Great Barrier Airlines Wheels Up [Archive]

GAMAN

17th Jun 2003, 07:11

Okay folks here are the facts from an inside point of view.
The aircraft was on an engineering test flight when it sustained some damage to the main gear door.
The aircraft and pilot have just returned from overseas.
It is now operating on a regular basis for the company.
The cherokee six incident was an aircraft not operated by the company and was flown by a PPL from an aeroclub. I know this a "rumour" site but you should try and get your facts straight.

nzer

17th Jun 2003, 08:21

On the up side one more Nomad out of the air can't be a bad thing !!

Uncle Billy

17th Jun 2003, 16:36

Come on GAMAN.

Are you trying to cover this up?

I have heard from a very reliable source that like you say the aircraft was on a maint flight, (to test the gear warning horn wasn't it)?
The pilot then returned to AA to land but forgot to put the gear down! OOOOPS!!!

But wait it got better. Once the pilot heard the undercarriage pods scraping along the runway decided to feed it the fat and go around and in the process did a Singapore Airlines arse scrape! ******!!

He was however lucky enough to get the wheels down and land which probably saved his arse from the big DCM.

GAMAN - You are right this is a "rumour" site but you of all people should know how small this industry is and you cant cover a @#ck up like that!

But nice try!

CT7

20th Jun 2003, 04:46

Well, from the holding point at A3 it looked a bit spooky!

Well covered (or recovered!) up by then saying there could be a gear problem to the tower, doing the required fly-by then landing.

Mr Proachpoint

20th Jun 2003, 10:09

Did the pilot not tell the tower that he'd had a wheels up? I'm sure theres a compulsory runway inspection that's required after an incident like that.

I'd hate to think that a piece of Nomad might have been lying on the runway afterwards waiting for some unlucky ******(s) to run over/suck up. Look what happened to Concorde..............

It sounds like a cover up to me but what bugs me is that the simple mistake of not 'dangling the dunlops' could have put others at risk. If this was reported to the tower in the accurate and timely manner in which it demands, CT7 might have also written about the hassle of being held at A3 while the runway was looked at. Was it done?

Does AIAL know of all this? I notice there is no mention of it on the CAA website under their weekly accident/incident reports. It may have been seen by the operator as worthy of hushing up as not being important. I read the CAA's site often and even something like a paraglider pilot breaking his ankle seems to get reported. If a broken ankle is worthy of reporting, surely this is too. Sure, the driver might feel a bit embarrassed by it all but I'm sure both he and the operator has a responsibility to see beyond that and look at the bigger picture. If a gear door or even a small part of it was left on the runway, I'm sure Murphy would spot it and have a field day.

A cock-up is forgiveable but a cover-up isn't.

Perhaps it was reported and the runway was inspected etc etc. If so I withdraw my comment. If not, the question of airmanship (or lack of it) is raised.

the maori mobster

20th Jun 2003, 12:08

hey GAMAN

what a F*&K UP

i heard you fella's were trying to cover it by saying it was an engineering test flight.

according to the Massey Home Built Aircraft Guide to Flying and you were in fact trying testing the gear wouldn't it be cheaper to put the flying waka on the old eel spears and let the gear hang out to see if it works?

coming back from overseas? is that what you call Great Barrier Island. the insect island.

what sort of place is GBA? do you guys work with Sunair Aviation out of Tauranga as well. i hear they turn there master switches off to keep the noise down!!!

fly real fast

20th Jun 2003, 12:48

MM,

It wasnt a line pilot at Sunair who selected the master switch off. Was the quality assessor or something of the sort. Then again, that's Ardmore for you

CT7

20th Jun 2003, 18:50

All I saw was the go around from about 2 - 3 feet. Not the scrape (if any). Man, that was enuf!

Two Cocks

5th Jul 2003, 08:26

Good morning

Well I've heard some interesting rumours from various people regarding the undercarriage problems with the Great Barrier Airlines plane.

CAA doesn't know about it. I thought as a responsible operator that it was in their best interest to do so. Top management decision that one.

