Am I dreaming or have I seen all this before ?

[Disco Stu]

I well remember a similar scenario involving a TN B737 in May '89

&

I seem to also remember an even earlier incident (possibly a D9S) maybe 20-25 years ago, so how come it happens again ????

http://www.abc.net.au/news/australia/qld/metqld-12jun2003-18.htm (Source ABC News - link here)


Posted: Thur, 12 Jun 2003 15:17 AEST

Safety body investigates highway landing strip incident
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau is investigating an incident in north Queensland in which a Qantas Link passenger jet came within 200 metres of landing on the Bruce Highway, just north of Mackay.

Authorities say the pilot managed to take evasive action after air traffic controllers alerted him to the potentially fatal approach late last month.

The 717 service from Brisbane eventually made a safe landing at Mackay Airport about 8:30pm.

The bureau's deputy director of air safety investigation, Alan Stray, says an inquiry into the incident is underway .

"The aircraft was observed by the air traffic controllers to be diverging to the right of the runway approach, and when it was at an altitute of about 600 feet the controller instructed the pilot of the plane to climb," he said.

"The aircraft went around and then completed an uneventful landing."

"The controllers took very responsible, timely action, but our investigation will be looking at the broader issues."

I thought we were supposed to learn from "history", especially in this aviation game. :confused:

Disco Stu

[Kaptin M]

Hiya Stu - how the :mad: are ya??..and that beautiful woman of your's?

Yep, happened before - probably in low vis conditions (rain, low cloud) when, even with the wipers working flat out (oh for the days of rain repellant - that stuff was truly magic) - lights are a fuzzy blur.

With an ILS, the centre line tracking is pretty accurate, but with a VOR DME approach - even using IRS - the proximity of the highway lights to the airport, at Mackay, is miniscule.
Add to that the fact that the FIRST lights the pilots are probably going to see are those of the MRD (Main Roads Dep't) and NOT the runway lights, and now the "come in spinner" factor is introduced.

Certainly DME and track miles should give a clue, however in sh!tty conditions .5 or .7 of a mile can easily go unnoticed, or dismissed as an error.

Anyway full marks to the boys in the Tower.
You weren't on, by any chance, Binos???

[FLICKER]

Whats scary to me is that if Air Services had their way Regional Towers like this one would be closed

[Winstun]

Fix the damn problem then. Deintensify the highway lights or black out this section. Install REILs.:ok: Can't rely on ATC to save ass from CFIT all the time.

[Ralph the Bong]

Agreed. At least make a note of it in the route manual or whatever.This is real trap and I wonder how many times it has happend before..

[Binoculars]

Nope, wasn't me, Kaptin. Still more to come out of this one, but I'm not at liberty to say anything.

Edited to add that 89 Steps to Heaven, who wanders into these forums every so often, was the alert controller involved. Well done, that man.

[Chocks Away]

...like you said Stu, thats not the first time in Mackay ... RPT or otherwise.

:hmm:

[Bagot_Community_Locator]

It's called :

"IFR - I Follow Roads"

;)

[FiveTanks?]

The 73 lining up on Nebo Rd became part of a much larger barney of course. On a lighter note, I recall that legend at the time had it that on the go-round and subsequent circut, the only semblence of checks called was, 'Is the gear down". Reply, 'Yeah mate'.

[Disco Stu]

The 737 incident was 14th May 1989. I do not remember the outcome of either the airline's own investigation (got overtaken/lost in the events Aug 89 - Mar 90) or the then BASI report either.

Will await with interest the outcome of this one though.

G'Day Kap, Bino's

Disco Stu

[HotDog]

Not having operated Australian domestic, what kind of approach plates are you guys using here? Jeppesen in my last life, was very specific in warning of potential wrong approaches onto proximity airfields on the same alignement or highways?

[OzExpat]

Well isn't this some sorta reunion? :ok: We got the Kaptin, we got Binos and, o' course, Disco Stu! :eek: How ya doin guys... long time no see! Sorry that I can't add anything to the discussion, but I just needed to say g'day, I'm pished! :D

[Binoculars]

Hot Dog,

How do you define same alignment? The original TN 737 incident was apparently to a road aligned 190M. I say apparently because I believe the crew clammed up and took the 5th. Can't pre-empt the investigation on this latest one, but local rumour would indicate the result won't be any better. I know when I'm driving down said road, aircraft on final 14 cross me at an angle of at least 60 deg.

Kaptin M is on the bell I think. Amazing how many local pilots who have declared it would be easy to make the same mistake without factoring in low cloud and drizzle.

Hiya Kap, Stu. Keep up the good work, Oz. :ok:

[Woomera]

Eeer Binos, Post Count Police here pull over please sir.

Thank you sir, did you know that you were posting without the correct Post Count displayed and do you have any reason for this please sir?

[Kaptin M]

Hale, hale the gang`s all here - anyone seen Gaunty?? I have a sneeking suspicion he might have been peeking in :cool:

It`s been a while since I made the VOR DME approach at Mackay, however if true to form, like most VOR approaches, the MKY one more than likely also leaves you at an oblique angle to the runway, and probably with Mount Nebo Road more aligned to the final approach course than R/W 14.

