either way.

[Jabawocky]

Mr Two stars…. :ok: Spot on.

I know a lot of pilots are shooters so this will not be news to them, from 1000m away….You need to be good. Or have good gear to help with trajectory and windage issues. Yes a projectile can easily travel that far but to be accurate is another thing. Most folk who have the gear and are that good do not behave like this.

I suspect even the most cowboy like idiots are not shooting at nag aids especially with vehicles and people around.

[Pinky the pilot]

I know a lot of pilots are shooters so this will not be news to them, from 1000m away….You need to be good.

I'm one:ok:. And this Saturday out at the local Rifle Club we're shooting at 900 yards.:eek:

And yes, you do have to know what you're doing to get hits in the centre of the target at that sort of distances.

And I also strongly doubt that any Fullbore Shooter would be involved in any such acts of vandalism.:=

My suspicion is that AsA was looking for reasons to decommission the aid. An opportunity came up when it was vandalised, so they cooked up a very flimsy OH&S case to excuse them from further maintenance.


Agreed.

[le Pingouin]

There were repeated acts of vandalism as well - from memory an air conditioner was nicked in one event.

As to shooting - surely if a cut lunch commando who was an ordinary shot can hit a man sized target at 600m with an SLR then a yob with a similar calibre weapon and a scope could hit a barn door at a 1000!

I'd agree it's not the back of Bourke but you wouldn't just happen to drive past while travelling between towns either.

[Pinky the pilot]

surely if a cut lunch commando who was an ordinary shot can hit a man sized target at 600m with an SLR

Depends on how much training he (you?) had.

then a yob with a similar calibre weapon and a scope could hit a barn door at a 1000!


Wanna bet?:ooh::E

[Squawk7700]

This reminds me of the scene from American sniper where they put an engineer up to work on a building as a decoy so they could find the sniper. He was subsequently shot... however they did find the sniper. I think think anyone from ASA is prepared to make that sacrifice :eek:

[Lead Balloon]

if a cut lunch commando who was an ordinary shot can hit a man sized target at 600m with an SLRA cut lunch commando who is an ordinary shot cannot hit a man sized target at 600m with an SLR, except by pure luck.

You might have accidentally hit the 0 key twice.

60m? yes.

600m? Don't make me laugh.

[le Pingouin]

Whatever you say Lead Balloon, I'm not claiming every shot at 600m but I hit it often enough. No special training other than a few 1000 rounds over the years.

[Lead Balloon]

I read the text as meaning that the SLR to which you refer does not have a scope (in contrast to the similar calibre weapon with a scope).

If you can reliably hit a man sized target at 600m, with an SLR with ordinary sights, you are no "ordinary shot".

[CaptainMidnight]

Well, this is quite a thread drift.

Does anyone have anything further related to the op?

[UnderneathTheRadar]

Whatever you say Lead Balloon, I'm not claiming every shot at 600m but I hit it often enough. No special training other than a few 1000 rounds over the years.

So now we know who's been shooting at YWE!

[le Pingouin]

Not guilty Your Honour! Haven't fired a shot in 25 years, honest guv!

[gerry111]

Le Pingouin,

Did your plain sighted SLR also get used for parade duties? :eek:

[Frank Arouet]

If you can hit a man size target at 600 meters with a 7.62 caliber SLR you would be a qualified rifleman in the Australian Infantry.
A similar caliber civilian weapon would be a .308 caliber.
A rested shot with a scope on such a weapon would be within the ability of most amateurs.
A scope on a SLR would be problematic with the standard weapon as it breaks like a shotgun and bearing wear at the hinge would make for inconsistent shots. Most sighted Military rifles are unbroken.
If you can't consistently hit a man size target at 600 meters with the SLR don't ask for a transfer to Artillery as I doubt you would have the mechanical dexterity to pull the "tit" let alone the mindset to work out the gunnery problem.
If you're a civilian, stick to flying.
Where were we again?

[Sunfish]

Off topic, but speaking as a former range conducting Officer there is no way in hell anyone is going to hit a "man-sized target" at 600m with a 7.62 open sighted SLR. I have the scar under the right eye and*plenty of experience to prove it.

What you can do is get a round within about a four foot bulls eye at that range, but that is all. At 1000 yds the bull is six feet in diameter with a .303. SMLE and that is an easy score.

I could get an M60 out to about 1800 yds on a bipod in still air, but I'm boasting.

