PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)
-   -   Network F100 busting minima, Paraburdoo (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/643951-network-f100-busting-minima-paraburdoo.html)

Transition Layer 28th Nov 2021 04:57

Network F100 busting minima, Paraburdoo
 
Flight below minimum altitude involving Fokker Aircraft F100, registration VH-NHV, at Paraburdoo Airport, Western Australia, on 22 November 2021

Bula 28th Nov 2021 08:46

Ouch.. 4 attempts.

Brakerider 28th Nov 2021 09:16

4 goes- makes you wonder if they had much gas to go anywhere else

No Idea Either 28th Nov 2021 09:39


Originally Posted by Brakerider (Post 11148095)
4 goes- makes you wonder if they had much gas to go anywhere else

Probably not after 4 attempts, so rather than running out of gas, they do the old ‘flying it to the runway trick’. Virgin and Qantas got away with it at Mildura, but they were caught out by unforecast fog. Justifying it after 4 attempts (any holding as well?) will be a little harder. I have no idea about the RPT arrangement here, was it a mining run/charter? They mightn’t be too happy either.

Capt Fathom 28th Nov 2021 10:14

What is the purpose of the Minimum Descent Altitude?

Torukmacto 28th Nov 2021 10:20


Originally Posted by Capt Fathom (Post 11148127)
What is the purpose of the Minimum Descent Altitude?

To avoid getting mentioned on Pprune

BSD 28th Nov 2021 10:36

Torukmacto - how true! But, hang about: elderly PPruners may recall a dramatic low fuel incident with an MMA F28 in the 70s in that region of WA.

Wonder if the inquiry will reveal any similarities?

Vref+5 28th Nov 2021 11:03


Originally Posted by Capt Fathom (Post 11148127)
What is the purpose of the Minimum Descent Altitude?

It’s there so the Coroner doesn’t talk about you in the past tense

dr dre 28th Nov 2021 11:11

Avherald info here:

Incident: Network Australia F100 at Paraburdoo on Nov 22nd 2021, descent below minimum without visual reference

Multiple CAVOK alternates in the area at the time it seems

volare_737 28th Nov 2021 11:25

I might be missing something here. How do the powers know they where not visual at minima ????

NaFenn 28th Nov 2021 12:20


Originally Posted by volare_737 (Post 11148170)
I might be missing something here. How do the powers know they where not visual at minima ????

I imagine through the crew reporting it

Brakerider 28th Nov 2021 13:24


Originally Posted by NaFenn (Post 11148199)
I imagine through the crew reporting it

maybe the FO snitched

donpizmeov 28th Nov 2021 13:44


Originally Posted by Brakerider (Post 11148226)
maybe the FO snitched

What ever happened to that famous CRM phrase “This will be our little secret"?

Switchbait 28th Nov 2021 15:10

Yawn. It clearly didn’t spear in… moving right along…

lederhosen 28th Nov 2021 15:34

I had a quick look at the charts and the approaches seem to have minimums of 500 to 600 feet with broken 800 reported in the metar. I would not be surprised if they had ground contact during the first approach and were fairly confident they would get in at the next attempt. Weather actually seems to have got worse certainly as far as visibility (in light showers of rain) is concerned during the further hour they spent trying to land, which was probably not what they were expecting in the Pilbara in summer. I suspect very few of us have been in this position given most company´s procedures quite rightly limit the number of missed approaches before diverting. With hindsight I am sure they wish they had made some other choices. But in a just culture self reporting usually limits punitive consequences.

compressor stall 28th Nov 2021 19:12

Would the imminent Part 121 Alternate requirements (had they been in place) have prevented this event?

krismiler 28th Nov 2021 21:57

Normally the ops manual gives you two approaches before you have to divert, unless there is a substantial improvement in the weather. To be sure of this I would want a report from a qualified met observer on the ground rather than making my own assessment.

They may have painted themselves into a corner by going below minimum divert fuel and then having no option but to land.

TBM-Legend 28th Nov 2021 22:31

I blame Alan Joyce...

Alt Flieger 29th Nov 2021 00:00

Krismiler ,Remote WA is the Wild West. Very few Control Towers , fewer qualified observers and even fewer precision approaches and NO requirement for mandatory alternates for single runways. RNP has improved things but mostly its all pretty basic. Third world really.
Not hard to get into trouble especially if you are a true believer in company fuel policy. Personally I spent most of my career ignoring it WA.

43Inches 29th Nov 2021 00:17

Several 2000mt sealed runways within 100nm and 20 within 200nm. Paraburdoo is far from isolated, all the nearby mine strips and then Newman at 115nm, Karatha, Hedland and Onslow all just over 150nm. With 4 attempts it seems more a fixation on getting in rather than looking for somewhere else to go, that's if what was said earlier about all the surrounding areas being CAVOK is true. After 2 or so attempts people tend to notice a jet floating around doing circles, so it gets attention, even the passengers will put in reports if they thought something was amiss.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:15.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.