Virgin Aircraft 'Emergency' Landing
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fact of the matter is I work for an airline that can't justify the purchase or hire of GPU's at each port resulting in regular maintenance burns in excess of 500kgs, it would take me weeks of carrying an extra ton here and there over 30 minute sectors to equal that wastage.
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I was training I was told that if the prediction for something to occur was equal to or greater than 50% then it would appear on the forecast without a PROB.
Never seen that one in writing though so I'm not sure how true it is
Never seen that one in writing though so I'm not sure how true it is
Bottums Up
Originally Posted by Kodachrome
When I was training I was told that if the prediction for something to occur was equal to or greater than 50% then it would appear on the forecast without a PROB.
Never seen that one in writing though so I'm not sure how true it is
Never seen that one in writing though so I'm not sure how true it is
Crikey advises that the ATSB have announced an investigation, as per the following links.
ATSB investigating Virgin Mildura fog incident | Plane Talking
Investigation: AO-2013-100 - Low fuel diversion involving Boeing 737-8FE, VH-YIR, Mildura Airport, Victoria on 18 June 2013
Originally Posted by AIP Gen 3.5
12.15.3 When thunderstorms or reduced visibility due to fog, mist, dust, smoke or sand is forecast but the probability is assessed at 30% or 40%, the terms PROB30 or PROB40 are used respectively. INTER and TEMPO may also be used with a PROB for thunderstorms. If greater than or equal to 50% probability is forecast, reference is made to the phenomenon in the forecast itself not by the addition of a PROB statement.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: aus
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can l ask the question how has qantas come out as heros?? Did they not land in thick fog of a npa below the minima ...maybe a little more fuel and no mayday or brace ...or was it clear when they touch down???
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking at Flightradar 24, the Virgin aircraft made the decision to divert to Mildura first, with the Qantas aircraft about 5 mins behind. Note, the Qantas did a few holding paterns to the east of Adelaide.
The Virgin aircraft disappears of Flightradar first with the Qantas aircraft still in view for another 3-5 mins. Based on this it would appear Virgin arrived in the Mildura area first, but Qantas who were behind them landed first???
The Virgin aircraft disappears of Flightradar first with the Qantas aircraft still in view for another 3-5 mins. Based on this it would appear Virgin arrived in the Mildura area first, but Qantas who were behind them landed first???
When you live....
Timing
Unless I'm missing something, the timing seems odd:
- YPAD TAF updated at 172100
- Diversion occurs at 172300
I find it hard to believe a crew, on discovering that their destination went below Alternate minima, continued with either no alternate (it seems they had no planned alternate based on them never getting near Adelaide) or with an alternate allegedly below the alternate minima.
So if they didn't know their destination was PROB30 two hours before they diverted - why not? The layers of the cheese should have been:
- ACARS updates
- company operations department
- ATC (would this warrant a Hazard alert? I thought they were for METARs going SPECI?)
Everyone else seems to have turned back (except the QF - where did he come from? Did he also not get the message?)
UTR
- YPAD TAF updated at 172100
- Diversion occurs at 172300
I find it hard to believe a crew, on discovering that their destination went below Alternate minima, continued with either no alternate (it seems they had no planned alternate based on them never getting near Adelaide) or with an alternate allegedly below the alternate minima.
So if they didn't know their destination was PROB30 two hours before they diverted - why not? The layers of the cheese should have been:
- ACARS updates
- company operations department
- ATC (would this warrant a Hazard alert? I thought they were for METARs going SPECI?)
Everyone else seems to have turned back (except the QF - where did he come from? Did he also not get the message?)
UTR
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: 41,000'
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Underneath the radar,
The most logical thing to do in that case would be to continue toward your destination, work out a PNR to a suitable alternate with a comfortable margin. If your destination is socked in at your PNR - go to your alternate. PIC 101. I'm only speculating but it looks like thats what they did in this case. Diverted to MQL only to find enroute, it was now fogged in. Very little time to make a decision to go back to ADL where you know you're landing below minima. Kudos to the crew. Safe outcome!
The most logical thing to do in that case would be to continue toward your destination, work out a PNR to a suitable alternate with a comfortable margin. If your destination is socked in at your PNR - go to your alternate. PIC 101. I'm only speculating but it looks like thats what they did in this case. Diverted to MQL only to find enroute, it was now fogged in. Very little time to make a decision to go back to ADL where you know you're landing below minima. Kudos to the crew. Safe outcome!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UTR,
The Qantas aircraft came from SYD and it arrived in the ADL area before Virgin and held to the east. As I said in my post above the Virgin aircaft, diverted towards Mildura first and the Qantas aircraft left it's holding and followed about 5 mins behind Virgin, but some how it landed first in Mildura. I'm not knocking any of the crews (Qantas and Virgin), I'm just stating what the radar (via Flightradar 24) showed. There must have been a reason why Qantas landed first, which should come out in the ATSB investigation.
