Originally Posted by compressor stall
(Post 11509786)
But in a normal first world country there would be ATC guidance / alerts that would have prevented this from escalating. Where was the controller? |
Originally Posted by topdrop
(Post 11509124)
Many years ago a USAF KC135 on a Cairns for Cairns tanking mission departed at night and were very slow on the left turn and went very close to Mt Yarrabah, despite ATC telling them to tighten up the turn, terrain ahead. Crew visited ATC next day and we had a friendly chat. They reckoned they probably missed the hill by about 200 ft.
The second 135s crew were given a rather extensive explanation of the 15SID by the ADC and then when they were airborne the aircraft flew an identical flight path to the first 135. The weather at time was strong southerly winds with heavy rain. All these years later and i still wonder if it was some sort pre programed track. |
Originally Posted by compressor stall
(Post 11509797)
Not mine to promúlgate…
|
Originally Posted by markis10
(Post 11509800)
Given exercise mobility guardian was in operation in uncontrolled airspace at the time (4x C17s were at CNS) with the aim to employ in contested, degraded, and operationally limited environments I suspect there is nothing to see here.
|
Originally Posted by compressor stall
(Post 11509786)
No kidding. If it reported as true (and not a NVMC dep with toys we don’t get to play with) then yes the crew clearly had a moment, but this thread is not about them -
Originally Posted by compressor stall
(Post 11509786)
But in a normal first world country there would be ATC guidance / alerts that would have prevented this from escalating. |
Originally Posted by compressor stall
(Post 11509795)
I’ve overlaid the screen grab onto the 1:250k topo and reckon they had 300’ of air under them.
We’ve been flying 300 feet above the terrain at speeds around 400 to 500 km/hour, sometimes in two or three aircraft formations, and that provides lots of fun and it is challenging for the pilot skills,” he says. |
If this is an event (and I’m being told it was a regular milk run not an low level exercise, but I have no proof of that) we’ll likely never find out in a report what happened being US MIL. There could be some interesting HF NTS issues.
What this alleged event may outline is the first demonstrable event where the reported lack of ATC has reduced the barriers of safety leading to a near miss. That’s the critical safety issue here relevant yo Aus aviation. Even if you do fly airliners in Class G. LB the path in the pic - if true - flown looks like a leisurely right turn onto a ~ 060 heading (can’t check exactly as on phone) , but very leisurely low AoB and wide radius putting it along shoreline and over rapidly rising land. Any wider and we’d have a different thread. |
Originally Posted by Blind Dog
(Post 11509803)
Hello Topdrop, I was the approach controller that night in Cairns. There was 2 KC135s and the first one was on the standard 15SID with the left turn on to 030. Once airborne they maintained rwy heading to approximately 2nm before commencing a lazy left turn which took the aircraft through the narrow gap between Mt Yarrabah and Mt Murray Prior with a lateral clearence from Mt Yarrabah of approximately 200feet but well below the peaks of both mountains.
The second 135s crew were given a rather extensive explanation of the 15SID by the ADC and then when they were airborne the aircraft flew an identical flight path to the first 135. The weather at time was strong southerly winds with heavy rain. All these years later and i still wonder if it was some sort pre programed track. Also, someone said that this was a transport flight, not a training exercise - difference types of mission, no? |
I would like to see the flight path of the C17 compared to the KC135s.
My guess is they are identical |
I’ve done some armchair research and come to the disturbing conclusion that these US people are flying these C17 aircraft all over the place. Apparently:
I reckon the 4 dead in an IFR mid air near Mangalore and the incidents at Ballina are among the many recent examples already demonstrating the inadequacies of Australia’s ANSP and airspace arrangements - before resource mismanagement resulted in the systemic use of TIBA/TRA. I very much doubt that the US military will have much to learn from Australian civilians’ views as to how the most powerful defence force on the planet should be flying its aircraft - but might as well give it a try. |
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
(Post 11510007)
I reckon the 4 dead in an IFR mid air near Mangalore and the incidents at Ballina are among the many recent examples already demonstrating the inadequacies of Australia’s ANSP and airspace arrangements - before resource mismanagement resulted in the systemic use of TIBA/TRA. I very much doubt that the US military will have much to learn from Australian civilians’ views as to how the most powerful defence force on the planet should be flying its aircraft - but might as well give it a try.
