Virgin ATR grounded in Canberra
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: North Qld
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How'z CASA going to handle THIS 1 ?
OK CASA, what's next for the VARA ATR OPS pls 
Are we ( the innocent flying public ) going to see some accountability from the regulator
I MEAN WHAT'S IT TAKE TO GET SOME DISCIPLINARY ACTION TO BE TAKEN / HOW MANY MORE INCIDENTS & BROKEN AIRCRAFT / EXPERIENCED PILOTS TO MOVE ON DO YOU REQUIRE FOR SOLID ACTION
Will the dept / aviation regulator, be hedging their bets on no more accidents with this troubled type over Summer the busy Thunderstorm period
WHAT ARE YOU GUNNA DO ABOUT IT JIM
Are we ( the innocent flying public ) going to see some accountability from the regulator
I MEAN WHAT'S IT TAKE TO GET SOME DISCIPLINARY ACTION TO BE TAKEN / HOW MANY MORE INCIDENTS & BROKEN AIRCRAFT / EXPERIENCED PILOTS TO MOVE ON DO YOU REQUIRE FOR SOLID ACTION
Will the dept / aviation regulator, be hedging their bets on no more accidents with this troubled type over Summer the busy Thunderstorm period
WHAT ARE YOU GUNNA DO ABOUT IT JIM
A full review is needed or may they'll wind up like this in Canada yesterday:
Poor choice of example. The elevator was incorrectly rigged two nights previously which resulted in insufficient elevator authority, this combined with the C of G issue caused the accident. The NTSB stated neither problem on its own would have caused the accident.
Preliminary report is out HERE. 3G at touchdown. That'll do it...
Originally Posted by The ATSB
Preliminary report published: 23 January 2018
Sequence of events
On 19 November 2017, a GIE Avions de Transport Regional ATR 72-212A aircraft, registered VH‑FVZ, was being operated by Virgin Australia as flight VA646 on a scheduled passenger flight from Sydney, New South Wales to Canberra, Australian Capital Territory. On board the aircraft was the captain, first officer, a check captain, two cabin crew and 67 passengers.
The first officer was pilot flying, and the captain was pilot monitoring.[1] The check captain was positioned in the observer seat on the flight deck and was conducting an annual line check of the captain along with a six month line check of the first officer over four flights on the day. The occurrence flight was the last of these flights.
At about 1320 Eastern Daylight-saving Time (EDT),[2] the flight crew were conducting a visual approach to runway 35 at Canberra. The calculated approach speed was 113 kt. At 1320:52, nine seconds prior to touch down, the aircraft approached the runway at a height of about 107 ft, slightly above the desired approach path. The flight crew reported that at about this time, there was turbulence and changing wind conditions. Flight data showed that at this time, speed had increased to 127 kt. In response to the increasing speed, the first officer reduced power to near flight idle.
Over the next five seconds, the descent rate increased significantly and the speed reduced.
During the last 50 ft of descent, the captain twice called for an increase in power and then called for a go-around. The first officer responded by increasing the power at about the same time as the aircraft touched down.
At 1321:01, the aircraft touched down heavily on the main landing gear and rear fuselage. Assessing that the aircraft was under control, the captain immediately called to the first officer to cancel the go-around and then took control of the aircraft. The flight crew completed the landing roll and taxied to the gate without further incident.
After shutting down the engines, the flight crew reviewed the recorded landing data which indicated a hard landing had occurred, requiring maintenance inspections. The captain then made an entry in the aircraft technical log, and subsequent inspections revealed that the aircraft had been substantially damaged. There were no reported injuries.
Aircraft damage
The aircraft sustained impact and abrasion damage to the underside of the rear fuselage and tail skid (Figure 1). Damage to the tail skid indicated that it was fully compressed during the landing. After landing, the main landing gear oleos remained fully compressed, indicating they had lost gas pressure.
At the time of the release of this report, the operator was conducting an engineering examination of the aircraft, in consultation with the aircraft manufacturer, to determine the extent of further damage and the required repair work to be undertaken.
