Fire Fighting 737 Crashed in WA [Archive]

givemewings

6th Feb 2023, 09:19

Ya beat me to it SOPS... weren't any posts when I checked, oops

Report from local Perth page: WA INCIDENT ALERTS

BREAKINGNEWS
5.30PM

Anon says a water bomber(AIR INTEL) plane just crashed in Hopetoun and Unconfirmed reports both crew have survived.

Update
5.50pm
Two people were onboard when it crashed but have been able to leave the crash and are now in hospital.

It's reporting that the Aircraft as a "737 Waterbomber".

6PM
The plane, believed to be a firefighting tanker, went down in the Fitzgerald River National Park. The two on board have been taken to hospital.

43Inches

6th Feb 2023, 09:24

VHOED191006

6th Feb 2023, 09:26

It does appear to be quite miraculous if that is the case.

PoppaJo

6th Feb 2023, 09:30

https://twitter.com/9NewsPerth/status/1622536244679917568?s=20&t=3aDkScClLHkMpY7SeuA1FQ

43Inches

6th Feb 2023, 09:30

I heard other assets were bombing the wreck to suppress fires as the crew escaped. Whether the wreck itself or it landed in/near the bushfire as well not sure.

givemewings

6th Feb 2023, 09:31

Amazing to have survived if it was some sort of bombing run gone wrong. Good to hear they got out with what sounds like minor injuries. Will be interesting to find out what happened. Hopefully no one else on board, it does sound like from the wording they were the only ones at this stage.

the playback in FR24 would suggest it was during a run. I took a screenshot but can't post here. There was also two other Aircraft in the vicinity, "BDOG123" and what looks to be a single of some type, can't recall the type now. I know FR24 isn't fail-safe but the 737 track stops not far past the river
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/920x2000/image_a06a094eb8fac5b47036aca10990658efe5df1ee.png
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/920x2000/screenshot_20230206_182447_flightradar24_34bd88b3b34280eab1d 3dafa631cf87d9d9ceccc.jpg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/920x2000/screenshot_20230206_183417_flightradar24_b56247eb320b2e9ab29 721daa10cc4345166dd82.jpg

VHOED191006

6th Feb 2023, 09:34

the playback in FR24 would suggest it was during a run. I took a screenshot but can't post here. There was also two other Aircraft in the vicinity, "BDOG123" and what looks to be a single of some type, can't recall the type now. I know FR24 isn't fail-safe but the 737 track stops not far past the river

On the topic of FR24, last data point has recorded the aircraft at 101kts GS, descending through 700ft, with a V/S of around -1100fpm.

givemewings

6th Feb 2023, 09:37

On the topic of FR24, last data point has recorded the aircraft at 101kts GS, descending through 700ft.
I'm using the phone app, and Prune won't let me upload the animation, but here's the last frame with the 737 on it if you want to find it in the playback

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/920x2000/image_0fb413f0dd916ae40208ee3bdfe688b9e9721add.png

Desert Flower

6th Feb 2023, 10:39

A water bombing plane has crashed while fighting two raging bushfires in a southern region of Western Australia.

The Boeing 737-3 belonging to Coulson Aviation with two people on board went down over the Fitzgerald River National Park on Monday at around 4.40pm (WST) and crashed in the forest between Ravensthorpe and Hopetoun.

Both pilots survived the crash and were able to free themselves from the wreckage but sustained minor injuries, WA police told Daily Mail Australia.

'The two pilots on board were retrieved from the crash site by helicopter and airlifted to Ravensthorpe Airport,' a police spokesperson said.

DF.

Saintly

6th Feb 2023, 11:17

Will Coulsen Aviation send another 737 tanker over to WA? I assume the crashed aircraft is a wreck now and nothing from it can be salvaged.

More importantly glad the two crew members are ok.

Kulwin Park

6th Feb 2023, 12:21

Will Coulsen Aviation send another 737 tanker over to WA? I assume the crashed aircraft is a wreck now and nothing from it can be salvaged.

How do you know that??? Nobody has even seen pictures yet to determine the condition of the hull.

Sailvi767

6th Feb 2023, 12:29

How do you know that??? Nobody has even seen pictures yet to determine the condition of the hull.

I have never known a airliner that made a off airport landing and flew again. I am sure it’s happened but incredibly unlikely. Even if zero damage the recovery effort would almost certainly render the aircraft unairworthy.

Capn Bloggs

6th Feb 2023, 12:36

Will Coulsen Aviation send another 737 tanker over to WA?
According to this:

https://www.nafc.org.au/fleet/

There isn't another 737 LAT in the Australian firebombing fleet.

Finn47

6th Feb 2023, 12:43

Perhaps he meant from the US? Coulson had six of them, now obviously five left.

WingNut60

6th Feb 2023, 12:54

Try TACA flight 110.

However, in this case, I can't imagine how you'd injure the crew without damaging the aircraft

Capn Bloggs

6th Feb 2023, 13:02

How do you know that??? Nobody has even seen pictures yet to determine the condition of the hull.
Seriously? Probably take to the cockpit with a Phillips head screwdriver for bits but that would be about it. Especially a 27 year old 737.

BNEAU

6th Feb 2023, 13:11

There isn't another 737 LAT in the Australian firebombing fleet.
There are two at RAAF Richmond, Bomber 137 (N137CG) and Bomber 210 (N138CG).

I’ve heard that the aircraft is a hull loss. Going to be a task getting it out. Though good to hear that it was a good outcome for the crew.

Start4

6th Feb 2023, 13:27

uxb99

6th Feb 2023, 17:50

I heard other assets were bombing the wreck to suppress fires as the crew escaped. Whether the wreck itself or it landed in/near the bushfire as well not sure.

Is there a protocol for suppressing any resultant fires if a fire fighting aircraft goes down? I can imagine it's potentially catastrophic in terms of making the fires worse especially for major forest fires.

LTP90

6th Feb 2023, 18:03

Perhaps he meant from the US? Coulson had six of them, now obviously five left.
Coulson, to my knowledge has only converted 3 of the 737's they have, their U.S. tanker numbers: 137, the red/White "Boeing" paint job.138 they sold to Australia and it now goes by 210, and 139 the one involved in this accident.
hypothetically if 137 is not already in Australia and not in heavy winter maintenance, it could be shipped over. Some of the U.S. Forest Service contracts start in March, but I do not know Coulsons start dates, if I remember right 137 has one of the earlier start dates.

LTP90

6th Feb 2023, 18:07

Is there a protocol for suppressing any resultant fires if a fire fighting aircraft goes down? I can imagine it's potentially catastrophic in terms of making the fires worse especially for major forest fires.
Yes, at least in the US, the protocol is put the fire out by all means. There have many several cases where the aircraft fire resulted in a large expansion of the fire perimeter, and loss of control lines.

Squawk7700

6th Feb 2023, 19:24

Temps in the mid 30’s C over there at the moment.

PoppaJo

6th Feb 2023, 19:29

Hard to imagine how it got down with no casualties after seeing the footage of the Canberra accident, happens very quick. Looks more like a forced landing perhaps, they got caught out in some specific situation, the only exit path was down, they must have had decent vis when making the decision, other aircraft had it in sight and able to distinguish flames. Will be interesting to see the photos and how much of it remains, sounds like it might still be in one piece.

mickjoebill

6th Feb 2023, 20:37

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-06/water-bomber-crashes-fighting-wa-bushfire-two-people-hospital/101938070

vegassun

6th Feb 2023, 20:56

N619SW a 27 year old 737-300

An old Southwest Airlines 300 sounds like.

Capt Fathom

6th Feb 2023, 21:08

So you can put a 737 down in the bush, and it hardly makes the news! If it had a kangaroo on the tail…….

Obidiah

6th Feb 2023, 21:24

KRviator

6th Feb 2023, 21:34

This story is struggling to pass the pub test.

A PA28 lands on a golf course and it's all over the news, a 737 crashes and virtually nothing??And that should tell you all you need to know about the so-called "news" media both here and abroad.

I don't subscribe to the illuminati, flat earth society or any of that rubbish, but I do believe we only hear on the 'news' what editors and producers want us to hear, which is usually the most sensationalist tripe they can find to generate advertising revenue and clicks.

logansi

6th Feb 2023, 21:36

First images

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1284x1019/327727500_1159336941450853_5341297298637497886_n_1__323fb696 3be355e775e821f0b53e5bdb650aff0e.jpg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/768x1024/329407037_1188142948370205_8088892768140500049_n_fed81041437 631ea107712372e0b5059199e63a4.jpg

mcoates

6th Feb 2023, 21:50

Good job landing near the road for recovery access ! Lucky boys !

logansi

6th Feb 2023, 22:11

Talking to someone in the know, apparently, the entire accident sequence was recorded by 2 of the HD cameras on the lead plane, doubt it will be made public for a while but will be an incredible bit of evidence for the investigators

43Inches

6th Feb 2023, 22:14

I think the picture paints the reason for survival, flat terrain, low scrub, cockpit looks intact. Fire looks towards the aft where I presume fuel has leaked.

It's definitely not going to fly again, that's not going to be an intact recovery, the back end will be charcoal.

A PA28 lands on a golf course and it's all over the news, a 737 crashes and virtually nothing??
A 737 crashes, supposedly on drop run into the bush and both crew only minor injuries??
FR24 has GS at 100kts ??

No spectacular footage at the time and now today the earthquake in Turkey/Syria trumps any local news about a plane crash in the middle of nowhere where the pilots survived. Had it been a slow news day it would have headlined.

Talking to someone in the know, apparently, the entire accident sequence was recorded by 2 of the HD cameras on the lead plane, doubt it will be made public for a while but will be an incredible bit of evidence for the investigators

Birddog overhead was most likely spotting for them and recording the whole thing.

mickjoebill

6th Feb 2023, 22:15

This story is struggling to pass the pub test.

A PA28 lands on a golf course and it's all over the news, a 737 crashes and virtually nothing??

A light plane crash has few if any political strands which can inhibit a journo going full on with dramatic language.
It is the role the aircraft had which is tempering reporting. Firefighting is a sensitive subject with the public, I've never seen negative press in Australia of the cockups made by volunteer firefighters. The press and pollies tread gingerly.

fdr

6th Feb 2023, 22:23

Try TACA flight 110.

However, in this case, I can't imagine how you'd injure the crew without damaging the aircraft

Seriously? Probably take to the cockpit with a Phillips head screwdriver for bits but that would be about it. Especially a 27 year old 737.

flat head, the LRUs are Dzus mainly...
I think the hint that the other fire bombers were suppressing the fire while the crew escaped might suggest that there won't be a sudden increase in available EADI, EHSIs, FMS CDUs and EIS's etc from the site.

Gonna be interesting to see what plonks a B733LAT into the weeds at a reported approach speed of 101GS. Many birds "thermalling" around the fires of WA these days?

Wouldn't be questioning SOPs until a lot more info comes out, Coulson had a bad day with the Herc, stuff happens in that environment occasionally, even to competent operators.

Boys are fortunate that the industry hasn't yet started using the early years B738 etc, the ones that have the "fold here" ring frames that were bogus manufactured non compliant to the TCDS production data... only about 2000 of those out there. Those are the ones that we have seen zigged zagged after relatively low energy off piste events in the carribean, Indonesia, and other exotic ports of call.

givemewings

6th Feb 2023, 22:26

This story is struggling to pass the pub test.

A PA28 lands on a golf course and it's all over the news, a 737 crashes and virtually nothing??
A 737 crashes, supposedly on drop run into the bush and both crew only minor injuries??
FR24 has GS at 100kts ??

To be fair, this happened late afternoon, down south of Perth. It was 'breaking' on MSM channels as the 6pm bulletin started. By the time anyone would have got reporters down/near there, it would be dark and there were no 'dramatic' pictures to share. Also no pax, you know how fast they stopped giving a sh... about UPS6 because it was 'just' a cargo flight.... media don't really change. If they can't quote someone saying the plane 'plummeted' and 'we was gunna die', there doesn't seem to be much 'interest' except by those in the industry.

I think once these pics hit the news, they'll (at least in Perth) be running them all day.

43Inches

6th Feb 2023, 22:28

The media is a business that is income and ego driven. The press will report on things that have public interest and affect a large group emotionally. A light plane landing in the suburbs evokes many emotions from fear for the occupants, elation on the survival aspects, pilots skills and thankful passengers and anger as to who could have been injured on the ground, ie good ratings. Qantas is the same, most of the population uses QF services, the public expects a flawless service and anything abnormal will invoke emotions in potential travelers. Aviation is also an easy target to get fear and good news stories, ie everyone almost died when the engine failed (plane plummeted, sparks were seen, peopled screamed), but they didn't and luckily they landed safely (the plane flew on and landed without incident) , the pilots heroic skill got them safely home...(the pilot did what he's trained/paid for, planes are designed for etc etc)

Today the Earthquake is the main topic so everything else gets sidelined as there is a human grief story unfolding, all the emotions for viewers to process and keep glued to screens for updates.

There is no big conspiracy, just what the media believes we would want to see the most, and to be honest there will not be a lot that will want to see continued coverage of a burning 737 in the middle of nowhere except in passing now that we know everyone is safe.

