Am I dreaming or have I seen all this before ?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: planit
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Said blackout the highway and install REILs (2 strobes at the threshold). Outrageous that pilots are expected to perform circling approaches in the 21st century. I believe ICAO rates it something like a 3500% increase in CFIT risk over an ILS. If you can't make it on a straight-in non-precision, suggest you divert to alternate. Messing around circling is like flying through TS, probably gonna make it but one day its gonna bite your ass. The good public deserve a better deal.
Give me a friggin bone!
thank heavens for D.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quick question for 717 drivers, do you fly VOR/DME Approaches in LNAV and VNAV? If not, what modes?
It has nothing to do with what happened in the Mackay incident, I am just curious.
Cheers.
It has nothing to do with what happened in the Mackay incident, I am just curious.
Cheers.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere on earth
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Terminator Winstun,
You may believe that ICAO rates circling apps as 3500% more dangerous than an ILS, but you're wrong. Try 7 times, or 700%. And if you want to install ILSs everywhere, then you can pay; I'd like to see you run a aviation business! It's affordable safety, old chap!
If you have a look at recent two-pilot high-capacity NPA accidents, almost all did not follow the basic tenets of good NPA airmanship and none would have passed the Flight ASafety Foundation's CFIT risk checklist. Like anything, if you don't konw what you are doing, then you stand to stuff it up. For those who regularly practise them, and who have robust, rigidly enforced SOPs, NPAs (including circling approaches) are just another arrow in the bag for conduct of safe, economical IFR operations. They're bloody good fun, too.
Which brings me back to the point of my earlier post: it's up to the captain to decide what arrow to use at the time. If the weather is bloody awful, I would contend that a circling NPA is a silly idea if a Straight In is available: by the same token, if the weather is well above the circling MDA, with good vis underneath, you would be doing your company a disservice by insisting on a full blown straight-in. What is wrong with a night circiut, for god's sake? Who is training you guys?
You may believe that ICAO rates circling apps as 3500% more dangerous than an ILS, but you're wrong. Try 7 times, or 700%. And if you want to install ILSs everywhere, then you can pay; I'd like to see you run a aviation business! It's affordable safety, old chap!
If you have a look at recent two-pilot high-capacity NPA accidents, almost all did not follow the basic tenets of good NPA airmanship and none would have passed the Flight ASafety Foundation's CFIT risk checklist. Like anything, if you don't konw what you are doing, then you stand to stuff it up. For those who regularly practise them, and who have robust, rigidly enforced SOPs, NPAs (including circling approaches) are just another arrow in the bag for conduct of safe, economical IFR operations. They're bloody good fun, too.
Which brings me back to the point of my earlier post: it's up to the captain to decide what arrow to use at the time. If the weather is bloody awful, I would contend that a circling NPA is a silly idea if a Straight In is available: by the same token, if the weather is well above the circling MDA, with good vis underneath, you would be doing your company a disservice by insisting on a full blown straight-in. What is wrong with a night circiut, for god's sake? Who is training you guys?
Last edited by Captain Custard; 30th Jun 2003 at 12:23.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Anywhere I want
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't know the area or its layout, but sounds like there are a few damn fine ideas surfacing about reducing the possibility of this happening again (here or anywhere where this could be a hazzard) .... depending upon good-ole CASA or Air Services or whoever.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Wybacrik
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't really know where you're coming from Custard!
I would have thought that it was obvious that any opposition to circling approaches, versus straight in, was based upon min. vis conditions!
Then you prattle on about "affordable safety"!
I think you might be out of your depth here!
I would have thought that it was obvious that any opposition to circling approaches, versus straight in, was based upon min. vis conditions!
Then you prattle on about "affordable safety"!
I think you might be out of your depth here!
PPRuNeaholic
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Cairns FNQ
Posts: 3,255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that Captain Custard has the nub of the issue here...
Is circling, or night circling, checked in sim rides?
amos2... The concept of "affordable safety" has existed in Oz for a real long time, so it's far from "prattle" to mention it. In fact, it's a salient issue. There are a number of realities associated with it as well, such as the cost of ILS equipment, the cost of earthworks for the ILS, maybe even relocating taxyways, etc. And for what... a couple of times a year? If that?
I'm not saying that "affordable safety" is right or even fair, but it IS the way things are. Where I am, circling approaches are more usual than any other type of approach. By night and day. Often in "black hole" conditions. But, like Captain Custard says, regular practice and appropriate, properly enforced SOPs helps to keep the operation safe. I'd add a few things to that list, like a measure of animal cunning and a sense of self-preservation.