Based on what we all know at the moment, I say well done to all crew.
The Qantas aircraft came from SYD and it arrived in the ADL area before Virgin and held to the east. As I said in my post above the Virgin aircaft, diverted towards Mildura first and the Qantas aircraft left it's holding and followed about 5 mins behind Virgin, but some how it landed first in Mildura. I'm not knocking any of the crews (Qantas and Virgin), I'm just stating what the radar (via Flightradar 24) showed. There must have been a reason why Qantas landed first, which should come out in the ATSB investigation.
Based on what we all know at the moment, I say well done to all crew.
Last edited by BPA; 19th Jun 2013 at 12:35.
All very interesting reading & much can be learnt for us all.
Few good questions being asked re Prob of FG. As has pretty much been alluded to hear any greater % of fog beyond 30 or 40 the relevant documents states Fog, full stop.
In a way there's a qualified met man in all of us drivers, we had to do Met along the way so apart from the legal side of things ALL pilots ought to be making fuel calcs to suit their understanding of the pending WX at the destination.
We've got a high press over us ATM with wide spaced iso's & clear night skies with light winds at Grnd Lvl along with being bloody cold & no split between temps, that tells us that this could get bloody ugly re Fog.
I know that I wouldn't trust the Met man (no offense Met man) as far as I could throw him with those conditions lurking.
Flying's bloody dangerous even on a Cavok day !
Wmk2
Few good questions being asked re Prob of FG. As has pretty much been alluded to hear any greater % of fog beyond 30 or 40 the relevant documents states Fog, full stop.
In a way there's a qualified met man in all of us drivers, we had to do Met along the way so apart from the legal side of things ALL pilots ought to be making fuel calcs to suit their understanding of the pending WX at the destination.
We've got a high press over us ATM with wide spaced iso's & clear night skies with light winds at Grnd Lvl along with being bloody cold & no split between temps, that tells us that this could get bloody ugly re Fog.
I know that I wouldn't trust the Met man (no offense Met man) as far as I could throw him with those conditions lurking.
Flying's bloody dangerous even on a Cavok day !
Wmk2
Last edited by Wally Mk2; 19th Jun 2013 at 14:56.
FWIW
From the BoM Aeronautical Services Handbook (Operational Manual for the Provision of Aviation Weather Services in Australia).
Investigations
No doubt both QF and DJ have asked for an AMIR.
In relation to Probability Forecasts
And specifically in relation to Fog
Adelaide in one of the aerodromes that has an Airport Weather Briefing prepared (Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne, Perth, Sydney and during the wet season, Darwin).
So PROB 5, 10 or 20 can be included in AWB, PROB 30 or 40 included in TAF.
It would be interesting to see the afternoon issue for the day concerned as to whether Code Grey was included (previous say of course).
http://reg.bom.gov.au/general/reg/ash/ASH.pdf
From the BoM Aeronautical Services Handbook (Operational Manual for the Provision of Aviation Weather Services in Australia).
Investigations
The Bureau prepares reports in relation to aviation accidents and incidents, usually in response to requests from government agencies responsible for aviation safety and from the aviation industry.
The principal types of reports are:
a. Meteorological information for Aviation Safety Investigation Reports (ASIRs), and
b. Aviation Meteorological Incident Reports (AMIRs).
The principal types of reports are:
a. Meteorological information for Aviation Safety Investigation Reports (ASIRs), and
b. Aviation Meteorological Incident Reports (AMIRs).
Meteorological Information for Aviation Safety Investigation Reports (ASIRs)
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) has the primary statutory responsibility for investigating aviation incidents or accidents. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) may also conduct such investigations in carrying out its responsibilities as regulator of civil aviation safety.
As part of an investigation into an aviation incident or accident, a request for meteorological information may be sought from the Bureau through the National Manager Aviation Weather Services (SRAV).
Procedures for the provision of meteorological information are maintained by SRAV and can be found on the Bureau’s Aviation Weather Services intranet.
All relevant information (charts, observations forecasts and warnings) is to be retained in the case of an incident or accident.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) has the primary statutory responsibility for investigating aviation incidents or accidents. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) may also conduct such investigations in carrying out its responsibilities as regulator of civil aviation safety.
As part of an investigation into an aviation incident or accident, a request for meteorological information may be sought from the Bureau through the National Manager Aviation Weather Services (SRAV).
Procedures for the provision of meteorological information are maintained by SRAV and can be found on the Bureau’s Aviation Weather Services intranet.
All relevant information (charts, observations forecasts and warnings) is to be retained in the case of an incident or accident.
Aviation Meteorological Incident Reports (AMIR)
Aviation industry clients (such as regional, domestic and international airlines, and Airservices Australia) may request an AMIR when a meteorology-related incident has a significant adverse effect on its operations. Typical incidents include unforecast weather causing multiple aircraft to divert to other destinations; and significantly over-forecast weather requiring excessive fuel to be carried.