Figure 1: Damage to the tail skid an underside of the rear fuselage
Source: ATSB
Weather and environmental information
Recorded weather observations at Canberra Airport indicated that at the time of the accident, there was scattered cloud at about 7,000 ft above mean sea level,[3] no precipitation, visibility in excess of 10 km, and a moderate north-easterly wind of about 16 kt.
The approach to runway 35 passes over undulating higher ground, which can be a source of mechanical turbulence. The flight crew reported that they regularly experienced turbulence at all stages of approach and landing at Canberra.
Aircraft information
The ATR 72-212A is a twin engine turboprop regional airliner. VH-FVZ was manufactured in 2013 and first registered in Australia in May 2013, and was configured with 68 passenger seats. The maximum landing weight of the aircraft was 22,350 kg. At the time of the landing, the gross weight was about 21,700 kg.
The aircraft’s flight crew operating manual recommended that prior to landing, power should start to be reduced to flight idle at a height of about 20 ft. The manual also advises that during the landing flare, speed will reduce five to ten knots below the approach speed.
Recorded data
The aircraft was fitted with a cockpit voice recorder and a flight data recorder, which recorded the flight data associated with the occurrence (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Graphical representation of recorded flight data
The figure shows relevant recorded parameters captured by the flight data recorder. The landing and selected approach speed are annotated.
Source: ATSB
The recorded data indicated that the approach was flown in conditions of light turbulence, and at about 1320:47, excursions of vertical acceleration indicate that the aircraft encountered turbulence. At this time, speed began to increase, and both engines were reduced to near flight idle power. The pitch attitude initially decreased before the nose raised to a near level attitude until the landing flare.
At the time of the touchdown, the descent rate was 928 feet per minute, the speed was 105 kt, and the peak pitch angle was 5.45 degrees. The peak recorded vertical acceleration during the landing was 2.97G.
Sequence of events
On 19 November 2017, a GIE Avions de Transport Regional ATR 72-212A aircraft, registered VH‑FVZ, was being operated by Virgin Australia as flight VA646 on a scheduled passenger flight from Sydney, New South Wales to Canberra, Australian Capital Territory. On board the aircraft was the captain, first officer, a check captain, two cabin crew and 67 passengers.
The first officer was pilot flying, and the captain was pilot monitoring.[1] The check captain was positioned in the observer seat on the flight deck and was conducting an annual line check of the captain along with a six month line check of the first officer over four flights on the day. The occurrence flight was the last of these flights.
At about 1320 Eastern Daylight-saving Time (EDT),[2] the flight crew were conducting a visual approach to runway 35 at Canberra. The calculated approach speed was 113 kt. At 1320:52, nine seconds prior to touch down, the aircraft approached the runway at a height of about 107 ft, slightly above the desired approach path. The flight crew reported that at about this time, there was turbulence and changing wind conditions. Flight data showed that at this time, speed had increased to 127 kt. In response to the increasing speed, the first officer reduced power to near flight idle.
Over the next five seconds, the descent rate increased significantly and the speed reduced.
During the last 50 ft of descent, the captain twice called for an increase in power and then called for a go-around. The first officer responded by increasing the power at about the same time as the aircraft touched down.
At 1321:01, the aircraft touched down heavily on the main landing gear and rear fuselage. Assessing that the aircraft was under control, the captain immediately called to the first officer to cancel the go-around and then took control of the aircraft. The flight crew completed the landing roll and taxied to the gate without further incident.
After shutting down the engines, the flight crew reviewed the recorded landing data which indicated a hard landing had occurred, requiring maintenance inspections. The captain then made an entry in the aircraft technical log, and subsequent inspections revealed that the aircraft had been substantially damaged. There were no reported injuries.
Aircraft damage
The aircraft sustained impact and abrasion damage to the underside of the rear fuselage and tail skid (Figure 1). Damage to the tail skid indicated that it was fully compressed during the landing. After landing, the main landing gear oleos remained fully compressed, indicating they had lost gas pressure.
At the time of the release of this report, the operator was conducting an engineering examination of the aircraft, in consultation with the aircraft manufacturer, to determine the extent of further damage and the required repair work to be undertaken.