Winstun`s idea of putting covers on top of the street lights is worth consideration, as might be having strobe "lead in" lights.

[Hostie Humper]

Was the aircraft actually doing the 14 VOR/DME or circling?
I can't see how you can line up on anything other than the RWY if you stay on the 14 VOR/DME. I have done this approach many times, and at the minima - approx 500ft AGL the RWY is only at a slight angle offset.
However if your circling at MK at night in marginal WX - then thats a different story. Dont try it, go for the VOR/DME.

[thumpa]

Look you experts can speculate all you bloody like. Why don't we wait for the report. Immediately you bloody all choose pilot error, how about the controller over reacting. Yeah that's right ,has a controller ever made a mistake?

[89 steps to heaven]

Yes controllers have made mistakes.

In this case, no.

Scariest incident I have seen.

Lots more to come out of this one!!!!!

[Binoculars]

But Officer Woomera, you don't understand... :ugh:

HH, the aircraft had just completed a 14 VOR/DME.

But fear not, seekers of the truth, the media has come to our rescue. Oh, you're gonna just love this one, guys and girls.

Daily Mercury 14th June


PASSENGER TERROR

TWO passengers at the centre of a potential air disaster are outraged at the wall of silence surrounding the incident.
World travellers Ran and Robyn MacDonald were sitting in the sixth row of the Qantas Boeing 717 which almost landed on the Bruce Highway south of the City Gates on May 29.

They know it might have been only a matter of seconds between them surviving and disaster.

The plane was just 200 metres (600 feet) off the ground when it aborted the landing.

Mackay aviation experts said it was likely, from that altitude, the plane would have taken only about 60 seconds to land and would have been been travelling between 180kmh and 200kmh on touch down.

The couple has travelled the world for the past 30 years.

They compared the fear they felt during the ordeal to that experienced while on board an Egypt Air jet air bus which aborted a take-off at high speed and skidded down the runway.

"We went in for a normal descent, although the pilot seemed to be on and off the throttle quite a bit," Mrs MacDonald said.

We were heading down at probably a 45-degree angle (!!!!!!) and then we felt the plane start to ascend steeply. It pushed us back in our seats a bit but I was still looking out the window," Mrs MacDonald said.

"I heard the landing gear come down before the first attempt and the cabin crew was told to be seated and prepare for landing a couple of minutes before we made the ascent.

"There was a public announcement and some of the passengers were talking among themselves before that, but after the announcement it was silent."

Mr MacDonald said the plane then circled for about 30 minutes before a second attempt to land was made.

"We were just up there circling in zero visibility. There was nothing but cloud. It was a complete white-out.

"It was real white-knuckle and sweaty palms stuff for me, very worrying. When I got home I made a note of it in my diary: May 29, scary landing.

"I kept thinking there must be something very wrong with landing systems if it took the pilot half an hour to be able to attempt another landing."

The couple called for an urgent review of landing safety procedures and scolded authorities for failing to inform the public or the Mackay Port Authority of the incident.

"This is a matter of public safety," Mr MacDonald said.

"It shouldn't be hushed up. This should have been brought to light immediately and the problems addressed.

"Mackay Port Authority, Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) and QantasLink need to urgently review and upgrade their landing and safety protocols," he said.

End of article.

I hardly need to add this was splashed on the front page.

The Daily Mercury thoughtfully provides a link where people grateful for their quality journalism can let them know how appreciated their efforts are. As a private citizen I'm sure others would like to join me in thanking them.

http://www.dailymercury.com.au/Pone.htm

[thumpa]

What a bloody disgrace. 89 steps were u one of the 2 world travellers interviewed. Sounds like he wasn't visual and did a bloody go around. Re entered the holding pattern for another go.

[89 steps to heaven]

Thumpa

Wait for the report. It will make an interesting read.

Not a world traveller.

I think there is something for everyone in this. :p
http://www.users.on.net/maddia/toon/toon.jpg

From Saturdays Daily Mercury

[VH-AJC]

Well at least the pic looks like a 717! :ok:

[Transition Layer]

Thumpa,

According to one of the other threads, 89 steps was actually the controller involved.

TL

[ccy sam]

From memory the 89 737 had conducted a DME arrival from the south and was circling on rwy 14. The EFIS MAP had shifted and showed the rwy in the wrong place. The wrong place lined up with a prominent road in MK. Come in spinner.

[Woomera]

Ullo Ullo Ullo Binos can I see your PPRuNing license then please, we don't want any trouble then do we sir?

Carrying on posting without displaying the correct Post Count is a serious offence, now you wouldn't want to set a bad example to the kiddies sir would we?

[Kaptin M]

"The EFIS MAP had shifted and showed the rwy in the wrong place." Was that in fact part of the finding, ccy sam? If so, I am surprised, as map ship usually occurs when outside effective update distance from nav aids - any map shift would have been corrected once the aircraft was close to the MKY VOR DME.

