Runway Collision at YPJT
I don't want to be the best pilot in the world - Just the oldest
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T = new name - same attitude.
So the twr would make a good Maccas with a view eh? Well when you only wheel your aircraft out once or twice a month at a time when it suits you to fly during the quiet times, you can be excused for adopting that attitude.
Snide, . .Reports are that neither of the aircraft involved were on training flights so training or perceived lack thereof I don't believe is an issue.
It is still not clear exactly what happened so now that we are all armed with T's expert advice on airmanship and how over reliance on the radio is the cause of all our ills, let's wait for the investigation results.
So the twr would make a good Maccas with a view eh? Well when you only wheel your aircraft out once or twice a month at a time when it suits you to fly during the quiet times, you can be excused for adopting that attitude.
Snide, . .Reports are that neither of the aircraft involved were on training flights so training or perceived lack thereof I don't believe is an issue.
It is still not clear exactly what happened so now that we are all armed with T's expert advice on airmanship and how over reliance on the radio is the cause of all our ills, let's wait for the investigation results.
So let me make sure I understand your logic Islander jock. <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
Because neither pilot was undergoing training then training or lack of is not an issue!
Oh I get it. Once you hold a licence your training is irrelevant.
You goose.
Because neither pilot was undergoing training then training or lack of is not an issue!
Oh I get it. Once you hold a licence your training is irrelevant.
You goose.
Chaps and Chapesses,. .A controller saying "Clear to land"-- What does it mean?? Obviously quite a few of you on this thread have no idea.
It does not make the slightest difference if it is the Wild West, GAAP (surprising as it may seem to some we even have multiple runway airports in the east) YSBK, EGLL or KJFK, the responsibilities and relationships of the pilot in command and the air traffic controller do not change.
If you bother to delve into the rules and regs., the MATS manual, blah blah, you will find that the final responsibility ALWAYS rests with the pilot in command.
Further more, a runway does NOT even have to be clear for a controller to issue a landing clearance.
Read all about it, but a plain English version is: The controller must have a reasonable expectation that the runway will be available at the time you arrive. That is all.
The rest is up to the pilot in command.
I am quite certain that this statement will raise a howl of protest from the ignoratii, but equally, I hope that at least some of you will be prompted to actually verify for yourselves that the statement is correct.
Thus, something like KLAX TWR to QF XX ---" UA 737 short final, AA 767 3 miles ahead of you for 25L, clear to land 25L"--- it's common, legal, practical, ICAO and all those good things, and we know what it means.
And it does happen in Sydney, when things get tight,(not quite the KLAX version, but receiving a landing clearance when the preceeding aircraft is still on the runway) and missed approaches do result. This is the price of achieving high movement rates, it happens world wide.
How many of you in the wild west really know what "cleared to land menas" means??
Ardmore, in New Zealand now has more movements than ANY GA airport in Australia,thanks to all the training contracts where Massey and others have beaten Australia out, there is a wonderful variety of versions of the "english" language, etc etc, AND NO TOWER, not even for a few hours a day.
Just a dammed good UNICOM, and a lot of pilots who have been taught good circuit discipline, and stick to it, something that seems to be missing in the "wild west".
Tootle pip!!
PS Gaunty,
Did you ever make it to a Great Eastern Fly-In at Evans Head. Every thing from powered parachutes and motor gliders through to the odd Sea Fury or Boomerang, over a 1000 movements on a peak day, three runways in a triangle, and guess what, no tower, not even a Unicom.
Just a large number of pilots using the brains God gave them, and simple common sense.
It does not make the slightest difference if it is the Wild West, GAAP (surprising as it may seem to some we even have multiple runway airports in the east) YSBK, EGLL or KJFK, the responsibilities and relationships of the pilot in command and the air traffic controller do not change.
If you bother to delve into the rules and regs., the MATS manual, blah blah, you will find that the final responsibility ALWAYS rests with the pilot in command.
Further more, a runway does NOT even have to be clear for a controller to issue a landing clearance.
Read all about it, but a plain English version is: The controller must have a reasonable expectation that the runway will be available at the time you arrive. That is all.
The rest is up to the pilot in command.
I am quite certain that this statement will raise a howl of protest from the ignoratii, but equally, I hope that at least some of you will be prompted to actually verify for yourselves that the statement is correct.
Thus, something like KLAX TWR to QF XX ---" UA 737 short final, AA 767 3 miles ahead of you for 25L, clear to land 25L"--- it's common, legal, practical, ICAO and all those good things, and we know what it means.