Figure 1: Damage to the tail skid an underside of the rear fuselage
Source: ATSB
Weather and environmental information
Recorded weather observations at Canberra Airport indicated that at the time of the accident, there was scattered cloud at about 7,000 ft above mean sea level,[3] no precipitation, visibility in excess of 10 km, and a moderate north-easterly wind of about 16 kt.
The approach to runway 35 passes over undulating higher ground, which can be a source of mechanical turbulence. The flight crew reported that they regularly experienced turbulence at all stages of approach and landing at Canberra.
Aircraft information
The ATR 72-212A is a twin engine turboprop regional airliner. VH-FVZ was manufactured in 2013 and first registered in Australia in May 2013, and was configured with 68 passenger seats. The maximum landing weight of the aircraft was 22,350 kg. At the time of the landing, the gross weight was about 21,700 kg.
The aircraft’s flight crew operating manual recommended that prior to landing, power should start to be reduced to flight idle at a height of about 20 ft. The manual also advises that during the landing flare, speed will reduce five to ten knots below the approach speed.
Recorded data
The aircraft was fitted with a cockpit voice recorder and a flight data recorder, which recorded the flight data associated with the occurrence (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Graphical representation of recorded flight data
The figure shows relevant recorded parameters captured by the flight data recorder. The landing and selected approach speed are annotated.
Source: ATSB
The recorded data indicated that the approach was flown in conditions of light turbulence, and at about 1320:47, excursions of vertical acceleration indicate that the aircraft encountered turbulence. At this time, speed began to increase, and both engines were reduced to near flight idle power. The pitch attitude initially decreased before the nose raised to a near level attitude until the landing flare.
At the time of the touchdown, the descent rate was 928 feet per minute, the speed was 105 kt, and the peak pitch angle was 5.45 degrees. The peak recorded vertical acceleration during the landing was 2.97G.
At the time of the release of this report, the operator was conducting an engineering examination of the aircraft, in consultation with the aircraft manufacturer, to determine the extent of further damage and the required repair work to be undertaken.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So where’s the breakdown in Virgin’s obviously poorly resourced and managed Cadet programs?
I think the FO’s hours are irrelevant. You have pilots all across the world (in much larger aircraft also) who have similar entry level hours but don’t achieve these incidents month after month.
Do Virgin separate the Cadet program from the main pilot body in regards to check and training like Easyjet etc do?? Seems like the Check and Training department is overloaded.
I think the FO’s hours are irrelevant. You have pilots all across the world (in much larger aircraft also) who have similar entry level hours but don’t achieve these incidents month after month.
Do Virgin separate the Cadet program from the main pilot body in regards to check and training like Easyjet etc do?? Seems like the Check and Training department is overloaded.
VH-FVZ has been ferried out of Canberra.
Edit. oops, maybe not yet. It was meant to go some days ago but last seen outside Hangar 43? on the Tower side of the airport.
Edit. oops, maybe not yet. It was meant to go some days ago but last seen outside Hangar 43? on the Tower side of the airport.
Last edited by seafury45; 24th Jan 2018 at 04:51. Reason: more info
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sydney
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So where’s the breakdown in Virgin’s obviously poorly resourced and managed Cadet programs?
I think the FO’s hours are irrelevant. You have pilots all across the world (in much larger aircraft also) who have similar entry level hours but don’t achieve these incidents month after month.
Do Virgin separate the Cadet program from the main pilot body in regards to check and training like Easyjet etc do?? Seems like the Check and Training department is overloaded.
I think the FO’s hours are irrelevant. You have pilots all across the world (in much larger aircraft also) who have similar entry level hours but don’t achieve these incidents month after month.
Do Virgin separate the Cadet program from the main pilot body in regards to check and training like Easyjet etc do?? Seems like the Check and Training department is overloaded.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Asia
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely VA will not risk a possible instantaneous collapse of the ATR due to not having the required resources as they would have just walked out the door...then again.