Capn Rex Havoc

6th Feb 2023, 22:54

Double donk fail due birds perhaps?

43Inches

6th Feb 2023, 23:05

Wouldn't be questioning SOPs until a lot more info comes out, Coulson had a bad day with the Herc, stuff happens in that environment occasionally, even to competent operators.

There's a steady stream of fire fighting aircraft accidents worldwide, even with LATs. Its very demanding and dangerous work, crashes will happen for so many reasons it's impossible to start to speculate on what went wrong without further info.

PiperCameron

6th Feb 2023, 23:29

There's a steady stream of fire fighting aircraft accidents worldwide, even with LATs. Its very demanding and dangerous work, crashes will happen for so many reasons it's impossible to start to speculate on what went wrong without further info.

So the main thing here is that the pilots "walked away with minor injuries" and live to fly again. Aircraft can be replaced.. highly-skilled and trained pilots are more difficult.

AnotherFSO

6th Feb 2023, 23:45

I think this would have to be the first airline passenger-class jet aircraft hull loss in Australia, wouldn't it? The PanAm 707 overrun at Sydney in 1969 (https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19691201-0) was repaired, apparently.

puff

6th Feb 2023, 23:50

RAAF 707?

AnotherFSO

6th Feb 2023, 23:53

RAAF 707?

True, I'd forgotten that one. I stand corrected.

Capn Bloggs

6th Feb 2023, 23:54

Originally Posted by Capn Bloggs View Post (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/651213-fire-fighting-737-crashed-wa.html#post11380925)
There isn't another 737 LAT in the Australian firebombing fleet.
There are two at RAAF Richmond, Bomber 137 (N137CG) and Bomber 210 (N138CG).
In my defence, you should have quoted my full post, which included the source of my claim:

https://www.nafc.org.au/fleet/

Capn Bloggs

7th Feb 2023, 00:24

Speculating from Google Earth, X marks the spot:

33°52'51.26" S 119°52'43.29" E or -33.880906° 119.878692°

BNEAU

7th Feb 2023, 00:49

In my defence, you should have quoted my full post, which included the source of my claim:

In my defence
You are not allowed to post URLs until you have at least 8 posts

Lead Balloon

7th Feb 2023, 00:51

Presumably ATSB won't investigate as there are no implications for transport safety.

MickG0105

7th Feb 2023, 00:54

https://youtu.be/rVd4KwoqXhg

As usual, Juan raises a good point - what exactly was the mission? Why was a very expensive bit of kit deployed to a fire in what is essentially uninhabited scrubland?

logansi

7th Feb 2023, 01:03

https://youtu.be/rVd4KwoqXhg

As usual, Juan raises a good point - what exactly was the mission? Why was a very expensive bit of kit deployed to a fire in what is essentially uninhabited scrubland?

Ever since the Black Saturday Royal Commission there has been an big focus in Australia on keeping fires small and hitting them hard as fast. It's why Victoria now uses what is called PDD (Pre-determined dispatch) where aircraft are deployed to all Grass and Scrub fires at the same time as the first truck. (If you call 000 an aircraft will respond).

LATs play this role by hitting fires in remote country and helping contain them before they are a threat to property. Just this year the Victorian LATs (an RJ85 and Q400) have been deployed multiple times to lightning strike fires in the Big Desert National park in the states NW. And have in the past been used on tiny fires (less than a few sqm) in remote alpine areas in the far east. They also become cost-effective when the reduce the number of flights required by Air tractors and commitment of ground resources.

WingNut60

7th Feb 2023, 01:18

So the main thing here is that the pilots "walked away with minor injuries" and live to fly again. Aircraft can be replaced.. highly-skilled and trained pilots are more difficult.
Latest in the West Australian newspaper Pilots recover at home as images from crash scene emerge - my emphasis.

Lottery tickets & new underwear!

Angle of Attack

7th Feb 2023, 01:30

It definitely is the first “hull loss” of a Boeing 737 in Australia, reported by ABC

BNEAU

7th Feb 2023, 01:38

megan

7th Feb 2023, 01:48

Many birds "thermalling" around the fires of WA these days?Predatory birds soar in the fire front to capture lunch escaping ie snakes, lizards, rabbits etc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4v68d7U03M

Avv

7th Feb 2023, 01:55

In my defence, you should have quoted my full post, which included the source of my claim:

As that link notes it's not the whole list of aircraft available, NAFC arrange planes for the commonwealth and on behalf of the States but the states also contract their own assets above that including the NSW owned B210 "Marie Bashir" and NSW contracted B137 for a total of 500 + aircraft available

VR-HFX

7th Feb 2023, 02:11

43Inches

7th Feb 2023, 02:31

Cool heads and more than a few ounces of luck. So glad to see they live to fight another day.Certainly that airframe is scrap.

The only civilian jet airliner I can recall living to fly again was a Japan Airlines DC8-62 that ditched in fog 2.5 miles short in SFO in1968. It was rebuilt and flew on for another 33 years.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/440x199/jal_flight_2_22_november_1968_cropped__161c06a5fa8200e3d2113 ae0d40fad844330dcf1.jpg

The JAL 2 water landing could hardly be called a ditching, the crew accidentally landed in the water when they flew too low on the ILS in fog, it was not intentional. The wheels contacted the water in the attempted recovery and the aircraft settled, with its wheels on the bay floor. In a weird set of circumstances the water came up to just under the exit door level creating some nice photo ops.

JAL2 - Bay Area Spotters (http://bayareaplanespotters.weebly.com/jal2.html)

As said earlier TACA flight 110, a 737, also landed off field and returned to service, even being flown out from a nearby road.

PiperCameron

7th Feb 2023, 02:48

Presumably ATSB won't investigate as there are no implications for transport safety.

From ABC News: "DFES and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) are both conducting separate investigations into the crash. In a statement, the ATSB said it was assembling a team from its Perth and Canberra offices with experience in aircraft operations and maintenance, human factors and data recovery to conduct the "evidence-collection phase" of the investigation. "Initially, investigators will seek to interview the pilots and witnesses to understand the circumstances of the accident, and determine the accessibility of the accident site with the aim of conducting an on-site examination of the aircraft wreckage," the statement said. "The scope of the investigation and its time frame will be determined as the ATSB builds its understanding of the nature of the accident."

WingNut60

7th Feb 2023, 02:49

As said earlier TACA flight 110, a 737, also landed off field and returned to service, even being flown out from a nearby road.
Gurgle indicates that the "nearby road" was a dis-used and reclaimed air strip.
A bit like the Gimli drag strip.

Lead Balloon

7th Feb 2023, 03:28

From ABC News: "DFES and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) are both conducting separate investigations into the crash. In a statement, the ATSB said it was assembling a team from its Perth and Canberra offices with experience in aircraft operations and maintenance, human factors and data recovery to conduct the "evidence-collection phase" of the investigation. "Initially, investigators will seek to interview the pilots and witnesses to understand the circumstances of the accident, and determine the accessibility of the accident site with the aim of conducting an on-site examination of the aircraft wreckage," the statement said. "The scope of the investigation and its time frame will be determined as the ATSB builds its understanding of the nature of the accident."Gee. No lives lost. No fare paying passengers involved. Inherently risky activity. What happened to ATSB's 'long standing policy'?

It couldn't be that ATSB's decisions to investigate are affected by the extent of media interest in accidents, could it?

PiperCameron

7th Feb 2023, 03:51

It couldn't be that ATSB's decisions to investigate are affected by the extent of media interest in accidents, could it?

Given 'Media Releases' from Preliminary Reports are a key part of ATSB's paper production effort, you might be tracking very close to the truth there, LB!

givemewings

7th Feb 2023, 03:52

Bit of ahead scratcher, this one from Perth Now:

St John WA said it was believed the pilots, one a man, were not seriously injured but would be assessed to see if they need to be flown to Perth for medical treatment.

One was a man, and the other... a hamster???

Speaking of bent fuselages, does a golf course in BKK count as "off airport"? If so, then there was a 747 that flew again after a round or two... :E

BuzzBox

7th Feb 2023, 03:54

It couldn't be that ATSB's decisions to investigate are affected by the extent of media interest in accidents, could it?

Dunno about that. Apart from The West Australian, the media has shown little interest in the fact that a B737 crashed in WA yesterday afternoon. Perhaps the east-coast-centric Australian media outlets don’t think such an event is newsworthy. :rolleyes:

I’m also more than a little surprised the world’s best aviation journalist hasn’t popped up with a few “insights”…

tartare

7th Feb 2023, 04:10

FullOppositeRudder

7th Feb 2023, 04:17

From logansi:

Ever since the Black Saturday Royal Commission there has been an big focus in Australia on keeping fires small and hitting them hard as fast. It's why Victoria now uses what is called PDD (Pre-determined dispatch) where aircraft are deployed to all Grass and Scrub fires at the same time as the first truck. (If you call 000 an aircraft will respond).

A similar policy in South Australia - two SEATs (AT 820s) and two observation helis are dispatched on the first alarm to any grass fire (or similar). In my observation probably 20% of these dispatches are "cancelled" whilst en route to the incident with a 'not required" pager message. We don't see LATs very often in SA. There are none based here, but they can be requested from interstate if needed. We've now got a couple of converted Blackhawks in our fleet - very useful in specific situations.

The question is asked in respect of this WA accident: "What is the mission here?" It's a good question :rolleyes:.

VHOED191006

7th Feb 2023, 04:50

2 crashes within the span of 3 years, whilst doing similar activities. Hmmmmmm.

BuzzBox

7th Feb 2023, 05:00

The question is asked in respect of this WA accident: "What is the mission here?" It's a good question :rolleyes:.

How about fighting a large out of control bushfire where lives and property were deemed to be at risk by the DFES? Is that not a good enough reason to bring out the big toys?

Capt Fathom

7th Feb 2023, 05:02

2 crashes within the span of 3 years, whilst doing similar activities. Hmmmmmm.

Whilst doing similar activities... Like fire fighting? That's what they do!

Lookleft

7th Feb 2023, 05:03

Gee. No lives lost. No fare paying passengers involved. Inherently risky activity. What happened to ATSB's 'long standing policy'?

It couldn't be that ATSB's decisions to investigate are affected by the extent of media interest in accidents, could it?

Careful LB your bias is showing. You know very well that a hull loss of a transport category aircraft is going to be investigated.

givemewings

7th Feb 2023, 05:09

How about fighting a large out of control bushfire where lives and property were deemed to be at risk by the DFES? Is that not a good enough reason to bring out the big toys?

Given they're based in BQB, any largish fire would surely be used as an opportunity to keep up the skills, even if it wasn't necessarily 'warranted' by life/property? I mean you don't want them sitting there until the 'Big One' comes with no recent 'in the field(air)' runs? IIRC this aircraft was here last year and help stopped a large fire in the Perth hills being much much worse... sister's place was in the danger zone, they were minutes away from having to leave when the call came through the LAT had changed the severity of the situation

Agent_86

7th Feb 2023, 05:12

I’m also more than a little surprised the world’s best aviation journalist hasn’t popped up with a few “insights”…

He's pulled the pin from The Worst Australian and is planning on more TV appearances and releasing new books :rolleyes:

Lead Balloon

7th Feb 2023, 05:22

Careful LB your bias is showing. You know very well that a hull loss of a transport category aircraft is going to be investigated.
No, it's your bias that is showing. The aircraft may have been originally certified in the transport category, but I very much doubt it could have been re-fitted with seats and returned to Part 121 ops.

But let's hope the ATSB comes up with some 'takeaways' that folks flying for the airlines will consider relevant.

Magnetomick

7th Feb 2023, 05:26

What is the slowest airspeed that aircraft could have been travelling at in controlled flight, if it had ditched all it's retardant?
I'm trying to understand how fast they may have been travelling if it was a forced landing - so to speak.
Remarkable...

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/920x2000/7f76ed70_195f_4636_8dce_fa5deb6ef699_5c616054e93afe797251a26 6d150eaabe938c95d.jpeg

Paul O'Rourke

7th Feb 2023, 06:03

I know there is the “Messiah,” but who is the other guy?
Amazing result.

FullOppositeRudder

7th Feb 2023, 06:12

2 crashes within the span of 3 years, whilst doing similar activities. Hmmmmmm.

And we managed to drown a Skycrane in Victoria in January 2019

Ascend Charlie

7th Feb 2023, 06:21

I know there is the “Messiah,” but who is the other guy?

The original, and best, is GT.

Hot on his heels and the darling of Ch 9 is Discrepancy.

BuzzBox

7th Feb 2023, 06:22

According to a report published on The West Australian (yeah, I know...) website this afternoon:

The first-ever Boeing 737 crash in Australia appears to have unfolded after the converted passenger jet clipped a hill and came down horizontally, allowing the pilots to miraculously escape with their lives.The water bomber operated by Canada-headquartered contractor Coulson Aviation crashed in the Fitzgerald River National Park at about 4.13pm on Monday while battling an out-of-control blaze in Ravensthorpe and Hopetoun.

