Near Miss - Darwin
I'd be happy if we just had some more staff !
Till now Ben Sandilands blog 'Planetalking' has been a lone voice on these issues, see here..Virgin Blue jet nearly wiped out by RAAF air controllers | Plane Talking ....and this event...Darwin ATC sent two Qantas jets on collision course | Plane Talking
This incident is getting a bit more mainstream media coverage but there still seems to be a disconnect to the 'how' and 'why'!
As Ben points out we currently have a Minister who is totally dis-enfranchised from his portfolio, see here:
It is clear for a number of reasons that the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, is acutely aware of the issues that are compromising public safety in air transport in this country. But as well as running a very complex and important portfolio, Anthony Albanese is also the leader of government business in the House of Representatives, a work load that seems designed to either fail or break anyone in his position.
Whatever PM Kevin Rudd was thinking when he devised this ministry structure, or whatever the current PM Julia Gillard was thinking when she left it untouched, it is one that is more than capable of failing or breaking aviation safety in Australia.
Whatever PM Kevin Rudd was thinking when he devised this ministry structure, or whatever the current PM Julia Gillard was thinking when she left it untouched, it is one that is more than capable of failing or breaking aviation safety in Australia.
Some of the comments from the PT blog highlight the very real safety issues at play with this event:
comet
Posted October 10, 2012 at 8:17 pm | Permalink
I think civilian lives come before any military needs.
The near misses and close-calls have gone from being a monthly event to a weekly event in Australia. The coming aviation disaster is inevitable, just on probability.
Brett karran
Posted October 10, 2012 at 11:52 pm | Permalink
As a 14 year Military ATC and now working within the SMS and Emergency Management environment, I respect your right to report incidents that have arisen in the course of the ATC duties. Why don’t you try and balance this by showing the statistics for the number of ‘controlled’ hours v number of incidents.
Everyday, worldwide, our ATC both civil and military do a fantastic job keeping our skies safe. Yes, issues occur, yes – if not detected, they could be catastrophic. ATC and Aircrew work in partnership to keep our skies safe and Australia has some of the safest airspace in the world. Report that!!!
Ben Sandilands
Posted October 11, 2012 at 6:37 am | Permalink
Brett,
I’m surprised that you haven’t read the ATSB report I linked to concerning the Newcastle incident of February 2011 between a chartered defence Westwind that was on approach to Williamtown and the Virgin Blue 737-700 that was climbed away from Williamtown.
Not only were the jets placed on a collision course, but deliberately done so, because as the report says, the controller assumed they would miss.
They only missed because of the TCAS alert and advisory generated in the Virgin cockpit.
This report also deals with 9 other then recent examples of defective military air traffic control at Williamtown. That is a very high rate of serial incompetency by military control at that airport.
If you go back through the file of ATSB notifications of investigations currently displayed on its website you will find that incidents at Darwin whether in the ground operations or when aircraft are in the air display an alarming and persistent rate of failure on the part of the terminal and approach control.
This performance is not keeping our skies safe. It is exposing us to unacceptably inferior levels of competency.
Not even the minister has been able to get the operational figures you suggest that I publish. Early this year he instigated up an ATSB investigation into the rate of proximity incidents in Australian controlled airspace, which includes both military control of civil movements, and civil control of civil movements, in order to get such figures and other important data.
Posted October 10, 2012 at 8:17 pm | Permalink
I think civilian lives come before any military needs.
The near misses and close-calls have gone from being a monthly event to a weekly event in Australia. The coming aviation disaster is inevitable, just on probability.
Brett karran
Posted October 10, 2012 at 11:52 pm | Permalink
As a 14 year Military ATC and now working within the SMS and Emergency Management environment, I respect your right to report incidents that have arisen in the course of the ATC duties. Why don’t you try and balance this by showing the statistics for the number of ‘controlled’ hours v number of incidents.
Everyday, worldwide, our ATC both civil and military do a fantastic job keeping our skies safe. Yes, issues occur, yes – if not detected, they could be catastrophic. ATC and Aircrew work in partnership to keep our skies safe and Australia has some of the safest airspace in the world. Report that!!!
Ben Sandilands
Posted October 11, 2012 at 6:37 am | Permalink
Brett,
I’m surprised that you haven’t read the ATSB report I linked to concerning the Newcastle incident of February 2011 between a chartered defence Westwind that was on approach to Williamtown and the Virgin Blue 737-700 that was climbed away from Williamtown.
Not only were the jets placed on a collision course, but deliberately done so, because as the report says, the controller assumed they would miss.
They only missed because of the TCAS alert and advisory generated in the Virgin cockpit.
This report also deals with 9 other then recent examples of defective military air traffic control at Williamtown. That is a very high rate of serial incompetency by military control at that airport.
If you go back through the file of ATSB notifications of investigations currently displayed on its website you will find that incidents at Darwin whether in the ground operations or when aircraft are in the air display an alarming and persistent rate of failure on the part of the terminal and approach control.
This performance is not keeping our skies safe. It is exposing us to unacceptably inferior levels of competency.
