Jetstar - Hamilton Island
I think we should follow Stormy's mates advice and wait until the ATSB has their say.
Even as a PPL and SLF, somatographic illusion from a fast accelerating jet makes things decidedly hard to determine what is actualy going on up front. 30 degrees of bank shows a lot of grass or sky from 15C and as Keg put it even 1000ft of vertical separation looks like your coming in the windows. Dont ask me I only payed for the ride. Frame of ref for even a seasoned travellor can be very subjective.......gotta luv jorno licence to BS
Even the irishman got hijacked in the interview. A turn to clear traffic suddenly becomes an evasive manoeuvre.
THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE
Even as a PPL and SLF, somatographic illusion from a fast accelerating jet makes things decidedly hard to determine what is actualy going on up front. 30 degrees of bank shows a lot of grass or sky from 15C and as Keg put it even 1000ft of vertical separation looks like your coming in the windows. Dont ask me I only payed for the ride. Frame of ref for even a seasoned travellor can be very subjective.......gotta luv jorno licence to BS
Even the irishman got hijacked in the interview. A turn to clear traffic suddenly becomes an evasive manoeuvre.THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know we aren't supposed to be speculating here, but seeing as the thread exists, but assuming a hypothetical, similar case on a desert island with one controlled runway, where an aircraft is taking off and another is on approach for the same runway... assuming the aircraft taking off actually was cleared to take off, one might think ATC must have thought the separation sufficient to give the landing aircraft clearance to complete its approach and land.
If it was that close isn't the aircraft behind supposed to initiate the evasive action, i.e. GA? And would not someone in the tower be asking why the controller permitted the approach to continue without recommending a particular course of action to one or both pilots?
On the other hand, if an aircraft was to enter the active runway without clearance to take off, and with another aircraft on short final, one supposes the pilot attampting to take-off might feel a little embarrassed.
Or is one missing something?
If it was that close isn't the aircraft behind supposed to initiate the evasive action, i.e. GA? And would not someone in the tower be asking why the controller permitted the approach to continue without recommending a particular course of action to one or both pilots?
On the other hand, if an aircraft was to enter the active runway without clearance to take off, and with another aircraft on short final, one supposes the pilot attampting to take-off might feel a little embarrassed.
Or is one missing something?
Just Binos
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mackay, Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, one is missing something, in fact the lot of you are. Something called facts.
Honest to God there is more bull**** on this thread than there is in the media beatups. They're trying to make a living; what's your excuse? I know exactly what was in the incident report, nothing more, as does every controller in Australia who wants to search the system, but it's enough to know that you should all keep your conspiracy theories under your respective hats.
Wunala, take your scanner and go back to FS2004 for chrissakes. You're talking through your arse.
Honest to God there is more bull**** on this thread than there is in the media beatups. They're trying to make a living; what's your excuse? I know exactly what was in the incident report, nothing more, as does every controller in Australia who wants to search the system, but it's enough to know that you should all keep your conspiracy theories under your respective hats.
Wunala, take your scanner and go back to FS2004 for chrissakes. You're talking through your arse.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: The Coast of Sunshine, Australia
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go Bino's
Ill informed speculation is the specialty of the press, not supposably professional aviation people.
Additionally, 14 year old high school students are yet to qualify to that level and are still restricted to the "be seen and not heard" end of the dining table.
Disco Stu
Ill informed speculation is the specialty of the press, not supposably professional aviation people.
Additionally, 14 year old high school students are yet to qualify to that level and are still restricted to the "be seen and not heard" end of the dining table.
Disco Stu
Last edited by Disco Stu; 19th Jul 2004 at 10:59.
PPRuNette
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: de nile...
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How'd he know that?
Could THIS POST have given you away
Wunala
I've only made a few posts so I don't feel the need to order a Personal Title and help support PPRuNe
posted 17th July 2004 10:59
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like you are a private pilot who thinks he/she knows best.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G'day,
Whoever you're talking to, here's my reply for myself or whoever you're talking to. ACMS, it sounds you're someone who thinks you're a professional pilot or something. You have no right to talk about someone when you don't even know them. Yes oh boy I've heard of VNAV, I've even heard of LNAV. Vertical Navigation for descent, auto approach, etc. Lateral Navigation for turning, straight and level flight and of course following the waypoints you've entered into the FMC. Not only you know ok? I'm sure many others here know AND no I'm not an airline pilot. Haven't event started my lessons yet, still in high school Please don't be so up yourself.