The jet had just completed the second half of a “split drop” load of retardant and hit the ground about 20 seconds later, Department of Fire and Emergency Services Commissioner Darren Klemm told reporters.

https://thewest.com.au/news/disaster-and-emergency/fitzgerald-river-national-park-apparent-cause-of-first-ever-boeing-737-jet-crash-in-australia-revealed-c-9678967

FullOppositeRudder

7th Feb 2023, 06:30

Quote:
Originally Posted by FullOppositeRudder View Post (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/651213-fire-fighting-737-crashed-wa.html#post11381330)
The question is asked in respect of this WA accident: "What is the mission here?" It's a good question https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies2/icon_rolleyes.gif.

How about fighting a large out of control bushfire where lives and property were deemed to be at risk by the DFES? Is that not a good enough reason to bring out the big toys?

Yes certainly - but that wasn't the case here according to the reports we've seen. It was in open bushland - albeit a national park. So far I've not seen anything which suggest lives and property were at risk here.

I wasn't the first one to ask the question BTW. Please refer post #53 earlier in the thread.

FOR
(53 years as a volunteer firefighter)

VHOED191006

7th Feb 2023, 06:38

Whilst doing similar activities... Like fire fighting? That's what they do!
That wasn't my point. My point was that 2 of Coulson's airtankers have crashed within a few years of each other, whilst trying to put out fires. My question is why have 2 crashed? What are they doing wrong?

logansi

7th Feb 2023, 06:45

More images of the crash site

https://i.imgur.com/byaENl4.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/XTnborm.jpg

43Inches

7th Feb 2023, 06:45

It couldn't be that ATSB's decisions to investigate are affected by the extent of media interest in accidents, could it?

Seems to be the only reasonable explanation for what they choose to investigate and what not. Apparently if it doesn't make the news it probably didn't happen is the tag line now.

Why is the ATSB not transparent like the NTSB, you can search every submitted accident/incident report here;

https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Forms/searchdocket

PS just enter Aviation into the 'mode' field and push submit, it will come up with all the latest.

Capn Bloggs

7th Feb 2023, 07:03

I'm sorry to say, Hoskins, that that will not buff out. :{

According to Google Earth, the terrain is pretty flat, so why would they be doing "dive-bombing" approaches (albeit fairly shallow), going pretty slow?

Trevor the lover

7th Feb 2023, 07:06

An "official" in WA has said in the media "it appears they hit a ridge line before crashing and it is a testament to the pilots skills that they were able to survive this."

Sorry, but am I callous to suggest, despite the nature of the operation, hitting a ridge line is not indicative of pilot skill, and anything after that hit just happened. They were there for the ride.

It can be too early to lay blame just after an accident, same can be said for apportioning praise to the crashers.

UnreliableSource

7th Feb 2023, 07:21

Careful LB your bias is showing. You know very well that a hull loss of a transport category aircraft is going to be investigated.

There are many reasons. Among them:
1. LAT operate over cities and towns.
2. Development of the investigative staff. These opportunities are rare.

rattman

7th Feb 2023, 07:23

43Inches

7th Feb 2023, 07:25

What is clear is that survival chances in transport category off airport landings are good if you can get out quickly before it burns. The main thing is to try to land upright at reasonable speed, just like in any other aircraft and you will give most everyone a fighting chance.

There was the qantas 747 that ended up in the golf course in Bangkok, they repaired few once and retired it

At least the JAL 2 DC-8 flew for 32 years post accident and succumbed to the wreckers claw when it developed cracks, so I'd say the repair was worth it.

laardvark

7th Feb 2023, 07:27

I just saw an ATSB guy interviewed .
he said the 737 may have clipped a ridge before crashing .

Stationair8

7th Feb 2023, 07:31

I thought GT, would have been seated in a simulator running through the scenario with the media.

mrdeux

7th Feb 2023, 07:34

There was the qantas 747 that ended up in the golf course in Bangkok, they repaired few once and retired it

Rubbish. It was retired in 2012, 13 years after it’s Bangkok excursion.

BNEAU

7th Feb 2023, 07:42

Given they're based in BQB, any largish fire would surely be used as an opportunity to keep up the skills, even if it wasn't necessarily 'warranted' by life/property? I mean you don't want them sitting there until the 'Big One' comes with no recent 'in the field(air)' runs? IIRC this aircraft was here last year and help stopped a large fire in the Perth hills being much much worse... sister's place was in the danger zone, they were minutes away from having to leave when the call came through the LAT had changed the severity of the situation
I do know that the fire B139 was working on was given a Watch and Act warning.

Last year it wouldn’t have been B139, it was being modified at that time and this was its first season here.

KRviator

7th Feb 2023, 07:45

That wasn't my point. My point was that 2 of Coulson's airtankers have crashed within a few years of each other, whilst trying to put out fires. My question is why have 2 crashed? What are they doing wrong?No argument that aerial firefighting is challenging, but I'm inclined to agree with the point being made. Imagine Qld Fire & Rescue or FRNSW writing off two uber-expensive 'traditional' fire appliances in what would be 'normal' operations for them, and similar questions would, hopefully be asked.

This is what they do, and to lose two LAT's, in one country in 3 years is unusual by any standard.

Capn Bloggs

7th Feb 2023, 07:51

Flightaware has a better record of the tracking; there is a hole in the Flightradar info.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N619SW

BuzzBox

7th Feb 2023, 07:55

Yes certainly - but that wasn't the case here according to the reports we've seen. It was in open bushland - albeit a national park. So far I've not seen anything which suggest lives and property were at risk here.

There were several "Bushfire Watch and Act" alerts in force for the area which stated: "There is a possible threat to lives and homes as a fire is in the area and conditions are changing." Some of those alerts have since been upgraded to a "Bushfire Emergency Warning", which state: "You are in danger and need to act immediately to survive. There is a threat to lives and homes." The bushfire is out of control and despite the fact it's within the national park, there are people who live nearby and the fire is headed in their direction.

The state government spent a truckload of $$$ to have LAT available during the bushfire season. Why wouldn't they use such assets to help control a large, out-of-control bushfire that's a potential threat to lives and property?

Checkboard

7th Feb 2023, 07:58

What is the slowest airspeed that aircraft could have been travelling at in controlled flight, if it had ditched all it's retardant?
I'm trying to understand how fast they may have been travelling if it was a forced landing - so to speak.

Full flap empty stall speed would have been about 90 knots, I’m guessing. Normal approach speed is in the 130s, and that’s 1.3 Vs

Duck Pilot

7th Feb 2023, 08:27

Obviously the recency introduced CASA Part 91 and 138 regulations aren’t effective if accidents like this are occurring on our turf, with fully government funded contracts going to foreign operators.

No disrespect to the foreign operator, however the federal and state governments who are funding these high risk aerial work activities are directly accountable for the management and oversight of these contractors, no matter if they are foreign or locally sourced.

Obviously inefficient new regulations, drafted by the experts in Canberra….

So what now, another few million $$$$ of taxpayers money to get another replacement machine onsite, or they just let the fires kill people and devastate taxpayers properties as the aerial firefighting asset is no longer available because it crashed?

prickly

7th Feb 2023, 08:50

Bit of ahead scratcher, this one from Perth Now:

One was a man, and the other... a hamster???

Speaking of bent fuselages, does a golf course in BKK count as "off airport"? If so, then there was a 747 that flew again after a round or two... :E
Nah, that was a total financial loss, QF spent about as much as a new 747 400 to repair the wreck just so they could perpetuate the myth

givemewings

7th Feb 2023, 08:52

I do know that the fire B139 was working on was given a Watch and Act warning.

Last year it wouldn’t have been B139, it was being modified at that time and this was its first season here.

Cheers for that, must have been one of their others. They definitely make a difference

Pinky the pilot

7th Feb 2023, 09:01

Did it really happen???:confused: Was not a mention on the ABC TV news here in South Oz?:ooh::E

Oh that's right. Interest rate rises and 'The Voice' are far more important!!!!:=

morno

7th Feb 2023, 09:13

There was the qantas 747 that ended up in the golf course in Bangkok, they repaired few once and retired it

Go back to the spotters board, and while you’re there make sure you tell them the facts that it flew for many years after.

Mumbai Merlin

7th Feb 2023, 09:14

Duck Pilot

7th Feb 2023, 09:37

Cheap operator ...

Extremely poor management, lacking in awareness.

The visibility out of a B737 at best of times is limited. Add in a mix of smoke, and any other challenges of "fire attack" etc; .. simply ask the question.. Why were there not at least two observers in the cockpit; additional to the two flying pilots; both of the "eyes" would be fully qualified B737 pilot's.

I'm pleased the crew escaped with nothing more than a bruise or two from their seat belt.

But really ?? No observers ??

I never had 2 observers in the cockpit when I was doing dive bomb approaches with 36 pax in the back of a Dash 8 into Tabubil, so why with no pax doing this ****?

All legal dive bomb approaches into Tabubil!! CASA PNG approved……..👎

poteroo

7th Feb 2023, 09:53

I just saw an ATSB guy interviewed .
he said the 737 may have clipped a ridge before crashing .

I've spent many hours doing low level animal tracking for DP&W over the FNP.
Apart from a line of granite hills, (up to 2k), along the immediate coast, the terrain is notable for steep 'Breakaways' close to the several creeks/ rivers. These are probably in the order of 100-300ft, but quite abrupt.
In onshore winds, SE-S, there's some mechanical turbulence for probably 7-8 nm inland.
Re the bird theory, in probably 50 hrs in a 172 over this area.... nary 1 sighted. Maybe you'd see a few wedgetails near fires, but as for large flocks..... never seen.

happy days

ozbiggles

7th Feb 2023, 09:57

I just saw an ATSB guy interviewed .
he said the 737 may have clipped a ridge before crashing .

From the same guy who said it was lucky they landed horizontally and not vertically? The ATSB is in good hands

givemewings

7th Feb 2023, 10:10

Video of aircraft before it burnt out on Twitter. Wingtip- would this be the Citation?

Twitter video

A little birdie

7th Feb 2023, 10:19

Nah, that was a total financial loss, QF spent about as much as a new 747 400 to repair the wreck just so they could perpetuate the myth

Tell me you know nothing about the QF1 repair job without telling me you nothing about the QF1 repair job.

Repair was less than $100 million. New 744 at the time was more than $160 million. Avagoodone.

Checkboard

7th Feb 2023, 10:27

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2EuJyCNlfM&ab_channel=7NEWSAustralia

43Inches

7th Feb 2023, 10:41

Tell me you know nothing about the QF1 repair job without telling me you nothing about the QF1 repair job.

Repair was less than $100 million. New 744 at the time was more than $160 million. Avagoodone.

Not entirely true, Qantas claimed it cost less than $100 mil, but never released any financials on it. The point was to make it look like a pure financial decision rather than avoiding tarnishing its jet hull loss record. There's a few that claimed it cost much more.

Glorified Dus Briver

7th Feb 2023, 10:42

I need all the experts on this forum to speculate and provide commentary about what happened before the great GT chimes in.

B772

7th Feb 2023, 10:43

I have never known a airliner that made a off airport landing and flew again. I am sure it’s happened but incredibly unlikely. Even if zero damage the recovery effort would almost certainly render the aircraft unairworthy.

JAL Flight 2 a DC-8-62 'landed' in SFO Bay 2.5 miles short of the runway on 22 NOV 1968. Retrieved, repaired by United and flew again for a further 30 odd years.

A little birdie

7th Feb 2023, 10:46

Not entirely true, Qantas claimed it cost less than $100 mil, but never released any financials on it. The point was to make it look like a pure financial decision rather than avoiding tarnishing its jet hull loss record. There's a few that claimed it cost much more.

I’ll take the word of the bloke who oversaw the repair job and still has OJH’s nose gear doors in his garage as wall art. avagoodone

old,not bold

7th Feb 2023, 11:17

Watching the video, we over here in the UK can only admire the laconic way the ATSB staffer told the journos that it was a horizontal landing as opposed to a vertical one into the ground, and "that makes a big difference".

dejapoo

7th Feb 2023, 11:27

I never had 2 observers in the cockpit when I was doing dive bomb approaches with 36 pax in the back of a Dash 8 into Tabubil, so why with no pax doing this ****?

All legal dive bomb approaches into Tabubil!! CASA PNG approved……..👎

I wish I had an observer for my complicit dive bomb into Tabubil… some may say it was wild

Skillsy

7th Feb 2023, 11:49

How do you know that??? Nobody has even seen pictures yet to determine the condition of the hull.
It wont be available over the next month at least so there is a gap in the fire fighting support effort.

gordonfvckingramsay

7th Feb 2023, 11:50

I’ll take the word of the bloke who oversaw the repair job and still has OJH’s nose gear doors in his garage as wall art. avagoodone

Totally separate issues. This 737 is fvcked and will never fly again. QF1 was repaired beyond its wirth to maintain the myth.

Skillsy

7th Feb 2023, 12:29

hoodie

7th Feb 2023, 12:38

I have never known a airliner that made a off airport landing and flew again. I am sure it’s happened but incredibly unlikely.
BAC 1-11 G-ASJD, 24 August 1964, Tilshead, England.

Landed wheels-up following the inability to release a drag parachute during deep stall testing by the manufacturer.

Was recovered and repaired, going on to fly with British United and British Caledonian until 1971 when it became a military research aircraft (XX105) and flew until 2003, eventually being broken up in 2012.

