Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Near miss over Launceston Virgin DJ

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Near miss over Launceston Virgin DJ

Old 25th Dec 2003, 17:09
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Strathallan, Relaxed, Scotland
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Near miss over Launceston Virgin DJ

An "airmiss" was reported on 24th December between (another) Virgin Jet and a light aircraft.

I have spoken to the pilot of the light aircraft involved. It was in level flight at 7,500ft and the pilot had the Virgin Jet in sight at all relevant times, and heard it on the radio.

There was no risk of collision. The Virgin Jet was speed-limited to 250 knots and the weather was crystal clear. The light aircraft pilot was monitoring the frequency which the Virgin Jet was working, and was looking at the Virgin Jet.

Had there been a collision risk he would have spoken up or taken avoiding action. He was flying some family members to be with other family members for Christmas and was not in a suicidal mood.

This is a simple old-fashioned beat-up unworthy of any Australian genuinely concerned with Air Safety. I regret that some people I respect are joining in the beat-up.

Boyd Munro

President
AIR SAFETY AUSTRALIA
PO Box 172 Unley SA 5061
[email protected]
Boyd Munro is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2003, 18:03
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
Boyd,

If there was no risk of collision, why did the TCAS issue a RA?

it means that the two aircraft were within 20 odd seconds of colliding.

Please answer this.

What is the "standard", for want of a better word, that VFR pilots apply to determine that they are NOT a collision threat to other aircraft?

Did they tell the Virgin pilots they were there?

did the vfr pilot have the slightest idea of the intended flight path of the jet?

For answers to these and other exciting questions, stay tuned folks for the next exciting episode of NAS - 'Nother Airspace Stuffup!

do you know what 250 knots indicated is actually? what was the tas/ground speed?

did the vfr pilot have the slightest appreciation for the rate of descent of the jet?

the answer is in all probability no.

why do people who really have no idea immediately tell us that nothing is wrong?
Dehavillanddriver is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2003, 19:27
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Asia
Age: 56
Posts: 2,600
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Boyd Munro

Boyd, how about you ask the crew of the Virgin aircraft what they saw before saying this was a non-event. I can assure you trying to see a light aircraft while doing 250 kts + is next to impossible sometimes. If they did get an RA as has been advertised then this is definitely another serious breakdown in separation by international standards even if Australia doesn’t recognize this anymore. This is just a political excuse to try and ram down our throat this whole NAS BS. I can assure you when, not if, there is a mid air caused by this new airspace, all you NAS people will go scurrying off into your little holes. Rest assured though that those responsible will be held accountable.
404 Titan is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2003, 21:21
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Angry

Mr Boyd,

I for one do not want to participate in an airspace system that relies on good airmanship backed up by TCAS as a last resort to avoid a midair collision.

You clearly do not understand the function of TCAS as Dehavillanddriver has stated. A TCAS RA (resolution advisory) represents a REAL THREAT OF COLLISION.

The fact the light aircraft driver had the Virgin aircraft visual, is poor comfort to the 177 odd passengers who unknowingly participated an avoidance manoeuvre by the Virgin crew. I ask you, prior to NAS, when was the last time you heard of a TCAS avoidance by an airliner in this country? How many TCAS RA's per year should we accept and still believe the system is safe?

Good airmanship and a good lookout is something our aviation forefathers relied on to solely to avoid collisions for many decades. In a busy traffic environment, should a visual lookout be the backstop to a modern ATC system?! We are supposed to have learned from the lessons of aviation and that sometimes, SAFETY COMES AT A PRICE. Have we not progressed in the last 50 years?

To rely on the good airmanship of potentially a sole pilot, to avoid the loss of 180 odd passengers and crew is madness! We owe it to the paying public to ensure that we have a system that provides the best level of protection the community is prepared to pay for. That is what we had prior to NAS. I am sorry but the freedom of a small minority of VFR pilots must come second!

Surely you realise that any system is only as good as its weakest link. Sadly the weakest link in our new airspace system is now that of the pilot (and I mean both VFR and IFR).

Please tell me, what has changed that ATC do not have a valuable role to play in our airspace system?

Are we all poorer for NAS?

Absobloodylutely

Last edited by Airspeed Ambassador; 26th Dec 2003 at 05:25.
Airspeed Ambassador is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2003, 22:24
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Any other pilots out there believe they can avoid a jet in a light aircraft, if needed?

Mr Munroe; running political interference, now? Are you paid to write this stuff? Because it's fairly embarrassing for you, otherwise.
simple old-fashioned beat-up
RAs are now routine beat-ups?
The Virgin Jet was speed-limited to 250 knots
Well, that's all right, then! At least if a jet collides with a lightie at 250kts INDICATED AIR SPEED, the jet may maintain enough structural integrity to land safely.
Had there been a collision risk he would have spoken up or taken avoiding action
You mean like the jet did? Obviously the jet was wrong I am ready to be convinced that a lightie can 'choose to avoid' a jet. What do you do- pull up sharply at the last minute (and move opposite to the RA)? Turn, 'cause lighties turn so sharply ? Or just pray that your transponder is on and accurate?

