3AW reporting parachuting plane down Barwon Heads 20/10/2023

[DARKMAIZE]

News reporting 2 injured out of 17 onboard.
I can't post links, but someone else might be able to soon.

[0ttoL]

News heli circling the location. Channel 7 showing some footage.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1080x1284/screenshot_2023_10_20_at_9_31_47_am_9ab530425c68b8f2bdd52add b29ec3ef87f3d4ee.png

[DARKMAIZE]

The Age Now has a photo of the crash site. Buy again, I can't post links or attach a photo.

Flight Radar shows VHUMV appears to have been climbing upwind at 500ft and I guess lost engine. 3000ft per minute descent only gave him 20 odd seconds to respond. Good outcome.

[0ttoL]

https://7news.com.au/news/vic/small-plane-with-multiple-people-on-board-crashes-near-lake-in-barwon-heads-victoria-c-12263208

It looks like they have only just made it to the land on the northern side of the lake


https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/920x1030/screenshot_2023_10_20_at_9_43_47_am_1cd3e77419664f4eb6d15947 7b1cdeb9988c64a0.png

[PiperCameron]

At least there is plenty of grass around there. They did well indeed.. but it must have been a bumpy ride to break the legs off of a Caravan!!

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/two-injured-as-plane-overshoots-runway-at-barwon-heads-airport-20231020-p5edql.html

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/734x489/2423cea5e50e0d853b3d79b29141ae2c8e2e85c4_426fe99c2e875339cdd 8609c1c7ab8181136a363.jpg
From The Age article

[Capt Fathom]

This thread is useless without the TAF and METAR! :E

[DARKMAIZE]

At least there is plenty of grass around there. They did well indeed.. but to break off the must have been a bumpy ride to break the legs off of a Caravan!!

That third photo I'm the age, it almost looks like the initial inpact was literally on the bank.of the river. Sure puts a whole new meaning to short field. And no doubt zero seatbelts for passengers. Dou le checked the times on flight radar. Speed loss at 20:57:55, track end 20:58:18. Very quick action required. Probably pilots longest 20 seconds ever.

[Lead Balloon]

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/540x720/resized_image0000002_622378ec9d7dca7723be77e2bb65c7ac580f1d1 c.jpeg
From the YBRS refueller.

[Liklik balus]

Fear not we are all saved, the numb nuts reporter is quoting "the Department of Civil Aviation" will investigate the accident. Doh!!!!!

[Lead Balloon]

...after being alerted by Airservices' Joint Rescue Coordination Centre.

[cooperplace]

Wonderful that all survived with seemingly few injuries. Congrats to the pilot. 3000fpm descent?? And as mentioned presumably no seatbelts? Do parachutists think they are Lady Diana?

This a/c had a complete power loss in 2009:
https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2010/aair/ao-2010-005, report says:

"compressor turbine blades that had been installed in the engine during the most recent overhaul were not approved for the PT6A-114"

17 POB? Seems a lot, but what could possibly go wrong?

[Lead Balloon]

Presumably no seats...

[megan]

Do parachutists think they are Lady DianaHow do you suggest skydivers may be restrained in keeping with FAR crash requirements?

Seats greatly hamper and present a very real danger to movement within the aircraft.

Once again a demonstration that the aircraft ride is the most dangerous part of skydiving, and not necessarily said tongue in cheek.

[logansi]

The landing gear has literally been torn off by the bank - can't get any closer than that.

Hope everyone is ok, bit sad to see UMV down, probably the most common callsign on MEL CTR with drops out of Barwon Heads or Moorabbin.

[cooperplace]

How do you suggest skydivers may be restrained in keeping with FAR crash requirements?

That's a good question and I have no idea; I understand they need to get out of the plane. I like to be strapped in firmly. I've never been skydiving but it seems there are no passenger seats in these planes, problematic in a forced landing. As someone who likes to load the aviation dice firmly in my favor, skydiving ops look scary.

[thunderbird five]

You don't need a parachute to go Skydiving.
You do need one to go skydiving twice.

[Forced Labor]

Thought this aircraft had a Garrett not PT6

[PiperCameron]

That's a good question and I have no idea; I understand they need to get out of the plane. I like to be strapped in firmly. I've never been skydiving but it seems there are no passenger seats in these planes, problematic in a forced landing. As someone who likes to load the aviation dice firmly in my favor, skydiving ops look scary.

Since the last thing the pilot wants (in unfortunate cases sadly it's his/her last thing ever) is for the load to shift on takeoff, rest assured the meat bombs certainly ARE all strapped in firmly,
.. but you don't need seats to do that.

