Come on Dick, I know it will hurt on the way up but come on spit it out. It goes something like this:

I AM SORRY

Everyone did as they were trained to do. Thats the difference isn't it. In the old days it took someone making a mistake to have a TCAS RA, ie. a near miss, now everyone can do as they are suppposed to do, and this debacle can still happen. Its just a shame that these days ATSB don't consider avoiding action in response to an RA to be a serious occurence. Guess they have to hit before its considered serious????

Another factor: Recent training I've recieved in recovering from compromised separation told me not to play levels when I don't have a standard, leave that for the TCAS. It would not be the actions of a reasonable controller to have intervened in this situation perhaps, like first aid the first thing you should do is not make the situation worse.

Gee I got through the post without swearing or mentioning Dick, Oh buggar I mentioned him. Oh buggar now I've....

you ge the picture

The reason for dick's absence - he's disappeared into his own nashole.

My Previous Post

An Update on response/acknowledgement from the Minister: None.

He obviously has no interest in our concerns about Aviation Safety in this country. Think about that at the November election - and tell a friend ... to tell a friend...

The truth about TCAS.


A properly flown TCAS resolution advisory (RA) is NOT a violent manoeuvre.

Honeywell TCAS II Users Manual

and

and

When issuing an RA the TCAS system calculates the required vertical speed based on the crew making no control inputs for five seconds, and then responding with a change in G of +/- 0.25 G (as appropriate) until the aircraft’s vertical speed (or pitch attitude in some installations) is in the green range.

For a TCAS climb RA that’s a pitch up causing +1.25 G, and for a TCAS descend RA that’s a pitch down causing +0.75 G. Once vertical speed (or pitch attitude) is in the green range G returns to 1.0.

There is nothing violent about a smooth vertical manoeuvre of +0.75 G or +1.25 G.

DICK APOLOGISES ON RADIO
 

I heard on the radio this morning dick apologising to the air traffic controllers. Yes , he said he was sorry, maybe a step forward?

What bothers me about this is that the only reason that he did apologise (as it seems to me, in my opinion) is that the powers that be that investigated the incident published thier finding that the controller/s concerned did not break any rules, doing what the rules request. He could not make this judgement on his own, an on this point it worries me that he doesn't really understand the rules of the air much at all, but still convey's to us the image that he is an aviation expert??? How can one claim to understand Airspace and Airspace reform when he seems to get the basics completely wrong!

Total Crap Air System
 

What a load of crap! TCAS is a can of worms. You cant trust it. It wont show all the traffic. No one even knows how it works.

TCAS is technology gone mad. No thank you very much!

Regardless of how smooth the manoeurve is, TCAS is still an emergency procedure.

The interesting point that Dick missed, was that the Lancair pilot had the Virgin jet in sight, yet couldn't determine in time or ajudged his current vector would not be a problem.

It was probably the former. How the hell would the Lancair pilot have time to determine if a collision risk exists, then have the time to maneourve his aircraft to avoid the collision. He had possibly less than 30 seconds to do all this. Sounds like any manoeurve he might make wouldn't be too smooth.

The other point, which has been made previously, why does Dick want this type of separation problem in the hands of the least experienced and capable person to resolve the conflict and take this responsibility away from ATC who have a better picture of the conflict than any pilot involved. Thats why we give ATC radar!

DP - "How the hell would the Lancair pilot have time to determine if a collision risk exists, then have the time to maneourve his aircraft to avoid the collision. He had possibly less than 30 seconds to do all this. Sounds like any manoeurve he might make wouldn't be too smooth."

With those sharp reactions, please tell me you're not a pilot or an ATC.........:ooh:

Dick's apology.....I got the impression he was apologizing FOR the air traffic controllers not to them.
Strange system

NotimTams,

Less than 30 seconds to;

- acquire the target
- determine if the target will be a collision risk,
- determine what avoiding action to take,
- initiate avoiding action,
- watch as your prop shears off the red fuselage

Reflexes have nothing to do with it. I'm talking about the human factor side of "see and avoid". I have worked with RAAF air defence in acft intercepts, and, guess what, even when told where to look, pilots often don't visually acquire targets till within seconds of intercept.

