Capt Fathom, I never used the word "approach." The video shows the aircraft flying down the runway at X height. Who knows, it may have been a go-around, but the video shows what is essentially a fly-by, hence my question-mark above.

The fact is, that it was rather foggy!

As it's been said many times, "welcome to the third world". Even India has CAT3 ILS at its major airports. Sad for a country that once led the way. We have great coffee shops and places to buy furry kangaroos but can't get the planes in. Pathetic really, almost comical.

Took the words right out of my mind BG. A question? Was YMTG out of question?

QUOTE

"Qantas and Virgin were both diverted to Mildura by air traffic control when Adelaide airport notified it that fog was closing it to arrivals. At the time air traffic control had reported that Mildura was clear. It acted on the best information it had, directed the affected airlines to go to Mildura, and then everyone was caught out by the unforecast fog that also affected the visibility at that airfield."

I doubt that ATC would have "diverted" the aircraft to MIA, it would have been the captains' decisions to divert there, not ATCs.

QUOTE

" Pilots are entitled to elect under their company’s operating procedures to fly an approach and abandon it if they cannot make visual contact with the runway at the decision height at which they continue the landing or power up the engines and climb away."

Pilots aren't "entitled" to do this under SOPs, it's expected of them by law... :ugh:


Not having a go at the pilots, they did a good job under tough circumstances, just more sh!t reporting....

I'm sure we all remember from PPL met. about visibility in fog. The distance through the fog is much less when looking straight down from overhead the airport than it is when you are in the soup and looking through 2km of water droplets trying to find the runway.

What a day...

I was on that flight
Things I remember

Cockpit said high headwinds to Adelaide
Cockpit said we were Diverting from Adelaide to Mildura for fuel and to wait for fog to lift at Adelaide
I recall one go-around with ground visible ( certainly wasn't a prec.. Large thrust and pitch change ) not saying there wasn't one.. Just didn't notice it.
Cockpit advised that next approach is a landing and he will call brace as it may be bumpy landing.
On final(?) captain called brace brace
Followed by front cabin crew repeatedly yelling "heads down stay down" until we had slowed down on rwy

I got a picture and will post later of out window view.

I was towards front of aircraft

My memory is being taxed after a loooong day. Left Brisbane at 6 arrived Adelaide at 7:30ish so there may be some inaccuracies


Pic on taxi
http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/4782/31ow.jpg
* said cockpit as can't recall who made PAs

QF were there prior
1384 aircraft still there when we left at 3

Kris

I am not interested in talking to media

YMTG runway is only 1524x30 so a bit tight I would imagine.

I was wondering about the military option, YPED. I happened to be listening to ATC before 1384 diverted, and ATC mentioned to 1384 that YPPF was now clear of fog. It is likely that YPED would have been clear as well.

What hasn't been mentioned so far is the way 3AW reported this (in the person of David Armstrong and that Journalist's Journalist Neil Mitchell). I admit I'm paraphrasing the exact wording here, but the story was retold as: "The Virgin 737 pilot was guided to a safe landing by the Qantas pilot who had landed before him . . ."

A 73 conducted an auto land into AD this morning in the fog and got in whilst no one else was getting in.( I'm not sure if they made previous attempts.) My question is, could they have used auto land as a last resort and landed below minima or is this a standard procedure in foggy conditions?

YPED was never clear (until around the same time AD became clear) and Parafield was for only a short period before it rolled in again.

Roundabout

Yes they could have but if you arrive to an airfield and it goes under minimums and you have fuel to an alternate field that is CAVOK , you would be shot for doing an unauthorized auto land into that runway. Sometimes **** happens and these aircraft got on the ground, thats what its all about...

That 737 that auto landed was me. We arrived into Adelaide with Melbourne diversion + 45 mins hold, because I had a feeling in my loins departing Sydney, and after a pulse quickening curfew arrival into Sydney with unforecast fog a week prior.

We held for about 25 mins while aircraft diverted left right and centre all around us.

When vis was reported as 820m we shot an approach and were just able to see expanding Hials at minima. Borderline stuff to be sure but we waited until vis was reported above requirements and got lucky.

Elected to auto land to enable all my attention to be on expanding segment.