Would it be possible for Binos, or 89 steps to let us know what the ATI was at the time of this alleged incident, please? It would be interesting to know the wind direction and velocity as well as cloud and vis. An aircraft making a VOR-DME approach, with a final inbound offset (to the R/W) course, and additionally laying off drift, in low vis conditions at night, are all factors worth considering by those who can't see how THEY could ever do the same.
This is at least the third time (we know of) that an airline transport aircraft has done this - aircraft with "state of the art" equipment at the time, crewed by two experienced pilots.
It's time to analyse what factors are involved, so that a FIX suggestion can be proposed to the authorities.

Hey thumpa, "Immediately you bloody all choose pilot error.." - that is what the decision eventually WILL be - has to be, however, fortunately at least ONE critical link in a chain of events leading up to a possible accident, was broken.
That link being the communication from the MKY Tower upon which the crew took positive action in the form of a go around.

Well done all round chaps!!

Now about that 45 degree descent angle, that world traveller Mrs MacDonald mentioned.....:E

[MIss Behaviour]

Time Mr & Mrs Mac went back to feeding the chooks!

By the way I thought the previous incident 14 years ago was a DC9 - not that a/c type would've made a lot of difference.

[Keg]

Thanks Binos, email sent!!

Even if they were lined up on the highway, what a crap bit of journalism!! :(

[fruitloop]

******
I thought it was an F-28 !!!!
Cheers

[OzExpat]

I think yer right fruitloop, it DOES look like an F28... well, sorta! :E Not sure about the "flap-evators" tho... :p

[FiveTanks?]

Hows about I liven this subject up a bit.

MIss Behaviour. Why on earth would you remember the 89 Mackay go-round as a 9.

Amos, Kap M et al well remember this incident. It did not help the cause. The crew, at the time quite rightly took the advice of the AFAP to, as Binoculars said 'take the 5th'.

Unfortunately when the pilot group tried to expose the lack of experience and, dare I say it professionalism of the scabs, the bloody media were pointed immediately back to the Mackay go-round and how the piots were being protected by the AFAP.

On Mackay, I don't know. I've gone in there at night at least 30 times. The main worry being the fog that rolls in at about 5am in winter. Obviously, after the original ****-up I I have looked for things that might throw me!

[ferris]

Just for my own interest.........

How bad could this get? Could the aircraft impact light poles or some such thing, before the crew realised (they were lined up on the road)? Or would you get, say, 50' above the poles, then realise, then try and go round? I recognise answers will be speculation, but it appears there may be people qualified to speculate here..............

edited to remove ambiguity

[FiveTanks?]

Would you know if a pole was up your arse Ferris.

[MoFo]

A strobe at the threshold would take the guesswork out of it.

[FiveTanks?]

Mofo
I won't say you're right or wrong with the strobe contribution.

The original 73 ****up was blamed on two service stations a mile apart.

[fruitloop]

OzExpat,
Do you also remember March 90 ??:O

[ccy sam]

Kaptian M, you may remember back in 89 Australia still had its own DME system. The only places that had international DME were international airports. So the last upate for the FMC would have been departing Brisbane.

[FiveTanks?]

Ccy Sam, ex Flight West dropkick by the look of it.

Tell us a bit more about the DME mate!

[ferris]

If it was your tiny pole up my arse, then I probably wouldn't notice.

I was hoping for an answer.

[FiveTanks?]

Ferris

Being a POM and being by choice among the arab. No I guess you wouldn'nt notice it.

[Capt Fathom]

From memory, in those days only Brisbane, Cairns & Hamilton Is. had an international DME, Townsville had a Tacan.
Stuff-all updating north of BN.
Still, that's no excuse for lack of situational awareness, but certainly a factor.
I seem to recall the TN 737 incident was a MEL based crew...they rarely venured north of BNE..??

[Binoculars]

Seems this thread is headed the way of the majority of threads in D&G. What is it about us Aussies that makes an intelligent discussion without resorting to abuse so unusual?

Ferris, I thought your question was a reasonable one, given the qualification you put on it. I will hazard a guess in reply, and as an ATC with 19 years local experience but a non-pilot I leave myself wide open to those who say my opinion is worth nought.

In doing so I am also accepting the reports I have seen of the 1989 incident as truth. In that incident, a circling approach off a DME arrival from the south was being made when the tower lost visual contact with the aircraft as it disappeared behind cloud and drizzle. When the ATC next saw the aircraft it was about 1 nm west of the field still descending. I speculate not as to its altitude; those figures will be in a report somewhere, but I know the controller involved was alarmed and the description he gave me using local references was scary.

The Bruce Highway out of the centre of Mackay, known locally as Nebo Road, is a brightly lit dual carriageway, fully built-up on both sides with a large number of motels, shops and four sets of traffic lights in about three kilometres. When it reaches the southern outskirts of the city at the last set of traffic lights, the road veers left by a matter of 10 degrees or so, becoming known as Broadsound Road, and the lighting and traffic density reduce. It is still the Bruce Highway, Highway 1 to Brisbane.