I feel sure that, if circling approaches constituted an unacceptable safety risk, insurance companies would be the first one to scream for change. That is the most likely scenario for ICAO and regulators to abandon circling approaches ... and I really don't see that happening.
For those who regularly practise them, and who have robust, rigidly enforced SOPs, NPAs (including circling approaches) are just another arrow in the bag for conduct of safe, economical IFR operations.
amos2... The concept of "affordable safety" has existed in Oz for a real long time, so it's far from "prattle" to mention it. In fact, it's a salient issue. There are a number of realities associated with it as well, such as the cost of ILS equipment, the cost of earthworks for the ILS, maybe even relocating taxyways, etc. And for what... a couple of times a year? If that?
I'm not saying that "affordable safety" is right or even fair, but it IS the way things are. Where I am, circling approaches are more usual than any other type of approach. By night and day. Often in "black hole" conditions. But, like Captain Custard says, regular practice and appropriate, properly enforced SOPs helps to keep the operation safe. I'd add a few things to that list, like a measure of animal cunning and a sense of self-preservation.
I feel sure that, if circling approaches constituted an unacceptable safety risk, insurance companies would be the first one to scream for change. That is the most likely scenario for ICAO and regulators to abandon circling approaches ... and I really don't see that happening.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: planit
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Custard, even that you know what you are doing and that you get off on it, the fact remains: non-precision and circling approaches are significantly riskier. As Amos points out we're talking about min vis conditions, and prancing around maneuvering 'visual' at night in marginal vis, maybe with turbulence, with 400' terrain clearance: you are rolling the dice A better pilot than you (or even me) has dogged it on a non-precision or circling approach. Not sure bout your figures, even so...this old practise, like NDB approaches, needs to be abandoned sooner rather than later. We are (most of us) living in a modern world. Not suggesting installing ILSs everywhere, in 2003 there is ample affordable technology / instruments available for any public transport aircraft capability for GPS RNAV with VNAV glideslope straight in approaches. 
A better pilot than you (or even me) has dogged it on a non-precision or circling approach. Not sure bout your figures, even so...this old practise, like NDB approaches, needs to be abandoned sooner rather than later. We are (most of us) living in a modern world. Not suggesting installing ILSs everywhere, in 2003 there is ample affordable technology / instruments available for any public transport aircraft capability for GPS RNAV with VNAV glideslope straight in approaches.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Wybacrik
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I guess it's fairly obvious now Oz, that you and Custard are talking G/A here, which I didn't realise, so I would suggest in future that you, he, and others from those ranks, clarify your position rather than give the impression that you're talking airline ops!
Whether you like it or not, there is a big difference between the two.
And that's not to denigrate what you and he do.
I did the same for many years!
Whether you like it or not, there is a big difference between the two.
And that's not to denigrate what you and he do.
I did the same for many years!
Last edited by amos2; 30th Jun 2003 at 17:13.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere on earth
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amos 2, sorry to disappoint you but I'm talking RPT jets in regional operations (ie non-ILS runways) here. That's exactly what was happening at MKY wasn't it? Just out of interest, perhaps you could give us a quick rundown of your experience in these approaches and in what aircraft you do them in?
We don't need to talk about G/A, because they do thousands of these things every year with obviously very little fuss.
Winstun, I wasn't suggesting circling in min vis at night, and you CANNOT circle at 400ft AGL at night in a C aircraft: it's illegal (unless the MDA happens to be at 400ft AGL, and I can't think of a circling MDA that low where I fly), so keep the argument on the straight and narrow, will you? I was merely pointing out some real-world commercial realities that have to be decided upon before commencing an approach of this type.
Don't get me wrong guys, I'd love to do GPS NPAs everywhere, especially when I get tied up with night effect, moon effect and all the other effects that make my ADF needles go round in circles, but the reality is that the captain makes a judgement call on the approach to be flown based on the expected or actual weather having cognisance of the additional cost to the operation of flying out the opposite direction to the inbound track for 15nm and back again juts for a Straight-In. He then is responsible for the outcome. As Ozexpat pointed out, I suppose we'll stop doing circles when the insurers (or CASA) deems them to be unsafe, and that ain't about to happen just yet.
And sorry about the Affordable Safety quip! I should have used "commercial reality", but I couldn't resist using RHs classic phrase to make the point!
