Virgin 737 in near miss
Just Binos
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mackay, Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dingo084; apart from requesting that all posts that disagree with you be removed as speculative drivel, do you have any valid points to raise? I think this thread is supposed to allow intelligent posts from either side. Where is yours?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPRUNE IS VITAL and IMPORTANT
Dingo084
Sorry, but I get a heap of help from infomation from pprune. If you doubt the bonafides of some people here at least apologise to HOTDOG who succinctly explained the TCAS AR limits.
I am sorry to say but it is persons like you not the ATC, Captains and Techs that bring this important information exchange forum to a lower level than it deserves.
If not for this thread I would not know what happened to VB until the ATSB report and that would be too late for NAS 2c.
To Others here,
Do not be defeatists, your imput is vital to some who are fighting these airspace changes based on proper risk analysis and have the ability and position to be heard.
To be truthful, I thought the Big Sky would ensure an incident like this would be months in coming and not such a near thing.
Lies and stupidity come unstuck when the resulting system produces the predetermined outcome, that the perpetrators try to say does not exist. The earth is not flat, the sun does not revolve around the earth and NAS, in its present form is, less safe by such a degree that the system will demonstrate its flaws.
My real fear is that if the Deputy Prime Minister can't hear alarm bells now, I wonder how close does it need to get?
Woomera, please keep this thread open we need the info and this issue is vital to our industry. Also keep backups of the NAS threads, as when this issue comes before a judiciary it will be helpful.
Let us all hope it is the Federal Court and not a Coronial Inquest. The money for the costs of a challenge is not the problem nor is the scientific evidence, the nefarious actions by some will speak for themselves.
The problem is to find the legal avenue to get persons protected by Soveriegn Powers before the court.
When that avenue opens and there is an even playing field, we will see how the processes and contradictions of the NAS plans and implimentation stands up to a QCs questioning before an independent intelligent and enquiring mind.
Until then keep providing what facts you can it is very important.
Cheers and thanks
Sorry, but I get a heap of help from infomation from pprune. If you doubt the bonafides of some people here at least apologise to HOTDOG who succinctly explained the TCAS AR limits.
I am sorry to say but it is persons like you not the ATC, Captains and Techs that bring this important information exchange forum to a lower level than it deserves.
If not for this thread I would not know what happened to VB until the ATSB report and that would be too late for NAS 2c.
To Others here,
Do not be defeatists, your imput is vital to some who are fighting these airspace changes based on proper risk analysis and have the ability and position to be heard.
To be truthful, I thought the Big Sky would ensure an incident like this would be months in coming and not such a near thing.
Lies and stupidity come unstuck when the resulting system produces the predetermined outcome, that the perpetrators try to say does not exist. The earth is not flat, the sun does not revolve around the earth and NAS, in its present form is, less safe by such a degree that the system will demonstrate its flaws.
My real fear is that if the Deputy Prime Minister can't hear alarm bells now, I wonder how close does it need to get?
Woomera, please keep this thread open we need the info and this issue is vital to our industry. Also keep backups of the NAS threads, as when this issue comes before a judiciary it will be helpful.
Let us all hope it is the Federal Court and not a Coronial Inquest. The money for the costs of a challenge is not the problem nor is the scientific evidence, the nefarious actions by some will speak for themselves.
The problem is to find the legal avenue to get persons protected by Soveriegn Powers before the court.
When that avenue opens and there is an even playing field, we will see how the processes and contradictions of the NAS plans and implimentation stands up to a QCs questioning before an independent intelligent and enquiring mind.
Until then keep providing what facts you can it is very important.
Cheers and thanks
Last edited by WALLEY2; 5th Dec 2003 at 22:47.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Oz
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't have the time/inclination/responsibility to highlight the speculative drivel in this thread.
However on just a couple of points
WALLEY2 offered
"Sorry, but I get a heap of help from infomation from pprune."
&
"If not for this thread I would not know what happened to VB until the ATSB report and that would be too late for NAS 2c."
WALLEY, yes I agree there is a heap information on pprune but to credit this thread with now knowing what happened to VB is dangerously stretching things just a bit far. Sensible people directly involved in incidents don't normally jump on pprune to air their unique knowledge. It's a rumour network
Binoculars, I have no side to play. My observation was of the degree and volume of irrelevant, assuming, ill informed and wildy speculative drivel that permeated this thread. Yes I know, it is only a rumour network. I am appalled that somebody could actually believe that they know all about the VB incident having read about it on pprune.