It is my understanding that in 1989 the TN 737 was lined up on Broadsound Road, which points about 190M. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I have spoken to more than one local pilot who has expressed a lack of surprise at the initial mistake in crappy conditions. The simple act of journalising, or seeing what you expect to see, means the fact that the lights you are lining up are 50 deg out of alignment and there's no Vasis to be seen can apparently be easily overlooked. I imagine that is one of the reasons why two crew are required.

But I digress from your question. It is MY UNEDUCATED OPINION that in conditions that provide for visual contact to be made off the VOR/DME, given the volume of vehicular traffic, I cannot conceive of a two pilot jet crew getting below about 300ft on Nebo Road without major, massive mental alarms going off in both crew members. Terrain within the area described is not a factor.

Broadsound Road is more problematic.

I hope this helps. I'm trying to be informative without second-guessing the enquiry.

Kaptin M, I'll leave the actual ATI conditions for 89 Steps to describe should he wish to, since I wasn't there.

I believe the discussion about DME to be immaterial. MK did have both DME's in those days, and the difference in final alignment at the minima was negligible.

[hoss]

I dont know about you,but one of the first things I do as I become visual is check the VASIS.

I trust the Crew realised early on that they had no VASIS and carried out the missed approach:ok: .

Safe flying, hoss

[OzExpat]

fruitloop... at the risk of drifting off-topic here, I remember a few things about March 90. I was 21 months away from my penultimate go-finish at the time, flogging around in a C90 and doing a bit of instructing on the side. I take it that you're referring to something else tho, so I'll need a hint. Probably had too much spaak since then... :E

[Zone 5]

Wish I'd only done 30 night approaches into Mackay...... Probably managed that in a year....

Agree wholeheartedly with those that suggest lining up on the road is unlikely off the 14 VOR/DME, but a left hand circle from the south, now that's a different matter.

Problem is that the image of the Nebo Rd looks far more seductive as a runway than the runway itself does, from two thirds of the way around base. About the right distance, just the heading is 50 degrees short.

No problem I hear you say - my situational awareness will tell me it can't be the runway, because it's too soon and on the wrong heading. Yeah, well, it's the fifth sector of the duty day, it's night, MBZ, forecast a bit out, misty rain, scud close to the minima, tailwind around base, it's a black hole at the best of times. Your tippy-toeing the forty-odd tons of alloy round the turn, sweating the RoD and seeking that image of the promised land out of those tank-commander slots they call windscreens.

Then, just a little bit early, up pops a match for the image you've been seeking - a double row of bright yellow-white lights, a mile and a half long and about where you expected in the windscreen. If the remaining 5% of your mental capacity isn't able to to scan further around towards the left pillar, and connect with the other dim, double row of lights that is nowhere near as inviting, then as Kap M so adroitly puts it "Come in spinner..."

Have, on the odd occasion flying, training and checking watched some get suckered off momentarily, reduce AoB, then realise the mistake as the picture became less tilted, roll back in and carry on. No real harm done, and a valuable lesson learned. However, get wings level and hold for 5 secs, now it's looking grim....

The best defence seems to be make it a specific item in the brief, and have the support pilot check the ND HDG, and help out with appropriate advice. Map shift might be a factor, if you do your BWC that way, if the IRS's have some residual, then a VOR/DME update close in may still not get the map spot on...

There have probably been one or two more incidents in the past than have been described here.

Increase the intensity of the RWY lights, get some approach lighting, encourage the local louts to pop off the sodium lamps with their sluggy's.... ;)

[hoss]

Zone 5,

Fair enough,but I still ask the Crew "where were you in relation to the VASIS?:rolleyes: ". The crew should have been aware of the VASIS and its serviceability status. If there are 4 white lights in a row next to (perpendicular to) the highway I retract my comments:p .

Safe flying, hoss

[Kaptin M]

hoss, there are those days when you don't simply pop out of the cloud and go straight into visual conditions - re-read Z5's scenario for an accurate account of the way a non-precision approach unfolds.
With low level scud/mist, etc., it's quite possible that the vasis may be obscured, or that you have still not turned sufficiently far enough onto finals for it to be visual.

The guys (and gals) operating in the front seats of airline aircraft have been chosen from the best that was available, and are regularly trained and checked to standards set by the Government regualtory authority - although Mr and Mrs MacDonald's 30 years of flying around the world may well exceed that of ANY pilot!

That this is at LEAST the third time Mt Nebo Road has been like a light to a moth for airlines must tell us SOMETHING Here is a CFIT waiting to happen!

Yes, thanks to Mackay ATC, a possible incident/accident was AGAIN averted.

3 times lucky!

It's past time that something was done about it.

(In the meantime, all the aces who have carried out x number of approaches, and who are all too ready to let us know that THEY would NEVER make this error in judgement, should immediately contact QANTAS and Virgin Blue, to let them know of their immediate availability :ok: :rolleyes: )

[Dan Kelly]

I'm with Zone 5 here, I think it's unreasonable for us to pontificate from the comfort of some kind of stationary chair, as to what the crew should have done.