If in fact you were doing an "engineering test flight" then why do it at Auckland Airport. If you you were testing the gear then surely if you had a problem you wouldn't test it at an International Airport? Why not North Shore where your engineering base is?

The logic behind that decision is beyond words.

If infact the real reason was the pilot forgot to lower the landing gear then this would explain some reasoning behind it. After one of those long flghts from the South Pacific Islands in a Nomad the pilot must have been quite tired.

Fly Real Fast - quite right, Sunair person was their Safety Officer. And I hear he didn't get fired!!!

Well he must be management material then...

Dances_With_Clouds

5th Jul 2003, 11:06

Just thought I'd better clear this matter up before it turns ugly and the boys/girl at Sunair get a worse rep. than they already have.

The incident regarding the QA manager happened before he was employed by Sunair (whilst he was instructing at Ardmore Flying School). It had nothing to do with Sunair or any of the pilots that work there.

By the way... he no longer works for Sunair. Officially finishes at end of month.

fly real fast

5th Jul 2003, 13:47

Dances with clouds.

Tell me about the bad rep those pilots at Sunair have? Havent heard any rumours since this time last year.

Did the safety officer resign or get fired? Suppose management should have done their homework prior to employing him. Must be a job coming up then? Might send in my CV.

Luke SkyToddler

5th Jul 2003, 14:35

Hey Sunair pilots have a GREAT rep :ok:

So good in fact, that they can STILL get into Cathay after they've just been sacked for running a partenavia out of gas and parking it on the beach :E

Go Sunair!!

Duff

5th Jul 2003, 17:40

LS Please tell me you are kidding. Is this thew same person that failed IFR Nav 7 times?

Sqwark2000

5th Jul 2003, 18:08

Duff, it is the same person you are thinking of, but don't fret, she got the DCM (& bar) from the Adelaide training phase.

Possibly for throwing a wild wobbly about not being able to attempt each test at least 3 times :}

S2K

Luke SkyToddler

5th Jul 2003, 20:37

Yeah but : the point is, how can a person get their basic level of mental capability absolutely torn to shreds in an official accident report (large sections of which will no doubt get reprinted in human factors textbooks for many years to come, http://www.taic.org.nz/aviation/02-006.pdf ), get their dodgy history splashed all over the front pages of every newspaper in NZ, become the laughing stock of kiwi GA, get sacked from job and slink out of country in disgrace, next thing you know, this same person has just breezed through one of the most notoriously difficult and thorough airline assessments in the world without any questions being asked?

And the story goes, she was already down in Adelaide halfway through a type rating, and was only uncovered when one of the pax who was on the accident flight heard about it, got understandably p!ssed off and sent a fax of the TAIC report to CX flight ops?

Questions really have to be asked.

Duff

5th Jul 2003, 23:03

Just read the report and I must correct myself. It was 6 attempts at IR Nav:rolleyes:

However, from what I see there are a number of exams she couldn't get first time including all PPL's!!

How do these people even get considered for interviews with the majors.

A frustrated Duff:confused: :confused:

slice

6th Jul 2003, 00:03

Luke & Duff, as far as I can see when it comes to getting interviews at CX (for SO positions at least) it seems to be 'who you know, not what you know'. They do, after all explicitly ask if you can provide referees from within Cathay on the application form. A bit too much nudge nudge wink wink perhaps? :E

currawong

6th Jul 2003, 07:15

This is pretty alarming stuff fellas!
Could be a subject for a new thread, perhaps?
:ok:

Dances_With_Clouds

6th Jul 2003, 11:31

U know wot I'm talking about.

How many of the sunair boys/girls have got into any of the regionals in the last 24 months??? They have some of the most experienced (and might I add best) pilots in the country, yet no one seems to want them.

Re: the QA position, from wot I've heard u have to be under 25 and work for less than $20/hr less than 3 days a week and meet all the CAA crap requirements.

fly real fast

7th Jul 2003, 04:03

D_W_C.

Seems that MANAGEMENT have made large errors in regards to employing. A beach landing, no thorough background checks on 'potential' employees, dodgey operating quality assessors etc etc. Heard last CAA audit went perfectly though.