First in, then others followed as fog quickly dissipated. Although around the terminal it seemed more clagged in than the runway.

Funny thing is, there were no requirements to divert really as metar had fog clearing 30 min after we arrived so if you'd trusted the metar you'd have gotten in.

Tough call when she's fogged in to put all your eggs in the metar basket but legally if you had 30 min on arrival at about 10:30 from memory you didn't have to go anywhere.

But we had bucketload so was a no brainier to wait it out.

Hats off to the mildura crews getting it down safely but I'd be damned if I'd leave an auto land capable airfield to head to a tinpot non-ils runway if I knew it had fog also.

That's the million dollar variable though isn't it. Was fog on the mildura metar?

At least it was not in the middle of WA in a F28 at night with only an NDB for the approach.

There is no way there was fog on MIA metar when the other crews elected to divert, surely, why divert? It was all down to fuel levels on arrival ADL.


601,
Better than being in a Baron in WA southwest with a NDB offset in 400m vis? Lol been there done that...Its all good mate...

Yeah sorry bad wording on my part. I'm sure they wouldn't have diverted Mildura if fog was there on ETA, but I wonder if it was a total surprise or if it was on the taf but not metar, then appeared out of the blue, much like Adelaide.

Totally agree with By George, third world country masquerading as a first world country.Airport operators more interested in selling fast food and a so called government flat out sabotaging the economy.
It's unbelievable that internationals arriving at our so called "Premier City" have to divert for fog. Reminds me of the story of the United Captains last Aussie Flight,"just like to congratulate you guys on being the second best controllers in the world." Controller not realising he was being set up responded, thanks very much, who's the best? Everybody Else!

ATC personell have othing to do with it, it is the government......oh sorry private companies that dictate our national interest......

Sorry AoA, Didn't mean to imply ATC are responsible for incompetent Government policy.

I'm told there was a video taken by someone on the ground of the 73 trying to land? Has anyone got a link to it?

Well done to the VA crew, I guess the seat covers where changed later on!! :eek:

Video here if link works
 

Video here if link works to 7 news

Virgin plane makes emergency landing at Mildura Airport - Yahoo!7

If you want a heads up the senate inquiry thread may give one!

http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-...011-a-106.html

I'll be careful here, but I'm pretty sure ( No MELS, abs certain ) the 737 will land off an ILS in zero visibility, as oppose to a VOR/DME approach in marginal visibility, I wait for the facts.

Just musing out loud...

I wonder if the airline's (collectively not just Virgin) bean counters had been on board enroute to the World Bean Counter's AGM in ADL, and had all had to go through the experience, including the BRACE, BRACE, BRACE; would they continue to advocate minimalist legal fuel "because statistically you'll just carry it for the sake of carrying it"?

Or would the experience, actually having some fear of the outcome, change their statistical outlook to permit the sensible carriage of an alternate, whether the current rules require it or not?

Hmmmm. :ooh:

What is a rough fuel figure to climb out of Adelaide and go to Melbourne and land with 2 tonnes?

Excellent post Claret!

If it was the required 2800m there wouldn't be a thread running on it.

Firstly, credit where it is due, and hats off to the crew for a safe outcome.

Video looks like some serious pea soup. Would be lucky to be 800m I would think. No wonder the pax had been given the brace command. Makes sense to me. I look forward to finding out how they pulled it off safely but I am going to guess like everyone else has been, and agree with the previous poster who said dial up the rnav which will give the pseudo glideslope to the threshold.

I wonder if there will be an RNP approach implemented in Mildura at a later date now that the test flying calibration has been already completed :E

Speaking of fuel, can anybody confirm whether VA have actually introduced new policy? I paxed 3 return sectors last week for business , 6 different aircraft for a total of 6 flights. Each aircraft was stinking hot, minimal to nil aircon until climb. No U/S APU's, just stinking hot onboard with plenty of pax whinging, including myself. I am curious whether a policy has been introduced? If it has it is not a good one. If my flights next week are a replica of last week I may go back to the Rat for a month or two to re-test the waters so to speak.
Three weeks ago the flights felt cooler??

Hmmm... i'm wondering why the BOM caint get their fog forecasts right ?