The 737 accident is quite something, given the pylon mounted engines hanging below the fuselage. I'm assuming the gear wasn't down here either - we'll see.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/658x483/1_11_20salisbury_20plain_a1b705b4118890df5793b640eaed78b0291 6d420.jpg

Avv

7th Feb 2023, 12:39

It wont be available over the next month at least so there is a gap in the fire fighting support effort.
There's enough capacity in the country to fill the gap, the LATs in Vic aren't getting a workout at the moment if the recent snow is any indication.
Also 139 was the National LAT, "Phoenix", it was positioned in WA due to higher fire danger there relative to the east coast after the flooding and benign summer but there was no guarantee it would be in WA for the whole season.

KAPAC

7th Feb 2023, 13:13

Duck Pilot

7th Feb 2023, 13:15

BAC 1-11 G-ASJD, 24 August 1964, Tilshead, England.

Landed wheels-up following the inability to release a drag parachute during deep stall testing by the manufacturer.

Was recovered and repaired, going on to fly with British United and British Caledonian until 1971 when it became a military research aircraft (XX105) and flew until 2003, eventually being broken up in 2012.

The 737 accident is quite something, given the pylon mounted engines hanging below the fuselage. I'm assuming the gear wasn't down here either - we'll see.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/658x483/1_11_20salisbury_20plain_a1b705b4118890df5793b640eaed78b0291 6d420.jpg

Regardless of the gear configuration, the engines would have most certainly punctuated the underside of the wings during impact - if you can’t work the rest out post impact you’re either a journalist or an aviation enthusiast.

It’s not rocket science as to why the aircraft burnt post impact.

hoodie

7th Feb 2023, 13:33

You are misreading my intention, which was to express surprised relief that the 737 crew survived.

andrasz

7th Feb 2023, 14:27

Looks more like a forced landing than crash. Cockpit section looks intact on first photo.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/862x575/bd266b64029e733a4a9b8386e2b1dadd_337af1f492244c679e0e7cd603f 8d1ca2c617634.jpg

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/862x575/28d3b8ab5d42d52d492d2b256db2da10_360248f9a51182cbe65cdd790de b81801c9031cb.jpg

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/862x575/7a01cd1025dfece058fe600b6754e4c4_4419379b2d6970b67b7b8f2a833 8b247d7cb6603.jpg

UnderneathTheRadar

7th Feb 2023, 15:44

QF1 was repaired beyond its wirth to maintain the myth.

I see what you did there! :ok:

tdracer

7th Feb 2023, 17:38

Tell me you know nothing about the QF1 repair job without telling me you nothing about the QF1 repair job.

Repair was less than $100 million. New 744 at the time was more than $160 million. Avagoodone.
There also was the availability of a new 747. At the time, the 747-400 firing order was pretty booked - getting a new one would have taken several years to get a delivery spot (try ordering a new A320 NEO and see how long it takes before delivery :rolleyes:).

No specific information on the QF1, but it wouldn't be the first time an operator spent an excessive amount on a AOG repair because an extended wait would have been needed to get a replacement.

Sorry to bring facts into your conspiracy theory discussion :=

C441

7th Feb 2023, 20:20

There was the qantas 747 that ended up in the golf course in Bangkok, they repaired few once and retired it
FWIW...To be strictly correct and contrary to popular opinion, the Qantas 747 didn't actually 'leave the airport'. It stopped in the wet, grassy runway overrun area short of the surrounding golf course, but that didn't stop it making a great story and source of the various quips related to the incident.

If that qualified as a golf course then many of my indirect golf shots would still be in bounds and I could play my next shot from roads, backyards, verandahs, creeks and even airports…….Similarly, If that qualified as 'off airport' then so would numerous other runway excursions where the aircraft returned to service.

tartare

7th Feb 2023, 21:07

Pictures on TV last night of both pilots in hangar - talking and walking - no apparent injuries.
Very lucky - must have been a relatively flat sliding forced landing.

Capt Fathom

7th Feb 2023, 21:22

It certainly didn’t ‘slide’ very far.

43Inches

7th Feb 2023, 21:31

Looking at the aerial footage you can see the two retardant drops clearly with the second directly behind the crash site. Looks like it may be exactly what the video earlier was talking about target fixation and they clipped the shallow ridge directly after the second drop, and slid to a stop. It does look very much like they were trying to tag the second drop onto the first line to form a break. Considering this seems to be a very common form of aerial firefighting mishap I wonder if they can mitigate it by adding another non flying crew member to monitor the drop while the pilots focus on flying and terrain, seems like if both pilots are watching the drop it's easy to forget whats ahead of you.

BTW I'm not saying this is exactly what happened but it fits pretty well with what the earlier video was talking about.

BuzzBox

7th Feb 2023, 21:59

FWIW...To be strictly correct and contrary to popular opinion, the Qantas 747 didn't actually 'leave the airport'. It stopped in the wet, grassy runway overrun area short of the surrounding golf course, but that didn't stop it making a great story and source of the various quips related to the incident.

But it was oh, so close. Photo taken from the golf course side of the road.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1152x864/qf1_bkk1_c7c09cf3dc11ab532b52e75f9b9c6cde59a2a5d1.jpg

peuce

7th Feb 2023, 22:07

Just a bit of info for those wondering why the tanker was there at all. The Fitzgerald River National Park is a UNESCO Biosphere. The Park contains 75 species of plant that are seen no where else in the world. I can tell you, if you ever visit it, you'll see some weird and wacky flora. So, apart from ensuring the fire didn't spread to nearby communities, and mining interests, the Park itself is probably worth protecting.

WingNut60

7th Feb 2023, 22:16

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/757x760/don_muang_d386727c43fa881f9969ffe843ee0343eda762c8.jpg
Kantarat Golf Course is entirely within the Don Muang boundaries.
Had they crossed that road they'd have been on the golf course but they'd have still been within the airport boundary.

finestkind

7th Feb 2023, 22:20

I never had 2 observers in the cockpit when I was doing dive bomb approaches with 36 pax in the back of a Dash 8 into Tabubil, so why with no pax doing this ****?

All legal dive bomb approaches into Tabubil!! CASA PNG approved……..👎

Sorry DP it maybe tongue in cheek but doing low, low level that does have continually differing terrain due to differing location does perhaps merit observers, whilst a legal dive bomb approach of same runway is slightly different.

ORAC

7th Feb 2023, 22:36

Sorry, but am I callous to suggest, despite the nature of the operation, hitting a ridge line is not indicative of pilot skill,
I am reminded of the old saying that senior pilots use their skill and ability to get them out of situations that their skill and ability should have stopped them getting into in the first place.

Fris B. Fairing

7th Feb 2023, 22:38

Cheap operator ...

Extremely poor management, lacking in awareness.

The visibility out of a B737 at best of times is limited. Add in a mix of smoke, and any other challenges of "fire attack" etc; .. simply ask the question.. Why were there not at least two observers in the cockpit; additional to the two flying pilots; both of the "eyes" would be fully qualified B737 pilot's.

I'm pleased the crew escaped with nothing more than a bruise or two from their seat belt.

But really ?? No observers ??

Speaking of visibility from a 737 cockpit, wouldn't it have made sense to retain the eyebrow windows in a tanker conversion?

Johnny Cash IBE

7th Feb 2023, 23:04

Why haven’t we heard anything from the AOC accountable manager? Ex CASA I believe??

Capn Bloggs

7th Feb 2023, 23:31

Article in today's "The West Australian":A TALE OF SURVIVALREBECCA LE MAY

A water bomber that crashed while battling an out-of-control bushfire in the State’s south is believed to have clipped a hill, authorities have revealed.

The two pilots who miraculously walked away from Australia’s first Boeing 737 crash were set to be interviewed by investigators on Tuesday night after being discharged from hospital the previous day.

The water bomber, operated by Canadian contractor Coulson Aviation, crashed in Fitzgerald River National Park at 4.13pm on Monday while helping quell the blaze in Ravensthorpe and Hopetoun, bursting into flames after impact.

Australian Transport Safety Bureau chief commissioner Angus Mitchell said the jet appeared to have “potentially clipped the ridge line and has pancaked down”.

One of the pilots was identified as Coulson’s director of flight operations John Gallagher, pictured below left.

Matthew Boyko is believed to be the second pilot on board.

“Certainly, a horizontal landing as opposed to vertical into the ground makes a big difference,” Mr Mitchell said.

“But these pilots, I’m sure, are very lucky to be alive. We are very fortunate to be standing here and not to be mourning the death of some firefighters. That’s a remarkable outcome.”

Once the site was safe to enter, air crash investigators would gather flight data and cockpit recorders, Mr Mitchell said. “They look at any of those potentially mission-critical aspects of the flight, particularly engineering, to see if that gives us any idea,” he said.

“This is certainly the first 737 collision with terrain that we’ve had in Australia. That in itself is quite significant — for an aircraft that size to come down in Australia.

“There’s nothing to suggest at this stage that there’s any ramifications to the global fleet.”

With the fire the plane was tackling still at the watch and act level — and Cowerdup in the middle of the zone elevated to an emergency warning — air crash investigators were unable to get on site on Tuesday, Mr Mitchell said.

The jet, nicknamed Phoenix, had just completed the second half of a “split” load retardant drop when it smashed into the ground about 20 seconds later, Department of Fire and Emergency Services Commissioner Darren Klemm said.

Emergency Services Minister Stephen Dawson said the pilots’ survival was “nothing short of miraculous”.

After a Coulson C130 Hercules water bomber crashed in NSW in 2020 — killing three crew — the ATSB found major shortcomings in Coulson’s practices.

Mr Mitchell said there could be “serious repercussions” from the investigation, with the ATSB potentially handing recommendations to the operator and broader aviation sector “so something like this doesn’t occur again”.

Johnny Cash IBE

7th Feb 2023, 23:40

It certainly didn’t ‘slide’ very far.
probably because it was only doing 100kts

Johnny Cash IBE

7th Feb 2023, 23:44

Cedrik

8th Feb 2023, 01:07

Ever since the Black Saturday Royal Commission there has been an big focus in Australia on keeping fires small and hitting them hard as fast. It's why Victoria now uses what is called PDD (Pre-determined dispatch) where aircraft are deployed to all Grass and Scrub fires at the same time as the first truck. (If you call 000 an aircraft will respond).

LATs play this role by hitting fires in remote country and helping contain them before they are a threat to property. Just this year the Victorian LATs (an RJ85 and Q400) have been deployed multiple times to lightning strike fires in the Big Desert National park in the states NW. And have in the past been used on tiny fires (less than a few sqm) in remote alpine areas in the far east. They also become cost-effective when the reduce the number of flights required by Air tractors and commitment of ground resources.

Let me first say there are tasks for all the aerial resources currently in Australia if they are used to the aircraft capabilities.
I'll dispute the last point you made.
I have seen Lat's used (Up close) and seen their capabilities. I have seen times when Lat's only were used, a 1.5 hour turn around back to the fire. SEAT's were available and not used, the turnaround for SEAT's usually anything up to half an hour because of closer airstrips. On this occasion I recall the SEAT could have had a 5 minute turn around carrying a third of the Lat. load. To me it just didn't make sense. I have also seen many times where Seat's were called to solidify a line laid by Lat's, most of the lines I have seen done by Lat's were light on. Going too far with a drop instead of concentrating the drop more. The drop setting was not high enough with either retardant or foam/water. There is one exception to that and it was the DC 10 (VLAT), the drops I saw with it were always heavy enough and laid down a good retardant line with reinforcement not needed. It might be something to do with the load it carried at 40,000 litres, 4 times more than the loads Lat's work with at a similar or slightly more running cost to the much smaller large air tankers.
Another thing I have seen is where SEAT's were held out while the Lat's set up and dropped their load, anything up to 20 minutes or on one occasion 40 minutes. The SEAT's were operating out of a close airstrip with 10 minute turn around, there were 4 seats. Seemed to be counter productive when the 4 SEAT's could deliver more than the Lat's load in a fraction of the time. The Air Attack supervisor is also a critical cog in the wheel, a good one the aerial side runs seamlessly. A not so competent one can be worse than none.
As I said if assets are used to the full capability it's a good system, that's not always the case.

Cedrik

8th Feb 2023, 01:11

I was always taught native Australian flora required bush fires to multiply.
Yes a cool burn, a scorching red hot fire and some country never recovers to it's previous state. You only have to look at some of the high country fires from years ago, some areas now are just low scrub with dead trees as far as the eye can see. Previously they was vibrant tall timber to ferns and everything in between, now decimated.

Australopithecus

8th Feb 2023, 01:44

I get a kick out of people who have never done aerial firefighting weighing in with helpful suggestions.

finestkind

8th Feb 2023, 02:26

I get a kick out of people who have never done aerial firefighting weighing in with helpful suggestions.

Sorry, I missed them. Where are the helpful suggestions?

Australopithecus

8th Feb 2023, 04:11

Sorry, I missed them. Where are the helpful suggestions?

Well, I particularly liked the idea of cramming two observers onto the flight deck who would of course be unable to observe anything useful. Sharpening up a risk assessment gets an honourable mention too. Putzes.

