Near collision as student tunes to wrong frequency: ABC news

[kaz3g]

Solo student pilot tuned radio to wrong frequency, ATSB report on mid-air near miss says - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-04/near-collision-after-student-pilot-tunes-in-to-wrong-frequency/6912746)

Bathurst Is is a registered airfield.

Kaz

[Duck Pilot]

Student made a mistake, the incident was reported and I'm sure the student has learnt a lesson. Why does the incident need to be exposed on Pprune? It's not the end of the world, let's move on. The operator addressed the issue appropriately IMHO.

No need for this post, case closed.

Mods, close this thread it's propaganda that doesn't need to be discussed on a public forum.

[kaz3g]

Perhaps Duckie the information was released to the media in the first place to add to the arguments for the ADSB fitment mandate and even its extension to the VFR fleet?

It's not here on PP because I want to criticise the student...as you say mistakes happen and I admit it sort of happened to me many years ago. I just happen to think it's a good thing to be aware of what is out there in the media.

Kaz

[roundsounds]

Interesting "safety message" in the report - all about RT procedures and nothing about looking out for traffic. It seems to me current NCTL practices rely heavily on radio, if no response to inbound / circuit entry calls then assume there's no traffic? The info in the ATSB report would indicate the 404 overtook the 172 and turned base outside of it, yet didn't sight it?

[Duck Pilot]

Bit confused why ADS-B should be dragged into this incident.

As far as the media go, the less they know the better.

[Flying Binghi]

Hmmm... i've really gotta get me-self a couple more call-signs. Could get quiet the discussion going..:hmm:




.

[Capn Bloggs]

Could get quiet the discussion going..
Quite.....

[Homesick-Angel]

A half descent lookout from both might have resolved a few issues...

Radio's are only a backstop for 3 reasons:

1- Ive flown enough piece of sh1t aeroplanes to know the radio is a good chance to be the first thing not to work correctly.

2 - I cant tell you how often Ive seen/heard student pilots chatting away and not listening on centre freq blissfully unaware they cant hear or be heard by the people who need to hear them in the CTAF.

3 - forgotten calls.

Not hearing anything is an excuse to look harder.

[Avgas172]

half descent maybe a half decent descent.
eh bloggs ....lol.

[jas24zzk]

Student made a mistake..............is that something new?
Bag of Luck, Bag of Experience. 1 point to the bag of experience....nil taken from the bag of luck, as all parties were making good use of the mk1 eyeball.

And homesick angel, you don't need to be in a POS aeroplane for a communication failure, unless you consider that, bumping the volume knob on freq change, or being busy when a call comes through not to be comms failures.

The radio doesn't have to be filling the cabin with smoke to lose comms when you need em. :E

Damm right about eye usage tho.

[Lead Balloon]

For a while there the ATSB was using every report it could as an excuse to drop not-so-gentle hints that mandatory fitment of FDRs to GA aircraft would be a good idea.

I suspect that ADS will become the 'new black'.

There's always a new gadget to finally solve a perennial problem.

[no_one]

I have wondered if a mode s transponder could include he frequency that the radio is tuned to in its data return. That way if atc were unable to raise an aircraft on a frequency they would know what frequency it was on and either contact it or relay a message to change. It wouldn't help here but would prevent some hassle in other situations.

[Squawk7700]

I have wondered if a mode s transponder could include he frequency that the radio is tuned to in its data return. That way if atc were unable to raise an aircraft on a frequency they would know what frequency it was on and either contact it or relay a message to change. It wouldn't help here but would prevent some hassle in other situations.

That is an excellent idea No_one and could be used world wide to enhance safety. Maybe send an email off to Garmin or some of the other big radio / transponder manufacturers (seriously). There's a few technical considerations to think about like multiple radios etc, but it certainly is a good idea to think tank.

It would shock many to know that many of us have flown into and out of CTAF airports without a radio for years!

[no_one]

That is an excellent idea No_one and could be used world wide to enhance safety. Maybe send an email off to Garmin or some of the other big radio / transponder manufacturers (seriously). There's a few technical considerations to think about like multiple radios etc, but it certainly is a good idea to think tank.


I would except that I am fearful that what I hope would be a simple software upgrade would become a CASA mandated $20k hardware upgrade....

[Homesick-Angel]

I resent the dissent about the decent spelling of descent....

[The name is Porter]

Why did you re-send it??