[Eaglerocker]

Its time CASA scraps the whole skydiving can work under private ops deal, all it does is allow these operators to cut corners and not pay pilots award wages. Having worked for a skydive mob ive seen things that have no place in the aviation industry.

[runway16]

20 SECONDS IN THE AIR

Hmm!

Does the pilot write up his logbook with .1 divided by 12? or just forget it?

R

[Squawk7700]

From memory, they clip themselves to the floor for restraint and C of G issue avoidance.

[megan]

The jumpers do need to be restrained, but the restraint doesn't comply with the crash requirement protection provided by a seat designed to comply with the FAR. They use generally a single point anchored to the floor, the APF authorise/approve each individual aircraft type system.

https://libraryonline.erau.edu/online-full-text/faa-aviation-medicine-reports/AM98-11.pdf

[RickNRoll]

I thought those engines were so mature technically they never fail if maintained properly.

[StallBuffett]

Wow. What's best glide in a caravan and what does that sight picture look like if the prop is still fine?

(Would it feather automatically? Not clear if we're talking partial or full loss of power)


I hear these guys on guys on the radio pretty regularly and they seem super professional and courteous to the mix of traffic.

Wishing those hurt a speedy recovery

[cooperplace]

The jumpers do need to be restrained, but the restraint doesn't comply with the crash requirement protection provided by a seat designed to comply with the FAR. They use generally a single point anchored to the floor, the APF authorise/approve each individual aircraft type system.

https://libraryonline.erau.edu/online-full-text/faa-aviation-medicine-reports/AM98-11.pdf
Ok thanks

[Desert Flower]

Thought this aircraft had a Garrett not PT6

Yes, definitely a Garrett.

DF.

[kingRB]

Once again a demonstration that the aircraft ride is the most dangerous part of skydiving, and not necessarily said tongue in cheek.


yeah - nah. Spend any time in the skydive world you'll see death and severe injury all the time. Most of it doesn't draw media attention like a downed aircraft does.

[megan]

Only ever had one injury, make that two, injuries that I'm aware of on our DZ, first jump student broke a leg and I a twisted an ankle on a down wind landing during a spot landing comp.

[kingRB]

Only ever had one injury, make that two, injuries that I'm aware of on our DZ, first jump student broke a leg and I a twisted an ankle on a down wind landing during a spot landing comp.

makes sense - your first post sounded like the usual mental gymnastics jumpers use to rationalise the risk.

[Squawk7700]

Yes, definitely a Garrett.

DF.

Looks like a Honeywell to me from the pictures.

[ACMS]

Idiots on Ch9 saying it was a “runway crash”

[Squawk7700]

Its time CASA scraps the whole skydiving can work under private ops deal, all it does is allow these operators to cut corners and not pay pilots award wages. Having worked for a skydive mob ive seen things that have no place in the aviation industry.

Are you suggesting that an under-paid pilot caused this aircraft to crash? Or is it due to the maintenance facility that's not doing their job because the company is cutting corners?

[Capt Fathom]

Looks like a Honeywell to me from the pictures.

Most of us 'oldies' refer to them as Garrett's.... otherwise no one knows what you're talking about!

[Desert Flower]

Looks like a Honeywell to me from the pictures.

Okay, so it was a Honeywell - which was originally designed in the 1950s by Garrett.

DF.

[Cloudee]

Are you suggesting that an under-paid pilot caused this aircraft to crash? Or is it due to the maintenance facility that's not doing their job because the company is cutting corners?
Or could he be suggesting the aircraft was grossly overweight, or ran out of fuel or the pilot was fatigued or maintenance issued not reported. Surely none of these things would occur in an Australian parachute operation under the rigorous scrutiny of the Parachute Federation and CASA.

[Desert Flower]

Or could he be suggesting the aircraft was grossly overweight, or ran out of fuel or the pilot was fatigued or maintenance issued not reported. Surely none of these things would occur in an Australian parachute operation under the rigorous scrutiny of the Parachute Federation and CASA.

Surely seventeen in a C208 is a tad overloaded though?

DF.

[Squawk7700]

Surely seventeen in a C208 is surely a tad overloaded though?

DF.

That would depend on the weight of the aircraft. For an aircraft to be “overloaded” it means that MTOW has been exceeded.

There are a lot of seats in a 14 seat 208 and they weigh a lot, so so with seats removed and a low amount of fuel, the world is your oyster for cramming in pax, subject to regulatory limitations on the number of passengers.

[Squawk7700]

Or could he be suggesting the aircraft was grossly overweight, or ran out of fuel or the pilot was fatigued or maintenance issued not reported. Surely none of these things would occur in an Australian parachute operation under the rigorous scrutiny of the Parachute Federation and CASA.