Eclan

8th Feb 2023, 04:44

Yes a cool burn, a scorching red hot fire and some country never recovers to it's previous state. You only have to look at some of the high country fires from years ago, some areas now are just low scrub with dead trees as far as the eye can see. Previously they was vibrant tall timber to ferns and everything in between, now decimated.Yes but this fire was in WA where the flora, much like the population, is feral and scrubby growth which breeds back twice as fast as it's cut down. Have you seen the photos? There might be some sort of unique west aussie weed there the locals adore but no one else knows or cares about it because it's about as interesting an organism as a canker. Don't worry, it'll bounce back thicker than before. This park is WA's floral equivalent of bogen central and this sort of uncouth scrub can't be suppressed for long even with flame.

Capt Fathom

8th Feb 2023, 06:07

It certainly didn’t ‘slide’ very far.

probably because it was only doing 100kts

How do you know it was only doing 100kts ?

Captn Rex Havack

8th Feb 2023, 06:24

Australopithecus, to quote you
"Well, I particularly liked the idea of cramming two observers onto the flight deck who would of course be unable to observe anything useful. Sharpening up a risk assessment gets an honourable mention too. Putzes."

Mate how about while the two pilots are heads outside aiming up the bombing run, the observers are watching over the inside and maybe, just maybe saying "guys you're 10 knots above the stall at idle thrust."
I'd consider that "useful observation" myself. Putz.

flyingfox

8th Feb 2023, 07:17

I was always taught native Australian flora required bush fires to multiply.

There are ultra rare animals and birds in there as well. They don't need uncontrolled fires.

flyingfox

8th Feb 2023, 07:25

Yes but this fire was in WA where the flora, much like the population, is feral and scrubby growth which breeds back twice as fast as it's cut down. Have you seen the photos? There might be some sort of unique west aussie weed there the locals adore but no one else knows or cares about it because it's about as interesting an organism as a canker. Don't worry, it'll bounce back thicker than before. This park is WA's floral equivalent of bogen central and this sort of uncouth scrub can't be suppressed for long even with flame.

You've just revealed a lot about yourself. It isn't good.

A little birdie

8th Feb 2023, 07:36

Totally separate issues. This 737 is fvcked and will never fly again. QF1 was repaired beyond its wirth to maintain the myth.

No. It wasn’t. Good grief. A new 744 cost about $160 mill. The repair job was less than $100 mill and QF got the aircraft back in service more quickly than had they ordered a new jet.

helispotter

8th Feb 2023, 07:46

And we managed to drown a Skycrane in Victoria in January 2019

...and more than those cases if you include smaller fixed wing and rotary. ATSB conducted a safety analysis of aerial firefighting a while ago and the report is accessible from their website:

A safety analysis of aerial firefighting occurrences in Australia, July 2000 to March 2020 (atsb.gov.au) (https://www.atsb.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/5777923/ar-2020-022_final.pdf)

tartare

8th Feb 2023, 08:10

How do you know it was only doing 100kts ?

Flight radar last return 204 kph = around 100 knots.

Mooloo

8th Feb 2023, 09:59

I live about an hour from where it crashed. If you’re wondering about the importance of its mission, it’s too nuanced to explain if you need it explained. Live in WA for a year…

We don’t know why it crashed, Most likely a stall or just CFIT produced by TF.

The pilots walked away thank god, but the prevailing feeling on the streets of Esperance is, great, now we’re down a water tanker rolling into bushfire season

Mooloo

8th Feb 2023, 10:10

Just like to say thanks to these crews , highly skilled , courages and living away from loved ones for months at a time so they can help save lives and millions of dollars worth of property in our country . A 737 , 747 , bae 146 or even a hurc is not a natural fire bomber , designed to live at flight levels . Nothing but respect for the skill required to do this job and it’s fricken great they got out . There will be more crashes and these pilots know that and they still strap in . Happy to see it’s not been a big thing here or on the news . Special mention to our military boys and girls also , similar sentiments.

Sorry mate. These boys and girls that spend time away from home and loved ones for months on end aren’t in this for altruistic reasons. Let’s take our rose coloured glasses off for a moment and take in the reality that this was probably pilot error and if we want to do a bit of hero worship, maybe thank god they didn’t kill anyone.

Capn Bloggs

8th Feb 2023, 10:24

but the prevailing feeling on the streets of Esperance is, great, now we’re down a water tanker rolling into bushfire season
Mooloo, you can tell your Esperantos that a couple of 737s are 4 hours away in Sydney. They'll be OK.

KAPAC

8th Feb 2023, 10:42

I’d be happy for my taxes to be used to bulldoze it into the ground where it is , cancel the inquiry if pilots say they lost situational awareness for a second and hit a bit of high terrain , pay hospital bills and pin a medal on their chests . Give them another tanker and stand back and watch them pit their skills against nature again . Thanking them and money they make are not related .

Capn Bloggs

8th Feb 2023, 11:00

the prevailing feeling on the streets of Esperance is, great, now we’re down a water tanker rolling into bushfire season
A pregnant hushpuppy arrived from "over east" (on loan) at Busso this arvo.

Xhorst

8th Feb 2023, 16:24

Sorry mate. These boys and girls that spend time away from home and loved ones for months on end aren’t in this for altruistic reasons.

HTF do you know?

Let’s take our rose coloured glasses off for a moment and take in the reality that this was probably pilot error and if we want to do a bit of hero worship, maybe thank god they didn’t kill anyone.

Do you have the same disdain for rural fire-fighters who risk their lives fighting bushfires but take home a pay-cheque? Or is it just pilots you have a problem with?

Next time I see a paid paramedic or doctor saves someone's life, I'll make sure to remember that they aren't doing it for altruistic reasons, and to thank god they didn't kill anyone.

tdracer

8th Feb 2023, 17:28

Yes a cool burn, a scorching red hot fire and some country never recovers to it's previous state. You only have to look at some of the high country fires from years ago, some areas now are just low scrub with dead trees as far as the eye can see. Previously they was vibrant tall timber to ferns and everything in between, now decimated.
That's what the forest service found in the US. If there are frequent wildfires, they tend to burn cooler and not do serious damage to the larger trees and such. However if fires are suppressed for several years, the area becomes overgrown with 'fuel', and a subsequent fire burns much hotter becomes highly destructive of the ecosystem. The problem is we've rather locked ourselves into the fire suppression mode, so there is little choice but to maintain the status quo - it's basically too late to return to the original frequent natural fire pattern.
Plus of course there is that messy issue of the need to protect the 'unnatural' human lives, structures, and infrastructure - which is hard to do if you allow wildfires to simply be 'wild'.

212man

8th Feb 2023, 21:37

Flight radar last return 204 kph = around 100 knots.
Pretty sure 100 kts is 185.2 km/h

fdr

8th Feb 2023, 22:13

Pictures on TV last night of both pilots in hangar - talking and walking - no apparent injuries.
Very lucky - must have been a relatively flat sliding forced landing.

It was in 'stralya... which is rather known for being phlatt.:}

FullOppositeRudder

8th Feb 2023, 22:35

From Cedrick:

Yes a cool burn, a scorching red hot fire and some country never recovers to it's previous state. You only have to look at some of the high country fires from years ago, some areas now are just low scrub with dead trees as far as the eye can see. Previously they was vibrant tall timber to ferns and everything in between, now decimated.

Very much confirms what I've see in my travels. I'm always surprised just how quickly the country recovers from a fire in my part of the world - even a big one. Driving though the the area yesterday of our last big one seven years ago (82,500 hectares, two lives lost, and over 90 homes lost in less than one day), we remarked that the roadside vegetation was more lush now than we can ever recall prior to the the fire. The Eucalypts have all shot out from ground level and have luxurious growth almost back to the levels of the dead branches resulting from the fire. The birds and the 'roos are back as well.

One the other hand we were shocked by what we saw and experienced on a drive though the Snowy Mountains a few years back where the "Canberra" fire has its origins. It's probably (hopefully) on the road to recovery. Nature is a great healer - we just need to be patient.

The use of LATs vs SEATS ? My observations parallel those from Cedrick in post #143 - very closely. (Perhaps we are thinking of the same event?) Always good for a vigorous discussion. But perhaps not here.

fdr

8th Feb 2023, 22:42

Speaking of visibility from a 737 cockpit, wouldn't it have made sense to retain the eyebrow windows in a tanker conversion?

If the eyebrow window is the solution, gotta wonder what the question was.

I've owned and driven a number of planes with eyebrows, B737CL, Westwinds, & Astras... They give a nice spot to put a tracker system in without chopping new holes in the pressure hull. Otherwise, keeping the sun shade in place is the main justification for what they do. Even in close form trail they don't get used.

PiperCameron

8th Feb 2023, 22:49

But let's hope the ATSB comes up with some 'takeaways' that folks flying for the airlines will consider relevant.

Well, they've started work on it: https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2023/report/ao-2023-008

Over the coming weeks, the collection of evidence will allow the ATSB to determine the scope of the investigation and gain a better understanding of its timeframe.

RickNRoll

8th Feb 2023, 23:13

From Cedrick:

Very much confirms what I've see in my travels. I'm always surprised just how quickly the country recovers from a fire in my part of the world - even a big one. Driving though the the area yesterday of our last big one seven years ago (82,500 hectares, two lives lost, and over 90 homes lost in less than one day), we remarked that the roadside vegetation was more lush now than we can ever recall prior to the the fire. The Eucalypts have all shot out from ground level and have luxurious growth almost back to the levels of the dead branches resulting from the fire. The birds and the 'roos are back as well.

One the other hand we were shocked by what we saw and experienced on a drive though the Snowy Mountains a few years back where the "Canberra" fire has its origins. It's probably (hopefully) on the road to recovery. Nature is a great healer - we just need to be patient.

The use of LATs vs SEATS ? My observations parallel those from Cedrick in post #143 - very closely. (Perhaps we are thinking of the same event?) Always good for a vigorous discussion. But perhaps not here.
The snow gums are a good indicator of what it's going wrong due to warming. They have evolved to need fire to create the next generation. Their life cycle requires that these fires only occur about every ten years so the saplings are mature enough to withstand the next fire. When fires are too frequent they die off.

Lead Balloon

8th Feb 2023, 23:25

Well, they've started work on it: https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2023/report/ao-2023-008

Over the coming weeks, the collection of evidence will allow the ATSB to determine the scope of the investigation and gain a better understanding of its timeframe.My comment: “[L]et's hope the ATSB comes up with some 'takeaways' that folks flying for the airlines will consider relevant.” was in response to Lookleft’s suggestion that this is the first loss of a transport category hull in Australia and that was the justification for ATSB to investigate, notwithstanding that there were no fatalities and it was a known risky kind of operation with nothing to do with transport of passengers or cargo. This aircraft might have started its life as certified in the transport category, but that ended as soon as it was modified to be and was then operated as a LAT.

To be clear, I think ATSB should be investigating this accident, preferably in consultation with or ideally with the assistance of the NTSB and Boeing. But I also think ATSB should be investigating all aircraft accidents involving fatalities.

I doubt that anything will come out of this investigation that will have any relevance to folks flying for the airlines or be anything novel. I guesstimate that the outcome will be to the effect that when engaged in known risky kinds of operations, bad things are more likely to happen in the blink of an eye.

Eclan

8th Feb 2023, 23:50

My comment: “[L]et's hope the ATSB comes up with some 'takeaways' that folks flying for the airlines will consider relevant.” was in response to Lookleft’s suggestion that this is the first loss of a transport category hull in Australia and that was the justification for ATSB to investigate, notwithstanding that there were no fatalities and it was a known risky kind of operation with nothing to do with transport of passengers or cargo. This aircraft might have started its life as certified in the transport category, but that ended as soon as it was modified to be and was then operated as a LAT.
It seems fairly obvious they are referring to the design intention of the aircraft. According to Coulson, the Fireliner has around 70 pax seats in it so even though it might operate under General Aviation (?) it is still intended for and capable of air transport to and from fire tasks. As opposed to Air Transport. It may not be used for airline or other transport category operations however it's still an airliner. A modified airliner. A modified air transport aircraft. Regardless of what it now self-identifies as, it's still a B737-300 which was conceived, designed and manufactured as a transport category aircraft. So there you go!

Eclan

8th Feb 2023, 23:52

I doubt that anything will come out of this investigation that will have any relevance to folks flying for the airlines or be anything novel. I guesstimate that the outcome will be to the effect that when engaged in known risky kinds of operations, bad things are more likely to happen in the blink of an eye.
I think you're right. But something must be changed to make it "safer" or else someone might be held responsible. Lots of people running for cover.

Johnny Cash IBE

9th Feb 2023, 00:05

I think you're right. But something must be changed to make it "safer" or else someone might be held responsible. Lots of people running for cover.
I believe there have been people rotating through senior roles in the Australian operations for some time now. The investigation should capture toxic culture, training deficiencies and any other contributory factors. It will be an interesting report, especially now the NTSB is assisting.