Cheers,
Wunala
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 48 | From: Sydney | Registered: Jul 2004 | Status: Offline | IP: Logged
(My Bold....for clarification
)
Gee, this boards' come a long way
GG
Could THIS POST have given you away
Wunala
I've only made a few posts so I don't feel the need to order a Personal Title and help support PPRuNe
posted 17th July 2004 10:59
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like you are a private pilot who thinks he/she knows best.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G'day,
Whoever you're talking to, here's my reply for myself or whoever you're talking to. ACMS, it sounds you're someone who thinks you're a professional pilot or something. You have no right to talk about someone when you don't even know them. Yes oh boy I've heard of VNAV, I've even heard of LNAV. Vertical Navigation for descent, auto approach, etc. Lateral Navigation for turning, straight and level flight and of course following the waypoints you've entered into the FMC. Not only you know ok? I'm sure many others here know AND no I'm not an airline pilot. Haven't event started my lessons yet, still in high school Please don't be so up yourself.
Cheers,
Wunala
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 48 | From: Sydney | Registered: Jul 2004 | Status: Offline | IP: Logged
(My Bold....for clarification
)Gee, this boards' come a long way
GG
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wunula sent me a PM today and can confirm that he is only
14, and hopes to become a Qantas cadet when he finishes
school.
Wunala, your an accident going somewhere to happen, you
must realise you are still wet behind the ears, I noticed in
your profile that you use MS flight simulator, I'm afraid young
man IMHO you need much more than this before you can
start telling the pro's here how to suck eggs.
Wirraway
14, and hopes to become a Qantas cadet when he finishes
school.
Wunala, your an accident going somewhere to happen, you
must realise you are still wet behind the ears, I noticed in
your profile that you use MS flight simulator, I'm afraid young
man IMHO you need much more than this before you can
start telling the pro's here how to suck eggs.
Wirraway
Last edited by Wirraway; 19th Jul 2004 at 12:29.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: The Coast of Sunshine, Australia
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wunala
There is nothing wrong with quietly reading and learning from what is written here. That said you must admit you will be challenged to sort the good info from the rubbish.
Good luck with the pursuit of an aviation career and don't be put off by those with a negative disposition. Aviation is still the best game in town.
Disco Stu
There is nothing wrong with quietly reading and learning from what is written here. That said you must admit you will be challenged to sort the good info from the rubbish.
Good luck with the pursuit of an aviation career and don't be put off by those with a negative disposition. Aviation is still the best game in town.
Disco Stu
Just Binos
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mackay, Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Stu,
Wunala, you appear to have learned a lesson and accepted it in good grace. I commend you for that. You are a novice to Pprune and to aviation, but you have enthusiasm which is to be encouraged.
Just remember there are a lot of hard heads on these forums who have been around the game for a long time in one form or another. Roam the threads, learn from their experience, and take particular notice of those who are rubbished and why. Your aim should be to post only when you know something about the subject.
There's plenty around here who take no notice of that, and no doubt somebody will come up with some examples where I've been guilty but there is an awful lot of good advice and experience to take in too. Make the most of it, ask questions rather than offer advice. Most grizzled oldies don't take advice too well from 14 year olds.
Good luck.
Wunala, you appear to have learned a lesson and accepted it in good grace. I commend you for that. You are a novice to Pprune and to aviation, but you have enthusiasm which is to be encouraged.
Just remember there are a lot of hard heads on these forums who have been around the game for a long time in one form or another. Roam the threads, learn from their experience, and take particular notice of those who are rubbished and why. Your aim should be to post only when you know something about the subject.
There's plenty around here who take no notice of that, and no doubt somebody will come up with some examples where I've been guilty
but there is an awful lot of good advice and experience to take in too. Make the most of it, ask questions rather than offer advice. Most grizzled oldies don't take advice too well from 14 year olds.Good luck.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Island air incident a 'misunderstanding'
Tues "The Australian"
Island air incident a 'misunderstanding'
By Steve Creedy, Aviation writer
July 20, 2004
AIR safety investigators are looking at whether a procedural misunderstanding resulted in a Jetstar Boeing 717 taking evasive action that alarmed passengers over Hamilton Island on Saturday.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau yesterday ordered a category four investigation into the event, its second lowest for probing aviation incidents.
The lower category indicates investigators do not believe the aircraft were in imminent danger of colliding, and Qantas has also rejected suggestions of a "near miss".
"Reports to hand from both crews and air traffic control indicate there may have been some misunderstandings regarding procedures," the ATSB said yesterday.
Jetstar Flight 711, with 124 passengers on board, banked sharply after taking off from Hamilton Island's runway 14 for Sydney about 4.20pm and confronted a Qantas Boeing 737 on approach to the same runway. The Qantas crew reported it could see the Jetstar plane and was aware of its altitude and track. Qantas said the B717 crew had also spotted the 737.
"Both planes were in visual contact and there was no danger to any passengers," the airline said.
It is understood the Jetstar crew elected to take evasive action after receiving a traffic advisory from the B717's traffic collision avoidance system.
A traffic advisory warns of traffic in the area but is not as serious as a resolution advisory, which tells crew a collision is imminent and recommends what action to take.