Is a pilot more likely to overload an aircraft because they are being paid less?

[Clare Prop]

There are plenty of operators who have CASA approvals ripping off their staff with sham contracting and/or wages well under the award rate. Network Aviation PIA - PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/654335-network-aviation-pia.html)
That is the domain of Fair Work Commission, not CASA, and they can't do anything if they don't know about it.

[Lead Balloon]

CASA pretending that commercial parachute operations are private is one of the more blatant, longstanding examples of corruption in the aviation sector.

[thunderbird five]

Does anyone remember from years ago the parachutists VS ASIC card (when operating at a security controlled airport) farce?
The CASA ruling came in at - parachutists were regarded as passengers when boarding, so no ASIC required.
Then when they bailed out and landed back at the same airport, someone had to run out and issue them each a VISITOR ASIC card and escort them back in.
They weren't eligible for their own ASIC cards because they were not flight crew.

[Eaglerocker]

Is a pilot more likely to overload an aircraft because they are being paid less?
Found a DZ manager/owner

[kingRB]

CASA pretending that commercial parachute operations are private is one of the more blatant, longstanding examples of corruption in the aviation sector.

while ongoing "private" regulation of what clearly are commercial operations is grossly negligent by CASA - not sure about corruption being the cause. Who are you claiming is financially incentivising CASA not to regulate it under commercial standards?

[Lead Balloon]

Your definition of 'corruption' is narrower than mine. Mine goes way beyond financial incentives.

[megan]

Spend any time in the skydive world you'll see death and severe injury all the time......your first post sounded like the usual mental gymnastics jumpers use to rationalise the risk.You should contact the Federation and tell about all those deaths and injuries that are occurring that they don't know about, up to the end of 2022 the ten year rolling average has been two deaths per year, for the year 2022 there were 68 injuries.

All activities involve risk of one sort or another, there are cowboys every where that shun procedures, I wish that pilots were as conscious of training and safety as the majority of the skydiving community. When the sport started in Oz the training was very militaristic, a result of it beginning by ex SAS and Commando personnel.

Jumping from the start was seen as a club activity and you had to be a member of the Federation to be involved, could even fly the aircraft on a PPL, with regulatory approval. Tandem passengers have to be members of the Federation prior to jumping, membership sign up taking place prior to the jump and cost is included in the jump price.Who are you claiming is financially incentivising CASA not to regulate it under commercial standards?The APF is the regulator of the industry, CASA may make regulatory decisions such as aircraft restraints but it is up to the APF to sign off on the design for the particular aircraft type. CASA used to have a jumping expert on staff but I'm of the impression they no longer do. Like gliding jumping is self regulated, is there such a thing as a commercial gliding license where a bystander can be taken for a joyride?


https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1681/ab280_8381def9175b545c2d899ca9608c85d061507cc2.jpg

[Lookleft]

I did my first parachute jump in 1982. It was with a static line round canopy and prior to that I was instructed on how to land and had to practise by jumping off any slightly elevated platform. The jump site was a tin shed at Collector and the jump plane was a C-182. To consider it a "commercial" operation was a bit of stretch. It was no more commercial than gliding and as I was accepting a significant part of the risk by jumping out of a perfectly serviceable aircraft the CAA didn't consider that it needed any more oversight than any other private operation.

Then of course came the tandem parachute. An innovation that really does deserve the appellation of "gamechanger". Along with the increase in young backpackers parachuting was available to anyone, disabled, centenarians, just show up and pay your money. Now the line between private and commercial ops was being blurred but the Regulator continued to allow the APF to oversight it. The people paying for the thrill of being intimately strapped to someone think that the operation is to the same standard as a commercial operation but (You will like this LB) caveat emptor!

The parachute operators are now operating fleets of sophisticated aircraft but still under the existing system. If CASA are corrupt in line with kingRBs definition then surely there would be evidence. If CASA are inept (more likely) then the parachuting industry has simply overtaken the regulations in the same way that AI and social media has.overtaken their respective legislative controls. I can't see CASA in the near or long term future regulating parachute ops to the same standard as regular passenger carrying operations.

[triathlon]

The jumpers do need to be restrained, but the restraint doesn't comply with the crash requirement protection provided by a seat designed to comply with the FAR. They use generally a single point anchored to the floor, the APF authorise/approve each individual aircraft type system.

https://libraryonline.erau.edu/online-full-text/faa-aviation-medicine-reports/AM98-11.pdf
you are wrong . The jumpers must be restrained for takeoff

[kingRB]

You should contact the Federation and tell about all those deaths and injuries that are occurring that they don't know about, up to the end of 2022 the ten year rolling average has been two deaths per year, for the year 2022 there were 68 injuries.

