Jetstar leaves Launceston in the dark?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure of the follow up procedures after trying to activate PAL, but I reckon I hear someone trying to activate PAL on area frequency just about every night shift.
I work the Launey airspace at night regularly and have never had anyone mention anything about a problem with the lights.
I work the Launey airspace at night regularly and have never had anyone mention anything about a problem with the lights.
Car 8
Stationair8
The Safety Officer's number in Launie is 0407305595, call sign Car 8
Cheers,
PITHBLOT
So from now on anyone who operates into YMLT when the tower is shut at night time, make sure the airport safety officer puts the lights on for your arrival and departure, does a runway inspection prior to your arrival and departure so that we don't get another incident at YMLT.
If you have any problems with the aerodrome lights let somebody know ie Melbourne Centre so that it is recorded and then contact ATSB
If you have any problems with the aerodrome lights let somebody know ie Melbourne Centre so that it is recorded and then contact ATSB
The Safety Officer's number in Launie is 0407305595, call sign Car 8
Cheers,
PITHBLOT
Thanks for that.
A phone-call to him or a call up on the CTAF frequency prior to departing or arriving at YMLT to verify the lights are on would be cheap insurance and also as a witness if somebody dobs you in to CASA/ATSB
A phone-call to him or a call up on the CTAF frequency prior to departing or arriving at YMLT to verify the lights are on would be cheap insurance and also as a witness if somebody dobs you in to CASA/ATSB
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
So from now on anyone who operates into YMLT when the tower is shut at night time, make sure the airport safety officer puts the lights on for your arrival and departure, does a runway inspection prior to your arrival and departure so that we don't get another incident at YMLT.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Here today, gone tommorrow
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think he is there all night egardless, certainly when I used to lurk @ 02:00. And yes very helpful with the PALC when it used to have a mind of its own.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zed said
I'm curious as to why you would backtrack half the runway length (from Bravo) in those conditions as opposed to the full length. What am I missing?
It is standard SOP to back track the runway in those conditions and with no Twr.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: In a time warp
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simple and very easy fix to all of this, "LEAVE THE TOWER OPEN 24/7" as it was before, if it costs more so well beit. I'm sure the average passenger wouldn't mind paying an extra couple of bucks to have the tower and RFF available during abnormal hours if they knew it may save there lives in the event of an accident.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Up North
Age: 53
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having paxed out of Launnie regularly, (at least once a week) over a period of 3-4 years in the late 90's on dear old AN, I can honestly say that, even on the foggiest of mornings, the aircraft only ever entered the runway at the threshold, never from any of the other taxi ways. Sure we may have sat at the threshold for a while, waiting for the fog to clear, but that's Launnie for you.
The SOP's sure must have changed since those times!!
As for this incident, just where are the safety mechanisms? What were the Firies doing, where was the safety officer when the aircraft was departing? I agree with stationair8, for an airport that processes 1 million pax a year, there should be plenty of revenue left over from the airport's operating costs, given the exhorbitant fees that would be charged to the operators, to put some more focus on operational support for the pax and crews!!
Perhaps the political push for maintaining the current hours of operation for the tower should also be directed to ensuring the safe operation of the airport at all hours!
Cheers
Prado
The SOP's sure must have changed since those times!!
As for this incident, just where are the safety mechanisms? What were the Firies doing, where was the safety officer when the aircraft was departing? I agree with stationair8, for an airport that processes 1 million pax a year, there should be plenty of revenue left over from the airport's operating costs, given the exhorbitant fees that would be charged to the operators, to put some more focus on operational support for the pax and crews!!
Perhaps the political push for maintaining the current hours of operation for the tower should also be directed to ensuring the safe operation of the airport at all hours!
Cheers
Prado
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pretty expensive manning the tower after 10pm for two freighter movements. Sure it should be manned for RPT jet aircraft, its really a duty of care issue for Airservices to ensure safety for the travelling public. Unfortunately, from all accounts, Airservices management are screwed up, and the they are too busy trying to save dollars rather than providing a service. If Rudd is serious, he should clean Airservices out , make it a government body that charges what it costs to operate, rather than a profit centre. The trouble with the Labor party is that they still have the mentality that people who travel by air are rich, and therefore can afford to pay!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: In a time warp
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the Examiner newspaper today.
Two Qantas pilots charged with recklessly operating an aircraft on take off from LST nearly seven years ago were granted a permanent reprieve in Hobart's Supreme Court yesterday.
blah blah blah (back ground story info)
Supreme Court Justice Pierre Slicer granted the men a permanent adjourment of their case, but its up to the DPP's Tim Ellis to decide whether he will appeal against the decision.
Justice Slicer said his judgement had been influenced by delays in the case and the loss of significant primary evidence since the alleged event took place seven years ago.
blah blah blah (back ground story info)
Supreme Court Justice Pierre Slicer granted the men a permanent adjourment of their case, but its up to the DPP's Tim Ellis to decide whether he will appeal against the decision.
Justice Slicer said his judgement had been influenced by delays in the case and the loss of significant primary evidence since the alleged event took place seven years ago.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: In a time warp
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is that C### Bruce still a safety officer at Launceston?
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Launceston. Tasmania,Australia
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An issue that won't go away
Flying blind: time to look at our air infrastructure
Ben Sandilands writes:
Crikey.com 29/4
Having failed in its long, costly and flawed prosecution of two Qantas pilots for recklessly endangering public safety is the Civil Aviation Safety Authority going to run with the ball over a similar incident involving two Jetstar pilots earlier this year?
On 23 October 2001, multiple witnesses reported a Qantas 737 takeoff from Launceston Airport without runway lights.
