Rex incident YSSY

[Matt48]

Originally Posted by Tim Hamilton

The less time you sped in the air in a damaged aircraft - is vital !

Mate, best quit while you're behind. !

[Ultralights]

I am simply saying there was another/closer option.

Nothing else !

yes, correct...

but not the BEST option..

[josephfeatherweight]

Appallingly ignorant comments from Tim Hamilton. Talk about digging the hole deeper!

[Car RAMROD]

Originally Posted by Tim Hamilton

I am simply saying there was another/closer option.

Nothing else !

Against my better judgement of not expending effort on you, here goes.

Yes there was "another option", but it wasn't a good one!

If they had enough fuel I'm sure Brisbane or Melbourne or was an option too!


Tim, the way you are writing is that the crew should have gone to BK simply because it was the closest physical airport, despite the fact that SY is the best option, given all the requirements as put forth in the CAOs for continued flight with 1 inop.
Have you given thought to the fact that, whilst something might be physically the closest, an airport a bit further may be better? Think of something called the need to descend and track miles- you wouldn't dive bomb in from over the top of something. Or maybe you would?

Now I suggest you refrain from posting unless you have something that is actually worthwhile.


I think the rest of us professional, and smart/logical pilots, are probably in agreement!

With that, I'd just like to echo what many others have said- good job crew!

[Mach2point7]

The modified Crikey story (including apologies) is now headed:

"REX may be victim of engine defect in lost prop incident"

But the text talks of an 1991 incident in the USA to which the NTSB concluded that it was "a fatigue fracture on the propellor shaft". Does not say anything about an engine defect, just the prop shaft.

First Crikey beats up on the aircrew and now on GE.

Surely the prop shaft is part of the propellor assembly or the gearbox assembly and not the engine. Please correct me if I am wrong.

[Band a Lot]

Originally Posted by Tim Hamilton

The less time you sped in the air in a damaged aircraft - is vital !

Actually QF32 proved that just the right amount of time in the air in a damaged aircraft "is vital"

Or Timmy should QF32 landed immediately back at Singapore?

Tim how long does it take to read the emergency procedures in Flight Manual for a lost propeller? or best relevant section of Emergency Procedures?

Or should crew not follow Flight Manual instructions in emergencies?

Show me any and I mean ANY POH or Flight Manual that has a "head to nearest airport" before reading this check list any further.

Not even Tim Taylor would suggest such stuff.

[Nose wheel first]

So Tim,

Keeping in mind there may have been damage to the aircraft that is not immediately apparent, that could prove to be Catastrophic
travelling the extra distance. (I am not necessarily referring to this incident. Just in general terms)

Based on the comment above I have a statement and a couple of questions.

1) But we ARE dealing with THIS incident. To introduce other hypothetical scenarios isn't helpful in this instance. To even suggest Bankstown, irrespective of you

simply saying there was another/closer option.

is implying that you absolutely believe they should have diverted there.

2) Do you have experience on the SAAB or any twin turboprop for that matter? If so, please share.

3) Are you suggesting that they should have abandoned their normal descent profile, steepened it up considerably, possibly stressed the aircraft more, rushed a briefing, flown into (possibly) unfamiliar airspace, elected to not have RFF available and elected to take a far shorter and narrower runway? All when

Keeping in mind there may have been damage to the aircraft that is not immediately apparent, that could prove to be Catastrophic
travelling the extra distance

I suggest to you that distance isn't the factor in this case but rather time (if we expand on your argument). I'd bet my left one that had they decided to go for Bankstown, they would have been airborne longer than they were going into Sydney.

Jonkster is bang on the money with his comment:

If so why? Brief the landing at bk from that position for us and explain why it would be the better option - I would assume with a southerly wind on that day they would be using the 11 rwys, how are they going to set themselves up for that from where they are? What altitude are they? What configuration? How long will it take to get into bk from there compared to sy? Why would it be shorter or better time-wise or facility wise or workload wise? Over what sort of area will they need to fly to set themselves up to land on 11c at bk? What traffic did bk have - would they need time to close the airspace and get circuit and inbound traffic clear?

Again, if you have some relevant experience and are able to comment from a position of authority, experience, knowledge, ability and expertise then I believe it is incumbent upon you to share with all of us what your qualifications are! If you have little or none then it would be nice if you'd kindly refrain from making ill informed comments.