Lead Balloon

9th Feb 2023, 00:13

It seems fairly obvious they are referring to the design intention of the aircraft. According to Coulson, the Fireliner has around 70 pax seats in it so even though it might operate under General Aviation (?) it is still intended for and capable of air transport to and from fire tasks. As opposed to Air Transport. It may not be used for airline or other transport category operations however it's still an airliner. A modified airliner. A modified air transport aircraft. Regardless of what it now self-identifies as, it's still a B737-300 which was conceived, designed and manufactured as a transport category aircraft. So there you go!It's not about what it started out as nor what it self-identifies as. It's about what was on its certificate of airworthiness when operated as a LAT.

That's why there was a regulatory problem that had to be worked through before any people were permitted to be carried in those seats.

I'll try to make my point by putting it this way: If Coulson had sold the aircraft to Qantas, do you think CASA would approve the addition of the aircraft to Qantas's AOC for the conduct of RPT?

And in any event, none of this is relevant if airworthiness had nothing to do with the accident.

Eclan

9th Feb 2023, 01:12

It's not about what it started out as nor what it self-identifies as. It's about what was on its certificate of airworthiness when operated as a LAT.

That's why there was a regulatory problem that had to be worked through before any people were permitted to be carried in those seats.

I'll try to make my point by putting it this way: If Coulson had sold the aircraft to Qantas, do you think CASA would approve the addition of the aircraft to Qantas's AOC for the conduct of RPT?

And in any event, none of this is relevant if airworthiness had nothing to do with the accident.
Yes that is all well-put and accurate however I think the arguing began because someone referred to it as an air or airline or whatever transport category jet which had crashed. If I read that I'd understand what he was trying to say. If he said it was the first in Australia, I'd say he's wrong as there was a B707 hull-loss in Australia back in the '90s. It could be a matter of semantics getting panties all bunched up or some might even say excessive pedanticism.

As for ATSB motivation, they are political same as most departments. It's easy to see why it'll be investigated even without fatalities whereas a Jabiru which hit a tree and killed both POB might not be. Personally I think it sucks.

Checkboard

9th Feb 2023, 14:32

I've owned and driven a number of planes with eyebrows, B737CL, Westwinds, & Astras... They give a nice spot to put a tracker system in without chopping new holes in the pressure hull. Otherwise, keeping the sun shade in place is the main justification for what they do. Even in close form trail they don't get used.

I flew 737s with eyebrows out of Perth. They were very useful in visual circuits and circling. On a base turn to the otherside (i.e. flying left seat and turning right or vise versa) the threshold is nicely visible in the eyebrow window.

J.O.

9th Feb 2023, 15:28

No, it's your bias that is showing. The aircraft may have been originally certified in the transport category, but I very much doubt it could have been re-fitted with seats and returned to Part 121 ops.

But let's hope the ATSB comes up with some 'takeaways' that folks flying for the airlines will consider relevant.
So pilots and operators of large air tankers don't deserve a chance to learn from others misfortunes in the hopes of avoiding a similar (or worse) fate? Good to know. :rolleyes:

Lead Balloon

9th Feb 2023, 20:32

So pilots and operators of large air tankers don't deserve a chance to learn from others misfortunes in the hopes of avoiding a similar (or worse) fate? Good to know. :rolleyes:I’m guessing you’re ‘not from around here’.

You obviously missed the earlier post in which I said: “To be clear, I think ATSB should be investigating this accident, preferably in consultation with or ideally with the assistance of the NTSB and Boeing. But I also think ATSB should be investigating all aircraft accidents involving fatalities.”

My comment that you quoted has a context. The context is recent aviation fatalities that ATSB has refused to investigate. They include a mid-air collision which resulted in two fatalities. ATSB refused to investigate on the ground that there was nothing to learn for transport safety and the ATSB is not funded to investigate that kind of accident. So the pilots of aircraft similar to those involved in the recent mid-air don’t deserve a chance to learn from others’ misfortunes in the hope of avoiding the worst fate?

This LAT accident involved no fatalities and has no implications for transport safety. Yet ATSB is investigating. Us ‘from around here’ know why.

You might say that we don’t know the implications until we find out what happened and why. And I’d agree with you, completely. And the same argument applies to the recent mid-air.

If exposing ATSB duplicity means I’m biased, I’m happy to be labelled biased.

Fris B. Fairing

9th Feb 2023, 20:41

If the eyebrow window is the solution, gotta wonder what the question was.

I've owned and driven a number of planes with eyebrows, B737CL, Westwinds, & Astras... They give a nice spot to put a tracker system in without chopping new holes in the pressure hull. Otherwise, keeping the sun shade in place is the main justification for what they do. Even in close form trail they don't get used.

The question was; How can it improve cockpit visibility by eliminating four windows that were there as original equipment? When they were converting DC-4s to tankers they would often install an eyebrow window for the very purpose later described by Checkboard.

tossbag

9th Feb 2023, 20:48

Over the coming weeks, the collection of evidence will allow the ATSB to determine the scope of the investigation and gain a better understanding of its timeframe.

You poor bastard, you actually believe what you wrote? Maybe sometime in 2027 we'll hear something.

malabo

9th Feb 2023, 22:11

Johnny Cash IBE

9th Feb 2023, 22:24

Bear with me, not an Australian, but why would the ATSB give a rat's ass? No loss of life, not even an injury, Part 138 utility operation - no public safety issues, foreign aircraft, foreign flight crew . It more or less burned as much useless scrub as it put out on its last pass. Let the operator figure it out, or not.

Surprised you're still on about cabin crew visibility when non-pprune rumours have graduated to power loss after completion of the last run.
I seem to recall houses covered in red powder last year during fires in Perth. Would be a flips t comment if the next crash was over rural houses. Investigations help understand the root cause and assist with preventing future events. I find your comments strange!

PiperCameron

10th Feb 2023, 00:35

You poor bastard, you actually believe what you wrote? Maybe sometime in 2027 we'll hear something.

Since I quoted the ATSB blurb directly, I guess they're free to believe whatever they want. Do I believe it?!? don't be silly... however, based on past performance, I do think 2027 is a perhaps tad optimistic.

Lucerne

10th Feb 2023, 00:51

tdracer

10th Feb 2023, 01:25

What reason has there been to suspect power loss?
Ah, they hit the ground? Power loss is always one of the first items investigated after a force landing.
However given that both pilots walked away, I doubt it'll take much effort to find out why they hit the ground (inadvertent ground contact, power loss, other control issue, etc.). Assuming it's not pilot error, then the real trick becomes figuring out why what happened happened.

Lucerne

10th Feb 2023, 01:30

Ah, they hit the ground? Power loss is always one of the first items investigated after a force landing.
However given that both pilots walked away, I doubt it'll take much effort to find out why they hit the ground (inadvertent ground contact, power loss, other control issue, etc.). Assuming it's not pilot error, then the real trick becomes figuring out why what happened happened.
I wouldn't mind betting that the cause was a stall from a too low and too slow scenario in an inappropriate configuration. That seems much more likely than a power loss on that aircraft and was the overall (nutshell) cause with regard to T134. We'll soon see I suppose. (well, maybe much later than soon as these things evidently take time). When the footage becomes more public this will become more evident I'm sure.

43Inches

10th Feb 2023, 01:37

Pretty sure it wasn't power loss, as you can see in the circle round aerial footage what looks like jetblast damage at high power leading up to the crash site, that is two lines of cut down scrub narrowing down to the impact point before the slide marks. It's either a stall with not quite enough alt to recover or target fixation and same result. I think the talk about clipping the ridge gives away what they already know.

SIUYA

10th Feb 2023, 01:38

Over the coming weeks, the collection of evidence will allow the ATSB to determine the scope of the investigation and gain a better understanding of its timeframe.

Why does it need a few weeks for the ATSB to work out the scope of the investigation?

I would have thought it was fairly obvious even at this stage that who, what, where, when, why and how were the scope of the investigation.

PC, I agree with you that 2027 is a bit optimistic for the ATSB report on this event. I'm with LB on this one and am also happy to be labelled as biased about the ATSB :suspect:

Lucerne

10th Feb 2023, 01:39

josephfeatherweight

10th Feb 2023, 04:05

Assuming it's not pilot error, then the real trick becomes figuring out why what happened happened.
A kind assumption and hopefully(?) correct, but not what I'm putting my money on...

ehwatezedoing

10th Feb 2023, 10:35

fdr

10th Feb 2023, 12:10

The question was; How can it improve cockpit visibility by eliminating four windows that were there as original equipment? When they were converting DC-4s to tankers they would often install an eyebrow window for the very purpose later described by Checkboard.

I flew 737s with eyebrows out of Perth. They were very useful in visual circuits and circling. On a base turn to the otherside (i.e. flying left seat and turning right or vise versa) the threshold is nicely visible in the eyebrow window.

The required visual field is laid out in §25.773, in very little detail, and amplified in AC 25.773-1. It is of interest on occasions, when near miss or un near misses (hits) happen. My old P3 and the Hercules as well had lots of glass up top, and the P3 was also good for a suntan but not much else, then again we were often well over 30 bank, up to 70 degree for some tac stuff, and that could be dealing with a single light source on a dark night in the middle of nowhere. The eyebrows were not overly useful even in the low level circuit. It's an interesting discussion, not related to the incident at hand, but the perception of a pill box visual for the B737 has come up on a number of bad events, and does not seem to really hold much water. (LAT's got the water tho...). I'm doing a test in a B737 next week, and also in another aircraft with eyebrows, and will take some snaps of the cross cockpit FOV, I am surprised that the B737 eyebrow actually gives meaningful cues to a visual circuit, but it would be interesting to see that. It's a simple process to determine the FOV from the design eye point, and then work back to see if there is pilot assistance from an expanded criteria. The A350 has a larger FOV than the vanilla rule and the GM on the subject, maybe that helps drive around the pattern. Large aircraft visual patterns are replete with examples of the drivers getting down into the weeds for various reasons, many the "100" "50" "40" "30" calls happening without a runway in front are the big cues, or the fish nets caught on the windscreen wipers...

Capn Bloggs

10th Feb 2023, 12:37

Large aircraft visual patterns are replete with examples of the drivers getting down into the weeds for various reasons, many the "100" "50" "40" "30" calls happening without a runway in front are the big cues
Love ya work, FDR! :D

Eyebrows were great when turning right base from seat 0A, YPBO 24 being a good example! :ok:

Eclan

10th Feb 2023, 12:53

Pretty sure it wasn't power loss, as you can see in the circle round aerial footage what looks like jetblast damage at high power leading up to the crash site, that is two lines of cut down scrub narrowing down to the impact point before the slide marks.
Can you please post the image you've seen with evidence or indication of the "jetblast damage" to the scrub?

tdracer

10th Feb 2023, 17:34

IF it was pilot error and they either struck the ground or stalled trying to avoid ground contact, the critical visibility would have been what's below, not what's above. How would eyebrow windows help?

john_tullamarine

10th Feb 2023, 20:31

Explanation sideline time out -

but the perception of a pill box visual for the B737

I've not come across such a reference previously. Might you be able to expand a bit upon its significance, please ?

Captn Rex Havack

10th Feb 2023, 21:33

Bloggsy - are you still flying or is seat 0A just a distant memory now?

43Inches

10th Feb 2023, 21:36

Can you please post the image you've seen with evidence or indication of the "jetblast damage" to the scrub?

The 7 news footage above has an aerial view circling around the crash site. You can clearly see the two retardant drops in the background and the swaths cut out from the scrub leading to the wreck. It also shows more clearly that the jet has slid down the back of a small ridge line after hitting the top of it, there's what looks like jetblast marks leading up to the ridge. Post #110.

https://youtu.be/c2EuJyCNlfM?t=9

Cedrik

10th Feb 2023, 22:55

Could those marks be where the engine intakes were scooping?

Lucerne

10th Feb 2023, 23:02

I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this but both this accident and that of Tanker 134's remind me also of the close call with the RJ a few seasons ago. There's a reoccurring problem here that needs addressing. We can talk about potential power loss, weird and irrelevant conversations about visibility and eye brow windows, and what the ATSB should be doing until we're blue in the face. However, what about the repetitively poor management of flight in the lower levels.

https://youtube.com/shorts/O2KCYhULWZ8?feature=share

43Inches

10th Feb 2023, 23:02

Could those marks be where the engine intakes were scooping?

I'm more leading to blast marks rather than impact marks, as they converge, if they were from the engines themselves they would be parallel. That is leading up to the ridge, after impact the more solid marks are most likely from structural impact and sliding.

I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this but both this accident and that of Tanker 134's remind me also of the close call with the RJ a few seasons ago. There's a reoccurring problem here that needs addressing. We can talk about potential power loss, weird and irrelevant conversations about visibility and eye brow windows, and what the ATSB should be doing until we're blue in the face. However, what about the repetitively poor management of flight in the lower levels.

It was mentioned in the video earlier involving target fixation and why were they bombing this fire etc. You can see the pattern of jet blast I was talking about converges as the jet closes in on the ground, which I feel is very similar to the damage pictured in the aerial 737 aftermath footage. It also shows how low these LATs get to tag the second pass, meaning even relatively low terrain like in WA comes into play.