Rather we should learn a lesson, that circling approaches in poor wx and/or viz and/or at night are not a good idea, and perhaps take a little extra time to manage a RWY approach where possible.

As for the status of the VASIS, I still pass my medical without cheating and without corrective spactacles. I still also have trouble picking out what the VASIS is indicating in some lighting conditions, until I get relatively close to it.

[Hugh Jarse]

And those frickin PAPI's are a pain in the arse. From 5 miles I have trouble pickin' the reds from the whites, and I still pass my eye test too.

At least the VASIS gives you a "diagrammatical" (for want of better words) indication and can be interpreted more easily from far further out........

[Sperm Bank]

M tks for the offer but we already have too many ACES here at DJ, just ask them. I suspect QF have the same problem. People who criticise have little or no comprehension of what REAL bad wx approaches are about and the sometimes inexplicable circumstances we find ourselves in. No amount of briefing can prepare for every possibility so experience and common sense play a big part in the final decision making process. These offest approaches are a challenge at times to say the least and with a cross wind and poor vis require extra vigilance. Several 727's in the 80's have lined up on ANZAC hwy in ADL from a 05 approach only to be told to go around by the twr. It can and will happen to anyone given the right conditions.

The GPS rwy aligned approaches will hopefully see an end to all this non-precision app rubbish. Bring on the 21st century pls!

[Hostie Humper]

Kaptin M, I cant help but think you were having a bit of a dig at me with your last comment - and if it's warranted that's fair enough, I don't mind. I am certainly not claiming to be any "ace".

Maybe I should have spelled my point out a bit clearer for some, however I was simply stating that if YOU STAY ON THE 14 VOR/DME APP the RWY will be almost straight ahead at the mimima, with a slight left/right to align on centreline. Maybe Bob Hoover could find Nebo Rd with a loop from 400ft, and a 60deg Hdg change while rolling out.

However if you 'think' you are visual at 4 to 5NM out - and break off the Approach, then you have some prominantly lit roads come into play, and hence the situation we are discussing.

I am no expert, and not criticising anyone, however this is the method I adopted after the 89 incident. (staying on the VOR/DME until the minima). Its called learning from others experiences, and you Kaptin should know about that, you seem to have been around long enough!

[Binoculars]

All I want to say is that PPRuNe didn't exist in 1989, and this thread is a great example of why things are better now that it does.

Remember that pilots of all levels of experience are reading this; some of them may never fly into YBMK, but we can hope that a new generation of pilots and, for that matter, ATC's will learn lessons from this that can be applied anywhere else.

Abuse and self-aggrandisement tend to be ignored. Keep your input relevant and everybody gains.

Carry on, I'm learning.

[Zone 5]

Very interesting thread guys, pleasure to read.

Hoss, wasn't actually thinking about you when I wrote my post, just wanted to share my experiences at this location.

After long enough doing this you begin to see circling approaches in RPT jets a bit like navigating using triple position line astro fixes - a certain amount of inherent satisfaction when you get it right, but in this day and age - why bother? The quickest, most economical approach is the one that doesn't require a miss off the bottom. (or worse...)

Roll on straight in precision runway approaches everywhere, LNAV/VNAV with GPS. Yeah!!

cheers

[hoss]

No worries Zone 5.

Actually I agree with you about the reality of the circle-to-land scenario.

I was just stirring things up a bit playing 'Devils Advocate':) .

Safe flying, hoss

ps. yep, bring on the GPS/NPA's with LNAV and VNAV:ok:

[ccy sam]

Anyone know when CASA will drag itself out of the 1960s and allow RPT Jets with FMC to fly LNAV/VNAV GPS NPAs?

[Captain Custard]

CCY SAM,

You have been able to since 18Oct2000. Read CAO 40.2.1 Section 13a. You just have to have a jet that can do it. Of course, the current GPS NPAs are actually almost more difficult to do than a VOR/DME. The Foxtrot waypoint totally messes up would otherwise be a beautiful way of getting on the ground (oops runway).

Another thought: Given that the 14 VOR/DME starts from the north (obviously)/goes over the top to the north (17 track miles, 3 minutes at $100 a minute...), a far more commercially viable option (if coming from the south) is to do a 32 VOR/DME (or DME Arrival) then circle from the minima onto 14. Much less track miles! Especially if the wx isn't too bad...

So now we have command/crew judgment having to decide the relative merits of each option. I hope nobody will support "requiring" 10 mile finals for all approaches, but then again, the troops have to make the right call about the relative risk of circling, at night.

Also "Terminator" Winstun's idea of lead-in lights is a good one.

[amos2]

Well, I gotta tell ya custard...

I support 10nm/3000ft finals in high speed jet transport a/c on all approaches...

all professional pilots do...

If you don't, well, I guess you ain't too professional!!

[AIRSWING]

The experienced (A) pass on their experiences to the less experienced (B) making them more experienced (C) . On route checks we were told about the Nebo Rd trap at MKY .Night arrivals were often after the tower had gone home (affordable safety) .Current QLink arrivals must be during twr ops at night with alert ATC (D) on duty.