I'll try to provide my viewpoint. Probably 30/15 or 15/30 depending on your perspective. Since 28-June I have been tracking the AsA TIBA/TRA/OPR Restrictions, so 3 months now. ASA TIBA / TRA etc. The thread has probably missed quite a few NOTAMs, and is by no means authoritative or to be used for navigation. There have been a couple of CS Approach TIBA/TRAs in these 3 months. These NOTAMs are an example, one is a Brisbane FIR NOTAM search, the other from a Cairns NOTAM search. C578/23 TEMPO RESTRICTED AREA ACT IN CLASS C AIRSPACE INCLUDING CTR C. DESIGNATED AIRSPACE HANDBOOK (DAH) SECTOR VOLUME NAMES AFFECTED ARE: CAIRNS APPROACH. INCLUDES CLASS C AIRSPACE WI 36NM OF CAIRNS VOR/DME FM SFC TO FL180. CONTINGENCY MAP (LISTED UNDER CAIRNS IN THE BN FIR) AVBL AT HTTP://WWW.AIRSERVICESAUSTRALIA.COM/NOTAMMAPS/INDEX.ASP ATS IN THIS AIRSPACE IS SUBJ TO CONTINGENCY DUE OPR RESTRICTIONS. RELEVANT APPROVAL FM CONTROLLING AUTHORITY REQUIRED. APCH CTL SER NOT AVBL. AD CTL SER AVBL ON MANOEUVRING AREA. CAIRNS TWR WILL ISSUE LANDING AND TAKEOFF CLEARANCE ON 124.9 MHZ. CTC CAIRNS TWR ON 124.9 MHZ PRIOR TO JOINING OR APPROACHING CIRCUIT AREA. PRIOR TO OPR IN THE TEMPO RESTRICTED AREA, PILOTS/OPERATORS MUST: 1. OBTAIN A BRIEFING ON CONTINGENCY PROCEDURES FM AIRSERVICES AUSTRALIA ON +61 7 3866 3798. 2. OBTAIN A LANDING, DEPARTURE OR TRANSIT TIME. PILOTS-IN-COMMAND ARE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR TERRAIN AND COLLISION AVOIDANCE WI THE AFFECTED AIRSPACE. AUTHORISATION TO ENTER THIS TEMPO RESTRICTED AREA DOES NOT CONSTITUTE CLEARANCE TO ENTER ANY ADJ OR EMBEDDED RESTRICTED AREAS. SARWATCH FOR INBOUND IFR ACFT LANDING AT CAIRNS WILL BE HELD BY CAIRNS TWR ON ADC FREQ 124.9 MHZ. FIS PROVIDED BY CAIRNS TWR ON ADC FREQ 124.9 MHZ AND MAY BE AVBL FM ADJ ATS UNITS OR HF. TFC INFO BCST BY ACFT AND MANDATORY BCST PROC ON FREQ 118.4 MHZ. THESE PROCEDURES DO NOT APPLY TO OPS IN ACTIVE MIL CTR AND RESTRICTED AREAS. SFC TO FL180 FROM 07 201355 TO 07 201945 C1187/23 TEMPO RESTRICTED AREA ACT IN CLASS C AIRSPACE INCLUDING CTR C. DESIGNATED AIRSPACE HANDBOOK (DAH) SECTOR VOLUME NAMES AFFECTED ARE: CAIRNS APPROACH. INCLUDES CLASS C AIRSPACE WI 36NM OF CAIRNS VOR/DME FM SFC TO FL180 CONTINGENCY MAP (LISTED UNDER CAIRNS IN THE BN FIR) AVBL AT HTTP://WWW.AIRSERVICESAUSTRALIA.COM/NOTAMMAPS/INDEX.ASP ATS IN THIS AIRSPACE IS SUBJ CONTINGENCY DUE OPR RESTRICTIONS. RELEVANT APPROVAL FM CONTROLLING AUTHORITY REQUIRED. APCH CTL SER NOT AVBL. AD CTL SER AVBL ON MANOEUVRING AREA. PRIOR TO OPR IN THE TEMPO RESTRICTED AREA, PILOTS/OPERATORS MUST: 1. OBTAIN A BRIEFING ON CONTINGENCY PROCEDURES FM AIRSERVICES AUSTRALIA ON +61 7 3866 3798 2. OBTAIN A LANDING, DEPARTURE OR TRANSIT TIME PILOTS-IN-COMMAND ARE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR TERRAIN AND COLLISION AVOIDANCE WI THE AFFECTED AIRSPACE. AUTHORISATION TO ENTER THIS TEMPO RESTRICTED AREA DOES NOT CONSTITUTE CLEARANCE TO ENTER ANY ADJ OR EMBEDDED RESTRICTED AREAS. SARWATCH FOR INBOUND IFR ACFT LANDING AT CAIRNS WILL BE HELD BY CAIRNS TWR ON ADC FREQ 124.9 MHZ. FIS PROVIDED BY CAIRNS TWR ON ADC FREQ 124.9 MHZ AND MAY BE AVBL FM ADJ ATS UNITS. TFC INFO BCST BY ACFT (TIBA) AND MANDATORY BCST PROC ON FREQ 118.4 MHZ. CTC CAIRNS TWR ON 124.9 MHZ PRIOR TO JOINING OR