Qantas jet baggage door opens inflight?
be another set of ears, eyes and brains
consider the bigger picture ... such as the affect on other users or facilities
take heed of the "hairs on the back of their neck" signals
consider the bigger picture ... such as the affect on other users or facilities
take heed of the "hairs on the back of their neck" signals
Do you understand why they burn off fuel, at leat do you understand why in this instance? Do you understand why they were returning to land?
You still haven't answered the questions:
Why is it such a big deal, from an operational perspective, that the firies were there?
Have you ever put more fuel on than was totally necessary just in case?
You have watched flying high a couple to many times I suspect. I don't think it was meant to be a documentary.
Remember the Ansett B747 that returned with an engine shut down to YSSY? The firies were not called out for that one either, but the nose wheel was not down and it ended up kissing the runway and the firies deployed 'cold' after the crash alarm was sounded. There was some smouldering underneath according to the BASI report, so it could have escalated, although in this case it didn't.
Some things are not evident or expected, but what is harm in cutting off a hole in the Swiss Cheese? (With apologies to Dr James Reason.....)
Bloggsy, I thought I might get picked up on the Metro speed thing - fair call. I know the PIC would not allow it to stall, but there may have been some limitations on the performance that I was not aware of (speed, turns etc) that could impact on my ability to control the arrivals sequence. Regardless, I was very surprised that ATC was not informed.
Arigato,
Showa Cho.
Yes. Of course. Let's not get smart about things hey?
I recall attending the Darwin/ATC chief pilots forum some years back and the ATC standards person in discussion criticized pilots for using different descent profiles. He commented that some aircraft like the 402 chieftain start their descent from 10,000 at around 60 nm whilst king airs and other aircraft use 30 miles! He saw that as an issue for ATC. He didn't understand how pressurization affected a descent.
My experience with "some" ATC is that technical knowledge is not so good.
If I believed all ATC were technically savvy I wouldn't be as critical. This leads to why is it important?
Where do you draw the line?
I have returned to my departure point on several occasions over 30 years, with no emergency services provided.
Was it because this crew used the word "undercarriage" this time?
I am aware of people who are very hesitant about what information they pass on to ATC. That's not healthy.
On this occasion the pilots advised ATC three times that they did not require any emergency services. The ensuing media coverage hasn't been helpful.
Whether you like it or not, (and being public servants you probably don't care) bad publicity is not some thing a pilot seeks for their company.
If emergency services are required and not sought, there would be severe consequences for the crew.
By the way, it's not that important to me. I first posted to indicate that all that was published was non sense, it wasn't a cargo door, they didn't dump fuel, hey didn't declare an emergency and finally it was a minor problem that was lown out of all proportion.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: goulburn
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes and that is perhaps the real issue with this whole event, how the media were alerted and the story that was fed to them.
If you take them out of play, then is there any issue at all??
If you take them out of play, then is there any issue at all??
Of. Course bad media is the issue
Making an issue out of a non issue simply feeds the monkeys.
Once again, ATC can never make a decision based on hindsight.
Unfortunately, the bottom line is that, in the interests of maintaining a multi-layered safety system, operators will sometimes have to wear the effects of a media circus.
operators will sometimes have to wear the effects of a media circus.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: goulburn
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is basically wrong if someone uses radio exchanges to form their own views with incomplete knowledge and then uses that in a way to impact operators reputations.
I seem to recall there was an inference in all this that someone tipped off the media rather than some monitoring of scanners, if so there you have the problem.
If that was not the case then apologies.
I seem to recall there was an inference in all this that someone tipped off the media rather than some monitoring of scanners, if so there you have the problem.
If that was not the case then apologies.
Peuce, I agree with the concept, that if anybody becomes aware of a safety issue they report it immediately.
What I have trouble with is people with little to no technical knowledge, making decisions that effectively over rule the Captain and create an unwanted drama. That doesn't increase safety. You have to reasonably recognize a safety issue?
Where is the line, that's the real question.
My experience with Darwin ATC is that they still have trouble recognizing an aircraft. I understand it's a training base and therefore lots of inexperienced guys licking the tower window wishing they were on the other side, but maybe they should pay more attention to the input from the experienced people they deal with.
If every time I thought an ATC instruction was doubtful, I decided to take upon myself to take action in the name of safety, it would create havoc and certainly wouldn't be appreciated by any one.
I thinks it's fair to say, once a crew are flying larger turbo props, Dash8 s and larger through jets, there has to be enough experience on board to expect them to make appropriate decisions. Listen to them. If they indicate there maybe a problem then sure go for it, call the cavalry.
What I have trouble with is people with little to no technical knowledge, making decisions that effectively over rule the Captain and create an unwanted drama. That doesn't increase safety. You have to reasonably recognize a safety issue?
Where is the line, that's the real question.
My experience with Darwin ATC is that they still have trouble recognizing an aircraft. I understand it's a training base and therefore lots of inexperienced guys licking the tower window wishing they were on the other side, but maybe they should pay more attention to the input from the experienced people they deal with.
If every time I thought an ATC instruction was doubtful, I decided to take upon myself to take action in the name of safety, it would create havoc and certainly wouldn't be appreciated by any one.
I thinks it's fair to say, once a crew are flying larger turbo props, Dash8 s and larger through jets, there has to be enough experience on board to expect them to make appropriate decisions. Listen to them. If they indicate there maybe a problem then sure go for it, call the cavalry.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why should this even be given a second thought? Whether the emergency services were required or not, it was the ATC on the line if it indeed became a much larger problem and they took the initiative of having some vehicles on standby. Of course we can expect the media will publicise it "...emergency vehicles surrounded the aircraft", but if that's what happened I'm sure everyone walked away not have to feel responsible for a major accident.
IMHO, much better to say "ah well" than "what if?".
IMHO, much better to say "ah well" than "what if?".