The new breed have not talked to A and have consequently not become C remaining B ,thank heavens for D.

If someone had not dicked Smith before he dicked us then there would not have been a D.

Is there a lesson here somewhere?

[Captain Custard]

Amos 2,

I suspect more professional than you'll ever be, sunshine, after a response like that.

BTW, how many NPAs with Circles have you done in your high speed jet transport?

[ccy sam]

The point is Capt Custard we don't want to fly a circling approach in a "high speed jet" if we can avoid it. One of the main causes of CFIT.

[Winstun]

Said blackout the highway and install REILs (2 strobes at the threshold). Outrageous that pilots are expected to perform circling approaches in the 21st century. I believe ICAO rates it something like a 3500% increase in CFIT risk over an ILS. If you can't make it on a straight-in non-precision, suggest you divert to alternate. Messing around circling is like flying through TS, probably gonna make it but one day its gonna bite your ass. The good public deserve a better deal.
thank heavens for D. Give me a friggin bone!:ooh:

[Hostie Humper]

A quick question for 717 drivers, do you fly VOR/DME Approaches in LNAV and VNAV? If not, what modes?

It has nothing to do with what happened in the Mackay incident, I am just curious.

Cheers.

[Captain Custard]

Terminator Winstun,

You may believe that ICAO rates circling apps as 3500% more dangerous than an ILS, but you're wrong. Try 7 times, or 700%. And if you want to install ILSs everywhere, then you can pay; I'd like to see you run a aviation business! It's affordable safety, old chap!

If you have a look at recent two-pilot high-capacity NPA accidents, almost all did not follow the basic tenets of good NPA airmanship and none would have passed the Flight ASafety Foundation's CFIT risk checklist. Like anything, if you don't konw what you are doing, then you stand to stuff it up. For those who regularly practise them, and who have robust, rigidly enforced SOPs, NPAs (including circling approaches) are just another arrow in the bag for conduct of safe, economical IFR operations. They're bloody good fun, too.

Which brings me back to the point of my earlier post: it's up to the captain to decide what arrow to use at the time. If the weather is bloody awful, I would contend that a circling NPA is a silly idea if a Straight In is available: by the same token, if the weather is well above the circling MDA, with good vis underneath, you would be doing your company a disservice by insisting on a full blown straight-in. What is wrong with a night circiut, for god's sake? Who is training you guys?

[CT7]

Don't know the area or its layout, but sounds like there are a few damn fine ideas surfacing about reducing the possibility of this happening again (here or anywhere where this could be a hazzard) .... depending upon good-ole CASA or Air Services or whoever.

[amos2]

Don't really know where you're coming from Custard!

I would have thought that it was obvious that any opposition to circling approaches, versus straight in, was based upon min. vis conditions!

Then you prattle on about "affordable safety"!

I think you might be out of your depth here!

[OzExpat]

I think that Captain Custard has the nub of the issue here...

For those who regularly practise them, and who have robust, rigidly enforced SOPs, NPAs (including circling approaches) are just another arrow in the bag for conduct of safe, economical IFR operations.
Is circling, or night circling, checked in sim rides?

amos2... The concept of "affordable safety" has existed in Oz for a real long time, so it's far from "prattle" to mention it. In fact, it's a salient issue. There are a number of realities associated with it as well, such as the cost of ILS equipment, the cost of earthworks for the ILS, maybe even relocating taxyways, etc. And for what... a couple of times a year? If that?

I'm not saying that "affordable safety" is right or even fair, but it IS the way things are. Where I am, circling approaches are more usual than any other type of approach. By night and day. Often in "black hole" conditions. But, like Captain Custard says, regular practice and appropriate, properly enforced SOPs helps to keep the operation safe. I'd add a few things to that list, like a measure of animal cunning and a sense of self-preservation.

I feel sure that, if circling approaches constituted an unacceptable safety risk, insurance companies would be the first one to scream for change. That is the most likely scenario for ICAO and regulators to abandon circling approaches ... and I really don't see that happening.

[Winstun]

Custard, even that you know what you are doing and that you get off on it, the fact remains: non-precision and circling approaches are significantly riskier. As Amos points out we're talking about min vis conditions, and prancing around maneuvering 'visual' at night in marginal vis, maybe with turbulence, with 400' terrain clearance: you are rolling the dice :ooh: A better pilot than you (or even me) has dogged it on a non-precision or circling approach. Not sure bout your figures, even so...this old practise, like NDB approaches, needs to be abandoned sooner rather than later. We are (most of us) living in a modern world. Not suggesting installing ILSs everywhere, in 2003 there is ample affordable technology / instruments available for any public transport aircraft capability for GPS RNAV with VNAV glideslope straight in approaches. :ok:

[amos2]

Well, I guess it's fairly obvious now Oz, that you and Custard are talking G/A here, which I didn't realise, so I would suggest in future that you, he, and others from those ranks, clarify your position rather than give the impression that you're talking airline ops!

Whether you like it or not, there is a big difference between the two.

And that's not to denigrate what you and he do.

I did the same for many years!