We don't need to talk about G/A, because they do thousands of these things every year with obviously very little fuss.
Winstun, I wasn't suggesting circling in min vis at night, and you CANNOT circle at 400ft AGL at night in a C aircraft: it's illegal (unless the MDA happens to be at 400ft AGL, and I can't think of a circling MDA that low where I fly), so keep the argument on the straight and narrow, will you? I was merely pointing out some real-world commercial realities that have to be decided upon before commencing an approach of this type.
Don't get me wrong guys, I'd love to do GPS NPAs everywhere, especially when I get tied up with night effect, moon effect and all the other effects that make my ADF needles go round in circles, but the reality is that the captain makes a judgement call on the approach to be flown based on the expected or actual weather having cognisance of the additional cost to the operation of flying out the opposite direction to the inbound track for 15nm and back again juts for a Straight-In. He then is responsible for the outcome. As Ozexpat pointed out, I suppose we'll stop doing circles when the insurers (or CASA) deems them to be unsafe, and that ain't about to happen just yet.
And sorry about the Affordable Safety quip! I should have used "commercial reality", but I couldn't resist using RHs classic phrase to make the point!
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Australia
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As usual, this forum has denigrated into a shouting match. Why can't we all just get along?? 
Obviously this is a problem regardless of who is to blame for the reported incidents. Wouldn't a relatively inexpensive and quick solution be to cap the road lights.
Surely with the local media attention the latest event attracted, it couldn't be too hard to get the applicable council or roads authority to at least consider the option. Wouldn't surprise me if Mr & Mrs Mac didn't have a hand in there somewhere or were authorities on local govenment.
Why do road lights need to illuminate upwards of 20ft AGL anyway? Must be to warn pilots that its NOT a runway.
Blue skies, you'll need em.
Obviously this is a problem regardless of who is to blame for the reported incidents. Wouldn't a relatively inexpensive and quick solution be to cap the road lights.
Surely with the local media attention the latest event attracted, it couldn't be too hard to get the applicable council or roads authority to at least consider the option. Wouldn't surprise me if Mr & Mrs Mac didn't have a hand in there somewhere or were authorities on local govenment.
Why do road lights need to illuminate upwards of 20ft AGL anyway? Must be to warn pilots that its NOT a runway.
Blue skies, you'll need em.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: planit
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but the reality is that the captain makes a judgement call on the approach to be flown based on the expected or actual weather having cognisance of the additional cost to the operation of flying out the opposite direction to the inbound track for 15nm and back again juts for a Straight-In. He then is responsible for the outcome.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Skylab
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the end of the day who was flying the aeroplane and who was monitoring azimuth guidance or was it a case of trying to remain visual in conditions that weren't?
I'm sorry but if you play by the rules and follow the procedures and SOP's then you really shouldn't have this kind of thing happening.
You should all buy a copy of the book Tombstone Imperative, the truth about air safety. Anyone that has an idea about the risk factors in this country and the trend toward a major crash will see the similarities in that book.
Over the last ten years we have come so close to a major accident it is not funny, granted that other airlines have lined up on roads in the past, it's happened in Mackay, Cairns and Adelaide, it is however a disturbing event this Mackay incident because IT IS STILL HAPPENING. So instead of talking about the virtues of circling approaches and ICAO, the regulatory authority should go through the airline concerned and sort it out before they crash an aeroplane.
A Question for the regulator, why are major airlines getting away with safety deficiencies? Why over the last two years have we seen numerous uncommanded engine shutdowns on the 717, cases of crew selecting flap rather that landing gear after takeoff and now a near landing on a highway? These are the events that have made the press, how many other safety deficiencies don't and at the end of the day, nothing is done about it.
Air safety is political, until the federal government and regulator get off their arses and become pro-active in avoiding a crash then we may actually avert one. I give it inside 5 years we'll see a major hull loss in this country.
This is not intended to be a flame post, but why are we seeing the same serious incidents occurr over and over again, and how long will it be before we run out of luck?
I'm sorry but if you play by the rules and follow the procedures and SOP's then you really shouldn't have this kind of thing happening.
You should all buy a copy of the book Tombstone Imperative, the truth about air safety. Anyone that has an idea about the risk factors in this country and the trend toward a major crash will see the similarities in that book.
Over the last ten years we have come so close to a major accident it is not funny, granted that other airlines have lined up on roads in the past, it's happened in Mackay, Cairns and Adelaide, it is however a disturbing event this Mackay incident because IT IS STILL HAPPENING. So instead of talking about the virtues of circling approaches and ICAO, the regulatory authority should go through the airline concerned and sort it out before they crash an aeroplane.