In the video below you can see the pilots scan approaching the target and the workload he is under, and then during the drop and recover there is a lot of flying happening... Imagine that with speed multiplied in a large jet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IB4b8Z0PtYQ

Eclan

10th Feb 2023, 23:51

Is this what you're talking about? It could even be where the vortices swept away the lighter scrub, leaves, dry fuel etc on the ground. Or maybe they're too close together, dunno, but as evident in the Avro/146 video a lot of dirt gets thrown up with a wing that close to the ground especially at that weight and only 101kts GS.

Target fixation and low airspeed do not necessarily go together. The Avro got close enough to the ground to raise dust to the ground because the terrain was hilly and the hill wasn't noticed whereas this terrain was relatively flat.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1810x778/crash_ed9bbdf9adbb906a62aeddc96eed891a5956186b.png

Capn Bloggs

11th Feb 2023, 01:44

In the video below you can see the pilots scan approaching the target and the workload he is under, and then during the drop and recover there is a lot of flying happening... Imagine that with speed multiplied in a large jet.
We can't see the general terrain that CL 415 was operating in but in the absence of high terrain immediately before the drop area, there seems to be a lot of unnecessary, tight manoeuvring going on. In any case, if anybody attempted to do that "in a large jet", quite frankly, they'd be a fool.

Similarly, in WA, in an area where there doesn't appear to be any relevant terrain, they are doing tight descending turns at low speed just before the drop, and according to the FlightAware track, didn't do a dummy run first, just a fairly tight orbit to the west of the target area.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/880x715/mem_map_b6af388ed58c630ba9c3c5a93803a67f6e91f549.jpg

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/847x804/bsn_coulson_flightaware_b9b0935b54531ff6cab48e5027e15c4be503 d8bb.jpg

IF it was pilot error and they either struck the ground or stalled trying to avoid ground contact, the critical visibility would have been what's below, not what's above. How would eyebrow windows help?
But if you're in a right turn, as these guys were, and the left-hand seater was flying, an eyebrow above the FO's head could be beneficial because you can see where you're turning towards, especially if it was a fairly obvious plume of smoke.

Lucerne

11th Feb 2023, 02:19

In the LATs the workload is halved with the introduction of the second pilot. RJ85 crew (Dubbo) have suggested that the FO manages engines and airspeed indications only and does not monitor terrain. The pilot flying manages the airframe and drop sequence and should be the one monitoring terrain at all stages of the drop sequence including the departure from the orbit. It is the decision making during the approach to the drop that seems to be the issue during the emerging pattern of LAT incidents/accidents. Yes they are managing a higher work load at low level, but, that's what they are there for and what they have been trained for. If there is a shortfall, it needs to be addressed. These flight crews are evidently experienced, intelligent people. Are they being strangled by poorly resolved procedures?

Lucerne

11th Feb 2023, 02:24

We use the turn windows in the 802 all the time. However, the absence of a turn window isn't attributable to CFIT. A lack of planning would be though.

Capn Bloggs

11th Feb 2023, 02:32

the absence of a turn window isn't attributable to CFIT.
Not directly, but it would help, IMO. Why are circling approaches so difficult? Because you're trying to judge a turn when you can't see, at least for the first part of the turn, what you're aiming for, as well as fly the aeroplane.

Eclan

11th Feb 2023, 23:24

Maybe the hill in that image, possibly unexpected in that relatively featureless terrain, was unnoticed by the crew until late in the drop run, whereupon back-stick was applied abruptly leading to stall and ground contact. Just speculation.

Hats off to those guys doing a dangerous job for less $$$ than the ones who flew the same jet when it was a SWA machine.

Lucerne

12th Feb 2023, 22:00

Hats off to those guys doing a dangerous job for less $$$ than the ones who flew the same jet when it was a SWA machine.

I would very much doubt that they're on less money. They would need their head read if that was the case.

Agent_86

17th Feb 2023, 09:51

ATSB have wrapped up their on-scene investigation and headed back to Canberra.

Johnny Cash IBE

17th Feb 2023, 10:04

I wouldn't mind betting that the cause was a stall from a too low and too slow scenario in an inappropriate configuration. That seems much more likely than a power loss on that aircraft and was the overall (nutshell) cause with regard to T134. We'll soon see I suppose. (well, maybe much later than soon as these things evidently take time). When the footage becomes more public this will become more evident I'm sure.
Totally agree Stockfeed. Finally someone with common sense.

By George

18th Feb 2023, 06:41

I have trouble with the stall theory. I agree they would have been at the back of the power curve, possibly with the stick shaker rattling away but not fully stalled. That aeroplane touched down gently enough not to break its back and slid more or less intact to a full stop. Fully stalled they would have hit much harder. AF447 in the South Atlantic quickly developed a sink rate in a fully developed stall of over 11,000 feet/min.

An empty 737-300 Freighter has a basic weight of around 31 tons. I have no idea on the weight of the fixed firefighting gear but assuming they had at least the fuel to go home plus reserves I would take a guess they would be around the 40-ton mark. A close friend who has flown this kind of operation claims 120 knots is an ideal dropping speed. This would place them at these weights very close to VREF with little margin for error. Smoke coupled with a subtle rising ground, and it is not hard to see a ground contact threat.
737's have a habit of breaking the fuselage both forward and aft of the wing box section. The 737-200 in the Hawaiian ditching was a classic example. A professional crew like this one would not have allowed a fully developed stall to occur. They may have run out of performance options and even allowed it to touch down to avoid a stall.
Anyhow, whatever the cause a lucky crew and a great outcome.

helispotter

21st Feb 2023, 11:24

In post #196, 43Inches shared link to the 7 News footage of the crash site and in #200 Eclan shared a screen shot from that video. In both, you can see multiple mitred (or turn-out) drains on the side of the dirt track where the 737 came to a rest. These are forking off from the opposite side of the track than from where the 737 had approached. These drains are used to direct rainwater to the land below the road which indicates that the 737 skidded downhill at least at the end of its run across the ground. That is consistent with the ATSB comment about the 737 clipping a ridge.

In post #98, Checkboard indicated the stall speed of a lightly loaded 737 with full flaps is around 90 knots, with an approach speed of 130 knots. Others have indicated final data from the 737 on FR24 indicated a ground speed of only about 100 knots (presumably while still flying).

While it is a different airliner, I was reminded of the accident involving the Air France A320 back in 1988 doing a low altitude and low speed airshow pass when it collided with trees and crashed. The Wikipedia write-up of this accident is at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_296Q . An extract from this has: "flyover... was supposed to take place at an altitude of 100 feet (30 m); instead... the flyover at 30 ft (9 m), skimmed the treetops of the forest at the end of the runway (which had not been shown on the airport map given to the pilots) and crashed.. All... survived the initial impact, but a woman and two children died from smoke inhalation before they could escape...". The rest is also worth reading. Wiki indicates its airspeed fell to as low as 122 knots before it hit trees. Look at the video to see just how slowly it was passing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zY2hz2K4UM

I haven't seen it reported here previously, but at https://www.atsb.gov.au/statements the ATSB has a statement from 11 Feb indicating: "...On Friday they [ATSB] welcomed a team of six investigators from the National Transportation Safety Board..., the Federal Aviation Administration ... and Boeing". That isn't really surprising, but good to read.

Meanwhile, I see from FR24 that Coulson and others are continuing to firebomb the fire in the same general area. Their C130H, N132CG was operating to the fire earlier today. It is a considerable round-trip from Busselton.

Capn Bloggs

3rd May 2023, 03:57

Preliminary report out:

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2023/report/ao-2023-008

Lucerne

3rd May 2023, 04:08

Preliminary report out:

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2023/report/ao-2023-008

Not a good look. 80ft, zero thrust, 1,800ft/min rate of descent. I don't know how they thought they would ever pull away from that.

red_dirt

4th May 2023, 00:08

Here’s me thinking the comments would go off here…….

Capn Bloggs

4th May 2023, 00:19

Here’s me thinking the comments would go off here…….
I think most of us are sitting quietly shaking our heads, unable to speak or type...

megan

4th May 2023, 03:10

I see it as a replay of this near miss. The pilot stated,While conducting retardant operations I descended below a ridge crossing altitude. This was NOT on purpose. I tunnel visioned the drop, and continued down. This was a little fill in spot and I was really focused on finishing the line. As I stated, this was NOT on purpose. We{crew} debriefed and talked about what happened, and of course, how to prevent this type of screw up.The 737 guys were in the same place as the RJ85, rising terrain in front of them, in the RJ case those experienced commented that the hill they missed tended to blended into the background of the still higher terrain.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/887x313/ab999_5ac3d964e3595d06cdf6bc6a74aac900017d336f.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2KCYhULWZ8

dejapoo

4th May 2023, 05:05

I think most of us are sitting quietly shaking our heads, unable to speak or type...

That'd be a first for you!

The Banjo

4th May 2023, 09:39

Capn Bloggs

4th May 2023, 10:02

A good outcome in the circumstances.
What, crashing a jet and almost killing yourself over a bush fire with not a threatened human structure in sight? Everything you listed, Banjo, would have prompted something other than VRef, in the weeds at full flap, descending.

NumptyAussie

4th May 2023, 10:34

I think most of us are sitting quietly shaking our heads, unable to speak or type...
and yet you managed to....

flyingfox

4th May 2023, 11:09

What, crashing a jet and almost killing yourself over a bush fire with not a threatened human structure in sight? Everything you listed, Banjo, would have prompted something other than VRef, in the weeds at full flap, descending.
The world has changed Cpt Bloggs. I agree entirely with your sentiment about the flying outcome here, but fire fighting is now also about protecting any valuable or irreplaceable assets such as certain pieces of forest or bushland. The aircraft should have been there, but flown in an entirely different manner.

Capn Bloggs

4th May 2023, 11:30

and yet you managed to....
That was yesterday, Numpty. :hmm:

Mach E Avelli

4th May 2023, 11:47

We must remember these pilots are not flying from ILS to ILS sipping on a cuppa tea in an airline. It is a very demanding job with low flying, heat and mechanical turbulence, wind shear, reduced vis in smoke and undulating terrain.
They survived in one piece. The jet is replaceable.
A good outcome in the circumstances.
So true. It was just a clapped-out old Boeing, not some super manoeuvrable squillion dollar tactical jobbie specially designed for the task. If it had been a fire truck that rolled over and burned, it would hardly have made the news, and the crew would have copped little criticism - more likely praise for doing such a dangerous job. But because it’s an aeroplane everyone gets their knickers in a knot.
Those of us (all of us at least once, surely?) who have screwed up and not crashed, had the luxury of a few more feet between us and the ground.

Badengo

4th May 2023, 12:18

Need to stop using aircraft that aren’t purpose built!

Governments need to seriously look into other options for the long term like the De Havilland Canada DHC-515.

flyingfox

5th May 2023, 08:06

Need to stop using aircraft that aren’t purpose built!

Governments need to seriously look into other options for the long term like the De Havilland Canada DHC-515.

You can't blame the aircraft for this accident. The DHC-515 is designed for areas with lakes. That excludes much of Australia. Jets are generally faster to get on task where distance is an issue. Old airliners are a cost effective choice. They just need to be manouvered judiciously and flown at a safe altitude for the task.

flyingfox

5th May 2023, 08:11

43Inches

5th May 2023, 09:15

Lets get to the real problem here, and it's not the aircraft or the pilots skill. It's training and procedures.

The common thread in many of these LAT accidents and near misses is the procedure of 'tagging' the first drop. Dropping a line of retardant around a co-ordinate is one thing, along a fire line or such, but trying to exactly tag that first drop to precisely join the lines is where the target fixation and errors really creep in, especially in aircraft that can be a struggle to fly precisely in these scenarios. Remember the old rule about riding a bike or skiing, where you look is where you go, fixate on the tag line, that's where the plane goes, and realize too late you are past the point of recovery and it's over.

It really seems that not enough focus in training is spent on how dangerous 'tagging' can be, and really considering what we've seen, maybe they need to approach subsequent drops in another way.

Need to stop using aircraft that aren’t purpose built!

Governments need to seriously look into other options for the long term like the De Havilland Canada DHC-515.

Fire trucks and ambulances are the same, a mix of purpose built and stock chassis with stuff attached. I know Victoria has had some woeful fire trucks over the years, some country CFA trucks could not even handle an incline in hilly terrain as they were built on cheap Isuzu chassis and the brakes would not hold the load on an incline.

As far as the CL range of aircraft, they would make a great addition for a select area of Australia, mainly around the east coast where adequate water areas are abundant. But as said before they would struggle for sortie times away from these areas.

Cedrik

5th May 2023, 22:57

As far as the CL range of aircraft, they would make a great addition for a select area of Australia, mainly around the east coast where adequate water areas are abundant. But as said before they would struggle for sortie times away from these areas.

At 30 million each? The best job I've seen with both pilots and operational dropping has been the DC10, A load of 3 or 4 times more than a LAT. A lot of LAT lines have to be reinforced, never had to do that with a DC10 drop.

helispotter

6th May 2023, 00:00

43" and others here make good observations, but this got me thinking:

Lets get to the real problem here, ... It's training and procedures.

So what training and procedures are needed?

The 737 has only a two person crew. How do they allocate responsibility such that they don't both become fixated on the 'drop'? Should one focus on flying and drop timing while the other should have zero interest in the actual drop and only focus on overall safety of aircraft and its crew while flying at such low altitudes? Or do such operations actually need more than a two person crew?