These days I satisfy myself by knocking the clothes pegs off the target frame at about 200m with a .308 or .223. I'm old and not as good as I once was.

[le Pingouin]

Yes gerry, open sights and whenever we used a rifle we were issued with our "personal" SLR - parade ground, range or going bush.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

I could get an M60 out to about 1800 yds on a bipod in still air, but I'm boasting.

Ah yes, then there was the day a big skippy made the mistake of hopping onto the range when the Transport Platoon boys were qualifying on the M60 ....................

.................... No, sorry can't tell you anymore. Children could be reading this and would likely have nightmares. :E

[Stanwell]

Transport? Those dudes?
I'll bet they didn't cease fire when the poor bugger eventually dropped dead from exhaustion, either.

1800 yards with an M60?
Did you hit anything - or just make holes in the air and scenery?


p.s. In my younger days, I was awarded the coveted 'crossed rifles' - to be worn on the forearm.
Well, y'see, this dopey person next to me on the mound had trouble working out which target was his.
.

[gerry111]

This banter is so much more fun than Dick's latest crusade. :)

[Sunfish]

Even more fun when a bunch of us on a tactical exercise crossed paths with a tank gunnery instructors course and our Commanders knew each other.

There I was, sitting on the turret of a Centurion going "left, left, up, up" oblivious to the MG firing between my dangling legs.

I had very fancy new spring diaphragm ear plugs, but they, and my hearing, didn't survive a Cent firing APDS from Ten feet away too well.

The things we did when we were young and stupid.

[Pinky the pilot]

What you can do is get a round within about a four foot bulls eye at that range, but that is all. At 1000 yds the bull is six feet in diameter with a .303. SMLE and that is an easy score.


Sunfish; At my Rifle Club, the 900 yd target has a bullseye about 24 inches in diameter, with the 'V' (centre) bull being about 12 inches diameter.
I'll measure them properly in due course.

Don't know what Club shoots with the target size you speak of.:confused:


Well, this is quite a thread drift.

Does anyone have anything further related to the op?

Doesn't look like it, does it?

[Sunfish]

Pinky, my targets were 40 years ago, starting with a SMLE at about age Fifteen. Thousand yards was an"easy" range because the bull was six feet across.

I forget which were the "harder ranges you may be right from memory somewhere between five and seven hundred was hard.

These were the days when the ammmo was free and I could buy a brand new jungle carbine still in cosmoline for $10.00 at the club.

[AU-501]

WHAT!! are you grunts on about ?

[The name is Porter]

I bazooka'd a cow in Cambodia from 75 metres once.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Aaahhh, 200m, the smell of gun oil and cordite. The absolute thump into a well rested butt the first time you squeeze the trigger on your first centre fire weapon...the SMLE No1 MK3 *....joy:} For a thirteen year old...heady stuff:ok:

Then again, range rifles are precision instruments. The peep sight of an M16, by comparison, is like looking through a cut out twenty litre drum trying to sight on a nail!

...nice drift, by the way...used to enjoy the discussions on the different fishing lures too.

[Car RAMROD]

Tried and true Halco Redheads, BusDriver man!

[advo-cate]

Come on thread is about under reporting by #asa and potential fatalities.

[Stanwell]

Well, good, Mr advo.
We've just been marking time, eagerly awaiting your informative post on subject.

Away you go, then...

[Sunfish]

Busdriver, I used to throw quarter ounce Celtas at trout - way too easy. I took up fly fishing instead and the next fish took Eighteen months, but far more fun!

[Eddie Dean]

Once, I killed a gopher with a stick

[Dick Smith]

I presume this thread has gone off track so there is no pressure on CASA and Airservices to actually move towards the NAS decision of actually training en route controllors in Australia to provide a class E separation service in the terminal area at airports like Mt Hotham and Ballina.

If you file IFR you pay for a control service but actually don't get one where the risk is highest- in the terminal area of non tower airports.

[Lead Balloon]

Alas, Dick, most of the frogs have been boiled and most of sleepwalkers have stumbled off the cliff.

You have to learn to trust governments. Their only concern is the objective public interest.

If there is another Lockhart River, never fear: more regulations and more power to the regulator will follow. :ok:

[le Pingouin]

Dick, is it any wonder your threads wander off into the nether-nether? You belittle people who tell you things you don't want to hear, hyperbole might sell cheap electronics and groceries but does nothing for serious discussion of safety issues, you go fishing for details of events and then abuse us when we can't provide any details and say we're covering something up and doing everything in our power to stop you. Paranoia anyone?