And it does happen in Sydney, when things get tight,(not quite the KLAX version, but receiving a landing clearance when the preceeding aircraft is still on the runway) and missed approaches do result. This is the price of achieving high movement rates, it happens world wide.
How many of you in the wild west really know what "cleared to land menas" means??
Ardmore, in New Zealand now has more movements than ANY GA airport in Australia,thanks to all the training contracts where Massey and others have beaten Australia out, there is a wonderful variety of versions of the "english" language, etc etc, AND NO TOWER, not even for a few hours a day.
Just a dammed good UNICOM, and a lot of pilots who have been taught good circuit discipline, and stick to it, something that seems to be missing in the "wild west".
Tootle pip!!
PS Gaunty,
Did you ever make it to a Great Eastern Fly-In at Evans Head. Every thing from powered parachutes and motor gliders through to the odd Sea Fury or Boomerang, over a 1000 movements on a peak day, three runways in a triangle, and guess what, no tower, not even a Unicom.
Just a large number of pilots using the brains God gave them, and simple common sense.
I don't want to be the best pilot in the world - Just the oldest
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Icarus,
Just so I am sure that I understand your logic.
Are you saying that no matter what the circumstances, regardless of what competency is displayed during a pilots training and testing. When he/she &*cks up at some future date, it can be attributed to a lack of standards in their training? Oh Please!
So to use your logic lets paint a hypothetical.
I have an instrument rating, obtained through reputedly the best IFR training establishment in WA. I display all the airmanship and skills required and recive a MECIR. However at some future date I descend below MDA on an NDB apprach into an unfamiliar airfield and plant myself into the side of a hill. Who is to blame? The school who tained and tested my IR or myself. Me thinks the latter. I do not know what the standard of training or quals of each pilot involved in this accident was... Do you?
However we digress from the point in issue here. There are obviously those who believe that an MBZ is a workable alternative to ATC operating GAAP services. Leadsleds example however of the fly in at Evans Head I feel is not a good example of how well things can go without a controller. I would suggest that with few exceptions, the majority of pilots flying into that event would have been experienced pilots. I may stand corrected there.
For those who do not have full knowledge of the current operations going on at JT, here is a rough breakdown.
8 x Fixed wing training schools. .1 x Helicopter " ". .2 x International " " 1 operating everything from Grob 115s to Cessna 500s.. .RFDS base with any number of Kingairs and PC12s coming and going all day.. .Many of the training operations also doing charter.. .Plus a large number of private aircraft.
If, as a director of a flying school, I was convinced that all the above could safely execute arrivals & departures (VFR and IFR), changes of runway etc without ATC services, then the push for an alternative would get my vote. But when you get all this training traffic plus the large volume of privately operated aircraft then that traffic can, in my opinion, only be safely coordinated from a central point. The bedlam which would occur on the radio with untold aircraft giving "Allstations Jandakot MBZ" calls in the circuit, joining the circuit, arriving and departing etc would have it reduced to the efficiency of a CB radio.
OK, my 2 cents worth.
Just so I am sure that I understand your logic.
Are you saying that no matter what the circumstances, regardless of what competency is displayed during a pilots training and testing. When he/she &*cks up at some future date, it can be attributed to a lack of standards in their training? Oh Please!
So to use your logic lets paint a hypothetical.
I have an instrument rating, obtained through reputedly the best IFR training establishment in WA. I display all the airmanship and skills required and recive a MECIR. However at some future date I descend below MDA on an NDB apprach into an unfamiliar airfield and plant myself into the side of a hill. Who is to blame? The school who tained and tested my IR or myself. Me thinks the latter. I do not know what the standard of training or quals of each pilot involved in this accident was... Do you?
However we digress from the point in issue here. There are obviously those who believe that an MBZ is a workable alternative to ATC operating GAAP services. Leadsleds example however of the fly in at Evans Head I feel is not a good example of how well things can go without a controller. I would suggest that with few exceptions, the majority of pilots flying into that event would have been experienced pilots. I may stand corrected there.
For those who do not have full knowledge of the current operations going on at JT, here is a rough breakdown.
8 x Fixed wing training schools. .1 x Helicopter " ". .2 x International " " 1 operating everything from Grob 115s to Cessna 500s.. .RFDS base with any number of Kingairs and PC12s coming and going all day.. .Many of the training operations also doing charter.. .Plus a large number of private aircraft.