Things will start moving shortly for the pilots. Seems most places are pretty stagnant at moment. Would have thought there would have been some movement in the company over the last 24 months though. Has events of the past affected/ still affect the current crop?

Two Cocks

7th Jul 2003, 06:03

I think this post is going away from the Wheels Up incident from Great Barrier Airlines.

But anyway, to all those brave SunAir Pilots, hold on tight, I know Eagle have a funny hiring system but you will get through eventually. How long can they look over good pilots before it comes to bite them in the butt again like it did a few years ago?

Split Flap

7th Jul 2003, 18:20

That would be pretty sad if some sort of managment upset was resricting chances for the pilots, but if they are getting interveiws then at least the airline is willing to take a look so can't be that bad?
NZGA is a cesspit isn't it.

Hang in there things will be happening soon.

BattleSTARGalatica

8th Jul 2003, 05:25

Luke

That "dispute" you are talking about between him and that other guy doesnt have anything to do with that pending court case between him and that other guy for "promises" and "favours" does it???

That other guy isnt well liked in the industry. Maybe that's why that guy is where he is today.

stillalbatross

12th Jul 2003, 21:38

Only just got my adobe acrobat to work and have a look at the report. I forget how many times I have heard someone ask what use Polar Stereographic chart plotting is, or what use are about a million other things out of the CAA exams. So I wonder how the TAIC can drag someones ability to pass exams and link it to an aviation incident? And then have the nerve to suggest that by sitting exams people get good at them and that's a bad thing. How else do you get through them? Why do PPSC and Bristol have exam crammers in the weeks leading up to the UK CAA exams? Funniest thing is that there is a metroliner that suffered a double engine failure (when crew shut down the wrong one) a few reports down and I don't see the TAIC saying "well he only got a bare pass in systems so he really shouldn't be flying" Unbelievable.

Luke SkyToddler

13th Jul 2003, 05:53

Yeah we all know that the actual content of the exams is utter b*ll*cks ... but I think it's fair to say they are a screening procedure.

They are trying to draw a connection between someone whose memory of non-important facts goes to pieces in the relatively moderate pressure of an exam room, and saying that that person is perhaps going to be more likely to have a total attack of headless chicken when things go wrong in the aircraft. I think that's a fair call.

Like in this case. It's easy to judge after the event but the bottom line is a perfectly good engine stopped turning on an air transport flight, she b*llocksed up the engine failure trouble checks and and then when that didn't work out she didn't even FEATHER! ******! That is not a go-for-the-checklist item at the end of the day, it is the most important memory item of all time when handling piston twins around hills and terrain, and it is supposed to be as natural as breathing. That is all it would have taken to keep the thing flying. The end result was an uncontrolled rapid descent towards high terrain in IMC :eek: :eek:

I don't know what was going through her head as the aircraft was falling out of the sky but I can tell you for sure that it was blind luck that saved that girl and her pax. There was a big black cell overhead at the time, the bases were bloody low up there all that day and if she had been just a few hundred yards further north of track she would have hit the hills before getting visual.

*shivers*

flyby_kiwi

13th Jul 2003, 08:02

Dances With Clouds:

I was around AFS the time that the guy behind the whole master switch ordeal was. He did train as an instructor (not sure if he finished) but was given his marching orders before he ever made it onto the payroll. He then went to another school and then to another then a long time later I read about his incident that got him banned from AFS in the news to no surprise.

(Sorry to steer the thread off topic)

stillalbatross

13th Jul 2003, 08:23

Sorry Luke, still disagree. As I said in my post there are also a large number of exGA pilots that have done some pretty stupid things and are now flying rather larger aircraft having dropped out of school early and struggling with exams. Why stop at the aviation exams, why not look at the UE, school certificate and University exam passes. They didn't do a degree? Then maybe they shouldn't be flying because we don't know how they cope under extended stress. If she had done her helicopter exams and passed those as well, would that make her a better pilot?

It is poor habit to use past exam performance here and not in any other accident report. And to use the term "Mistake" in an impartial accident report is utterly laughable. Can you imagine these people doing the Erebus accident or even the Dash-8 at Palmy? Why has the TAIC and CAA changed so much? Any lawyer after our blood would happily hang his hat on this stuff.