APPROACHING CIRCUIT AREA. THESE PROCEDURES DO NOT APPLY TO OPS IN ACTIVE MIL CTR AND RESTRICTED AREAS. SFC TO FL180 FROM 07 201355 TO 07 201945 TMA ATS Contingency Plan If we consider these NOTAMs to be representative of the NOTAMs that were current at the time, then everything is OK - PRIOR TO OPR IN THE TEMPO RESTRICTED AREA, PILOTS/OPERATORS MUST OBTAIN A BRIEFING ON CONTINGENCY PROCEDURES FM AIRSERVICES PILOTS-IN-COMMAND ARE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR TERRAIN AND COLLISION AVOIDANCE WI THE AFFECTED AIRSPACE
For situations resulting in TIBA or TRA declaration the ATM Director So there would be a CIRRIS and PAR for this TIBA / TRA declaration and I suspect that both documents would be released under Freedom of Information. TCU not available, TWR available. Questions: Would CS TWR know if the pilot had obtained a briefing, do they even care? IDK Would CS TWR issue an airways clearance? IDK Would CS TWR issue a SID? IDK Did CS TWR issue the RWY 15 SWIFT EIGHT DEPARTURE? IDK (SID has a number of warnings and restrictions, DER, MAX IAS, MIN AOB) At what point would CS TWR instruct the aircraft to make a transmission on 118.4? IDK Would CS TWR monitor the turn (height, turning onto correct track)? IDK Without knowing the exact date then it’s not possible to listen to the audio. And I didn’t record the ATIS current during the TIBA/TRA so it’s not clear what operational information was included on the ATIS. As I have stated on the other thread what concerns me is the differences between normal and contingency operations, in particular, console configurations. Cairns Approach is located in Brisbane Centre and uses a EUROCAT display. ATC alarms include Short Term Conflict Alert (STCA), Danger Area Infringement Warnings (DAIW), Cleared Level Adherence Monitor (CLAM) and Minimum Safe Altitude Warning (MSAW). The latter is basically the ATC equivalent of a Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS). Cairns Tower was retrofitted with INTAS (anyone, anyone - Integrated Tower Automation Suite) and as CS TCU “owns the airspace” and CS TWR "owns no airspace"; it is highly unlikely that CS TWR has MSAW alarms activated and displayable. TBC. If TCU had been operating then on receipt of MSAW (or probably earlier) the ATC would've issued a safety alert ATC will issue a Safety Alert to aircraft, in all classes of airspace, when they become aware that an aircraft is in a situation that is considered to place it in unsafe proximity to: a. terrain; necessary by: LOW ALTITUDE WARNING, CHECK YOUR ALTITUDE IMMEDIATELY, QNH IS (number) [(units)]. [THE MINIMUM SAFE ALTITUDE IS (altitude)] or TERRAIN, CHECK YOUR ALTITUDE IMMEDIATELY (suggested pilot action if possible) Aircraft calls 118.4 - crickets. So the Swiss cheese aligned, AsA failed to provide a service, a heavy jet missed the hills, more by accident than design. Nothing to see, these aren't the droids you're looking for, move along. Really, is this the best we can do? |
Originally Posted by sunnySA
(Post 11510039)
So the Swiss cheese aligned, AsA failed to provide a service, a heavy jet missed the hills, more by accident than design. Nothing to see, these aren't the droids you're looking for, move along. Really, is this the best we can do?