See what I mean now about the Lancair pilot actions.

Downdraught .. (or anyone that may be able to help)



any chance of a transcript of the transmission in toto?

Whilst there is a wealth of information and argument in all these related threads it seems some misconceptions have occurred.

TCAS is last line of defence. A Resolution Advisory is not a normal operating procedure but an emergency manoeuvre.
An earlier respondent refers to a Honeywell manual declaring this to be a non-violent manoeuvre. Several emergency procedures could be described similarly however the correct reaction and smoothness of execution should not be confused with the category of the operation.
We now have EGPWS. This is also last line of defence technology. To say we can now descend our aircraft relaxing our situational awareness is ludicrous. To say I won’t hit the hill because the system will tell me to “Pull Up” is akin to what appear to be some of the collision avoidance arguments associated with TCAS.

The interim ATSB report indicated that crews of both aircraft and the ATS controller complied with published procedures.
An RPT aircraft was forced to perform an emergency manoeuvre whilst the system was operating as it should. This, at the very least, indicates something is seriously wrong.
The theory that the ATSB members are just a bunch of drinking mates of criminal controllers and incompetent pilots should be discarded and impartial, intelligent and reasoned analysis should be applied to the system that produced such a result.

In a parallel thread Mr Smith invites those who wish to discuss the matter with him to call. Another respondent was kind enough to transfer contact details from another source. In this case SM4 Pirate may call and give his name. Would this method of communication alter what SM4 Pirate had to say? What should be considered carefully is the view/concern/opinion/conviction/suggestion offered and not the means of expression or by whom it is expressed. Likewise, the response by Mr Smith in another thread that a post in an anonymous forum by design should be given no notice is somewhat arrogant.
This is true because I said so (and am prepared to put my name to it) does not necessarily ensure such. We only have to look at the current world situation to see the fallacy of this.

The Pilots of two serviceable aircraft and an Air Traffic Controller complying with published procedure needed an emergency manoeuvre to avoid a collision.
There is something very wrong here and instead of insulting comments and slanderous behaviour perhaps the problem should be the focus of attention.

The Voice:

Heres a transcript

So now the organisation that is responsible for investigating aviation incidents and accidents is part of the "mates network".:rolleyes:

Dicks Radio Statements
 

Dick Smith, In the first release said he could not see why Virgin a/c didn't cease descent

Now Dick is saying he can't see how Virgin a/c failedd to follow ATC proceedure and continue the descent.

This is very strange behavoir,so much for unalerted see-and-avoid as a CTAF, when alerted see and avoid fails dispite extensive lookout for the aircraft and 3 alerts from ATC.

Anyone left in the aviation industry that hasn't been on the receiving end of blame from Dick?

Anyone???

And he wonders why people aren't rushing to call him personally...

Question: Why do ONLY Australians cry like friggin schoolgirls? Points to some serious flaw in local aviation educational practices for many years or some defect in the Aussie intellect. :hmm: Providing dynamic ATC seperation and traffic advisory services, piloting a jet while scaning outside, following proper TCAS operational procedure. It's all quite simple really. :rolleyes:

!!!!su Tonka .. thanks very much buddy - interesting the poor choice of woods within the first few uttered by Dick.

I get the feeling that he was pitching off the back foot in the 'interview' .. actually he comes across as clutching at straws. What I wonder is, if this 'apology' could seriously be considered one if it was proffered as a retraction in any defamation action pending.

As for the reason why it occurred .. hardly likely it was driven by the pressing need to admit he was sorry for deriding the ATCO's so, but more pushed into it by the report I'll bet, which seeing as how he can't attack that anymore, he'll go the mob responsible for it..

Come on Woomeri, I have seen people banned forever off PPRUNE for much less than that. Please show some consistency and also some pity upon us and get rid of Winstun off these boards. PLEASE!!!