How bizarre.

[le Pingouin]

P.S. We're still waiting to see those miraculously modern US procedural sep standards......

[Dick Smith]

Le ping. The reason I ignore you is that you don't even have the integrity and confidence to make such requests under your real name.

There is nothing to stop anyone on this site from using their real name at any time. I and others are suspicious of those who don't when it's clear that there would be no fair reason to hide the truth!

Or could it be you so lack self confidence that you are simply not game to be open and honest ? If so I feel sorry for you.

[Plazbot]

My real name is Dirk Danger

[le Pingouin]

Dick, as has been pointed out to you multiple times this is an anonymous forum (as far as it goes) so if you choose to play here you accept that. Many of us don't have the luxury of independent wealth and need our jobs to put bread on the table - managers can be terribly vindictive over petty things and have been so in the past to people I've worked with.

As Plazbot says I could use a name that sounds genuine but isn't and you'd be none the wiser. Who are you or others to decide there is no fair reason to not use a real name?

You can take it or leave it, I don't particularly care, but as you're the one making claims about US procedural standards you need to pony up some solid evidence. Or what do you have to hide?

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

Well, that's weird. I could've sworn that not so long ago, Dick had a crack at someone over their anonymity on this forum. The conditions of the forum (and reasons thereof) were pointed out to Dick, and Dick apologised (to his credit). And yet here we are again. WTF?!

[Jabawocky]

Dick…Idon't use my real name (because I can't)but everyone knows who I am. So what difference does that make. You still ignore me.

I recall ABC radio in Tas. Who am I and what would I know. :ok:

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

...class E separation service in the terminal area at airports like Mt Hotham...

Yep, imposition of CTA wherever more than one aeroplane might be in the vicinity of another.

LOL. Soon we'll be reopening all those Towers someone had closed down.

[Dick Smith]

It's quite ok with me it you want to be anonymous but don't the expect me to treat you as I would a real person.

[le Pingouin]

The point is Dick, it would make no difference whether you knew my name or not as you still wouldn't have a clue who I am. I'm just a controller who's been doing the job for 20 years and flight service before that. I don't have a public profile and I'm not in positions of influence within aviation organisations.

[Dick Smith]

Thanks for retaining an interest.

Luckily most of your income comes from the 50 million + air passengers each year.

It's GA that is being destroyed .

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Dick, the best thing you could have done was convince the communication minister to include a WAAS capable bent pipe transponder on either or both of the NBN birds...however, too late for that!

THE most safest situation for regional aerodromes is the availability of vertical guidance for any instrument approach.

[Dick Smith]

My cj3 has fully coupled vertical guidance to the minimum now. So there is clearly no need for WAAS.

Just need to get the baro coupling certified in more aircraft I would say.

[Pera]

It's quite ok with me it you want to be anonymous but don't the expect me to treat you as I would a real person.

Interesting position. No use ever replying to your posts in the future. I wonder if you will treat people you know, who use this forum under pseudonym, the same way. Not many people on here use their own name.

[Dick Smith]

Pera. That is rediculous

Of course I treat the people I know as real people. It's just that I couldn't be bothered to treat a question as serious if the poster is both anonymous and unknown to me. I may be wasting my time.

There is certainly a place for anonyminity on this forum- but it's completely unnecessary if someone is asking me to make an effort and post details on airspace procedures that are common and accepted in other leading aviation countries.

In North America there is lots of low level E to 700 agl well below radar coverage and there is no measurable extra delay compared to what happens in Australia in class G.

It's all about having an open mind and being prepared to copy the best from anywhere. Certainly worked with me.

[gerry111]

OK..

So who's going to be the first unknown poster to 'out' themselves to Dick?

I'm currently shopping for Christmas so my gift to him may be a dictionary.

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

It's just that I couldn't be bothered to treat a question as serious if the poster is both anonymous and unknown to me. I may be wasting my time.

Dick, that's your call, and you've every right to see it that way. I'm just buggered if I can work out why you then spend so much time posting on what is almost exclusively an anonymous forum.

[Lead Balloon]

A dictionary for Dick? Don't be rediculous GIII!

[Pinky the pilot]

Don't be rediculous GIII!

Oh, the irony.:hmm:

[Squawk7700]

Many of us don't have the luxury of independent wealth and need our jobs to put bread on the table - managers can be terribly vindictive over petty things and have been so in the past to people I've worked with.



Sounds like ATC is a fun place to work !