Merged: Tiger Tales
In was listening to this flight on my scanner.
App advised the crew that the wind on the ground at Avv was 010/08 and which Runway would you like? The crew said 18 ILS. So far no problems, 8 kts is well within limits.
Next call was a "Go Cat... Going around, climbing to 2500'" ( as published )
App advised to climb to 3000' ( They CORRECTLY DECIDED THAT THEIR TAILWIND AT 800' WAS TOO MUCH and wisely went around )
They then conducted a visual tear drop back to RWY 36, most likely within the circling area at all times.
App also confirmed if they were visual and they said yes.
So, if they stayed in the circling area and remained visual with the runway 36 approach environment and threshold WHAT IS THE PROBLEM???????
They didn't need to climb back up and do another VOR app for 36 as they were VISUAL.....
Some people need to settle down.
I would probably have done the same thing myself if diverting there at night. Normally a straight in app on an ILS is easier and SAFER than a non prec approach.
App advised the crew that the wind on the ground at Avv was 010/08 and which Runway would you like? The crew said 18 ILS. So far no problems, 8 kts is well within limits.
Next call was a "Go Cat... Going around, climbing to 2500'" ( as published )
App advised to climb to 3000' ( They CORRECTLY DECIDED THAT THEIR TAILWIND AT 800' WAS TOO MUCH and wisely went around )
They then conducted a visual tear drop back to RWY 36, most likely within the circling area at all times.
App also confirmed if they were visual and they said yes.
So, if they stayed in the circling area and remained visual with the runway 36 approach environment and threshold WHAT IS THE PROBLEM???????
They didn't need to climb back up and do another VOR app for 36 as they were VISUAL.....
Some people need to settle down.
I would probably have done the same thing myself if diverting there at night. Normally a straight in app on an ILS is easier and SAFER than a non prec approach.
Perhaps what they should have done when they realized they had too much tailwind is break off to the east and conduct a right hand visual circuit at 1,500' within the circling area.
Even at 800' on a 2 nm final for 18 they could have broken left and climbed back to at least 1000' to circle or indeed stayed at 800' as 800' is the CAT D circling minima.
What I don't understand is Mel App telling the crew to climb to 3000'?? They are OCTA and can dam well do as they please without ATC interference and besides:
1/ the published missed app is 2,500' and
2/ the MSA to the south within 25 nm is 2,500'
I think ATC might not have helped the crew and only added to their workload.
Even at 800' on a 2 nm final for 18 they could have broken left and climbed back to at least 1000' to circle or indeed stayed at 800' as 800' is the CAT D circling minima.
What I don't understand is Mel App telling the crew to climb to 3000'?? They are OCTA and can dam well do as they please without ATC interference and besides:
1/ the published missed app is 2,500' and
2/ the MSA to the south within 25 nm is 2,500'
I think ATC might not have helped the crew and only added to their workload.
Last edited by nitpicker330; 2nd Jul 2011 at 01:33.
Nitpicker, how, pray tell, were they supposed to maintain visual reference with the landing runway while circling to land with the runway behind them while flying the missed approach for the ILS?
Nuts idea.
Nuts idea.
Last edited by DirectAnywhere; 2nd Jul 2011 at 02:04.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sunny QLD
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seen others do it on missed approach from the southern runway (14 from memory?) VOR approach. teardrop and land 32 in VERY marginal conditions....
We tried twice to get in and diverted to BNE but somehow the other carrier decided a teardrop from missed approach in circling area was ok. I too questioned how they could have maintained visual reference with runway whilst pointing the other way.
We tried twice to get in and diverted to BNE but somehow the other carrier decided a teardrop from missed approach in circling area was ok. I too questioned how they could have maintained visual reference with runway whilst pointing the other way.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Earth!
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jumping the gun?
Zone - if what you say is correct maybe CASA have jumped the gun a bit? Suspending the AOC before they even know whats happened perhaps?
However I guess all will be revealed in due course...
I do agree with Ero-Plano though, in that its all very strange that JQ come VERY close to killing hundreds of people in MEL and DRW and get no such action.
However I guess all will be revealed in due course...
I do agree with Ero-Plano though, in that its all very strange that JQ come VERY close to killing hundreds of people in MEL and DRW and get no such action.
JQ come VERY close to killing hundreds of people in MEL and DRW and get no such action.
But this will be a wake up call at places like JQ hopefully
Question is Tigers name is now mud. Do they really think they can solve all the issues in 7 days and do they really think pax will still fly them? or will they take their bat and ball and go back to SIN?
Zone - if what you say is correct maybe CASA have jumped the gun a bit? Suspending the AOC before they even know whats happened perhaps?
I would suggest that this would have only been a small part of the reason.
Let's hope that this is the start of CASA doing what it should and not just picking a soft target to be seen.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During that approach and at about 15 kilometres from Avalon the jet was tracked as descending suddenly to as low as about 1600 feet at a point where the minimum safe altitude is 2500 feet.
The question is how far was the aircraft from the 36 runway threshold when it first descended below 2500'? Quoting Ben Sandilands, 15Km= 8.1nm. I am not sure where this data comes from, however, if it is correct then this would constitute operating below LSALT at night in contravention of the AIP.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Doing a pre flight inspection
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I sincerely wish all Tiger guys and gals the best over the next few days. Hopefully when airborne again, your will be more properly supported by your management.