If, as a director of a flying school, I was convinced that all the above could safely execute arrivals & departures (VFR and IFR), changes of runway etc without ATC services, then the push for an alternative would get my vote. But when you get all this training traffic plus the large volume of privately operated aircraft then that traffic can, in my opinion, only be safely coordinated from a central point. The bedlam which would occur on the radio with untold aircraft giving "Allstations Jandakot MBZ" calls in the circuit, joining the circuit, arriving and departing etc would have it reduced to the efficiency of a CB radio.
OK, my 2 cents worth.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leadsled
Thank you for your little reminder of who retains what responsibility and where, I think most of us mere earthlings in the wild west can work that one out.
Methinks you are being a bit precious me lad.. .Islander Jock got it pretty right about Jandakot and Evans Head. No I never had the privilege or pleasure, but I would be amazed if there wasn't a very very thorough briefing conducted and comprehensive NOTAM for all participants at such an event. The organisers insurers would have demanded it. I certainly wouldn't have had any trouble with it, but it is hardly routine.
KLAX, I would expect nothing less than that from highly trained professionals. At night there, you've only got to watch the almost perfectly spaced string of pearls stretching as far into the distance as you can see, wafting down the approach. What you don't see is Tom, Dick and Harry blundering about trying to work out where upwind, downwind and cross wind is from wherever they happen to turn up. And you know what happens when somebody does get out of step.
I am most impressed with your Ardmore example and I would be interested in the traffic mix. Perhaps I have been away from JT for too long and the training standards have slipped for some of the operators. The ones that I do know have an exceptionally high standard. I would suspect that it is the wide diversity of operators and equipment that separates Ardmore from JT.
Dont get me wrong I am not an advocate of Towers willy nilly and I have spent at least half of the time operating everything from C172 to high performance turbine equipment in and out of busy outback and mining strips than TCA and MBZs to understand the look see hazards. . .I have a great deal of respect for the training standards that allows us wild westers to operate in some pretty remote and inhospitable areas, routinely day in day out. I have spent days out there without having to talk to another aircraft beyond gidday I'm bored owyergoin mate.
At JT, BK or wherever your "cleared to land" and all that means, is only the final result of getting them all together in the right sequence, it's not IMHO the main game, that belongs to an experienced ATCO.
Thank you for your little reminder of who retains what responsibility and where, I think most of us mere earthlings in the wild west can work that one out.
Methinks you are being a bit precious me lad.. .Islander Jock got it pretty right about Jandakot and Evans Head. No I never had the privilege or pleasure, but I would be amazed if there wasn't a very very thorough briefing conducted and comprehensive NOTAM for all participants at such an event. The organisers insurers would have demanded it. I certainly wouldn't have had any trouble with it, but it is hardly routine.
KLAX, I would expect nothing less than that from highly trained professionals. At night there, you've only got to watch the almost perfectly spaced string of pearls stretching as far into the distance as you can see, wafting down the approach. What you don't see is Tom, Dick and Harry blundering about trying to work out where upwind, downwind and cross wind is from wherever they happen to turn up. And you know what happens when somebody does get out of step.
I am most impressed with your Ardmore example and I would be interested in the traffic mix. Perhaps I have been away from JT for too long and the training standards have slipped for some of the operators. The ones that I do know have an exceptionally high standard. I would suspect that it is the wide diversity of operators and equipment that separates Ardmore from JT.
Dont get me wrong I am not an advocate of Towers willy nilly and I have spent at least half of the time operating everything from C172 to high performance turbine equipment in and out of busy outback and mining strips than TCA and MBZs to understand the look see hazards. . .I have a great deal of respect for the training standards that allows us wild westers to operate in some pretty remote and inhospitable areas, routinely day in day out. I have spent days out there without having to talk to another aircraft beyond gidday I'm bored owyergoin mate.
At JT, BK or wherever your "cleared to land" and all that means, is only the final result of getting them all together in the right sequence, it's not IMHO the main game, that belongs to an experienced ATCO.
Islander Jock: Yes most things can be traced back to training. Try reading some ATSB analyses some time.
What if one or both of these pilots were recent products?
I however do agree about the idiotic push to make JT an MBZ by, as I said before elsewhere, enthusiastic amateurs. They know not what they do. Your point about wheeling the beast out of the hangar twice a month is valid.
. .Gaunty, you say you have been away from YPJT for too long but then proceed to pronounce that standards have slipped with some of the operators.. .I know, a little bird told you. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
One final thought. Trains run on tracks, a predetermined path in space/time but we can still make them hit each other. So what chance do we have for aircraft?
I feel that the sun may have been a factor but what would I know I only spoke with the CFI of one of the companies.