As an alternative to more people in the cockpit monitoring the situation, how about incorporating more technology? After all, seemingly suitable technology has been around for decades already:https://youtu.be/vSyDslyADv4
The lower selectable limit of terrain clearance shown in this video is 200', not bad for a high speed jet bomber!

megan

6th May 2023, 01:27

Need to stop using aircraft that aren’t purpose built!

Governments need to seriously look into other options for the long term like the De Havilland Canada DHC-515And how does a purpose built aircraft such as the Canadair provide greater capability than a 737? The accidents are caused by pilot error.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M73lyUmjL7s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-P3cr_c2IbE

red_dirt

6th May 2023, 02:00

Cost versus reward….. a fire burning in the boon docks of bum f$&k nowhere costing mega bucks versus heavy plant which by all account was doing its job well.

we are becoming far too dependent on the aerial assets these days

KRviator

6th May 2023, 08:42

Anyone have any info on total sorties flown for the last say, 5 years, nationwide, vs the loss rate? The C130 down Canberra way, the 737, a Dromader crashed about 8 or so years ago due fatigue while on a tasking, a Huey in Tasmania a couple years ago from memory and I have it in my mind there was another Huey that went down on a creekbed a year or three ago - but cannot remember if it was providing aerial support for the firies.

No argument from me that it is a risky business, but losing not one, but two LAT's plus a number of smaller aircraft for what is, quite frankly, a limited number of flights per annum suggests the risk v reward matrix needs to be reconsidered before we lose any more good aviators for jobs that aren't absolutely necessary...

MickG0105

6th May 2023, 10:03

... As an alternative to more people in the cockpit monitoring the situation, how about incorporating more technology?... Something like this perhaps?

https://youtu.be/gm6u6it2qYM

Duck Pilot

6th May 2023, 10:23

The accidents are caused by pilot error???

Totally Incorrect due to the FACT that CASA forced Part 138 aerial work operators to mandated bucket loads of safety management measures for high risk operations…….🤬🤬🤬

A government contractor pancakes a 737 whilst doing 138 stuff and CASA recon the new regs are fit for purpose🤬🤬

And they have the audacity to scrutinise the hell out of other 138 operators who are doing very low risk operations in comparison to low level fire fighting operations. The 737 wasn’t designed to be a fire bomber, nor was the C-130.

Hope they can address the inconsistencies in the PIR🙃

Somehow doubt based on previous performance…

helispotter

6th May 2023, 11:30

Anyone have any info on total sorties flown for the last say, 5 years, nationwide, vs the loss rate?...

The ATSB seems to be on the case with a review currently underway:

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2021/aair/as-2021-015

The link to an earlier statistical report is broken at the above site but I have seen it before somewhere on the ATSB website.

As for the recent aerial firefighting related accidents in Australia, these are some I recall in chronological order (including cases listed by KRviator) with help of ATSB website:

08-12-09: AS350B2 (VH-NFO) & BK117 (VH-LXC) near Orange, NSW [older case of collision, fortunately not major]
....
23-10-13: PZL Mielec M18A VH-TZJ near Ulladulla, NSW
17-08-18: BK117 VH-JWB Ulladulla, NSW
28-01-19: S-64E N173AC near Jericho, VIC
07-12-19: UH-1H VH-OXI near Crawford River, NSW [fire control work]
09-01-20: UH-1H VH-ONZ Ben Boyd Reservoir, NSW [bushfire clean-up work]
23-01-20: EC130Q N134CG near Peak View, NSW
14-02-22: UH-1H VH-UHX near Launceston, TAS
06-02-23: 737-3H4 N619SW Fitzgerald River NP, WA

The UH-1 loss recalled by KRviator might be Garlick UH-1H VH-HUE which suffered an engine failure while conducting long-line ops in support of Snowy Hydro 2.0 some distance from Talbingo on 17 April 2018. It ended in a riverbed. I seem to recall a second UH-1 / 205 was also lost supporting Snowy Hydro (not the case of accidental load release from Bell 205, also VH-HUE, on 10 Jan 2019 listed on ATSB site, rather a further loss of a helicopter).

KRviator

6th May 2023, 22:46

The ATSB seems to be on the case with a review currently underway:

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2021/aair/as-2021-015

The link to an earlier statistical report is broken at the above site but I have seen it before somewhere on the ATSB website.Found it. Like CAsA, the ATSB screwed up their new website and there's dozens, if not hundreds of dead links on their own website yet alone everyone that had linked to reports there externally. Anyways, here's the report: A safety analysis of aerial firefighting occurrences in Australia (https://www.atsb.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/5777923/ar-2020-022_final.pdf)
The UH-1 loss recalled by KRviator might be Garlick UH-1H VH-HUE which suffered an engine failure while conducting long-line ops in support of Snowy Hydro 2.0 some distance from Talbingo on 17 April 2018. It ended in a riverbed. Yep, that's the one I was thinking of, but I had conflated it with the Ben Boyd prang, thanks for clarifying it. :)

megan

7th May 2023, 02:18

The 737 wasn’t designed to be a fire bomber, nor was the C-130.With the exception of the Canadair and Be-200 I'm hard pressed to think of any aircraft designed with water bombing in mind. Personally can't see what difference it makes as to the airframe used, the catalogue of aircraft used is long, Neptune, B-24, DC-7, Catalina, Electra, Avenger, Mars etc etc The 747 and MD-87 are now used as well.

helispotter

7th May 2023, 12:56

With the exception of the Canadair and Be-200 I'm hard pressed to think of any aircraft designed with water bombing in mind. Personally can't see what difference it makes as to the airframe used, the catalogue of aircraft used is long, Neptune, B-24, DC-7, Catalina, Electra, Avenger, Mars etc etc The 747 and MD-87 are now used as well.

Of course at the other end of the scale are all the fixed & rotary wing aircraft now used for firefighting. For fixed wing, most are purpose built aerial agriculture aircraft adapted to fire-fighting. While looking through recent "Aerial Work" related accidents on ATSB site, it was apparent that there were at least as many accidents during aerial application tasks as those related to firefighting. Low level flight is clearly more risky, regardless of the role.

helispotter

7th May 2023, 13:09

Juan Browne (blancolirio) has provided a good review of ATSB's preliminary report with his own observations:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFH-ycXG0vY

One of the main points he makes is that it always takes time for turbofans to build up thrust after throttles are increased and the lag between throttle-up and response is shown in one of the ASTB figures.

I wonder how many more metres may have been enough to just clear that ridge and avoid the accident?

He discusses the altitudes in the ATSB data plots from about 22:55. At 23:16 he mentions an apparent discrepancy between Corrected Altitude and the Radar Altimeter plot. But I see on the ATSB plots, they refer to "Radio Height Left (FEET)" and "Corrected Altitude (FEET)". Dumb question but is the "Radio Height" a distance to the actual ground as opposed to height above sea level of "Corrected Altitude"? *

* Seems so, since this all roughly lines up in the report: (Corrected Altitude) - (Radio Height) = (Terrain Altitude)

helispotter

9th May 2023, 02:02

Further to the question I asked in post #238, the Cambridge Aerospace Dictionary defines "Radio Height" as "Height above ground measured by radio altimeter". So it occurred to me that given ATSB presented synchronised plots of Corrected Altitude and Radio Height in Figure 8 & 9, then it is possible to work back and also estimate the terrain altitude as derived from the flight instruments. Furthermore, since the ground speed is also plotted in Figure 9, it is also possible to convert from a time series x axis in Figure 9 to a distance over ground.

Also, Figure 6 in the report, showing the terrain profile in the area of the impact is not to scale but it does provide five key track and corresponding ground elevation points. So if we (boldly) assume the point at which the Radio Height has dropped to zero equates to the initial impact point with the ridgeline, we can overlay a semi-scaled version of Figure 6 over the converted flight path and terrain elevation derived from Figure 9.

Starting with the semi-scaled version of Figure 6 (x and y both in metres), it might look something like the following plot, with (1) being ridgeline impact, (2) being second impact and (3) being main wreckage locations:

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/818x177/coulson_737_approx_terrain_derived_from_atsb_prelim_report_5 c015c131e60cc6ff1cf8bf2e246c9d6fbe068bf.jpg

Then merging this with the derived flightpath and terrain (again both x and y in metres) from Figure 9 as outlined above:

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/978x176/coulson_737_approx_flight_path_and_terrain_derived_from_atsb _prelim_report_a21956c3ecbb06ca5d8103edfac9fa70bfcbc030.jpg
The pink lines represent the estimated start and end of the second retardant drop shown in Figure 9 of ATSB's report. Red lines are again as indicated above. The terrain as shown in the brown line has been 'massaged' to reasonably align with that derived from flight instruments (green line), but is still consistent with the information provided in Figure 6. The radio altimeter would in part be measuring the height to the top of the scrub whereas Figure 6 elevations appear to be measured at ground level.

43Inches

9th May 2023, 04:11

That video explains a lot about what happened. A few key points like, the captain was concerned with using all retardant to it's maximum effectiveness. This had two results, 1 he pulled out of the first drop to save some retardant for a second go on a more favorable line, and 2, once on that line he was very concerned with ensuring the retardant 'tagged' or continued to first drop for maximum effect. That then gets anyone in the mindset of fixating on the second drop point to ensure it's all worthwhile. The fixation is evident when the pilot bunts the nose down late in the approach probably to follow the target in the windscreen and that small change in such a large aircraft resulted in a combination of very low thrust and high rate of descent. Everything is out of whack now and in what would be a normal recovery is now low, and with a full spool up required for any performance, by the time you realize what has happened you are flicking the hilltop.

I can see a few ways to reduce it happening again. PM needs to be drilled on watching all parameters, IAS and ALT are obvious, but power and attitude and descent rate as well, what would be called stable approach criteria. Set drop points to overlap, and not tag, yes you waste a little bit of retardant, but if you start to miss you are less likely to push the nose down subconsciously (or just can tagging and drop the retardant without target restraints). Also given the response time of the engines would it be better to have these aircraft fitted with modified spoilers so that they can use significant power against drag, if performance is required, ditching the spoilers with 80%+ N1 would be much faster response than spooling from idle, but then I supposed the cowboy operators would use them to dive bomb canyons or something....

megan

9th May 2023, 04:32

Also given the response time of the engines would it be better to have these aircraft fitted with modified spoilers so that they can use significant power against drag, if performance is required, ditching the spoilers with 80%+ N1 would be much faster response than spooling from idleA technique used by early jet naval aircraft, and even the later Vietnam era A-4 and A-6, approach flown with speed brakes out.Set drop points to overlap, and not tagNot exactly sure the difference you imply by "tag" and "overlap" 43", fire fighters say after the first drop the successive drops have form an unbroken continuous line ie no gap in the line for the fire to breach. Retardant drops are not to directly extinguish the fire, the chemicals mixed with the water create a fire proof barrier of sufficient width that the fire hopefully can't jump.

43Inches

9th May 2023, 09:22

Not exactly sure the difference you imply by "tag" and "overlap" 43", fire fighters say after the first drop the successive drops have form an unbroken continuous line ie no gap in the line for the fire to breach. Retardant drops are not to directly extinguish the fire, the chemicals mixed with the water create a fire proof barrier of sufficient width that the fire hopefully can't jump.

With what I see of tagging they try to drop right on the end of the first run with little margin, so as to not waste retardant. This then makes a very precise point you are aiming for rather than an 'area' as such, which would promote target fixation. I meant aim to overlap the last of the first run with the start of the next, you might double up 100 meters or so, but it will relax the margin for getting it wrong and trying to nose down on the target point. The other thing I'm thinking is what was the need to slow down on the second run, if the first at 130kts was fine, why do you need to slow for the second, it's the same retardant composition, or is there a body angle consideration for the 737 LAT.

J.O.

12th May 2023, 15:16

43" and others here make good observations, but this got me thinking:

The 737 has only a two person crew. How do they allocate responsibility such that they don't both become fixated on the 'drop'? Should one focus on flying and drop timing while the other should have zero interest in the actual drop and only focus on overall safety of aircraft and its crew while flying at such low altitudes? Or do such operations actually need more than a two person crew?

It's absolutely possible to do it safely with a two person crew, if you have SOPs that allow the PF to focus on the target line and the drop while the PM monitors altitude, airspeed, thrust (and AoA - if they've invested in such equipment) throughout the run. Just like in a CAT III approach, the PM should not be looking outside - ever. My spidey senses tell me that there was two sets of eyes looking outside because if the PM was doing their job, they would have recognized their low energy state and called for an abort.

J.O.

12th May 2023, 15:23

I see it as a replay of this near miss. The pilot stated,The 737 guys were in the same place as the RJ85, rising terrain in front of them, in the RJ case those experienced commented that the hill they missed tended to blended into the background of the still higher terrain.

I'm not suggesting that target fixation wasn't a factor, but if you look at the data traces, the 737 was in a consistent, descending, low energy state. The rising terrain they contacted was not as abrupt as the one the Neptune crew missed narrowly. IMHO, the 737 was always going to hit the ground in that energy state. The hill just made it happen a few seconds sooner.