CASA launched a criminal prosecution against both pilots which ended in the Supreme Court in Tasmania yesterday when Justice Pierre Slicer granted a permanent stay because, among other things, the investigation had failed to preserve vital evidence.
On 12 March this year a Jetstar A320 was recorded by a security camera as taking off from the same airport without lights, but on this occasion, the independent safety investigator, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau launched its own as yet incomplete inquiry.
That evidence has been preserved.
Both incidents raise the same serious concerns for passenger safety, but have ended in the hands of two different bodies.
The ATSB is not an enforcer of safety laws. If it finds evidence of criminal activity, that is, the pilots disregarded the prohibition on taking off from an unlit runway, it can drop its inquiry and leave it to CASA to pursue.
If it finds however, that something else, such as a systems failure, caused the black takeoff, it will pursue a technical analysis and issue safety recommendations if necessary to the world’s aviation authorities and airlines using A320s.
In the 2001 incident, CASA took action because it saw it as a deliberate breach of the law rather than a safety issue warranting the technical skills of the ATSB which, tellingly, never pursued it.
Two issues are now unresolved. One is the capacity of the authorities to prosecute alleged acts of reckless indifference to safety by pilots, and the other the risk that systemic issues are causing runway lights which are supposed to be remotely activated by pilots to fail.
In recent months the ATSB incident database has recorded a number of claims that runway lighting systems have switched themselves off before departing airliners have started or completed their takeoffs.
Put beside well-documented failures by AirServices Australia to provide full air traffic control on important air corridors at night, the combination of dark skies and dark runways ought to be causing concern in the government over the state of air transport infrastructure and its safety implications.
Ben Sandilands writes:
Crikey.com 29/4
Having failed in its long, costly and flawed prosecution of two Qantas pilots for recklessly endangering public safety is the Civil Aviation Safety Authority going to run with the ball over a similar incident involving two Jetstar pilots earlier this year?
On 23 October 2001, multiple witnesses reported a Qantas 737 takeoff from Launceston Airport without runway lights.
CASA launched a criminal prosecution against both pilots which ended in the Supreme Court in Tasmania yesterday when Justice Pierre Slicer granted a permanent stay because, among other things, the investigation had failed to preserve vital evidence.
On 12 March this year a Jetstar A320 was recorded by a security camera as taking off from the same airport without lights, but on this occasion, the independent safety investigator, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau launched its own as yet incomplete inquiry.
That evidence has been preserved.
Both incidents raise the same serious concerns for passenger safety, but have ended in the hands of two different bodies.
The ATSB is not an enforcer of safety laws. If it finds evidence of criminal activity, that is, the pilots disregarded the prohibition on taking off from an unlit runway, it can drop its inquiry and leave it to CASA to pursue.
If it finds however, that something else, such as a systems failure, caused the black takeoff, it will pursue a technical analysis and issue safety recommendations if necessary to the world’s aviation authorities and airlines using A320s.
In the 2001 incident, CASA took action because it saw it as a deliberate breach of the law rather than a safety issue warranting the technical skills of the ATSB which, tellingly, never pursued it.
Two issues are now unresolved. One is the capacity of the authorities to prosecute alleged acts of reckless indifference to safety by pilots, and the other the risk that systemic issues are causing runway lights which are supposed to be remotely activated by pilots to fail.
In recent months the ATSB incident database has recorded a number of claims that runway lighting systems have switched themselves off before departing airliners have started or completed their takeoffs.
Put beside well-documented failures by AirServices Australia to provide full air traffic control on important air corridors at night, the combination of dark skies and dark runways ought to be causing concern in the government over the state of air transport infrastructure and its safety implications.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: springfield retirement castle
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Might be a little lesson coming out of the Jetstar Launy incident as to the benefits of union membership.
(Awaiting incoming from the chief google economist/proto-fascist in residence paf).
(Awaiting incoming from the chief google economist/proto-fascist in residence paf).
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Two Questions
What happened to the carrers of these two QF guys with respect to currently flying or able to return to work?
What has happened with the two J* guys also?
J
What happened to the carrers of these two QF guys with respect to currently flying or able to return to work?
What has happened with the two J* guys also?
J
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah 'jab' I was wondering the same thing, like that TV show......."where are they now?"
I was actually in Launy just last night & find it hard to believe that any crew would intentionally T/Off without rwy lighting, damn that's dark when taxing onto the rwy with the lights off (well would be).
'stationair8'..........."CASA spewing lots of dollars?"(that would be an understatement) you mean WE as in the tax payers are spewing lots of dollars!
Christ lets hope that all concerned has learnt something from this, afterall aviation has been & will always be about learning!
CW
I was actually in Launy just last night & find it hard to believe that any crew would intentionally T/Off without rwy lighting, damn that's dark when taxing onto the rwy with the lights off (well would be).
'stationair8'..........."CASA spewing lots of dollars?"(that would be an understatement) you mean WE as in the tax payers are spewing lots of dollars!
Christ lets hope that all concerned has learnt something from this, afterall aviation has been & will always be about learning!
CW
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think if you look at CASA's history, you will find that they (CASA) never seem to do any good in the courts in Tasmania. Whether or not its the system, or the hired in staff, they never seem to win.
Tasmania has some quirky law, that allows a judge to drop the charge if the person is over 60 and hasn't committed a previous crime.
Funny how CASA spend a small fortune to take two pilots too court, but turn a blind eye to Air Services Australia who like to have closed towers when RPT jets arrive at YMLT, YMHB, Avalon etc.
Lets see your press statement on that MR Gibson.
Funny how CASA spend a small fortune to take two pilots too court, but turn a blind eye to Air Services Australia who like to have closed towers when RPT jets arrive at YMLT, YMHB, Avalon etc.
Lets see your press statement on that MR Gibson.