Not even the minister has been able to get the operational figures you suggest that I publish. Early this year he instigated up an ATSB investigation into the rate of proximity incidents in Australian controlled airspace, which includes both military control of civil movements, and civil control of civil movements, in order to get such figures and other important data.
Last edited by Sarcs; 10th Oct 2012 at 22:03.
And two days later......
Investigation: AO-2012-119 - Loss of separation assurance - VH-ZZJ / VH-LOJ, Bombardier DHC-8-202 / Aerospatiale AS332L, Darwin Airport, NT, 4 September 2012
Summary
The Bombardier DHC-8 was cleared for takeoff on runway 29 and the Aerospatiale AS332 being cleared for takeoff on runway 36. The crew of the DHC-8 elected to delay takeoff until the AS332 had crossed runway 29. The investigation is continuing.
*
The Bombardier DHC-8 was cleared for takeoff on runway 29 and the Aerospatiale AS332 being cleared for takeoff on runway 36. The crew of the DHC-8 elected to delay takeoff until the AS332 had crossed runway 29. The investigation is continuing.
*
Last edited by RENURPP; 10th Oct 2012 at 22:55.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CRIKEY August 3, 2012
Qantas, Air China jets flew too close after Australian ATC forgot they were converging at same altitude
by Ben Sandilands
Another day, another third world screw up by Australian air traffic control.
This time an ATSB report out this morning highlights how on an Air China A330-200, flying from Melbourne to Shanghai, and a Qantas 737-800 flying from Sydney to Darwin, were known to Airservices to be flying at the same altitude of 36,000 feet and on converging paths as they entered airspace above Tindal, south of the NT capital, and then forgot about them until an air traffic control system alert went off.
The incident happened on 6 April this year, and would have put the lives of more than 400 people at risk had each jet been flying full.
The lapse occurred when one controller was handing over the area he was controlling to a replacement.
When the conflict alert drew the attention of the replacement controller to the situation the jets were separated by the minimum required lateral space of five nautical mile.
However momentum and reaction time saw that distance shrink to 3.5 nautical miles before orders to one aircraft to climb and another to descend to different levels restored the distance between them to levels required by the safety regulations.
On Tuesday the ATSB dissected an incident in which an air traffic control with a ‘mental model problem’ sent a Crown Casino Gulfstream G-IV jet headlong in a descent path under the nose of an approaching Virgin Australia Boeing 737 while both jets were vectored under professional control into the same part of the sky near Armidale last October.
There are serious issues of professional and managerial competency in Airservices. They are being addressed in part by a broader study by the ATSB ordered by the Minister for Transport, Anthony Albanese, in February, and various changes in command in the air navigation services provider.
The question as to whether they are being addressed with sufficient urgency and depth remains unanswered, as jets continue to be mishandled in Australian airspace with unacceptable frequency.
Qantas, Air China jets flew too close after Australian ATC forgot they were converging at same altitude
by Ben Sandilands
Another day, another third world screw up by Australian air traffic control.
This time an ATSB report out this morning highlights how on an Air China A330-200, flying from Melbourne to Shanghai, and a Qantas 737-800 flying from Sydney to Darwin, were known to Airservices to be flying at the same altitude of 36,000 feet and on converging paths as they entered airspace above Tindal, south of the NT capital, and then forgot about them until an air traffic control system alert went off.
The incident happened on 6 April this year, and would have put the lives of more than 400 people at risk had each jet been flying full.
The lapse occurred when one controller was handing over the area he was controlling to a replacement.
When the conflict alert drew the attention of the replacement controller to the situation the jets were separated by the minimum required lateral space of five nautical mile.
However momentum and reaction time saw that distance shrink to 3.5 nautical miles before orders to one aircraft to climb and another to descend to different levels restored the distance between them to levels required by the safety regulations.
On Tuesday the ATSB dissected an incident in which an air traffic control with a ‘mental model problem’ sent a Crown Casino Gulfstream G-IV jet headlong in a descent path under the nose of an approaching Virgin Australia Boeing 737 while both jets were vectored under professional control into the same part of the sky near Armidale last October.
There are serious issues of professional and managerial competency in Airservices. They are being addressed in part by a broader study by the ATSB ordered by the Minister for Transport, Anthony Albanese, in February, and various changes in command in the air navigation services provider.
The question as to whether they are being addressed with sufficient urgency and depth remains unanswered, as jets continue to be mishandled in Australian airspace with unacceptable frequency.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Tallong NSW
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ben has published a screen grab of the Virgin Australia incident report and the attempt to downplay the incident. Wonder if the same details gonna come out of Darwin.
Airservices 'lost Virgin jet' screen grab unmasks its lies | Plane Talking
Airservices 'lost Virgin jet' screen grab unmasks its lies | Plane Talking
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canberra
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about this for a plan:
- Darwin is basically a civilian aerodrome and ATC should be handed to AsA
- There are no base squadrons at Darwin to relocate
- AsA increase their revenue
- Defence reduce their costs
- Training exercises can still be held at Darwin ala similar to Rockhampton
- Maybe conduct the winter exercises at Learmonth, Curtin or Scherger away from high volumes of civilian traffic (beneath high level oveffliers obviously)
A lot of the work has already been done in the past. Having said all this if I was Albo Id want AsA to get their own *stuff* in a pile before trusting them with anything more than what they have at the moment.