Although I do think that the lack of ATC may had some role to play in this incident (in that it could have reduced the severity of this incident), I reckon inadequate crew training is more to blame. Blind Dog said that the 2nd KC-135 crew was given a detailed explanation of how to fly the SID after the first crew almost flew into that mountain a few minutes earlier, but still managed to end up in the same situation as the preceding crew. Lead Balloon pointed out that the C-17 and KC-135 guys are trained at the same facility. I really don't want to cast a shadow over our U.S friends, but I must question the quality of the training that they're receiving in the aspect of flying complex SIDs. How is it that 3 separate crews trained by the same people at the same place manage to end almost flying into the side of the same one mountain? |
They were probably on NVG’s doing a little sightseeing. What’s everyone getting worked up over?
|
Yes havick, no one has 100% discounted that.
@ others my inbox is now empty…. :} There’s no date / time on the pic. Maybe the next step is for someone with better internet than what I can get in Yogistan to look at the night time YBCS departures on ADSB exchange history view on fast forward (200x). |
Originally Posted by Gone Troppo.
(Post 11507923)
Anyone know any details on this?
Nothing on ATSB, surprisingly Deoarted at night supposedly, did not make the immediate left turn and was below lowest safe for quite some time before presumably a GPWS alerted escape. Called ATC but they were TIBA memory it was only this particular departure that had tracking issues with the LNAV track, possibly due to the unique design critiera? |
No evidence has been produced to show that the event the subject of this thread was unintentional low flying, even if it is correct that the aircraft was ‘only’ 300’ above terrain.
There are published stories about US C17s coming to Australia to practise, among other things, low flying. There are published stories about the US C17 crews trained to Special Operations Low Level (SOLL) II standard. The US does this stuff for real, in places where people are trying to shoot them down and kill them. You can google this stuff. We’re already convinced that Airservices is a managerial basket case. I don’t see the point in trying to make a big thing out of an event that may be a non-event, especially when it involves a (conveniently) security-constrained crew, of a foreign military aircraft, who aren’t going to say anything. And has anyone ever seen an ATSB report about a near miss with terrain by a foreign military aircraft? I’ve already posted a link to the contact details for the US Training Command responsible for training C17 (and KC135) crews. Please post, here, copies of the terms of the correspondence, sent by those with safety concerns about the circumstances, to that Command. Then post the terms of any response. My educated guess is that the reflex response of the recipients will be: “Didn’t we fight the Austrians in dubya dubya two?” But I’ve been wrong, many times before. Maybe the US military and ATC do have something to learn from Australian military and ATC. |
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
(Post 11510549)
There are published stories about US C17s coming to Australia to practise, among other things, low flying. There are published stories about the US C17 crews trained to Special Operations Low Level (SOLL) II standard. The US does this stuff for real, in places where people are trying to shoot them down and kill them. You can google this stuff.
|
You can google it.
But please: Post, here, copies of the terms of the correspondence you send to the Air Education and Training Command at Altus AFB, Oklahoma, about your concerns, as well as what you send to ATSB. This is really important, right? |
Originally Posted by dr dre
(Post 11510599)
Do they practice that stuff against a mountain overlooking a major city with communities perched below that mountain where the wreckage will fall?
|
Originally Posted by dr dre
(Post 11510599)
Do they practice that stuff against a mountain overlooking a major city with communities perched below that mountain where the wreckage will fall?
Do you really think a pissy goat hill is beyond blokes who have recent combat experience and train low level NVG below 500' ? |
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:44. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.