Airprox above Launceston
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: HK
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Got caught in fog there nearlly fifteen yrs ago and nothing seems to have changed and nothing ever will unless someone plows in!
Even then I doubt whether things would even change then, Launy is Launy!
Even then I doubt whether things would even change then, Launy is Launy!
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: AUS
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that Missy knows what the crew should have done, and in what order. I don't, I wasn't there. With fog around, either runway might have been suitable and usable. Tasdevil.f27 says that VB used 32L for the 2nd approach and JQ was still above. 'After the event' WHAT IF's count for naught. Professional pilots pre-brief on Contingency Planning, and leave What If's to the wannabes and neverwillbes.
We don't need another unsubstantiated LAUNY beat-up like the action taken against the QF crew with the supposed lights out incident. Hearsay affected the 2 QF guys lives, even though there was no supporting evidence.
We don't need another unsubstantiated LAUNY beat-up like the action taken against the QF crew with the supposed lights out incident. Hearsay affected the 2 QF guys lives, even though there was no supporting evidence.
Last edited by Back Seat Driver; 7th May 2008 at 08:14.
As Vref+5 said ...
I"n G there is no separation standard listed therefore there was no airprox"
As a punter, am I pleased that my Jet RPT aircraft is flying in dodgy weather, near another Jet RPT aircraft, in airspace that has no separation standards?
Damn right, I'm not
I"n G there is no separation standard listed therefore there was no airprox"
As a punter, am I pleased that my Jet RPT aircraft is flying in dodgy weather, near another Jet RPT aircraft, in airspace that has no separation standards?
Damn right, I'm not
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He said both aircraft were in contact with the Melbourne control tower because the Launceston tower had closed.
Bloody good radios we have in towers these days!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Capricorn
Age: 57
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dubya speaks crap again.
"Yes Maggott,
at night, in IMC, and RPT... other procedures are available, and are sometimes different to published missed approaches.
The pilot would also have had available to him (or her) the single engine contingency (aka escape procedure) which can be used in a situation if you get to the bottom of an approach, then suffer engine failure and don't get visual. The published missed approach will kill you. In this case it is okay to use the single engine contingency....
What I am trying to say, is that we can't comment on what the crews did on this occasion. They may have used procedures that you and I have no idea of....and been totally legal in doing it...."
Both engines in both aircraft in were working. NO contingency options available.
IF you start an Instrument Approach you either land or CONDUCT THE PUBLISHED MISSED APPROACH.
If the conditions were IMC, how did they both get below MSA without starting an approach?
If they were both above the MSA who bloody cares.
Now where are those weapons of mass destruction DUBYA?
"Yes Maggott,
at night, in IMC, and RPT... other procedures are available, and are sometimes different to published missed approaches.
The pilot would also have had available to him (or her) the single engine contingency (aka escape procedure) which can be used in a situation if you get to the bottom of an approach, then suffer engine failure and don't get visual. The published missed approach will kill you. In this case it is okay to use the single engine contingency....
What I am trying to say, is that we can't comment on what the crews did on this occasion. They may have used procedures that you and I have no idea of....and been totally legal in doing it...."
Both engines in both aircraft in were working. NO contingency options available.
IF you start an Instrument Approach you either land or CONDUCT THE PUBLISHED MISSED APPROACH.
If the conditions were IMC, how did they both get below MSA without starting an approach?
If they were both above the MSA who bloody cares.
Now where are those weapons of mass destruction DUBYA?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Capricorn
Age: 57
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He said both aircraft were in contact with the Melbourne control tower because the Launceston tower had closed.
Good pick up Dirty Pierre.
Even ANSA management do not allow an aircraft in the circuit area at YMLT to talk to YMML tower.
The guys in ML tower wouldn't know what to say to the aircraft in cira at LT anyway.
"Ah.... Ah.... contact Melbourne Centre....ah ah standby for frequency information....ah..ah..QANTAS 418 RWY 27 Line up behind the company 747 on final."
Good pick up Dirty Pierre.
Even ANSA management do not allow an aircraft in the circuit area at YMLT to talk to YMML tower.
The guys in ML tower wouldn't know what to say to the aircraft in cira at LT anyway.
"Ah.... Ah.... contact Melbourne Centre....ah ah standby for frequency information....ah..ah..QANTAS 418 RWY 27 Line up behind the company 747 on final."
BSD said
Thats the whole point. DJ was below JQ during the initial approach, then when DJ went round at some point they would have been above JQ (probably at above 1200-1500ft agl at opposite sides the aerodrome). It is how they then got to be below for the second approach that is the interesting aspect of this.
