Near Miss - Darwin
Bottums Up
Thread Starter
QantasLink & Qantas Domestic Near Miss - Darwin
A Qantas 738 and a Qantaslink 712 had a close call last week. 5 Dogs was perhaps too cryptic with his/her post - http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/4970...t-cracker.html. Less than 1000' separation, allegedly. 
ATSB investigating. Investigation: AO-2012-131 - Loss of separation assurance VH-NXQ / QFA A839, near Darwin NT, 2 October 2012
ATSB investigating. Investigation: AO-2012-131 - Loss of separation assurance VH-NXQ / QFA A839, near Darwin NT, 2 October 2012
Originally Posted by RENURPP
Even though I wasn't present for their latest effort, (I am aware of the crews input) I strongly agree they (Darwin ATC) are a shambles, have been for many many years and I suspect nothing will change, after all it is the military.
This is a link to the ATSB report which should become interesting.
Investigation: AO-2012-131 - Loss of separation assurance VH-NXQ / QFA A839, near Darwin NT, 2 October 2012
Two aircraft allocated the one SSR code.
The aircraft past within 800 feet (possibly closer) vertically of each other.
Last minute runway changes with no supporting clearance, simply advised of a runway change and track direct Darwin.
Asked for more track miles only to be given a clearance to divert around weather.
Then after landing lectured on changing to ground. like that was the worst event that happened in the last 10 minutes
This is a link to the ATSB report which should become interesting.
Investigation: AO-2012-131 - Loss of separation assurance VH-NXQ / QFA A839, near Darwin NT, 2 October 2012
Two aircraft allocated the one SSR code.
The aircraft past within 800 feet (possibly closer) vertically of each other.
Last minute runway changes with no supporting clearance, simply advised of a runway change and track direct Darwin.
Asked for more track miles only to be given a clearance to divert around weather.
Then after landing lectured on changing to ground. like that was the worst event that happened in the last 10 minutes
Last edited by Capt Claret; 7th Oct 2012 at 07:39.
Cannot comment on the incident referred to, but am often irked by Darwin ATC issuing 4 instructions with the takeoff clearance, all delivered at machine-gun speed. The "fast-talking" seems to be a hallmark of military controllers. Apart from that, the place is decades overdue for a discrete VHF frequency for the ATIS; trying to listen to a crackly NDB at night is no fun, with the result that the approach controller gets asked to repeat/clarify several details.
Yes I agree about the Darwin ATIS.
Maybe if you guys flying into/out of Darwin submitted a few Air Safety Reports about the ATIS it might get upgraded to VHF?
Put your thoughts in writing........
Maybe if you guys flying into/out of Darwin submitted a few Air Safety Reports about the ATIS it might get upgraded to VHF?
Put your thoughts in writing........
Last edited by nitpicker330; 7th Oct 2012 at 08:28.
Maybe if you guys flying into/out of Darwin submitted a few Air Safety Reports about the ATIS it might get upgraded to VHF?
Originally Posted by Renurrp (I think)
Last minute runway changes with no supporting clearance, simply advised of a runway change and track direct Darwin.
Asked for more track miles only to be given a clearance to divert around weather.
Asked for more track miles only to be given a clearance to divert around weather.
Last edited by Capn Bloggs; 7th Oct 2012 at 12:55.
Late at night, ATC is a real risk for jets to arrive.
One officer to do Delivery, SMC, Tower and Approach is bollocks. Late runway changes, often for an NPA with tailwind to facilitate 'departing traffic' (one Kingair).
And FFS, fix the fukcing ATIS and put it on VOLMET and ACARS
One officer to do Delivery, SMC, Tower and Approach is bollocks. Late runway changes, often for an NPA with tailwind to facilitate 'departing traffic' (one Kingair).
And FFS, fix the fukcing ATIS and put it on VOLMET and ACARS
Near Miss Darwin? where's the pageant at? shenanigans? the ol vic is gone now right? 
but yeah, darwin atc. heh.
but yeah, darwin atc. heh.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A while back I was cleared for immediate takeoff (at B2).
There was another aircraft short final.
I held position (the effo actually called clear right,)
The aircraft short final stated xxx VERY SHORT final.
Tower cleared him to land, whilst never canceling my takeoff clearance or instructing me to hold short or even saying anything!
Darwin ATC at its finest!
There was another aircraft short final.
I held position (the effo actually called clear right,
) The aircraft short final stated xxx VERY SHORT final.
Tower cleared him to land, whilst never canceling my takeoff clearance or instructing me to hold short or even saying anything!
Darwin ATC at its finest!
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...am often irked by Darwin ATC issuing 4 instructions with the takeoff clearance, all delivered at machine-gun speed. The "fast-talking" seems to be a hallmark of military controllers. Apart from that, the place is decades overdue for a discrete VHF frequency for the ATIS; trying to listen to a crackly NDB at night is no fun, with the result that the approach controller gets asked to repeat/clarify several details.
Late at night, ATC is a real risk for jets to arrive.
One officer to do Delivery, SMC, Tower and Approach is bollocks. Late runway changes, often for an NPA with tailwind to facilitate 'departing traffic' (one Kingair).
