|
Here is a link to the book that gives wonderful insight into the history of WA flying from DC3s to the introduction of jet operations into the Pilbara and beyond. Many interesting yarns and I’ve personally found the book very beneficial for the flying we do today. It’s available on ebook.
iflewformma.com |
I think the thread has drifted somewhat. The type of approach is almost irrelevant and all that particular discussion does is take away from the real lessons here.
Edit: I am totally onboard with the idea that Australia is lagging behind the rest of the world, no argument there. It just didn’t cause this incident as crews always have a choice even if it’s an unpopular one. |
AltFlieger, your frustration is misguided. Ive been designing these things for 16years and the only reason -AR approaches are not more common is because aircraft capability is not that common. 737/320 and soon Q400 are the only types approved capable. Others can be but operators choose not to.
What does this have to do the regulator? |
Originally Posted by alphacentauri
(Post 11155661)
AltFlieger, your frustration is misguided. Ive been designing these things for 16years and the only reason -AR approaches are not more common is because aircraft capability is not that common. 737/320 and soon Q400 are the only types approved capable. Others can be but operators choose not to.
What does this have to do the regulator? What was frustrating is that when the first -AR approaches were introduced they were a game changer. Then they went backwards to generic charts. Melbourne RWY 34 was a good example. From a minima of 200’ back to a GNSS approach simply because of ATC workload. Very frustrating. |
Meanwhile, back at Paraburdoo…..!
|
Fathom, to you it's "THE DOO", thank you. :ok:
|
Report finally out. https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...ir/ao-2021-048
|
Poor buggers. Never leave with air in the tanks and tell your mates to bugger off until you get in! Oh and a quick Mayday will get you the weather reports you need.
|
Originally Posted by Roj approved
(Post 11148909)
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. |
No not brand new but the Townsville refueler tells me they were "Green with Green" though (limited experience in each seat).
A critical point many airlines overlook & take for granted in times of change or crewing droughts, such as we are seeing right now. Happy Landings :ok: |
Originally Posted by Chocks Away
(Post 11408945)
No not brand new but the Townsville refueler tells me they were "Green with Green" though (limited experience in each seat).
|
:ok: Crossed wires sorry.
Comment was regarding their Newman incident. "Play-on is the call". |
Originally Posted by Chocks Away
(Post 11408945)
No not brand new but the Townsville refueler tells me they were "Green with Green" though (limited experience in each seat).
A critical point many airlines overlook & take for granted in times of change or crewing droughts, such as we are seeing right now. Happy Landings :ok: |
Originally Posted by Chocks Away
(Post 11408949)
:ok: Crossed wires sorry.
Comment was regarding their Newman incident. "Play-on is the call". Qf paid an ENORMOUS amount of money to repair an F100 that encountered low level wind shear in cavok conditions approximately 10 years ago. The plane was bent the f up but they fixed it to not screw the insurance/record of the mighty QF. Captain was VERY experienced, not your insinuated green blah blah… Theres an atsb investigation I think if you care to look it up, point is you can cherry pick if you like and hate on pilots if that’s what gets you off but please, PLEASE, get your facts right BEFORE you cherry pick. Otherwise you just end up looking a bit dumb? Wouldn’t you agree? |
Originally Posted by Cloudee
(Post 11407753)
Report finally out. https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...ir/ao-2021-048
Originally Posted by ATSB (AO-2021-048)
Paraburdoo Airport had an automatic weather station, which could measure the relative humidity at the surface. However, there were no means for measuring atmospheric data above the surface, which is one of the elements used to forecast cloud bases. In addition, the nearest weather balloon stations were more than 160 NM (300 km) from Paraburdoo, and therefore, the Bureau of Meteorology relied on cloud observations at nearby aerodromes to verify the expected conditions for Paraburdoo. Also, as the Newman automatic weather station was not recording the cloud or weather data groups, it was unknown if a SPECI report should have been issued for Newman for low cloud conditions, as it was for Paraburdoo.
For context, I'm currently flying in Canada, and while not every strip in the middle of nowhere has a weather station, every airport that gets airline jet service has, at a minimum, an automated weather station that gives you access to wind, ceilings, temperature, and altimiter. Considering that these weather stations are also installed at a large number of 1500m gravel strips serving remote communities of 150-500 people, it seems otherworldly that not only do several of the airports in Australia that get airline jet service not have those, but also that this has been so normalized that there are pilots on this thread implying that this situation is fine, and people should just "learn how to interpret weather". Seriously, let's say it's $100 000 to set up, and another few thousand to maintain yearly. Seems like a no-brainer compared to a) costs of carrying extra fuel on flights there, b) potential costs of an incident/hull loss, and c) increased weather forecast accuracy (due to better ground-level data). You could even have those stations issue AUTO TAFs if you connect them into the BOM back-end! |
Originally Posted by AlphaVictorFoxtrot
(Post 11412349)
I do love how lots of people are ****ting on the crew, while this paragraph is in black and white in the report, in the "What ATSB found" section.
For context, I'm currently flying in Canada, and while not every strip in the middle of nowhere has a weather station, every airport that gets airline jet service has, at a minimum, an automated weather station that gives you access to wind, ceilings, temperature, and altimiter. Considering that these weather stations are also installed at a large number of 1500m gravel strips serving remote communities of 150-500 people, it seems otherworldly that not only do several of the airports in Australia that get airline jet service not have those, but also that this has been so normalized that there are pilots on this thread implying that this situation is fine, and people should just "learn how to interpret weather". Seriously, let's say it's $100 000 to set up, and another few thousand to maintain yearly. Seems like a no-brainer compared to a) costs of carrying extra fuel on flights there, b) potential costs of an incident/hull loss, and c) increased weather forecast accuracy (due to better ground-level data). You could even have those stations issue AUTO TAFs if you connect them into the BOM back-end! |
Originally Posted by AVF
Seriously, let's say it's $100 000 to set up, and another few thousand to maintain yearly. Seems like a no-brainer compared to a)
|
Originally Posted by Capn Bloggs
(Post 11412585)
add a d) the billions of dollars ripped out of the ground every year in that part of the world.
|
Originally Posted by Led Zep
(Post 11412601)
It is hard to fathom how some of those places have the knock-out combo of no TAF, AWIS, mobile, ADSB and VHF coverage.
And, yeah, that weather station services a radius of about 150 miles... but, crucially, the remote communities further afield almost universally have either a weather station locally or one within about 150 miles. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:25. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.