That's not accurate. On the 330 Fleet in my company, there are numerous mismatches between the IPad and the aircraft database. In fact some aircraft have different databases, tailored by available storage and routes they operate on. I can't say exactly what JQ has. So while it seems pretty easy for experts on PPrune armed with FlightRadar to decide the nearest available airport, things are often a little different in the cockpit

Sure Trevor. I'm sure it's quite simple in the 172. When you have 25,000 hours on heavy jets free to give me some advice.

Zero hours on heavy jets, so I’m not going to presume to criticise anyone. But is it really true that there would not be current, consistent, comprehensive AIP data at the fingertips of a ‘heavy jet’ crew?

Would seem a bit upside down if us plebs in a 172 have it, but the big boys and girls in the heavy metal didn’t.

Oh I see, so there are "suitable" airports and then there are "more suitable" airports.

Depends on the airline LB. I dont know what airline Savage 175 flies for but despite a lot of JQs faults the technical side of the operation is to a high standard. Everytime I have looked for an airport in the Ipad that is on the PFD it is always there. Just to clarify the PFD will only show airports 1500m or greater. There are different symbols for airports and navaids. So Cowra still has an NDB and will show up on the PFD as an NDB but the airport is not in the database and is therefore not in the ipad.

Savage 175 It may not be accurate for you but my statement is accurate for JQ operations which is the airline involved in the incident.

I think what he is raising is the suggestion that nearest Could be considered as a temporal thing, rather than a distance thing.

Thanks LL. That’s useful info.

Ok Savage, I'll acknowledge your 25,000 jet time if you'll acknowledge my 20 years straight on multi engine jets. My point remains that I do not see how not having all that stuff electronically at your fingertips should make too much difference if you are required to get on the ground in a fire emergency - dial up the Ymia vor. Select heading, point at the needle. Land aeroplane. Surely you can still do that without a super computer.

Great, now there’s even less toilet paper for the elderly residents of Mildura thanks to this unexpected arrival.

I concur with Trevor the loverboy,

When I'm flying i preload lines for extended final track on airports that have a runway length suitable for an A380, even though they may not be listed in our manual as suitable, critical or an emergency airfield. If I have a serious fire/smoke I can say to FO - "Point the aircraft to the that line about a 10 mile final".

Everyone has different techniques and management ideas, no one crew will do things the same way another crew will.

The cargo compartment on the A320 has sufficient fire suppression that under most circumstances likely to be encountered, the end result of a few minutes is unlikely to be any different.

Not to say a fire/smoke warning should be disregarded as non-urgent, but a safer result is going to be a landing at an airport where the crew can obtain adequate information beforehand and process it so as to not lose situational awareness, vs saving a few minutes by simply “point and aim”.

But..... you’re flames are coming out the sides and it’s about to be catastrophic, then point and shoot!

Its not that complicated.
Rule 101 of being an RPT Captain; Operate the aircraft in accordance with Company approved Ops. Manual.
Follow normal procedures , complete all checklists.
In Non-normal situations again follow non-normal procedures , complete all non-normal checklists.
If the checklist ends with “ land at the nearest available airport” do it.
The QRH of the aircraft I operate is pretty clear.
The question you never want to have to answer in a court of law is : “Are you aware of the statement on page ...... of your Company Ops manual?
If so why did you choose to ignore it?”
Even worse your Lawyer might have to answer it while trying to defend the claims on your estate.

Rule CAR 145

I think CAR145 gives the pilot in command "emergency authority" to "render a departure from those rules necessary in order to avoid immediate danger".

It's pretty clear isn't it ? Nothing complicated.

I am more to happy to stand up in a court of law and say "I deliberately ignored" something written in the ops manual using my authority under CAR 145.

John Citizen , I am aware of the CAR’s
Nothing precludes the Pilot in Command of exercising his/her Command Authority . But only after complying with the procedures contained in the Company Ops Manual.
A colleague of mine had his last years in the business made a misery by on-going litigation by a certain idiot regulatory authority over something far less serious.
Do not ever say “ I deliberately ignored........”
Trust me , you don’t want to go there.

It was a good outcome. Just another day at the office.
Luckily, we won't be reading "Miracle on the Darling" any time soon!

I disagree.

You clearly wrote that This clearly means that the PIC must ALWAYS operate in accordance with the manuals at all times and nothing else at all. You did not include the authority to deviate from these manuals under CAR 145 if required.

You even reinforced this by writing that if a pilot deliberately ignored anything in the manuals that they would have difficulty in a court of law. So this basically tells me don't ever contravene the company manuals.

Yes "ignore" sounds deliberately rebellious but you wrote it first, choosing such a word that makes a pilots actions sound worse than it is.

A more diplomatic less rebellious way to describe such actions would be "I was aware my actions weren't in compliance with the operations manuals, but after careful deliberation of all the options, we the crew assessed our actions to be the safest option under the circumstances".

well said -;)
deckare a Mayday and the rule book gets tossed out the window! CMD decision making comes in to play!

feeling a little butt hurt are we Trev? -)

So if had a ticking bomb in the aircraft just about to explode, but landed on 4km runway with a 12 knot tailwind, I would have to go around in order to comply with aircraft limitations and company manuals ?

Or "I deliberately ignored and exceeded the aircraft and company limits and still landed"

Or "I was aware of the aircraft and company limits but we chose to land as this was the safest option". Isn't this the same as deliberately ignoring but just saying it in a nicer way.

Either way, you still did not follow procedure whichever way you want to describe it, ignore, neglect, overlook, didn't comply or disregard.

My aircraft type has a pretty comprehensive “ Bomb on Board” Non-Normal checklist.
Plus lots of CRM training for just scenario.
Run that first. Then do what you like.
And hope you have prayed to the correct Diety.