Will CASA suspend JQ for descending below MSA on approach?

[scrubba]

New Oversight Rules?

Cactusjack,

I must have missed the repeal of subsection 7(a) of the Civil Aviation Act.

Can you point out the sections of the TransTasman Mutual Recognition Act that create the special "hands-off" arrangement for aviation oversight, so we can get the Civil Aviation Act amended to correctly reflect these special arrangements?

[flying-spike]

Didn't miss a repeal, just didn't read

9 CASA’s functions
(1) CASA has the function of conducting the safety regulation of the following, in accordance with this Act and the regulations:
(a) civil air operations in Australian territory;
(b) the operation of Australian aircraft outside Australian territory;
(ba) ANZA activities in New Zealand authorised by Australian AOCs with ANZA privileges;

Visa-Versa for NZ registered aircraft operating here and by the way,
7 (a)=
"Application of the Criminal Code" or if you mean this:
"7 Extra‑territorial application
This Act extends to matters relating to:
(a) foreign registered aircraft flying into or out of Australian territory or operating in Australian territory; "(not ANZA aircraft)

[Cactusjack]

Folly

(ba) ANZA activities in New Zealand authorised by Australian AOCs with ANZA privileges;

Spike beat me to it. My point exactly
Scrubba

[maggotdriver]

Having had a mate sitting in the back of a Westwind as it ploughed into the McDonnell Ranges, I can't believe people are saying this is not a big deal. It is a huge deal, it is one of the most fundamental parts of aviation "don't run out of fuel, don't hit the f...ing hills". Only luck had it that they were 1000' low at the "right" time, so to speak. The Westwind on approach to Alice Springs was the wrong time, it hit the highest boulder sitting on the range, for the sake of twenty feet left, right or up they would be here.

This is a BIG deal!

[waren9]

NZCAA has no say on Jetstar operations?

Who was it that forgot to read the 500hr rule that apparently still applies to Jetstar as a foreign AOC holder?

[Mstr Caution]

Maggot driver.

I'm with you on this one.

We'll have to wait for the report.

However, I'm concerned as to how a two pilot airliner could be 1000ft lower than it suppose to be. If there's no issues as to why it was 1000ft low. Then could the same errors lead to another aircraft being 2000ft low?

On face value an error has allegedly occurred.

I'm more concerned with the operational environment that has allowed errors to occur on a repitive basis.

[Ollie Onion]

Ah yes Waren, there are certain exclusions under the ANZA treaty and that is one of them.

[Lookleft]

If it was an RNP approach then they may have been descending in a mode other than managed and they possibly thought that the aircraft would take care of the constraints. It would explain why they could be 1000' below an altitude before they picked up the error. A two pilot cockpit is full of errors hence the need for TEM.

[amos2]

You are kidding aren't you LL?

[Angle of Attack]

Lots of opinions but looks like a stuff up, and it's pretty obvious it was, enough said, the report will bring out the details.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Lookleft:

The "aircraft will take care of the constraints"?! Fvck me, who is flying who here? That mentality represents all that is bad about automated aircraft.

[Sarcs]

possibly thought that the aircraft would take care of the constraints.

Mate LL gotta agree with Gfr (gotta love that name!) here:

Fvck me, who is flying who here?

...excuse me but you still got to monitor that the bloody computer is doing what your told it to do...FFS do you think your gettin paid to just sit and scratch your balls/b*#!

[gordonfvckingramsay]

My point exactly Sarcs. Seen it before, people happy to sit there while the aircraft flies them from A to B. you MUST monitor.

[Lookleft]

I was offering a possible explanation not excusing what happened. If you don,t think it's possible look beyond D&G and check out the YouTube video on children of the magenta. Rnp is meant to be done on managed and does even more to turn the pilots into systems monitors than just the autopilot. The ATSB started looking at the implications of RNP in incidents years ago so this will give them the opportunity to provide some safety lessons (hopefully).

[DirectAnywhere]

I'd go further.

You must put the aeroplane where YOU want it, not where it wants to put you. That takes more than just monitoring. It takes active management.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

DirectAnywhere, even better.

[Lookleft]

Couldn't agree with you more and that's why there is a whole debate on other forums about the role of the pilot and manufacturer's concerns about manual flying skills. In the words of Molly Meldrum "do yourself a favour" and look at children of the magenta on the CRM forum. The subjugation of the pilot to the machine has been happening for a while.

[ejectx3]

Unbelievable that people calling themselves professional pilots can have the mindset that "the aircraft was responsible for the approach profile"

Stop the world I want to get off.

[Jack Ranga]

No-one is indispensable (not even you Al). In the end you are just an insurance claim. The odds have been calculated. 1 in ? Chance. The hull will be lost, the claims will be paid........

All in all you're just a.......nother......brick in the wall

[Bula]

Fark me, any of you bolding non coms actually fly RNP approaches?

..... What are you going to monitor with other than the FMGC profile and your altimeter, the coriolis effect?