- Darwin is basically a civilian aerodrome and ATC should be handed to AsA
- There are no base squadrons at Darwin to relocate
- AsA increase their revenue
- Defence reduce their costs
- Training exercises can still be held at Darwin ala similar to Rockhampton
- Maybe conduct the winter exercises at Learmonth, Curtin or Scherger away from high volumes of civilian traffic (beneath high level oveffliers obviously)
A lot of the work has already been done in the past. Having said all this if I was Albo Id want AsA to get their own *stuff* in a pile before trusting them with anything more than what they have at the moment.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How short some peoples memories are...
the very reason (other than being a nice tactical location) that defence does ATC at Darwin is because when cyclone Tracy hit all those years ago, all the civil ATC went walkabout, leaving Darwin in a bit of a mess when it came to the recovery operation.
that is why military ATC operate there and why they will continue to do so.
the very reason (other than being a nice tactical location) that defence does ATC at Darwin is because when cyclone Tracy hit all those years ago, all the civil ATC went walkabout, leaving Darwin in a bit of a mess when it came to the recovery operation.
that is why military ATC operate there and why they will continue to do so.
How short some peoples memories are...
the very reason (other than being a nice tactical location) that defence does ATC at Darwin is because when cyclone Tracy hit all those years ago, all the civil ATC went walkabout, leaving Darwin in a bit of a mess when it came to the recovery operation.
that is why military ATC operate there and why they will continue to do so.
the very reason (other than being a nice tactical location) that defence does ATC at Darwin is because when cyclone Tracy hit all those years ago, all the civil ATC went walkabout, leaving Darwin in a bit of a mess when it came to the recovery operation.
that is why military ATC operate there and why they will continue to do so.
If that's the case why aren't RAAF screwing up the controlling in Cairns, Rocky, McKay etc, they all get cyclones.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They have a base to operate out of in the far north (Townsville).
Remember that Darwin is a capital city, you cant just have controllers walk out on the job and expect no fallout from it.
Its not an arguement I am making, its just the facts; thats why RAAF control Darwin. That and the fact it is a military base. some people tend to forget that.
Remember that Darwin is a capital city, you cant just have controllers walk out on the job and expect no fallout from it.
Its not an arguement I am making, its just the facts; thats why RAAF control Darwin. That and the fact it is a military base. some people tend to forget that.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"How short some peoples memories are...
the very reason (other than being a nice tactical location) that defence does ATC at Darwin is because when cyclone Tracy hit all those years ago, all the civil ATC went walkabout, leaving Darwin in a bit of a mess when it came to the recovery operation.
that is why military ATC operate there and why they will continue to do so."
Went "walkabout" or couldn't get in or when they could,
were ordered to evacuate ?
What about the thought that
1. Their wasn't much left of Darwin Airport after Tracy went through.
2. All official radio communication from Darwin was cut because
all the radio transmitters and aerials had been destroyed.
3. Anyone would have been out in the suburbs might not have been able
to get to the airport.
The first plane into Darwin was a Fokker F27 after the aircraft
was contacted by a RAAF safety officer from his vehicle radio
while they were circling the city trying to work out what to do
or where to land. The RAAF officer then cleared enough of the
runway so they could land.
Another F27 arrived an hour later and then the RAAF C-130
with General Stretton aboard so from then on the city was under
Stretton's control.
Not many people in Darwin were at their posts at the
start of Christmas Day !
the very reason (other than being a nice tactical location) that defence does ATC at Darwin is because when cyclone Tracy hit all those years ago, all the civil ATC went walkabout, leaving Darwin in a bit of a mess when it came to the recovery operation.
that is why military ATC operate there and why they will continue to do so."
Went "walkabout" or couldn't get in or when they could,
were ordered to evacuate ?
What about the thought that
1. Their wasn't much left of Darwin Airport after Tracy went through.
2. All official radio communication from Darwin was cut because
all the radio transmitters and aerials had been destroyed.
3. Anyone would have been out in the suburbs might not have been able
to get to the airport.
The first plane into Darwin was a Fokker F27 after the aircraft
was contacted by a RAAF safety officer from his vehicle radio
while they were circling the city trying to work out what to do
or where to land. The RAAF officer then cleared enough of the
runway so they could land.
Another F27 arrived an hour later and then the RAAF C-130
with General Stretton aboard so from then on the city was under
Stretton's control.
Not many people in Darwin were at their posts at the
start of Christmas Day !
Last edited by 500N; 13th Oct 2012 at 05:01.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Darwin,N T
Age: 76
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Darwin ATIS
As a radio tech working for ASA in Darwin, I am surprised that a discrete VHF outlet isn't provided for this facility. The service on NDB is low Fi, the one on VOR is low level(due to modulation constraints). Would be easy to set up a VHF service from Knuckeys Lagoon. Anyway a happy new year to all you guys.