Passengers said the Jetstar aircraft banked left after taking off steeply and started to descend as the Qantas aircraft passed close by.
The B717 crew later told the ATSB it considered the avoiding action was warranted and Jetstar chief executive Alan Joyce yesterday defended the action. He said the aircraft had been under the directions of Hamilton Island tower and had maintained separation at all times.
========================================
Island air incident a 'misunderstanding'
By Steve Creedy, Aviation writer
July 20, 2004
AIR safety investigators are looking at whether a procedural misunderstanding resulted in a Jetstar Boeing 717 taking evasive action that alarmed passengers over Hamilton Island on Saturday.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau yesterday ordered a category four investigation into the event, its second lowest for probing aviation incidents.
The lower category indicates investigators do not believe the aircraft were in imminent danger of colliding, and Qantas has also rejected suggestions of a "near miss".
"Reports to hand from both crews and air traffic control indicate there may have been some misunderstandings regarding procedures," the ATSB said yesterday.
Jetstar Flight 711, with 124 passengers on board, banked sharply after taking off from Hamilton Island's runway 14 for Sydney about 4.20pm and confronted a Qantas Boeing 737 on approach to the same runway. The Qantas crew reported it could see the Jetstar plane and was aware of its altitude and track. Qantas said the B717 crew had also spotted the 737.
"Both planes were in visual contact and there was no danger to any passengers," the airline said.
It is understood the Jetstar crew elected to take evasive action after receiving a traffic advisory from the B717's traffic collision avoidance system.
A traffic advisory warns of traffic in the area but is not as serious as a resolution advisory, which tells crew a collision is imminent and recommends what action to take.
Passengers said the Jetstar aircraft banked left after taking off steeply and started to descend as the Qantas aircraft passed close by.
The B717 crew later told the ATSB it considered the avoiding action was warranted and Jetstar chief executive Alan Joyce yesterday defended the action. He said the aircraft had been under the directions of Hamilton Island tower and had maintained separation at all times.
========================================
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wood's Hole (N4131.0 W07041.5)
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, at least the media got somethng right - TA vs RA and its response prioritization.
Perhaps the media ought to use the phrase "judicious maneouvring in response to a TA". Sure beats the incorrect phrase (with respect to a TA) "EVASIVE ACTION".
A scenic departure off RWY 14 HTI - the punters should be grateful. So long as they didn't get to see Pentacost Island's peak from below.
Perhaps the media ought to use the phrase "judicious maneouvring in response to a TA". Sure beats the incorrect phrase (with respect to a TA) "EVASIVE ACTION".
A scenic departure off RWY 14 HTI - the punters should be grateful
. So long as they didn't get to see Pentacost Island's peak from below.
Bottums Up
Wunala
As yet it has not been established that the two aircraft "almost hit". It seems that you are convicting one crew based solely on the rumours on PPRuNe and some media reports.
If they were my crew, I'd investigate and then take appropriate action, not shout at them, not get angry, not cover up. All of those responses are inappropriate.
Unless one or both crew were behaving in a wilfully negligent manner, it is reasonable to assume that at worst, a mistake was made. The perfect pilot has yet to be born.
Sultanas and Gin,
I don't follow the "turned off for normal cabin noise abatement".
Would you please elaborate?
As yet it has not been established that the two aircraft "almost hit". It seems that you are convicting one crew based solely on the rumours on PPRuNe and some media reports.
If they were my crew, I'd investigate and then take appropriate action, not shout at them, not get angry, not cover up. All of those responses are inappropriate.
Unless one or both crew were behaving in a wilfully negligent manner, it is reasonable to assume that at worst, a mistake was made. The perfect pilot has yet to be born.
Sultanas and Gin,
I don't follow the "turned off for normal cabin noise abatement".
Would you please elaborate?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Black stump
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A foundation of NAS is "see and avoid".
Maybe this incident is not directly related to NAS .... but ...
isn't it interesting to note that despite one aircraft having established and confirmed visual contact with the traffic and being assigned visual separation responsibility, the situation still evolved to a point where one aircraft needed to take avoiding action!
Maybe this incident is not directly related to NAS .... but ...
isn't it interesting to note that despite one aircraft having established and confirmed visual contact with the traffic and being assigned visual separation responsibility, the situation still evolved to a point where one aircraft needed to take avoiding action!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now, I'm aware that I don't know all of the facts here, one rarely does. But why on earth were the guys maneouvring on the basis of a TA? 
I do hope the J* Ops Manuals state that any evasive action is to be on the basis of a RA, not a TA.
I do hope the J* Ops Manuals state that any evasive action is to be on the basis of a RA, not a TA.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: posts: 666
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Binos are you considering returning to therapy? you still sound a bit wound up. you gotta sort those issues out mate. being set off by a 14yo ...
you're still skidding around with a few empties in your 6-pack.
... you're still skidding around with a few empties in your 6-pack.