BattleSTARGalatica

16th Jul 2003, 04:04

so what you are saying is "Have a potentially disastorious incident which is completely your fault and you will get an airline job?" Staying where I am thank you

Cypher

16th Jul 2003, 08:08

No,

Have a potentially disastorious incident which is completely your fault, and get through it by "Forrest Gumping" your way through the incident... then you get an airline job!

Maybe the airlines believe that these particular people that sand hills is talking about, haven't run out of good luck yet....

though I'd love to see a B767 bounce off a roof of a car! That would make quite a sight.. ;)

BattleSTARGalatica

16th Jul 2003, 13:17

Reading through incident reports on Caa website today.... Damn there is a multitude of GBA incidents. What happened to all those people? Airlines I bet. Where do they source their pilots? I'm led to believe they are North Shore Aeroclub? The incident about the BN2 was particularly alarming. :mad: IDIOTS!!!

nike

17th Jul 2003, 05:18

BSG, could you put a hyperlink through to these reports, I had some trouble finding any of them. Were they recent?

danke veilmals

SepsOff

18th Jul 2003, 15:10

not sure about the bounce off the car but the twotta driver had daddy in the firm, an original 'gang of 100' member no less!

stillalbatross

19th Jul 2003, 08:06

Fact of the matter is. When attempting to compile a report on a light aircraft accident where there is no damage to the aircraft the investigator is relying a lot on what you have to say. It appears if you say anything more than "I was happy at 9000 ft and now it's parked on the road" these days you will get hung out to dry in a report that 10 years ago (or in any other western country) was not this judgemental. It's you career on the line.

no_HANDLE

21st Jul 2003, 11:58

The pilot of the banana beach ldg about 1 year ago should be hung out to dry, if it was me i would be expecting it.

I was flying at the time of this incident and had just explained to that pilot about 10mins before hand how to x-feed the tanks (all bananas have a slightly different system) this banana was very easy. left tank left engine, left tank right engine ect.
The pilot in question didn't even attempt a x-feed and when the engine did fail from fuel starvation, did nothing about it.

A flight test was carried out after the incident by a tauranga A-Cat, the a/c was at MAUW and the engine was shut down, with cruise pwr on the live engine (in other words if you did nothing). The banana was able to maintain a 100-150fpm rod. till it joined the circuit. (work it out from 6000ft, thats 30+mins flight time).

The pilot stuffed up every thing you are taught from day one, and is now taking CAA to court for deformation and loss of income.

Who is really in the wrong??????
:yuk: :yuk:

CT7

21st Jul 2003, 13:27

It's not often I back the CAA, but here....

I mean we all make mistakes, but I ask you.....

prospector

21st Jul 2003, 16:47

Stillalbatross,
Exam results have been published in accident reports on previous occassions, one that comes to mind was in Wanganui some 35 to 40 years ago. It was based on many of the same criteria that has been presented in the case brought up in this thread. The end result, from memory, was that if the theory exams were missed three or four times that was your lot. No more attempts were allowed. Made sense then, and still does now.

Prospector

Junior Senior

24th Jul 2003, 07:00

ref Sunair, they hold a strong backing in the upper level so I'm not sure what's happened with Eagle.?? I've made my views known to a couple of those who have influence here.... I wont let the cat out of the bag just yet though. As for the Quality Manager, I also see his signatures on some particular boeing manuals, from over a year ago... seems like he may have his finger in a few pies. 100% compliance is impressive given what I heard the situation was this time last year!

no_HANDLE

24th Jul 2003, 17:36

Junior Senior,
Would you be able to let that poor cat out it"s sufficating :D

I'm sure there are a few Sunair pilots on line who would like to know. The mood around the camp reguarding that subject is not a good one at the moment.

Cheers :D

randyduck

24th Jul 2003, 19:45

I dont know what the cat in the bag story is.. although JS may have an indication on the 1st August. I think J.S. is leading a few monkeys up a few trees too early. Patience.. all will be revealed on about the 18th of August ;) - subject to mgmt being able to stick to their wall planner.