Tasdevil.f27 says that VB used 32L for the 2nd approach and JQ was still above.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: AUS
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Missy, where did you get the 1,200-1,500 ft figure from? Access to the radar tapes, if so you shouldn't be publishing it here, OR as I suspect just pluck it out of your @rse. Why can't an aircraft in trail of another climb through the leads altitude, (with appropriate separation). You have demonstrated an ability to read the YMLT approach chart but have no knowledge of the dynamics of the event or the circumstances in which they occurred. Why should the crew of the 2 aircraft be subject to your misguided allegations? Leave it to the responsible people who will deal in fact, not fanciful conjecture.
Already this thread has made it into the mainstream (albeit CRIKEY) media.
By the way Mr.Sandilands.. swish/swish, never heard it before, but it reminds me of a horses tail, and we all know what a horses tail is connected to, a horses......
Already this thread has made it into the mainstream (albeit CRIKEY) media.
By the way Mr.Sandilands.. swish/swish, never heard it before, but it reminds me of a horses tail, and we all know what a horses tail is connected to, a horses......
Last edited by Back Seat Driver; 9th May 2008 at 02:41.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Out on the catwalk
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"By the way Mr.Sandilands.. swish/swish, never heard it before, but it reminds me of a horses tail, and we all know what a horses tail is connected to, a horses......"
An excellent point.
An excellent point.
Back Seat Driver said
And which particular allegations (misguided or otherwise) are you referring to? I don't think I have introduced any allegations to the debate.
I think there was a degree of luck with this reported airprox. I'd much have this as a learning experience for all concerned. It would be interesting to have this scenario in the SIM and see what pilots did.
Why should the crew of the 2 aircraft be subject to your misguided allegations?
I think there was a degree of luck with this reported airprox. I'd much have this as a learning experience for all concerned. It would be interesting to have this scenario in the SIM and see what pilots did.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: AUS
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote Missy #38
Do you know for a fact that JQ was holding while DJ carried out the approach. Perhaps JQ were still miles away. I don't know, I wasn't there.
Quote Missy
Why? Perhaps by then they were nowhere near the missed approach track.
Quote Missy
Aircraft pass each other a zillion times a day, why is this 'interesting'?
Apparently the 2 aircraft were in proximity of some sort, but there is no evidence that the proximity was in any way less than that required. By making these statements you suggest that the crews erred otherwise you're just sprouting your own guesses. My point to you is Missy, I don't know what they should have done, because I wasn't there, and unless you were, you don't know either.
Lastly Missy
I've never met an airline pilot who left anything to luck. If you made that kind of accusation about any professional pilot, in a bar anywhere, you'd be drinking by yourself little Missy.
With Virgin making an approach, Jetstar should have held at 4100ft (in case Virgin went round)
Quote Missy
when Jetstar went round Virgin should have climbed to 4100ft
Quote Missy
It is how they then got to be below for the second approach that is the interesting aspect of this.
Apparently the 2 aircraft were in proximity of some sort, but there is no evidence that the proximity was in any way less than that required. By making these statements you suggest that the crews erred otherwise you're just sprouting your own guesses. My point to you is Missy, I don't know what they should have done, because I wasn't there, and unless you were, you don't know either.
Lastly Missy
I think there was a degree of luck with this reported airprox
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There'll be no one watching tonight. Tassie airspace (along with a few other sectors around the country) TIBA for 7 hours.
Last edited by Roger Standby; 26th May 2008 at 15:46.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: act
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are the only western country that I know of (I fly regularly around Europe, US, Asia, Middle East) that allows 2 high capacity RPT jets to operate at the same airport without a published separation standard (note - saying "you stay at 4100, I'll maintain 3100" on the CTAF is not a published standard) Anyone see a problem here? With more 190's and possibly RJs coming into the country operating at regional airports, there is going to be more of these incidents - it's a statistical fact.
If you don't learn from other's mistakes, you are doomed to eventually make the same ones.
If you don't learn from other's mistakes, you are doomed to eventually make the same ones.
I'm in one of those moods
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SFC to A085
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rog,
.
Tis a bit like the Knight's scene from Monty Python's Holy Grail ....
.
... funny, they seem ‘armless’ enough, most of the time
.
.... hat .... coat .... bayonet .... DOOR!
.
Tis a bit like the Knight's scene from Monty Python's Holy Grail ....
.
... funny, they seem ‘armless’ enough, most of the time
.
.... hat .... coat .... bayonet .... DOOR!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Hey Rog
I am sure he will in good time, however unless they resource his Tower with enough ATC's the result might be the same.......
J
PS aanyone see the news today?
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=570538
I am sure he will in good time, however unless they resource his Tower with enough ATC's the result might be the same.......
J
PS aanyone see the news today?
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=570538