PERTH 6/12
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keg, thanks for the considered response. In answer to your direct question, not a lot. I am beginning to see that I may have jumped a bit too high here, so I apologise to an extent. I still think 6-8 hours is excessive, but see how it could have got to that state.
Nunc est bibendum
Just a bit of updated info. From my understanding- and this gleaned from a bunch of different sources including the news- the airport was on a 5nm for most of the day from 1000 onwards. Now THAT is unusual in terms of having T/S with lightening around for that length of time and it certainly wouldn't take long for a back log of 15-20 aircraft just for the Qantas terminal. Once they say 'go', to turn all those aeroplanes around is going to take a bloody long time with only 5-7 gates available. Depending on the aircraft types would depend on the gates available, etc.
Just 'one of those days' I guess. Glad I wasn't out in it.
Just 'one of those days' I guess. Glad I wasn't out in it.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: oz
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"copa airlines embraer 190 gets struck by lightning"
Watch the r/h nose wheel just after the lightning hits the tail. Lucky no one was on the headset at this time. Puts it into perpective!
Watch the r/h nose wheel just after the lightning hits the tail. Lucky no one was on the headset at this time. Puts it into perpective!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: In the bone yard.
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IIRC during the storm when they guy in SYD was struck the Weather Bureau reported that the lightning strike count within the airport perimeter during that storm went over 4000.
As you saw in the Copa clip strikes can happen in 'apparently' safe conditions.
As a study into the ramifications of ordering or allowing people to stay outdoors during thunderstorm activity the MOCK TRIAL trial of a real QF Duty Maintenance Manager was held at the QF SDT. It was conducted by real lawyers and Police prosecutors. The DMM was accused of culpability arising out of the death by lightning strike of an apprentice engineer who was out on the ramp during a thunderstorm.
I can tell you that after that little glimpse into the legal process the storm warning & ramp clearance policies were strictly adhered to during every future instance.
As you saw in the Copa clip strikes can happen in 'apparently' safe conditions.
As a study into the ramifications of ordering or allowing people to stay outdoors during thunderstorm activity the MOCK TRIAL trial of a real QF Duty Maintenance Manager was held at the QF SDT. It was conducted by real lawyers and Police prosecutors. The DMM was accused of culpability arising out of the death by lightning strike of an apprentice engineer who was out on the ramp during a thunderstorm.
I can tell you that after that little glimpse into the legal process the storm warning & ramp clearance policies were strictly adhered to during every future instance.
Is this actually the case?
Qantas passengers fume as storm creates chaos - The West Australian
This seems like an unusual thing to have in an award. Last time I was at an airport when the Aerodrome Lightning Warning was issued all staff ran for cover, and no one was allowed outside til the warning passed. Now VA and others apparently have an exemption to that and let staff work in lightning storms ? Or is it just G. Thomas having a go at those "over unionised QF employees creating havoc for passengers by having outdated work practices compared to their Virgin counterparts" again?
Qantas passengers fume as storm creates chaos - The West Australian
Safety provisions in the Qantas baggage handlers and engineers' awards prevent staff working on the tarmac when there is lightning within 5km of the airport.
Other airlines - whose staff work under different provisions - were unaffected, although the weather played havoc with arrivals and departures.
Other airlines - whose staff work under different provisions - were unaffected, although the weather played havoc with arrivals and departures.
I can't speak for engineers and baggage handlers but for tech crew, it is policy contained in the operational suite of manuals: "Operations during Thunderstorms (Including Ramp Operations)" and it is published by Flight Technical. Nothing to do with the award.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lightning can strike well ahead of, or behind, a storm system. 5 kms is really not enough to ensure safety. See this article -
Lightning Detectors Provide Early Thunderstorm Warning and Save Lives
I have observed a lightning strike just over my back fence when the associated storm was about 10 miles away. It was a very small bolt, but probably could have killed. There was no associated thunder. I was mowing the lawn at the time, rushing to finish before the rain. Needless to say, I packed up immediately & hightailed it into the house!
I think this could be an explaination as to why people get struck on golf courses, on the beach, in the park, etc. They think that because the storm is in the distance they are safe. It would also explain why a number of these victims survive, with the lightning bolt being very small.
Lightning Detectors Provide Early Thunderstorm Warning and Save Lives
Lightning is also unpredictable - even sneaky. While most strikes occur close to the rain, hail and winds of a thunderstorm, a significant proportion occur well before or after the main part of the storm has passed. For more information visit the Lightning page.
