Sky Air World Rwy Excursion
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just spoke to a friend that was on the flight, the plane did a go around on the first attempt to land. The second attempt was rough with loud bangs and bumps with the aircraft swerving sideways and fish tailing, then they taxied normally to the gate. In the light of day it appears that they missed the runway and the bangs and bumps were the aircraft hitting runway lights and blowing tyres, also the wing has recieved damage from hitting the ground. From what I was told everyone in Honiara thinks they were lucky to be in one piece today, and that the aircraft will need major work before it can fly.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sth of 0
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any idea of the conditions at the time and the runway used
Also wondering if the E170 have the fuel for a diversion (guessing Santo at around 640 miles) after already having one shot or would have been committed to landing at HIR.
Sincerely hope the reports of damage are over stated.
Unfortunately the BNE - HIR route has not been all that kind to the SAW operation.
Also wondering if the E170 have the fuel for a diversion (guessing Santo at around 640 miles) after already having one shot or would have been committed to landing at HIR.
Sincerely hope the reports of damage are over stated.
Unfortunately the BNE - HIR route has not been all that kind to the SAW operation.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sth of 0
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would say that SAW would have had the SON WX, it would have to have been one of the flight plan ETP diversion airfields. Somehow I would think that SAW would not have got that wrong!!
Also if an immediate diversion was required to make SON, no problems with the legalities there, at least the fuel is there for the approach and the divert ............anyway appears you answered my question, one shot and still have the fuel for a 650mile divert, not bad after what must be almost a 3 hours flight.
Regards Munda as an alternate....that would have to be an issue with CASA surely, Airline Ops approval is their domain and as they do the approvals, surely, they would have monitered the divert destinations.
Also if an immediate diversion was required to make SON, no problems with the legalities there, at least the fuel is there for the approach and the divert ............anyway appears you answered my question, one shot and still have the fuel for a 650mile divert, not bad after what must be almost a 3 hours flight.
Regards Munda as an alternate....that would have to be an issue with CASA surely, Airline Ops approval is their domain and as they do the approvals, surely, they would have monitered the divert destinations.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
down3gr33ns
I was also in the area when the aircraft diverted, they immediately asked for the latest WX for SON, I would have thought that that would be the most prudent thing to do.
You would have diverted relying only on your forecast no doubt.
Have flown the 737, and on the rare occasion have diverted after one approach. No big deal.
We all know the 172 won't do 650 nms. The fact you call yourself down3gr33ns, does that mean you have a retractable rating?
You are the only one to use the term "defacto alternate"
Sorry, as a professional pilot, that does not compute.
Offset
You would have diverted relying only on your forecast no doubt.
Have flown the 737, and on the rare occasion have diverted after one approach. No big deal.
We all know the 172 won't do 650 nms. The fact you call yourself down3gr33ns, does that mean you have a retractable rating?
You are the only one to use the term "defacto alternate"
Sorry, as a professional pilot, that does not compute.
Offset
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Down 3g
1. Yes they requested a TAF and actual!, what would you have asked for?
2. Yes what other reason would I have diverted for?
3. Yes, your termonilogy!
4. C172, is it the aircraft type you are on at the moment?
Offset
2. Yes what other reason would I have diverted for?
3. Yes, your termonilogy!
4. C172, is it the aircraft type you are on at the moment?
Offset
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
down 3g
"As an aside, there was significant industry talk that Munda was being used as a defacto alternate - a bit of a concern as it is a sub-standard (jet) strip, no navaids, difficulty in getting TAF's etc. Can anyone confirm??"
"Significant industry talk" What does that mean? You with your pissed friends at the bar!
"Can any one confirm??" anyone at the bar confirm what what was said!
What a joke!
Offset
"Significant industry talk" What does that mean? You with your pissed friends at the bar!
"Can any one confirm??" anyone at the bar confirm what what was said!
What a joke!
Offset
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sth of 0
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the term is "TECHNICAL" alternate, not DEFACTO.
With regards WX requests, well isn't that what professional crew do, so points on the board for that one.
d3gr33ns, whilst I would be the first to admit that the most practical minimum size aircraft for the BNE - HIR - BNE route would be a 733, (Good on Our Airline) the fact remains that most commercial jets (using ETP. divert points etc) could be planned.
The fact that the E170 could shoot the HIR approach , and still divert to SON is pretty impressive,
BUT I guess that one needs to look at the payoad being diverted. Flt crew may look at KG per mile, but the BCounters look at things differently..
Must say, I have always wondered why SAW has such a hard-on for the BNE - HIR - BNE route.
Low yield and now this!
With regards WX requests, well isn't that what professional crew do, so points on the board for that one.
d3gr33ns, whilst I would be the first to admit that the most practical minimum size aircraft for the BNE - HIR - BNE route would be a 733, (Good on Our Airline) the fact remains that most commercial jets (using ETP. divert points etc) could be planned.
The fact that the E170 could shoot the HIR approach , and still divert to SON is pretty impressive,
BUT I guess that one needs to look at the payoad being diverted. Flt crew may look at KG per mile, but the BCounters look at things differently..
Must say, I have always wondered why SAW has such a hard-on for the BNE - HIR - BNE route.
Low yield and now this!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sth of 0
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sure that the facts will dribble in and eventually hit the press..... but I would have to suggest that cnic, witwiw and feenix may be the most accurate and up to date reference to this incident in the short term.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Brisbane
Age: 68
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Offset 2R ,have you not had your medication or am I missing something. The post was about an incident in Hir involving E170 operated by SAW. Instead you start bad mouthing Down 3gr33ns. In answer to your answers when I divert I ask for actual wx not a TAF I should already have. Diversions occur for all sort of reasons and not just wx and for the life of me I don't know where you got that Down3 gr33ns flies a 172 as he didn't say so and it is not in his profile. So therefore offer something constructive to the original post or go back to GA and your 172's
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Brisbane
Age: 68
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I heard further last night that the aircraft taxied in normally and it was the ground engineer who found the tyre damage and grounded the aircraft which seems to back up cnic's post. It must still be unservicable as I noted Our Airline B737 did their Emerald flight last night.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I can see Offsets' point here: You either have a legally held Alternate, or you dont. Black and white, simple.
It sihts me to tears to hear this rot like 'Technical Alternate", "De-facto Alternte" and the like. I've read Jepps and AIP, AERAD you name it and there is not one, NOT ONE, reference to a "technical" alternate.
The use of these terms should really be considered a CRM 'red flag'.
It sihts me to tears to hear this rot like 'Technical Alternate", "De-facto Alternte" and the like. I've read Jepps and AIP, AERAD you name it and there is not one, NOT ONE, reference to a "technical" alternate.
The use of these terms should really be considered a CRM 'red flag'.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The SkyAirWorld Pilots involved acted accordingly....
They dealt with the situation as best as possible.
The weather was definatly not the best of weather it was rather lousy.
The Aircraft will need some work, but will be up and running soon-ish
____________________________________________________________ __
They dealt with the situation as best as possible.
The weather was definatly not the best of weather it was rather lousy.
The Aircraft will need some work, but will be up and running soon-ish
____________________________________________________________ __
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bad Wx.... Broken at 400', pissing rain, CB's, VOR intermittent, can't understand a word from Henderson flight service, 2 Otters and a helicopter with ETA's the same as you and wait for it their VFR, this is a standard bad day at HIR.
I almost forgot to mention the dog's there is always dog's.
I almost forgot to mention the dog's there is always dog's.