[megan]

Again, if you have some relevant experience and are able to comment from a position of authority, experience, knowledge, ability and expertise

Jerk.....I mean, Tim Hamilton has none of those. Still awaiting the apology to the crew for a job well done.

[Tim Hamilton]

Originally Posted by Nose wheel first

So Tim,



Based on the comment above I have a statement and a couple of questions.

1) But we ARE dealing with THIS incident. To introduce other hypothetical scenarios isn't helpful in this instance. To even suggest Bankstown, irrespective of you is implying that you absolutely believe they should have diverted there.

2) Do you have experience on the SAAB or any twin turboprop for that matter? If so, please share.

3) Are you suggesting that they should have abandoned their normal descent profile, steepened it up considerably, possibly stressed the aircraft more, rushed a briefing, flown into (possibly) unfamiliar airspace, elected to not have RFF available and elected to take a far shorter and narrower runway? All when

I suggest to you that distance isn't the factor in this case but rather time (if we expand on your argument). I'd bet my left one that had they decided to go for Bankstown, they would have been airborne longer than they were going into Sydney.

Jonkster is bang on the money with his comment:

Again, if you have some relevant experience and are able to comment from a position of authority, experience, knowledge, ability and expertise then I believe it is incumbent upon you to share with all of us what your qualifications are! If you have little or none then it would be nice if you'd kindly refrain from making ill informed comments.

It saddens me to see you doing this TWF

I enlightened many here with my fresh perspective, my job is done

Goodnight all.

Lots of Zzzzz

Tim aka The Yoda of Aviation.

[spinex]

C RAMROD, if you're in need of inspiration in the little room, a quick scan of old mate's previous utterings on these pages should get things moving along.

A long (very) time ago I had a business card that identified me as a Consulting Gynecologist (amateur); all that indicated was an enthusiasm for the subject, not any expertise and I'd suggest there may be a parallel here.

[josephfeatherweight]

I enlightened many here with my fresh perspective, my job is done

You're the finest example of a self-licking icecream I've come across in a long time.
Sleep tight...

[Nose wheel first]

I enlightened many here with my fresh perspective, my job is done

Time to stop feeding the troll

[Tim Hamilton]

Note VH-NRX is an old aircraft.
Over 25 years old in fact.

As you can see from history in previous post above.
It has been around the block – many times
Nothing last forever.

Time to put NRX and the other SAAB-340’s out to pasture.

[unworry]

Originally Posted by TTY

A little bit over 20 years ago but on Feb 1 1993 a Nord Mohawk 298 VH-HKS lost a prop somewhere over the national park area just north of Sydney whilst en-route to Tamworth. Don't think it was ever found.

You might want to pop into that old pub near wiseman's ferry and admire the ceiling fixture

[Tim Hamilton]

Originally Posted by unworry

You might want to pop into that old pub near wiseman's ferry and admire the ceiling fixture

Dont tell me they have MDX there also ...

[FlyingChipmunk]

Spinex....
Gold!
you're up next on Jimmy Fallon's show

Originally Posted by spinex

C RAMROD, if you're in need of inspiration in the little room, a quick scan of old mate's previous utterings on these pages should get things moving along.

A long (very) time ago I had a business card that identified me as a Consulting Gynecologist (amateur); all that indicated was an enthusiasm for the subject, not any expertise and I'd suggest there may be a parallel here.

[unworry]

Tim, if you're up,

I'm still intrigued why you so stridently believed at the time that AF447 was downed by a meteorite? Care to share?

[dijical]

I'm amazed that Ben Sandilands would totally shred his reputation in this way. What he wrote was extraordinarily negligent given the fact free basis that he started with.

If REX wants to sue him for defamation, I'd imagine it would be a complete shoe in. If they don't sue him, they will have a sword hanging over him that he can never escape.

Either way his credibility is gone. Very sad.

[Tim Hamilton]

Ben Sandilands is the most Respected and Knowledgeable
Aviation journalist in the land.
Resolute – the Yoda of Australian Aviation.

[dijical]

Originally Posted by Tim Hamilton

Ben Sandilands is the most Respected and Knowledgeable
Aviation journalist in the land.
Resolute – the Yoda of Australian Aviation.

Alas, no longer.