Perhaps the Senate Enquiry has shined more a heatlamp spotlight towards the Minister and CASA more than many give credit for. Maybe, just maybe, CASA actually might start to regulate, not just pontificate. Maybe the levels of overall support to repressed crews in this country might come under more scrutiny.
Systemically, we have seen decades of our governments stripping services designed to support pilots, CASA failing to regulate and rewrite their regs in suport of pilots, and airline management squeezing the max from their pilots with a disregard of related human factor issues, max duty hours and and max pax, all putting greater levels of responsibility on crews who can be more tired, more reliant on automation in an environment now littered with more traps and holes in the cheese than ever before. There is a tower at Avalon, but was there a controller there at the time of this incident to support this crew? Qantas pays ASA to keep towers operating for even delayed Qantas arrivals, but do LCC need this level of support also? If not, why is there a difference Mr CASA? Is the risk assessment worth reexamining?
Perhaps the Senate Enquiry has shined more a heatlamp spotlight towards the Minister and CASA more than many give credit for. Maybe, just maybe, CASA actually might start to regulate, not just pontificate. Maybe the levels of overall support to repressed crews in this country might come under more scrutiny.
Systemically, we have seen decades of our governments stripping services designed to support pilots, CASA failing to regulate and rewrite their regs in suport of pilots, and airline management squeezing the max from their pilots with a disregard of related human factor issues, max duty hours and and max pax, all putting greater levels of responsibility on crews who can be more tired, more reliant on automation in an environment now littered with more traps and holes in the cheese than ever before. There is a tower at Avalon, but was there a controller there at the time of this incident to support this crew? Qantas pays ASA to keep towers operating for even delayed Qantas arrivals, but do LCC need this level of support also? If not, why is there a difference Mr CASA? Is the risk assessment worth reexamining?
I too questioned how they could have maintained visual reference with runway whilst pointing the other way.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it hard to understand how the Authorities in Australia allow Commercial Jets to Operate in the middle of the night into places like Avalon where the Tower is unmanned. CASA should seriously look into the safety of such operations (CTAF ) for Airline Operations. Furthermore and I hate to say this but ATC is no great help to pilots in this country, very often they make the pilot's job harder.
After reading the Tiger reason for the suspension of services and comparing it with the initial CASA press release I would have to say Tiger are in denial.
CASA are concerned about a number of serious issues including the Tiger management and operational position holders are not appropriately qualified.
When Shelley Roberts resigned there were rumours she could not do her 'own thing' and was dictated to by Davis of SIN when she wanted to restructure Tiger Australia and employ more resources.
After viewing some of the Tiger testimony given at the Senate hearing I could not believe the level of incompetence of the CEO Rix and the Director of Flight Operations Berry
CASA are concerned about a number of serious issues including the Tiger management and operational position holders are not appropriately qualified.
When Shelley Roberts resigned there were rumours she could not do her 'own thing' and was dictated to by Davis of SIN when she wanted to restructure Tiger Australia and employ more resources.
After viewing some of the Tiger testimony given at the Senate hearing I could not believe the level of incompetence of the CEO Rix and the Director of Flight Operations Berry
Well gee mate let me think........
Mmmmmm
Doing a missed approach at 800' is 2.5 nm north of the runway, move to the left ( east ) and join down wind. We do it ALL the time in Fukuoka, after flying the ILS 16 down to 1500' we break right and join down wind for Rwy 34, all at night.
I realize that they were breaking off the approach at only 800' but it should still permit a 45 deg left turn to join downwind whilst the FO keeps sight of the runway out of the right window ( but does he have to? ) I will agree though that it may be a bit late.
Obviously they hadn't pre briefed the procedure or thought about what they would do.
In any event flying the published missed approach to 2,500' south would permit them plenty of time and space to re join the circuit then descend to 1500' for a visual right base within the circling area.
Mmmmmm
Doing a missed approach at 800' is 2.5 nm north of the runway, move to the left ( east ) and join down wind. We do it ALL the time in Fukuoka, after flying the ILS 16 down to 1500' we break right and join down wind for Rwy 34, all at night.
I realize that they were breaking off the approach at only 800' but it should still permit a 45 deg left turn to join downwind whilst the FO keeps sight of the runway out of the right window ( but does he have to? ) I will agree though that it may be a bit late.
Obviously they hadn't pre briefed the procedure or thought about what they would do.
In any event flying the published missed approach to 2,500' south would permit them plenty of time and space to re join the circuit then descend to 1500' for a visual right base within the circling area.
Last edited by nitpicker330; 2nd Jul 2011 at 03:32.
CASA are concerned about a number of serious issues including the Tiger management and operational position holders are not appropriately qualified.
CASA has to approve the people in the positions initially and then when people move on they re-assess the new "applicant" for the position.
So in regard to this issue, CASA are saying we are not confident in the people WE APPROVED for those positions. Or does it mean that having seen how they operate, CASA are no longer confident in these people and their ability to act appropriately?
Their qualifications cannot be the issue surely as they were previously assessed.
There is clearly more to all this.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Aloft
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Zone: you said it yourself - Cat D (in fact on any of the IACs) is the maximum circling area for which adequate obstacle clearance has been established and published.
So in this case a higher category for circling is N/A
Therefore MSA applies.
So in this case a higher category for circling is N/A
Therefore MSA applies.
T-Vasis. I agree and embarrassing for the largest shareholder - Singapore Airlines (SQ) who own approx one third of Tiger. I suspect SQ will be doing some soul searching.