Mods: Even though Mr Munroe has posted in multiple forums, please let the posts stand. It shows the NAS mentality.
ferris is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 00:53
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: usa
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fill me in.. Please!!

What am i missing. I learnt to fly in Australia so i'm somewhat familiar with the airpsace system downunder. Basically the Ozzie system is being transformed to the US system of airspace? Correct?
halfmoon is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 01:43
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 147
Received 9 Likes on 2 Posts
My God, Boyd..... I, as a professional airline pilot, find your perspective on all of this breathtaking and frightening.
Ushuaia is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 04:49
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: America/Australia
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RA's are serious business and all should be investigated. I understand that 115 RA's occurred in Australia in the previous year prior to NAS implementation. For the rocket scientists out there, this is an RA every 3.1739 days. Just food for thought...
Duke16 is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 05:11
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The dark corner of the bar
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mr Munro, your perspective on this incident smacks of a basic lack of understanding of PROFESSIONAL airline/ flying operations. The airspace reforms downgrade the safety of operations and compromise the inocents that sit behind us and pay good money to arive alive at their destinations.

Your airspace will cost lives and you know it. See and avoid pricipals do not even go close to working when travelling at up to 7 or 8 miles a minute. By the time you see them you have hit them. As for the no talking on the RT. That just shows that the people who have invented and backed this system are rank amatuers.

I would sugest you take a ride in my jump seat and spot lighties for me because I cant see them most of the time. A jump seat is a third seat in the flight deck in case you are not familiar with the term.
Douglas Mcdonnell is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 05:40
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sydney N.S.W.
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Merry Christmas Boyd!

I don't know why you are wasting your time here, anything like a factual report on a Civil Air beat-up simply results in a heap of name calling and gets all the Chicken Little "professionals" ranting against anyone not wearing six gold bars on each shoulder.

Gotta go and get back in the bunker, too many planes falling out of the sky....
RV8builder is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 05:49
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This is all fixed quite easily. Replace the letter E with C on all the maps.
tobzalp is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 05:59
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: YMML
Posts: 2,560
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Douglas Mcdonnell Mate, if you can get me past security I'll run spotter for you everyday of the week and twice on Sundays

Talking to my man in Istanbul, something is not getting out about TCAS. Some of the tales he tells me about TCAS in hot environments like flying into airspace around New York were interesting to say the least. One thing come up though,( now tell me if I am wrong) TCAS even in RA gives warning and climb or descent advisaries that will result in profiles of no greater than 1500ft differences to whatever you are doing at the time. Now if my memory serves me it does not take to much change in attitude at 250kts or better to get that result.

He did come up with one scare story and it sounds exactly the same as here. He got an RA whilst in descent. He held level and a lightie passed 300 ft under his nose right on centre line. VFR unannounced.

Maybe NAS needs tweaking. It would be a given that DJ would be on a published route. It is a given that the Tobago had a visual on DJ so...Why can't we report alt/posit (in relation to aid if that makes the heavy iron happy) if we are transitting that published route? We have the tools , why can't we use them?

Regards

Mark
OZBUSDRIVER is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 06:36
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: brisbane
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Was the VFR driver called Mr Magoo?

Lets wait for the offical report to come out, before sprouting off about what was not dangerous. I understand from the Virgin pilot that the TCAS got to 200ft.
buzztart is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 07:03
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Usually Oz
Posts: 732
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Smile

Interestingly enough, both versions could be correct.

About a year ago I was happily tootling up the Light A/c Lane Nth of BK when SYD RDR gave a call to someone in my position. Intrigued, I answered. Apparently, I was in danger of collecting a QF B767 at 3,000ft on a right base for the 16R ILS. Turns out my Mode C height box was pushing out an ALT readout 1,000ft higher than actual.

The bloke was also disturbed [by his tone of voice] that I could see the B767. Funny, how on a CAVOK day, you can't see any CTR/CTA boundaries marked in the sky [back to US/Oz ATCO cultural differences....sorry ]

Had we been in another place&time, there could have been a dreaded incident which in fact was a non-event. Equally, with RDR services close to GA airports, it's worth "TALKING TO ATC" to check your transponder readout every now and then.

G'day & Happy NY
Feather #3 is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 07:26
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: usa
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I thought it was interesting reading that in the land of Oz you only get 115 RA's a year! You've got to be kidding me. Thats about 3 a day. I fly into NYC airspace 15 days out of the month, 4 legs a day and i'll tell you right now on average I personally get about 3-4 RA's a month with up to 20-30 TA's a month...
This is normal for NY airspace and that number ONLY gets higher in the summer months.
Whats the problem?
Whats the big deal??
Keep your eyes OPEN and RESPOND!!
halfmoon is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 09:26
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Boyd,

It is fortunate in this case that there was a further back up to TCAS.