All activities involve risk of one sort or another, there are cowboys every where that shun procedures, I wish that pilots were as conscious of training and safety as the majority of the skydiving community. When the sport started in Oz the training was very militaristic, a result of it beginning by ex SAS and Commando personnel.


absurd you'd even try and compare death and injury rates of skydiving to death and injury caused in the aircraft ride to height. I'm well aware of where the sport started in Australia, and understand that it has precisely zero to do with the current standards and training in the APF world. I've flown the military, SAS and civilians in parachuting operations and I can guarantee you the way civilian DZ's are run these days is about as far from a military standard as you could possibly get. You're regurgitating the same mental gymnastics i've heard hundreds of times from skydivers, so it seems you're just as incapable of looking at the industry with any objectivity and seeing what a complete clownshow it is. Which only gets worse the longer CASA keeps ignoring the aircraft operation as being commercial.


Jumping from the start was seen as a club activity and you had to be a member of the Federation to be involved, could even fly the aircraft on a PPL, with regulatory approval. Tandem passengers have to be members of the Federation prior to jumping, membership sign up taking place prior to the jump and cost is included in the jump price.

Thanks for stating how obviously farcical the entire process is to circumvent the reality that the general public are paying to fly in an aircraft being operated privately.

The APF is the regulator of the industry, CASA may make regulatory decisions such as aircraft restraints but it is up to the APF to sign off on the design for the particular aircraft type. CASA used to have a jumping expert on staff but I'm of the impression they no longer do. Like gliding jumping is self regulated, is there such a thing as a commercial gliding license where a bystander can be taken for a joyride?


What has any of that got to do with the regulation and limitations imposed on a pilot operating a Caravan or 750XL in a fully commercial skydiving environment? The APF has got nothing to do with the regulation, licensing and limitations in which the pilot is held accountable to. That's entirely the problem. Private licensing standards, commercial operation.

[tail wheel]

Thought this aircraft had a Garrett not PT6

You're right. Probably the cause of the crash. :E

Engine manufacturer: HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.
Engine type: Turboprop
Number of engines: 1
Engine model: TPE331-12JR-704TT

[Lookleft]

You're right. Probably the cause of the crash.

On ABC Melbourne ye3sterday they interviewed a State MLA who was onboard the aircraft. He described passing through about 800' when the noise stopped. He also said that he heard the stall warning. His recollection was that the pilot put the nose down to gain airspeed. If they had landed in the water then he thinks there would have been a lot of deceased parachutists.

[megan]

you are wrong . The jumpers must be restrained for takeoffWhat part of The jumpers do need to be restrained did you not understand?

[cooperplace]

a State MLA who was onboard the aircraft... described passing through about 800' when the noise stopped. He also said that he heard the stall warning. His recollection was that the pilot put the nose down to gain airspeed.
Well you would, wouldn't you? Engine failure: stick forward!

[cncpc]

Since the last thing the pilot wants (in unfortunate cases sadly it's his/her last thing ever) is for the load to shift on takeoff, rest assured the meat bombs certainly ARE all strapped in firmly,
.. but you don't need seats to do that.
Used to jump. Used to drop jumpers. I've never seen anyone "strapped in" on a jump load. There are reasons for that.

I and any other pilots I've caught the ride up with do call for everyone to sardine forward for takeoff.

[cncpc]

To the pilot...great job, Sir or Ms..

[bloated goat]

To the pilot...great job, Sir or Ms..


or non-binary please……

[DARKMAIZE]

If they had landed in the water then he thinks there would have been a lot of deceased parachutists.

Maybe, but turns out that lake is mostly under 1m depth. They probably could have walked out.. :P.

Lools like the wheels have turned up based on some new photos today (I'm still short 8 posts dammit)

[Deaf]

Maybe, but turns out that lake is mostly under 1m depth. They probably could have walked out..
Aveerage may be under 1m but from sailing in the river and lake many years ago in a Mirror dinghy there is no real average. It's about 1 foot deep (keel up) and or channels 10ft deep (keel down) with the channels shifting position.

[Chairmans Lounge]

History just repeats, fortunately with no loss of life this time around. Well done Captain! Life membership at the club with full open bar benefits.