I too got caught out yesterday, and I would have landed with 2.5 tons of fuel. I think the met boys were having a bad day, as the fog wasn't forecast and didn't clear until 1-2 hours AFTER the forecast TTF period! A quick discussion with my FO and we just went back to where we had just come from. The good news on that one was that the wind @ FL350 was 260/176kts, so picked up a nice little tail wind! I have left the auto-pilot on many times doing a practice RNAV/Z runway approach, and had made the decision a long time before, that it would get you within the runway confines, in fog. You may take out a few lights, but way better than crashing in a paddock!! I don't know the facts, but I imagine this is exactly what the Virgin crew did. Maybe the QF crew were just alerting them to the actual viz conditions as they made their final approach. I too would have prepared the cabin for a possible crash landing as they have had a lot of rain up that way, and the grass verges would be very soft. Brilliant result i reckon! :D

Interesting seeing around 72 posts in just one day on a subject that is obviously controversial.
I wonder whether this core subject (Min fuel) will result in much worse than what we are talking about here some day/night. It's on the cards just a matter of time when & then we shall see all the boffins ducking for cover with the word 'commercial' once again being swept under the 'safe' carpet!
I've operated in & out of MIA for many a year & it's a well known shocker of a place for fog, forecast & un-forecast. Lost a patient early one morning 'cause of fog, tried my damnedest to get in to that place several times never seeing the rwy/lights 'till in the missed App but had to go home with a very teary paramedic on board:sad:

The tech crew got safely on the ground that's the main thing, now lets talk about improving the situation so the risks can be further reduced not increased by the bean counters!

Wmk2

After having seen the fog at BN being cleared by aircraft executing missed approaches, the vis you see on the video taken from the terminal area may not be the vis the crew had on their second approach.

The completion of the missed approach may have dissipated the fog enough to complete the final approach and landing.

Never trust ADL in winter !
 

Personal experience - Ansett days; CBR to ADL with a CAVOK TAFOR / TTF-M on ADL.
Preparing for briefing prior to TOPD and got the ADL atis which indicated fog moving in from the NE. Had not received any hazard alert from ATC.
Mildura and MEL had fog and too far into the flight to return to CBR so the decision was made to continue to ADL and try to beat the fog (with the option of an autoland if need be).
VOR/D 05 no good so took a 5kt downwind ILS 23 and got visual at 600'. The fog continued to thicken after our arrival.
From what I have observed at ADL, the fog forms up the Barossa Valley , not so much over the airport itself, then slides down the valley with a katabatic breeze which also takes out Edingurgh.
The ADL forcast might not have fog but it is frequently not too far away.

Role on....

Thankful very experienced Captain flying this one, 30+yrs flying experience

Been told he cut his teeth flying turbo props flying Adl to Mql in his younger days

Top effort

Channel 9 Brisbane made a similar statement in their promo for the 6 o'clock news but there was no such reference in the full bulletin.

Bl@@dyHell! That video gave me goosebums.

Ben Sandilands has completely missed the point, which is that the BOM have comprehensivley failed the travelling public by it's apparent inability to forecast accurately. This is endangering the lives of thousands of unsuspecting travellers because airlines are trusting the forecasts to carry fuel levels that are too low to cope with a bad forecast/unplanned diversion.

Bloggs- Bingo.

Surely it doesnt 'cost' the BOM anything to put a PROB30 up in the TAF the night before? In the past fortnight I have had early morning departures to 2 aerodromes that had no mention of fog and thus no alternate requirement. The temp/dew point split and wind off the metar led me to believe that fog would be likely and whaddyaknow- speci's come out mid-sector. 1 resulted in a diversion and the other occassion the fog was partial and not fully over the airfield.

Do the BOM have a vested interest in not putting limiting forecasts up?

Like Singapore's rolling tempo to enable singair to avoid carrying extra fuel?

Has anyone ever seen anything higher than PROB30 for FG or any other weather for that matter? Eg, PROB70 FG? I never have. It always seem to be PROB30 or nothing. If you see PROB>50 for FG or BR, that would at least get more attention.

I have never seen anything greater than PROB40 on a TAF. It was my understanding that PROB30 means it is unlikely but definitely could occur. PROB40 on the other hand indicates a very high certainty of the event occurring.