Strikes 10 miles (16km) or more ahead of the storm are not uncommon, and while the storm may be visible in open country, at this distance thunder may not be heard. These sorts of strikes are often referred to as "bolts from the blue"
(my emphasis)
Strikes 10 miles (16km) or more ahead of the storm are not uncommon, and while the storm may be visible in open country, at this distance thunder may not be heard. These sorts of strikes are often referred to as "bolts from the blue"
(my emphasis)
I think this could be an explaination as to why people get struck on golf courses, on the beach, in the park, etc. They think that because the storm is in the distance they are safe. It would also explain why a number of these victims survive, with the lightning bolt being very small.
But were the staff members of other airlines actively working outside on the ramp whilst an aerodrome lightning warning was active at Perth yesterday? If so it reflects very poorly on these other companies for allowing this to happen, and on the staff for choosing to be out in the open, even though the storms seem to be long way away.
My thoughts are that the airport authorities would have lifted the warnings if there was a chance to do so, even for a few minutes, to allow some waiting aircraft the chance to park at the bay and connect an aerobridge.
Or are Qantas just being overcautious?
My thoughts are that the airport authorities would have lifted the warnings if there was a chance to do so, even for a few minutes, to allow some waiting aircraft the chance to park at the bay and connect an aerobridge.
Or are Qantas just being overcautious?
Nunc est bibendum
At Sydney if the lights are flashing, they flash all over the airport and everyone is off the ramp no matter what company they work for. I've not heard of something like this being in an award. It would be an OHS issue first and foremost and it wouldn't matter if the award said you can work outside, it won't absolve a manager's duty of care of the individual.
My thoughts are that the airport authorities would have lifted the warnings if there was a chance to do so, even for a few minutes, to allow some waiting aircraft the chance to park at the bay and connect an aerobridge.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys, the 5nm warning is Qantas company policy. The 5nm tarmac shutdowns are directed from the Sydney operations centre based on weather radar. Whether this is sensible or not, and whether they could've done it better, well that's another issue. But they're the facts.
Yes, there was a LOT of lightning in those storms. We sat there, engines running for 5 hours (and we got off lightly compared to others), watching it and waiting for the tarmac to open and the backlog to clear. It was a spectacular display at times. One outbound crew relayed to me how passengers were whining in the gate lounge that they should be allowed to board, until a lightning bolt struck the near the aerobridge with a nice loud crack. Then they went real quiet!
Re the SAA airbus, don't know whether it was struck by lightning (though one of our 767s certainly was struck during approach), but the media report is not entirely correct. It had two burst/flat tyres. It was not an indication problem. How do I know that? It turned off the runway right in front of us after landing and sat there while the fire crews and their ground engineer inspected it. The deflated tyres were clearly visible, one on the left bogie and one on the centre. That incident, plus several medical issues on various aircraft, just added to a really crap day.
It was definitely one of those "let's chuck on another 6 tonnes" days! There were indeed some very agitated and anxious passengers, but feedback was that the pax, despite a few eyeing off the doors & slides, were generally very happy with how the crews handled it all. A few PAs stating that "we share your frustration and pain" (which was quite genuinely true!) seemed to do the trick.
Yes, there was a LOT of lightning in those storms. We sat there, engines running for 5 hours (and we got off lightly compared to others), watching it and waiting for the tarmac to open and the backlog to clear. It was a spectacular display at times. One outbound crew relayed to me how passengers were whining in the gate lounge that they should be allowed to board, until a lightning bolt struck the near the aerobridge with a nice loud crack. Then they went real quiet!
Re the SAA airbus, don't know whether it was struck by lightning (though one of our 767s certainly was struck during approach), but the media report is not entirely correct. It had two burst/flat tyres. It was not an indication problem. How do I know that? It turned off the runway right in front of us after landing and sat there while the fire crews and their ground engineer inspected it. The deflated tyres were clearly visible, one on the left bogie and one on the centre. That incident, plus several medical issues on various aircraft, just added to a really crap day.
It was definitely one of those "let's chuck on another 6 tonnes" days! There were indeed some very agitated and anxious passengers, but feedback was that the pax, despite a few eyeing off the doors & slides, were generally very happy with how the crews handled it all. A few PAs stating that "we share your frustration and pain" (which was quite genuinely true!) seemed to do the trick.
Nunc est bibendum
...but feedback was that the pax, despite a few eyeing off the doors & slides,
That they were doing so after up to 8 1/2 hours is no surprise.