Like it says down the bottom of these pages
As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent.
A sensible person would test thoroughly anything they read on pprune before giving it any credence, something I fear has not been done on this thread.
ding
However on just a couple of points
WALLEY2 offered
"Sorry, but I get a heap of help from infomation from pprune."
&
"If not for this thread I would not know what happened to VB until the ATSB report and that would be too late for NAS 2c."
WALLEY, yes I agree there is a heap information on pprune but to credit this thread with now knowing what happened to VB is dangerously stretching things just a bit far. Sensible people directly involved in incidents don't normally jump on pprune to air their unique knowledge. It's a rumour network
Binoculars, I have no side to play. My observation was of the degree and volume of irrelevant, assuming, ill informed and wildy speculative drivel that permeated this thread. Yes I know, it is only a rumour network. I am appalled that somebody could actually believe that they know all about the VB incident having read about it on pprune.
Like it says down the bottom of these pages
As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent.
A sensible person would test thoroughly anything they read on pprune before giving it any credence, something I fear has not been done on this thread.
ding
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Block Levels
LurkR,
You should find that this has no impact on skywriters:
- Skywriting abouve major capital cities would be in Class C airspace, block levels are allowed
- Block levels not allowed to be assigned in E airspace to IFR (including military at the moment) becuase of the chance they could clean up a VFR, and E airpace is heavily dependent on all aircraft cruising at the hemispherical levles outlined in AIP. If you are a skywriter and operate in E airspace, you would be VFR and not require a clearance ... and as for operating at block levels (since you don't need the clearance), check AIP, but I am guessing "operationally required" would fall under that category? However, if you were a skywriter and operating in E airspace and operating at different levels, making yoursepf known to ATC might not be such a bad thing if there is IFR traffic opertaing in the area (although I am not suggesting this as the books don't say to do this and after all VFR is see and avoid in the new system).
You should find that this has no impact on skywriters:
- Skywriting abouve major capital cities would be in Class C airspace, block levels are allowed
- Block levels not allowed to be assigned in E airspace to IFR (including military at the moment) becuase of the chance they could clean up a VFR, and E airpace is heavily dependent on all aircraft cruising at the hemispherical levles outlined in AIP. If you are a skywriter and operate in E airspace, you would be VFR and not require a clearance ... and as for operating at block levels (since you don't need the clearance), check AIP, but I am guessing "operationally required" would fall under that category? However, if you were a skywriter and operating in E airspace and operating at different levels, making yoursepf known to ATC might not be such a bad thing if there is IFR traffic opertaing in the area (although I am not suggesting this as the books don't say to do this and after all VFR is see and avoid in the new system).
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Oz
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hempy, go ahead and differ but do not beg.
If at some time in the furture you do get directly involved in an incident then you would be wise to speak only to those with a statutory right to speak to you (check out who they are, you may be surprised who you don't have to speak to). And then only when you are comfortable with being interviewed and only do so with a "friend" at your side. Never speak to an investigator on your own.
I say again, do not beg or I might feed you.
ding
If at some time in the furture you do get directly involved in an incident then you would be wise to speak only to those with a statutory right to speak to you (check out who they are, you may be surprised who you don't have to speak to). And then only when you are comfortable with being interviewed and only do so with a "friend" at your side. Never speak to an investigator on your own.
I say again, do not beg or I might feed you.
ding
Prof. Airport Engineer
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Australia (mostly)
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dingo,
I fear that you are pushing a dead dog [no pun intended].
It may be that you are well intentioned, and for those good intentions we thank you. But speaking in accordance with "statutory rights" works in the perfect world or the abstract world, not in the real world. It is insufficient to move us forward in what are very difficult days, when progress will come from those with the courage to speak out against the one-eyed king[s].
In the meantime, Walley 2 has said it politely, and Hempy has said it subtlely. Let me say it explicitly - p#ss off.
I fear that you are pushing a dead dog [no pun intended].
It may be that you are well intentioned, and for those good intentions we thank you. But speaking in accordance with "statutory rights" works in the perfect world or the abstract world, not in the real world. It is insufficient to move us forward in what are very difficult days, when progress will come from those with the courage to speak out against the one-eyed king[s].
In the meantime, Walley 2 has said it politely, and Hempy has said it subtlely. Let me say it explicitly - p#ss off.