[ 25 February 2002: Message edited by: Icarus2001 ]</p>
What if one or both of these pilots were recent products?
I however do agree about the idiotic push to make JT an MBZ by, as I said before elsewhere, enthusiastic amateurs. They know not what they do. Your point about wheeling the beast out of the hangar twice a month is valid.
. .Gaunty, you say you have been away from YPJT for too long but then proceed to pronounce that standards have slipped with some of the operators.. .I know, a little bird told you. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
One final thought. Trains run on tracks, a predetermined path in space/time but we can still make them hit each other. So what chance do we have for aircraft?
I feel that the sun may have been a factor but what would I know I only spoke with the CFI of one of the companies.
[ 25 February 2002: Message edited by: Icarus2001 ]</p>
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Big Southern Sky
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T. . [quote] . .Gaunty, Good to see you are at your usual standard. Yes I still believe that the YPJT Tower would make a good McDonalds with a view.<hr></blockquote>
You Goose!!
[quote] . .You failed to answer the primary question, What happened to see and avoid, observance of safety principles is an attitude taught by responsible schools, aviation, motorbike,advanced driving,sailing and almost any other human performance pursuit you care to imagine.<hr></blockquote>
What on earth do you suppose happened to the many other Pilots unfortunate enough to have been involved in Midair collisions over the years? Or are you suggesting they were all derelict in their duties? . .HMMM.. It is easy to cast stones at those who can’t defend or explain why they didn’t see the other traffic!. .Most “performance persuits" are regulated! . .To minimise the possibility of injury or death from said pursuits! . .This is because even the best stuff up! And then some need protection from themselves and protection from others who could not find their Ass.. with two grabs!!
[quote] . .I rest on my previous, where was the check on short final, "runway clear" ?????. .In the past month I personally have had 2 go-rounds, pilot initiated at YPJT , when it becam obvious previous traffic would not clear the active runway. I fail to see what the traffic density has to do with good airmanship other than to sharpen up one's situational awareness.<hr></blockquote>
So your “Sharpened situational awareness” is able to cope with how many aircraft in proximity? And even if you sighted one ( around pillars, cowlings, wings, below, above, behind etc), can you watch all the others? If you say Yes, I say Bollocks!. .Radio in an MBZ becomes almost useless when more than 3 or 4 are on frequency!
[quote] . .Chino in California with 2 parallel and a cross runway reverts to a CTAF outside Tower Hours without even a certified air ground operator.<hr></blockquote>
And let me guess?.. Outside Tower hours would be DARK, and therefore ONE runway is lit and in use!!! . .CASA have been working on MBZ day procedures for Parrallel Runway Airports. The ability to regulate which runway is used for what and by whom is proving nigh on impossible.. .WHY? Because it would resemble a circus..
[quote] . .In Australia YSBK with 3 parallel is a MBZ for as many hours a day as YPJT and the freighters are certainly more active outside Tower hours to avoid delays which supports the justification for the MBZ, one would have great difficulty even imagining YSBK is severe clear for extended periods.<hr></blockquote>
NO WRONG!!!!. .YSBK is GAAP for all daylight hours 364 day a year (Anyone flying on Christmas day doesn’t need our help!) and except between 8pm local (Weekends only) and Last light during the short peak of summer! Total of 8 hours a year !. .Outside Twr hours (DARK O’CLOCK) one set of runway lights are used ie 11/29C. .Freighters operate at night due to transport connection and delivery schedules. . .Spoken to an HS748 or Metro Pilot about nights into BK. Me thinks you know JACK about BK!!. . . . [quote] . .It would seem in the YPJT incident occurred whilst the Tower was still operating, again it is the PIC who is responsible for separation.<hr></blockquote>
Lets wait and see the results of the investigation shall we!. . . .I am curious, how many hours a year would you spend observing traffic at Towered airports?. .Not including OT it equates to around 1692Hours per year for these eyes!
Lead
[quote] . .Further more, a runway does NOT even have to be clear for a controller to issue a landing clearance. . .Read all about it, but a plain English version is: The controller must have a reasonable expectation that the runway will be available at the time you arrive. That is all. . .The rest is up to the pilot in command.<hr></blockquote>
Technically correct, although I know of not one ATC in this country that will clear an aircraft to land unless in the opinion of the controller NO collision risk exists ie . .If the preceding landing is turning off or rolling through to the upwind end etc.. .The clearance WILL NOT be issued unless the runway is clear or useable to the arriving aircraft!!. . . . [quote] . .Ardmore, in New Zealand now has more movements than ANY GA airport in Australia,thanks to all the training contracts where Massey and others have beaten Australia out, there is a wonderful variety of versions of the "english" language, etc etc, AND NO TOWER, not even for a few hours a day. . .Just a dammed good UNICOM, and a lot of pilots who have been taught good circuit discipline, and stick to it, something that seems to be missing in the "wild west".<hr></blockquote>
. .These would be the same pilots who have little experience operating in a controlled environment! And have therefore less experience in the airways system generally, you can pick them a mile away, and they are watched like hawks for the inevitable stuff up!. .Where is the traffic data collected and how calculated? How much does the “dammed good” Unicom operator/s cost?. .Ardmore is not blemish free since the removal of ATC!
