Could it be an experience issue with the crew? Network has had rapid expansion, crew being upgraded/employed onto the F100 as more experienced crew move to the A320.

They have had a few move through management positions recently too.

Are you suggesting rapid expansion is a bad thing? Hypothetically it would only be bad if you tried to do it on no more money than you were spending before the expansion though right……….. … … in order to be cheaper than the other guy right…… … hmmmm. Surely a correctly resourced company can expand rapidly?

Is Part 135 a thing in Australia?

Busting minima should not be taken lightly and will be properly investigated. However this crew did not autoland in nil visibility, they self reported going below an MDA of probably between 500 and 600 feet on a non precision approach, with a reported cloud base of broken 800 in light rain showers and visibility reducing to 3000 meters.

In this situation in a jet you can break out with ground contact but not be able to see the runway because of the forward visibility. On an ILS with minimums of 200 feet you would probably see the runway at 400 feet and it would be a normal day at the office. The F100 is pretty well equipped, half way to an Airbus, said friends of mine more familiar with it. We will find out eventually what happened and why. But so far it sounds a bit less dramatic then some are making out.

I think one learning point may well be that marginal conditions can make decision making more difficult. If the reported weather had been clearly insufficient the decision would have been easy. Or to use Professor Handy´s analogy ˋthrow a frog in boiling water he will jump out, warm the water slowly and he will boil to death.´

There is a new rule relating to approach bans that becomes effective at midnight tonight. The old charter and RPT chestnut also becomes history.

The Metar reported by Avherald (link in post 9) has vis all the 9s and scattered 600, broken 1500 in force at the time of the first approach. I am not familiar with Australian operations, but do any of the later reports make an approach ban relevant?

it is from midnight!

This op would be part 121 though. Above 9 seats and 8618.

Approach bans do not exist here yet. The new rules with approach bans come in at midnight, however approach bans are only going to be runways with RVR readings. I don’t think YPBO has them so it wouldn’t have stopped an approach.

And an air traffic control service, so that’s something else YPBO lacks 😂

Thanks! based on what we know so far I am pretty sure most, probably all of us would have made a first approach. With hindsight the sense of two misses and you divert seems obvious. But we were not there and I have not seen any hard evidence to back up the assertion that everywhere else nearby was cavok. Some doubt about met forecasting in this part of the world has been raised together with the rapidly worsening weather evidenced by the destination airfield metars. Again I look forward to the official report.

How did this get reported?

The crew lodged their own report about going below mins?😅

Network have had some trouble with Fukker pilots skill sets in the last couple of years

'Busting minima' is a reportable matter under the TSI legislation.

Lederhosen posts…
”The F100 is pretty well equipped, half way to an Airbus, said friends of mine more familiar with it. We will find out eventually what happened and why. But so far it sounds a bit less dramatic then some are making out.”
Whilst I can see how it may be dismissed as less dramatic… it is busting minima. Minima designed by clever people in back offices looking at terrain obstacles aircraft type etc.
If the above sentiments are widely felt within the airline pilot community in the “feeder carriers”, we are in for a bumpy ride.

The selective quoting by CaptainSouth is rather misleading. My first line in post 44 was:

Busting minima should not be taken lightly and will be properly investigated.

Is this a skill set issue as suggested by another poster? there is no evidence so far about the quality of their flying. You can question their judgement but not their flying skills.

I am a retired 737 and Airbus captain with a lifelong interest in flight safety. So I am not sure what my views have to do with feeder carriers. I think we can learn quite a lot from incidents like this, but in a slightly more nuanced way than naughty little fxkker drivers! which was the gist of a post a couple of responses earlier.

I doubt this is a skill set issue. Nobody who has done both thinks “ Fokker bad… airline good”
Pilots in WA are battle-hardened. Its a tough gig.
Hardest job I ever had was single Pilot IFR in a light turboprop. Boeings are easy in comparison.
Its the operational environment.
I will say it again ….Wild West and Third World.
And that is being unkind to parts of the Third World……..

Part 91/121/135 in WA is not that arduous

- perhaps the VHF/HF comms are frustratingly congested at times.

- most flights Tanker return fuel or close to it with MLW.
- Weather is generally benign and predictable with a look at the days MSLP Analysis.
- ADS B is glorious compared to the procedural past.
- Lots of Network alternate options in the 2000m range with FUEL, Lighting and stairs.

To label WA flying the wild west or 3rd world is a stretch.

WOW , ADSB. The hieight of sophistication!
Cyclones are not “benign weather” And it does take much when forecasting and facilities are rubbish.
Not a CAT 1 approach between Perth and Darwin. LOL
Where else have you operated ?
Europe? USA?
Trust me WA is rubbish.
30 years ago low population and low frequency of operations were used by the Bureaucrats to justify low expenditure on exotic stuff like Control Towers and Nav. Aids and radar etc. Thanks Dick! We are way past that now with frequency of Jet traffic into Mining sites etc.Shouldn’t happen in a First World country.
Its rubbish!

Maybe some of you guys need to come to PNG for a reality check!

We can show you guys some **** that will make your eyes bulged, and we do it every day!!! OPS Normal.

Over 20 years up there and I haven’t killed myself yet, come close to it though on a few occasions….

So , PNG is worse . So what. Been to Nepal ? Landed at Lukla ?
The thread is about WA. And aviation generally in Australia. Its nowhere near worlds best practice. Not even close.
Wait for the Royal Commission after the first hull loss. It will be a ripper.

Don’t worry bro, Australian Aviation will be safer in about 6 hours time when the new ops regs go live. Only took about 30 years to draft and implement, good use of taxpayers money🤬

I do agree with you, couldn’t miss an opportunity to take the piss!