[Captain Custard]

Amos 2, sorry to disappoint you but I'm talking RPT jets in regional operations (ie non-ILS runways) here. That's exactly what was happening at MKY wasn't it? Just out of interest, perhaps you could give us a quick rundown of your experience in these approaches and in what aircraft you do them in?


We don't need to talk about G/A, because they do thousands of these things every year with obviously very little fuss.

Winstun, I wasn't suggesting circling in min vis at night, and you CANNOT circle at 400ft AGL at night in a C aircraft: it's illegal (unless the MDA happens to be at 400ft AGL, and I can't think of a circling MDA that low where I fly), so keep the argument on the straight and narrow, will you? I was merely pointing out some real-world commercial realities that have to be decided upon before commencing an approach of this type.

Don't get me wrong guys, I'd love to do GPS NPAs everywhere, especially when I get tied up with night effect, moon effect and all the other effects that make my ADF needles go round in circles, but the reality is that the captain makes a judgement call on the approach to be flown based on the expected or actual weather having cognisance of the additional cost to the operation of flying out the opposite direction to the inbound track for 15nm and back again juts for a Straight-In. He then is responsible for the outcome. As Ozexpat pointed out, I suppose we'll stop doing circles when the insurers (or CASA) deems them to be unsafe, and that ain't about to happen just yet.

And sorry about the Affordable Safety quip! I should have used "commercial reality", but I couldn't resist using RHs classic phrase to make the point!

[amos2]

I thought I made it quite clear that I don't do circling approaches Custard!

Nobody needs to!

Why do you continue to question that?

[5miles]

As usual, this forum has denigrated into a shouting match. Why can't we all just get along?? :}

Obviously this is a problem regardless of who is to blame for the reported incidents. Wouldn't a relatively inexpensive and quick solution be to cap the road lights.

Surely with the local media attention the latest event attracted, it couldn't be too hard to get the applicable council or roads authority to at least consider the option. Wouldn't surprise me if Mr & Mrs Mac didn't have a hand in there somewhere or were authorities on local govenment.

Why do road lights need to illuminate upwards of 20ft AGL anyway? Must be to warn pilots that its NOT a runway.


Blue skies, you'll need em. :ok:

[Winstun]

but the reality is that the captain makes a judgement call on the approach to be flown based on the expected or actual weather having cognisance of the additional cost to the operation of flying out the opposite direction to the inbound track for 15nm and back again juts for a Straight-In. He then is responsible for the outcome. Custard, more than one captain has made a bad judgement call that he thought was a good call. That he is responsible for the outcome is no comfort to the dead pax or their relatives. These approaches are already identified as too risky and need to be outlawed. You will be in the grave by the time CASA to catch up with reality (look at NAS). Insurers don't know whats really going on....:uhoh:

[Pete Conrad]

At the end of the day who was flying the aeroplane and who was monitoring azimuth guidance or was it a case of trying to remain visual in conditions that weren't?

I'm sorry but if you play by the rules and follow the procedures and SOP's then you really shouldn't have this kind of thing happening.

You should all buy a copy of the book Tombstone Imperative, the truth about air safety. Anyone that has an idea about the risk factors in this country and the trend toward a major crash will see the similarities in that book.

Over the last ten years we have come so close to a major accident it is not funny, granted that other airlines have lined up on roads in the past, it's happened in Mackay, Cairns and Adelaide, it is however a disturbing event this Mackay incident because IT IS STILL HAPPENING. So instead of talking about the virtues of circling approaches and ICAO, the regulatory authority should go through the airline concerned and sort it out before they crash an aeroplane.

A Question for the regulator, why are major airlines getting away with safety deficiencies? Why over the last two years have we seen numerous uncommanded engine shutdowns on the 717, cases of crew selecting flap rather that landing gear after takeoff and now a near landing on a highway? These are the events that have made the press, how many other safety deficiencies don't and at the end of the day, nothing is done about it.

Air safety is political, until the federal government and regulator get off their arses and become pro-active in avoiding a crash then we may actually avert one. I give it inside 5 years we'll see a major hull loss in this country.

This is not intended to be a flame post, but why are we seeing the same serious incidents occurr over and over again, and how long will it be before we run out of luck?

[OzExpat]

I see that you prefer to kill the messenger than absorb the message amos. That's one way to dodge the issue, I suppose.

[Binoculars]

Have your arguments about whether circling approaches should ever be made, even in CAVOK conditions, that's your problem to sort out.

But with all the shooting of the messenger that's going on here, one thing appears to have been forgotten. The last incident in MK was NOT off a circling approach, it was off a 14 VOR/DME.

Can we get back to the facts?

[Captain Custard]

Binos,

Yeh, thanks for that.

Here's a good contributing cause; given that we HAVE to do NPAs at some places...

Jepp do not put the final approach track alignment on their charts, unlike ASA, which have a small pic on the side of the chart which shows where the actual aircraft track goes: very good for working out what the hell you're going to see at the MDA. Perhaps this may have helped the boys with orientation, especially if they were not "locals".

Another case of ozzies doing it better than yanks??