Did the Tabago pilot say at what point he was going to take action to avoid the B737.

Maybe he was waiting to see the whites of the eyes of the passengers staring back at him before he acted.

Some of the OBJECTIVES OF AIR SAFETY AUSTRALIA are

To increase the safety of aviation in Australia
To influence legislation in a manner which improves safety, increases flexibility, and reduces costs
To provide a well-researched, rationally-presented, forcefully argued voice for pilots in Parliament

Can you explain how your post is well researched, rationally presented or is in any way increasing or improving safety?

Swan River Rat
Swan River Rat is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 11:01
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Feather#3



About a year ago I was happily tootling up the Light A/c Lane Nth of BK when SYD RDR gave a call to someone in my position. Intrigued, I answered. Apparently, I was in danger of collecting a QF B767 at 3,000ft on a right base for the 16R ILS. Turns out my Mode C height box was pushing out an ALT readout 1,000ft higher than actual.

This about a year ago is not such a bad thing. Of course as VFR to be in C you needed a clearance so you could be reasonably assumed to be OCTA. Today in E as VFR you do not need a clearance. Sooooo with your faulty mode C reading in todays world the traffic that will get an RA reference you with that faulty readout will be responding to incorrect information and whilst doing everything properly may very well hit you.

Enjoy your tootling.
tobzalp is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 13:05
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Ozmate
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2 X RA's in as many weeks in class "E"?
No, Mr. Experts, this is NOT “normal” nor is it acceptable!
Review this stupid situation immediately or have blood on your hands.
The TCAS RA procedure is in the "Non-Normal Manoeuvres" section of the B737 Operations Manual for a very good reason.
i.e. It is not supposed to be a weekly occurrence because of a system that allows an RPT jet on a normal descent path to be "surprised" by another A/C to the extent that it needs to take the last step in COLLISION (yes, that's what the "C" in TCAS stands for!) avoidance.
In addition, what about the potential for injury to unrestrained cabin crew and pax during one of these "routine" RA's?
As someone has already stated, “TCAS RA doesn’t mean "NAS system worked as planned" it means the last link in the chain didn’t break”
As a regular user of airspace in Australia in an RPT jet I feel a lot less safe now than I did a month or so ago as a direct result of the NAS.
Are you listening?
This is NOT acceptable.
Get it?

woftam is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 14:42
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Angry

It seems that some professional jealousy keeps creeping into the debate and clouding the views of those that do not utilise Australian airspace as part of their everyday job.

Merry Christmas Boyd!
I don't know why you are wasting your time here, anything like a factual report on a Civil Air beat-up simply results in a heap of name calling and gets all the Chicken Little "professionals" ranting against anyone not wearing six gold bars on each shoulder.
There is very real reason why a vast majority of working pilots contributing to this forum are against the outdated, dangerous and amateurish attempt to "reform" our airspace.

A lot of posts here by those against NAS have been factual, to the point and based on actual operating experience.

Lowering yourself to such remarks does nothing but further scare me when I think that amateurs like RV8 builder are ploughing through airspace I may be occupying without speaking up or even monitoring the right frequency because he can't understand why those 6 bar professionals are kicking up such a fuss.

Had there been a collision risk he would have spoken up or taken avoiding action. He was flying some family members to be with other family members for Christmas and was not in a suicidal mood.
As others have said, relying on the most inexperienced and casual users of the airspace to make decisions on whether a conflict situation exists is absolute ludicrously. TCAS is not meant to be a traffic separation tool.

We have gone back to the dark ages with airspace management in this country due to weekend aviators and others without professional practical experience operationally making decisions on our workplace envrironment.

I pray that it doesn't take a collision to wake these fools up into realizing the momentous mistakes they have made.
Perpetual_Hold_File is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2003, 15:26
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Gate 69
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Red face

Halfmoon wouldn't 115 RAs per year mean 1 every 3 days, NOT 3 per day?!

Good point Tobzalp. If a VFR driver had a transponder on and it was giving incorrect alt info, the RA could actually drive us into him! When and How are they supposed to get a alt check from ATC!? Especially say out at Alice! Hmmm

Trust me "See and Avoid" is the LAST bit of protection you have to miss someone. It should NOT be used as the primary means.

Wasn't it 100 years of flight just last week? Boy look how far we have come, still looking out the window (have you ever had a good look at the size of a jet or even a turboprop windscreen, not exactly made for VFR) to avoid hitting another aircraft. It is not like the are many more aircraft flying now, nor has the speed hasn't increased that much has it?!

Every aircraft, and I mean EVERY aircraft should have a transponder and a radio. I bet most VFR guys have a GPS that cost a few $$, so a don't give me that B/S that it cost too much. Hello, planes are not cheap!!

Don't lower the standard of our aispace to make it easier for VFR pilots at the risk of IFR pilots and paying pax. Just made it easier for VFR guys to get an airways through Class C. Simple.
Near Miss is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.