A Question for the regulator, why are major airlines getting away with safety deficiencies? Why over the last two years have we seen numerous uncommanded engine shutdowns on the 717, cases of crew selecting flap rather that landing gear after takeoff and now a near landing on a highway? These are the events that have made the press, how many other safety deficiencies don't and at the end of the day, nothing is done about it.
Air safety is political, until the federal government and regulator get off their arses and become pro-active in avoiding a crash then we may actually avert one. I give it inside 5 years we'll see a major hull loss in this country.
This is not intended to be a flame post, but why are we seeing the same serious incidents occurr over and over again, and how long will it be before we run out of luck?
Just Binos
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mackay, Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have your arguments about whether circling approaches should ever be made, even in CAVOK conditions, that's your problem to sort out.
But with all the shooting of the messenger that's going on here, one thing appears to have been forgotten. The last incident in MK was NOT off a circling approach, it was off a 14 VOR/DME.
Can we get back to the facts?
But with all the shooting of the messenger that's going on here, one thing appears to have been forgotten. The last incident in MK was NOT off a circling approach, it was off a 14 VOR/DME.
Can we get back to the facts?
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere on earth
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Binos,
Yeh, thanks for that.
Here's a good contributing cause; given that we HAVE to do NPAs at some places...
Jepp do not put the final approach track alignment on their charts, unlike ASA, which have a small pic on the side of the chart which shows where the actual aircraft track goes: very good for working out what the hell you're going to see at the MDA. Perhaps this may have helped the boys with orientation, especially if they were not "locals".
Another case of ozzies doing it better than yanks??
Yeh, thanks for that.
Here's a good contributing cause; given that we HAVE to do NPAs at some places...
Jepp do not put the final approach track alignment on their charts, unlike ASA, which have a small pic on the side of the chart which shows where the actual aircraft track goes: very good for working out what the hell you're going to see at the MDA. Perhaps this may have helped the boys with orientation, especially if they were not "locals".
Another case of ozzies doing it better than yanks??
Last edited by Captain Custard; 9th Jul 2003 at 09:07.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Unfortunately Amos, circling approaches are still a very necessary, and commonly executed part of life in this part of the world, generally due to the terrain at the reciprocal end to which the let down to minimum is executed - but not to the 400' as Winnie says. That used to be the minima for G.A. aircraft from memory.
But whether it's a straight in, from an oblique final approach, OR a circling approach, my suggestion for implementing strobes in Mackay was along the same lines as those in place in Vila, Vanuatu (remember there, Amos?), and Kagoshima, Japan.
This is a line of single strobe lights, several kilometres in length if a circling approach is needed, that leads the pilot from the MDA position to the threshhold.
Admittedly they ARE a bit of a pain in low cloud, rainy conditions, because of the "bounce" from the lights - but they're sure as hell easy to follow, and can't be confused with road lighting.
And make for AFFORDABLE SAFETY.
Winstun's idea of also covering the highway lights is practical, and inexpensive.
Have a friggin' bone, boy!!
BTW, Binos, is the Mackay airport locally or Federally maintained...so that we know where you should send these recommendations.
But whether it's a straight in, from an oblique final approach, OR a circling approach, my suggestion for implementing strobes in Mackay was along the same lines as those in place in Vila, Vanuatu (remember there, Amos?), and Kagoshima, Japan.
This is a line of single strobe lights, several kilometres in length if a circling approach is needed, that leads the pilot from the MDA position to the threshhold.
Admittedly they ARE a bit of a pain in low cloud, rainy conditions, because of the "bounce" from the lights - but they're sure as hell easy to follow, and can't be confused with road lighting.
And make for AFFORDABLE SAFETY.
Winstun's idea of also covering the highway lights is practical, and inexpensive.
Have a friggin' bone, boy!!
BTW, Binos, is the Mackay airport locally or Federally maintained...so that we know where you should send these recommendations.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: brisbane, Australia
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kaptin M
Memories of Vila,(great as long as the power was working)Were you the LHS driver the night that the Island "disappeared" for a few minutes ??What about the "eeaww"damper in the special info book.Yep great place for a engine change..
Cheers
Memories of Vila,(great as long as the power was working)Were you the LHS driver the night that the Island "disappeared" for a few minutes ??What about the "eeaww"damper in the special info book.Yep great place for a engine change..
Cheers