[amos2]

let's not get circling approaches mixed up here with a normal circuit.

In cavok conditions why would one circle at the MDA?

[Kaptin M]

Unfortunately Amos, circling approaches are still a very necessary, and commonly executed part of life in this part of the world, generally due to the terrain at the reciprocal end to which the let down to minimum is executed - but not to the 400' as Winnie says. That used to be the minima for G.A. aircraft from memory.

But whether it's a straight in, from an oblique final approach, OR a circling approach, my suggestion for implementing strobes in Mackay was along the same lines as those in place in Vila, Vanuatu (remember there, Amos?), and Kagoshima, Japan.
This is a line of single strobe lights, several kilometres in length if a circling approach is needed, that leads the pilot from the MDA position to the threshhold.
Admittedly they ARE a bit of a pain in low cloud, rainy conditions, because of the "bounce" from the lights - but they're sure as hell easy to follow, and can't be confused with road lighting.

And make for AFFORDABLE SAFETY.

Winstun's idea of also covering the highway lights is practical, and inexpensive.
Have a friggin' bone, boy!! :ok:

BTW, Binos, is the Mackay airport locally or Federally maintained...so that we know where you should send these recommendations. :uhoh:

[HotPete]

Re strobe lead-in - also the old Hong Kong

[fruitloop]

Kaptin M
Memories of Vila,(great as long as the power was working)Were you the LHS driver the night that the Island "disappeared" for a few minutes ??What about the "eeaww"damper in the special info book.Yep great place for a engine change..
Cheers

[Binoculars]

Kaptin M,

Federal control over MK airport ceased a long time ago. The memory stretches, but it was probably 88 when we first became a "GBE". Could be wrong there.

Now owned and run by Mackay Port Authority including all lighting. AirServices' only connection is ATC and maintaining our radio gear and the radar/navaids.

Cheers.

[Disco Stu]

Forgive me for using Pprune to highlight this incident in the hope that we all will learn from it.

It saddens me when I realize that aviation, aviation safety, aviation regulation and the airline system has degenerated into what we see displayed in not only this thread but most Pprune threads these days. A few old stagers that know what they are talking about seemingly overwhelmed by allot that don't know anything. If they did know anything about this game they certainly wouldn't be expousing the dribble they have been.

The incident in May '89 was bad enough, but to have it repeated 14 years later says volumes for safety education and safety regulation in Oz. I might just print this and keep it till May 2017 for the next episode ;)

Incase I haven't made myself clear, a few of you would be advised not to talk aviation until you actually have some experience in it ('cos your posts indicate Nil experience at this time).:ok:

Disco Stu
:*

[Kaptin M]

Conversely, Stu, your thread has brought a lot of "stuff" to the surface that COULD be beneficial in helping to prevent, at worst an accident (CFIT), and at the very least, present some info to the lesser experienced pilots, and some ideas that the Mackay City Council might consider for implementation.....after, Binos' and 89 steps submission to them :ooh:

The subject has been thrown around here (on PPRuNe), in an attempt to try to FIX a known problem area, rather than just pointing a finger at the crew.
I believe that if the 2 aforementioned gentlemen WERE to present some of the more relevant posts to the local pollie, or the Council, then it would be remiss of them if they were not to take some positive action, esp. if nothing were done, and a similar "event" occurred in the future.

How about it guys?
Let's capitalise on all the time spent key tapping here, to make a positive input into Oz aviation safety!

[Disco Stu]

Good suggestion Kap. This incident must rattle into action all involved, pilot organisations, the Airline/s, Mackay Council, The QLD Transport (Road) people, the ATSB and even CASA (remember they claim to be a Safety Authority). I believe now that an incident has happened if nothing is done to manage a demonstrated risk then all of the above leave themselves open to a future allegation of failing their duty of care.

Mind you nothing appears to have happened since the May '89 incident (cos it happened again) so why would one believe anything will happen now. I'm not very confident am I?

Disco Stu
Hey Kap :ok:

[Binoculars]

Funny how things disappear, isn't it? I turned this thread up accidentally on a search for something entirely different.

For those who took part in the thread and who haven't been appraised of the action taken, in case any of them are still interested, there has been an installation of strobe lights at the threshold of 14.

The only problems have been related to the brightness of the strobes. There are three stages of runway lights at MK, and the brightness of the strobes increases exponentially with each stage. Stage three lights have the locals complaining about intrusive strobes, so a lot of Port Authority work has gone into putting shields at correct angles etc, and if we forget to lower the lights from 3 to 2 after dusk on a clear night, they're fairly overpowering to aircraft on final.


The end result is though, that an improvement was achieved through publicity. Maybe Dunnunda played a part? :ok:

[tipsy]

Thanks for the update Binoculars.

I am sure Disco Stu (Banned.. Persona Non Grata) will smile when I tell him your news.

tipsy:p

[Binoculars]

I did see that and wonder, tipsy. Our gentle DS banned? While idiots like....XXX-XXX and QQQQ QQQQQ still contribute their ******??

Tell him to PM me! ;)