L.B
I reckon they absolutely would/will Littlebird! The utter contempt VA flight ops management shows towards the ATR crew is astounding! Going by the folks I’ve spoken to there Crewing is going to become a major issue for them. How do you convince suitable candidates to accept a bum deal on the ATR when they are giving pilots with no experience the 737?!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Melbourne
Age: 60
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So putting Cadets on the 737 is safer ?..........That in its self presents an even greater safety risk.
Cadets belong in GA first, learning to fly propelled machines in an RPT network.
e:g Rex..Skippers..Airnorth etc. NOT on commercial airliners.
Then ONLY once they have accumulated some experience and skills, send them on to become Second Officers......then ONCE they have numerous successful sims under their belt and a complete understanding of the company SOP.....Only then give them a crack at the jet.
Cadets belong in GA first, learning to fly propelled machines in an RPT network.
e:g Rex..Skippers..Airnorth etc. NOT on commercial airliners.
Then ONLY once they have accumulated some experience and skills, send them on to become Second Officers......then ONCE they have numerous successful sims under their belt and a complete understanding of the company SOP.....Only then give them a crack at the jet.
Interesting that you think that Rex, Skippers and Airnorth aren't flying commercial airliners.
DIVOSH!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Asia
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been watching the train network crisis in Sydney with interest of late. Perhaps someone should approach the train driver union head for their advice and possible representation in all ATR matters. Sizzle it will!
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They just fly around the country side for fun and everyone gets free trips! They'll be real pilots one day.
Agree with Di_Vosh. Aviation in a great part of the world, would not function without the supply of ab-initio /low time RHS'ers, (Cadets if you will)
Having had the fortune to observe operations of such nature, I can attest to the success and viability of such operations, however I would question the need for such, in the Australian environment. Where there is an adequate supply of suitable pilots in the open market, why do we need to feed an oversupply by way of cadetships.
That said: with a professional, well resourced, dedicated training organisation in control, and with careful selection of appropriately experienced and trained Captains, risks are mitigated and suitable outcomes achieved.
Myself, and many similarly experienced colleagues, have conducted jet operations with 300 hour graduates into complex airspace, in weather conditions not experienced in this country, to conduct all manner of approaches (including ASR and PAR) without significant incident.
If the prior training is comprehensive and competent, and the LHS is appropriately experienced and trained, it works. Any suggestion that such operations in Australia are having problems because of the experience level of the RHS, ignores the success of overseas operations, and places blame in the wrong lap.
my 2c worth
Maui
Having had the fortune to observe operations of such nature, I can attest to the success and viability of such operations, however I would question the need for such, in the Australian environment. Where there is an adequate supply of suitable pilots in the open market, why do we need to feed an oversupply by way of cadetships.
That said: with a professional, well resourced, dedicated training organisation in control, and with careful selection of appropriately experienced and trained Captains, risks are mitigated and suitable outcomes achieved.
Myself, and many similarly experienced colleagues, have conducted jet operations with 300 hour graduates into complex airspace, in weather conditions not experienced in this country, to conduct all manner of approaches (including ASR and PAR) without significant incident.
If the prior training is comprehensive and competent, and the LHS is appropriately experienced and trained, it works. Any suggestion that such operations in Australia are having problems because of the experience level of the RHS, ignores the success of overseas operations, and places blame in the wrong lap.
my 2c worth
Maui
You know maui, I’m old school GA, and you and I haven’t always seen eye to eye in the past, but I believe you are 100% correct.
I’ve had the privilege of working beside all manner of candidate over the past 20 years. My observations are that a properly resourced and run Cadet program can produce very good airline pilots. Generally what they lack in experience they more than make up for in intellect and aptitude. As far as their ongoing experience goes, I guess the depth of that will depend on what they take in during the formative years, and what can be passed on by their aircraft commanders.
The trick of course, is to get it right.
I’ve had the privilege of working beside all manner of candidate over the past 20 years. My observations are that a properly resourced and run Cadet program can produce very good airline pilots. Generally what they lack in experience they more than make up for in intellect and aptitude. As far as their ongoing experience goes, I guess the depth of that will depend on what they take in during the formative years, and what can be passed on by their aircraft commanders.
The trick of course, is to get it right.