The purpose of an AMIR is to review the service delivery aspects of the incident and make recommendations for remedial action where appropriate.
Procedures for the provision of an AMIR are maintained by SRAV and can be found on the Bureau’s Aviation Weather Services intranet.
Aviation industry clients (such as regional, domestic and international airlines, and Airservices Australia) may request an AMIR when a meteorology-related incident has a significant adverse effect on its operations. Typical incidents include unforecast weather causing multiple aircraft to divert to other destinations; and significantly over-forecast weather requiring excessive fuel to be carried.
The purpose of an AMIR is to review the service delivery aspects of the incident and make recommendations for remedial action where appropriate.
Procedures for the provision of an AMIR are maintained by SRAV and can be found on the Bureau’s Aviation Weather Services intranet.
In relation to Probability Forecasts
Probability Forecasts, indicated by PROB%ddhh/ddhh, shall only be used if the estimated probability of occurrence is thirty or forty percent, and shall only be used with reference to thunderstorms or poor visibility (less than the alternate minimum) resulting from fog, mist, dust, smoke or sand, e.g. PROB30 0118/0123 0500 FG. PROB is included in the forecast before the RMK section. If greater than or equal to 50 percent, reference is made to the phenomena in the forecast itself, not by the addition of a PROB.
INTER and TEMPO are not to be used with fog.
Airport Weather Briefings (AWB) are provided for some capital city aerodromes and are used by both operators and Air Traffic Services. They are an extension to the TAF service aimed at expanding on the information provided in the TAF.
The office responsible for the preparation of the TAF prepares the AWB.
AWBs are issued in conjunction with the routine TAF but take a lower priority and are not amended or updated (except for the Code Grey component which can be amended as a separate product).
AWBs are issued in conjunction with the routine TAF but take a lower priority and are not amended or updated (except for the Code Grey component which can be amended as a separate product).
Airport Weather Briefings may contain the following sections (as per local arrangement): Current TAF, TAF Summary, Thunderstorm Potential, Other Possibilities, Outlook, Code Grey, Issuing Officer and Notes.
The TAF Summary is an explanation of the TAF, using plain language, with no jargon or acronyms. It may include the synoptic situation, local effects and reasons for forecast changes in weather conditions.
The Thunderstorm Potential section highlights the possibility of thunderstorms occurring within a 20nm radius of the aerodrome reference point and is used for flight planning and air traffic management purposes. Phrases such as slight chance, chance and likely should be used instead of a percentage. INTER or TEMPO should not be used.
The Other Possibilities section should include comments on other possibilities that may occur during the validity of the TAF. It can include conditions that have a less than 30% chance of occurring, or if there is an uncertainty as to the timing of an event. Particular attention should be paid to SAM (special alternate minima) conditions, noting that decisive phrases such as “conditions could drop to below SAM” are more useful to the aviation industry than “conditions could drop to SAM”.
The Outlook section includes a brief description of the weather for the following 2 or 3 days based on the Public Weather forecasts. It should also include the forecast maximum and minimum temperatures where available.
Code Grey information is included in the afternoon issue of the AWB.
Code Grey advice is a special forecast service intended to supplement the routine 06 to 12 TAF. It is designed to reduce the operational impact, particularly on long-haul flights arriving the following morning, of later amendments to the 06 TAF.
The service gives flight planners some insight into alternative weather scenarios being considered by the forecaster, and as such it provides early advice of a possible later TAF amendment. It is issued when there is a small but realistic chance of fog, thunderstorms, or visibility or cloud (BKN or more) below Special Alternate Minima. The probabilities used will be 5, 10 or 20% only.
It would be interesting to see the afternoon issue for the day concerned as to whether Code Grey was included (previous say of course).
http://reg.bom.gov.au/general/reg/ash/ASH.pdf
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two year wait for a Basi report with no pressure, yet crews have less than a couple of hours to make these decisions under pressure with a high work load!
There are 26 recommendations from the senate inquiry not the Atsb about the Norfolk Island accident.
Crikey blog
Damning Senate report on ATSB, CASA Pel-Air failings | Plane Talking
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sunny QLD
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting situation you often face. You arrive at aerodrome A at 2300z with fog, with a metar saying fog clearing at 0000z. But 2330z is your aerodrome B diversion fuel cutoff time.. You have fuel in tanks to hold until 0030 and make an approach to A.
You have no legal obligation to divert at 2330 to B. Do you stay or do you go at 2330?
You have no legal obligation to divert at 2330 to B. Do you stay or do you go at 2330?
Last edited by ejectx3; 19th Jun 2013 at 20:58.
You have no legal obligation to divert at 2330 to B. Do you stay or do you go at 2330?