And FFS, fix the fukcing ATIS and put it on VOLMET and ACARS.
One officer to do Delivery, SMC, Tower and Approach is bollocks. Late runway changes, often for an NPA with tailwind to facilitate 'departing traffic' (one Kingair).
And FFS, fix the fukcing ATIS and put it on VOLMET and ACARS.
Bloggsy, why should you do it?????? 
Well mate, take 5 mins to actually complain through the correct channels about what could potentially be a flight safety hazzard. Then after mountains of paperwork they might actually be forced to do something about it.
I'm sick to death of Pilots bitching and moaning about a particular subject then later on you find that they haven't bothered to provide suitable feedback to the appropriate authority. Why? Because they couldn't be bothered!!!
Basically if you don't ask then nothing will happen
Well mate, take 5 mins to actually complain through the correct channels about what could potentially be a flight safety hazzard. Then after mountains of paperwork they might actually be forced to do something about it.
I'm sick to death of Pilots bitching and moaning about a particular subject then later on you find that they haven't bothered to provide suitable feedback to the appropriate authority. Why? Because they couldn't be bothered!!!
Basically if you don't ask then nothing will happen
Last edited by nitpicker330; 8th Oct 2012 at 05:24.
Here's and idea regarding the ATIS.
If you don't want to submit a report then I'd suggest each and every one of you guys ask Brissy Centre to read you the ATIS each time, they'll soon get sick of it and pass the **** down the chain.
If you don't want to submit a report then I'd suggest each and every one of you guys ask Brissy Centre to read you the ATIS each time, they'll soon get sick of it and pass the **** down the chain.
Last edited by nitpicker330; 8th Oct 2012 at 05:31.
The ATIS is provided directly by Darwin Tower ATC, it's a "service" provided by them, directly relates to flight safety in Darwin and in my opinion is relevant to the overall topic of the standard of Air Traffic services provided by Darwin ATCO's .
Last edited by nitpicker330; 8th Oct 2012 at 07:47.
often for an NPA with tailwind to facilitate 'departing traffic'
There is always the magic word "require".
Given the often sharp edge shears with a tailwind in Darwin, and the resultant record of heavy landings, "require" as is your responsibility as PIC.
Tootle pip!!
Last time I telephoned DN ATC to ask if it was okay to bring a pilot out for a couple of circuits to qualify him for LAHSO, I got told in no uncertain terms that ATC was not there to pander to the whims of "you pilots" and the cheeky bugger (who big-noted himself as the senior tower controller) even had the hide to say that he was sick and tired of "you pilots" causing ATC to have ASORs!
Can't say I go for that attitude!
Needless to say, no training for the young pilot and, when I put my concerns to the RAAF liaison officer, although he was supportive and passed it up the chain, but his boss was less empathetic and although a response was promised, as yet nothing.
Junior controllers playing ego games with often inexperienced pilots - I fear someone is going to get hurt...
Can't say I go for that attitude!
Needless to say, no training for the young pilot and, when I put my concerns to the RAAF liaison officer, although he was supportive and passed it up the chain, but his boss was less empathetic and although a response was promised, as yet nothing.
Junior controllers playing ego games with often inexperienced pilots - I fear someone is going to get hurt...
4SPOOLED, I did mine about 2 years back now and was required then to do a practical examination as set out below:
1.5 The practical check must be conducted in an aeroplane at an aerodrome at
which LAHSO are authorised or in a synthetic flight trainer approved by
CASA as suitable for that purpose. LAHSO need not be in use at an
aerodrome during the test if the appropriate procedures are simulated by the
person conducting the check.
CAO40, Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 set it all out. Sorry for the thread drift...
1.5 The practical check must be conducted in an aeroplane at an aerodrome at
which LAHSO are authorised or in a synthetic flight trainer approved by
CASA as suitable for that purpose. LAHSO need not be in use at an
aerodrome during the test if the appropriate procedures are simulated by the
person conducting the check.
CAO40, Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 set it all out. Sorry for the thread drift...
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Summary
A Boeing 717 inbound to Darwin was cleared to descend through the level of an
outbound Boeing 737 near Darwin. ATC subsequently cancelled the clearance and
there was no breakdown of separation standards however a loss of separation
assurance occurred. The investigation is continuing.
*
A Boeing 717 inbound to Darwin was cleared to descend through the level of an
outbound Boeing 737 near Darwin. ATC subsequently cancelled the clearance and
there was no breakdown of separation standards however a loss of separation
assurance occurred. The investigation is continuing.
*
Is this some watering down so not to get a media frenzy going?
Two jets at 800' apart less altimitry errors is only a loss of separation assurance?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 48
Posts: 1,286
Likes: 0
Received 33 Likes
on
10 Posts
Darwin, Amberly, Townsville, they are all pathetic and quite frankly dangerous when it comes to ATC services, treat them as Class G and you may be safe. in fact class G would be safer than their service. As for the ATIS stuff it ask Bne centre for it the message will get through, but hey it's the NT always a croc attack somewhere lol!
I doubt any high performance jet could achieve such a feat.