All this talk of CASA surveillance levels, restraining one way human cargo, APF etc was tragically raised way back in 2014


https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2014/aair/ao-2014-053

[Fark'n'ell]

You do need one to go skydiving twice.
no you don't
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPC_h9Vmlxw&pp=ygUVc2t5ZGl2ZXIgbGFuZHMgaW4gbmV0

[megan]

Private licensing standards, commercial operationAt the end of the day the pilot is not called the PIC for nothing, s/he is the one that accepts the job, or rejects the job, and sets the standards by which s/he operates, if s/he is not satisfied with the standards being asked of them then grow some and say no, or move on. It's the PIC's license that's up for grabs by the judge, and CASA will be the ones that lead the charge to throw the PIC under the bus. The world ain't fair, business is built upon the ethic of screwing the little guy for as much as it's possible to get away with.

Here's an idea, organise an association dedicated to the interests of jump pilots and get some standards that you all agree upon set. There are times when you have to take charge and not sit back whinging that someone ought to do something. We had occasion that the AFAP implied violence against our company negotiators, result? We dumped the AFAP and formed our own union.

I speak from experience of 27 years flying a fleet of ten aircraft, twelve pax, in quasi scheduled private airline operations in Oz, ops manual or regulatory requirements ignored totally. You put your big girl/boy pants on, not happy, move on, CASA in this case was cognizant but couldn't care less.

Little more skill on display here Fark?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEP8juRSBRo

[PiperCameron]

It seems the ATSB are calling this a "forced/precautionary landing":

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2023/report/ao-2023-049

[DARKMAIZE]

It seems the ATSB are calling this a "forced/precautionary landing":

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2023/report/ao-2023-049

That can't be right.. All the news agencies are saying it's a runway overshoot.. Clearly ATSB must have their memos wrong.. :P

[PiperCameron]

That can't be right.. All the news agencies are saying it's a runway overshoot.. Clearly ATSB must have their memos wrong.. :P

Well, (a) the news has come a long way from the original "Small plane with multiple people on board crashes near lake in Barwon Heads, Victoria" and (b) given the stretch of water between the end of the runway and the paddock they wound up in, that's a pretty impressive overshoot!

[Fark'n'ell]

MEGAN,
I have seen that one.There are also a couple of guys who have skydived
from one aeroplane to another without a chute.

[Sue Vêtements]

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1681/ab280_8381def9175b545c2d899ca9608c85d061507cc2.jpg

a 172? now that's pushing it a bit! Was that one at a time? :E

The only people we ever strapped in were observation riders (for obvious reasons) we just used to have everyone come forward on takeoff (in a 182) then sit back down once the climb was established

I think the sport has changed a lot though. It used to be a 182 in a field with no facilities and now it's become a lot like skiing with purpose built airports flying "real" aircraft, food for sale, air conditioned packing areas ... and wind tunels. Took some of the fun out of it really :}

[Ken X]

a 172? now that's pushing it a bit! Was that one at a time? :E

I did several jumps from a 172 back in 1980 ish
We landed it in a field, took the right hand door off and removed all the seats apart from the pilots. Two bods in the back and one in the front, sat with their back to the controls. Banking right was interesting. Still remember standing with my left foot on the wheel, holding the strut. If you had upset the pilot he took the parking brake off and you were away. Different times I guess.

[megan]

a 172? now that's pushing it a bit! Was that one at a timeFlew the 1965 National Championship using two 172's lifting three jumpers at a time in the SA summer heat. Worked a charm, in those days the comps were style made from about 6,000, and spot landing made from about 2,000. You used what was available, our regular jump aircraft on the home DZ was a 180, in the capital city it was this very aircraft.


https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1500x1018/0183728_6e893517bceff92c4ae078ef294a85541ed41302.jpg

[cooperplace]

MEGAN,
There are also a couple of guys who have skydived from one aeroplane to another without a chute.
Ya gotta love that. What could possibly go wrong?

[Ant T]

Originally Posted by Fark'n'ell
MEGAN,
There are also a couple of guys who have skydived from one aeroplane to another without a chute.


Ya gotta love that. What could possibly go wrong?

Think this might be conflating a few different achievements…

A skydiver has jumped without a ‘chute and landed in a net.
A wingsuiter has jumped without a ‘chute and landed on a massive stack/line of cardboard boxes (really!) (Edit: I believe he did wear a parachute as a back up, but landed without deploying it…)
A skydiver has jumped, with a ‘chute for safety that was not released, from one aircraft into another aircraft.
Two pilot/skydivers have each jumped, with ‘chutes, from separate aircraft (leaving those aircraft with no-one on board), and attempted to enter the other aircraft and take control (one achieved it, the other did not, landed under his ‘chute, and the aircraft crashed, empty).

But, as far as I know, no-one has yet jumped from one aircraft to another without a back-up ‘chute.