[quote] . .Did you ever make it to a Great Eastern Fly-In at Evans Head. Every thing from powered parachutes and motor gliders through to the odd Sea Fury or Boomerang, over a 1000 movements on a peak day, three runways in a triangle, and guess what, no tower, not even a Unicom. . .Just a large number of pilots using the brains God gave them, and simple common sense.<hr></blockquote>
Good stuff – Just 3 little things
- How many days did the event go for? 3. . .- Airports like BK and JT operate 364 days a year for good reason! . .- BK has between 600 and 1600 moves a day for most days of the year except when its is IMC, then the traffic numbers drop due the absence of VFR. The IFR’s are of course separated in IMC. . .In a Zone of 3nm that means careful timings and one in, one out!. . <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
[ 25 February 2002: Message edited by: Capcom ]
[ 25 February 2002: Message edited by: Capcom ]</p>
You Goose!!
[quote] . .You failed to answer the primary question, What happened to see and avoid, observance of safety principles is an attitude taught by responsible schools, aviation, motorbike,advanced driving,sailing and almost any other human performance pursuit you care to imagine.<hr></blockquote>
What on earth do you suppose happened to the many other Pilots unfortunate enough to have been involved in Midair collisions over the years? Or are you suggesting they were all derelict in their duties? . .HMMM.. It is easy to cast stones at those who can’t defend or explain why they didn’t see the other traffic!. .Most “performance persuits" are regulated! . .To minimise the possibility of injury or death from said pursuits! . .This is because even the best stuff up! And then some need protection from themselves and protection from others who could not find their Ass.. with two grabs!!
[quote] . .I rest on my previous, where was the check on short final, "runway clear" ?????. .In the past month I personally have had 2 go-rounds, pilot initiated at YPJT , when it becam obvious previous traffic would not clear the active runway. I fail to see what the traffic density has to do with good airmanship other than to sharpen up one's situational awareness.<hr></blockquote>
So your “Sharpened situational awareness” is able to cope with how many aircraft in proximity? And even if you sighted one ( around pillars, cowlings, wings, below, above, behind etc), can you watch all the others? If you say Yes, I say Bollocks!. .Radio in an MBZ becomes almost useless when more than 3 or 4 are on frequency!
[quote] . .Chino in California with 2 parallel and a cross runway reverts to a CTAF outside Tower Hours without even a certified air ground operator.<hr></blockquote>
And let me guess?.. Outside Tower hours would be DARK, and therefore ONE runway is lit and in use!!! . .CASA have been working on MBZ day procedures for Parrallel Runway Airports. The ability to regulate which runway is used for what and by whom is proving nigh on impossible.. .WHY? Because it would resemble a circus..
[quote] . .In Australia YSBK with 3 parallel is a MBZ for as many hours a day as YPJT and the freighters are certainly more active outside Tower hours to avoid delays which supports the justification for the MBZ, one would have great difficulty even imagining YSBK is severe clear for extended periods.<hr></blockquote>
NO WRONG!!!!. .YSBK is GAAP for all daylight hours 364 day a year (Anyone flying on Christmas day doesn’t need our help!) and except between 8pm local (Weekends only) and Last light during the short peak of summer! Total of 8 hours a year !. .Outside Twr hours (DARK O’CLOCK) one set of runway lights are used ie 11/29C. .Freighters operate at night due to transport connection and delivery schedules. . .Spoken to an HS748 or Metro Pilot about nights into BK. Me thinks you know JACK about BK!!. . . . [quote] . .It would seem in the YPJT incident occurred whilst the Tower was still operating, again it is the PIC who is responsible for separation.<hr></blockquote>
Lets wait and see the results of the investigation shall we!. . . .I am curious, how many hours a year would you spend observing traffic at Towered airports?. .Not including OT it equates to around 1692Hours per year for these eyes!
Lead
[quote] . .Further more, a runway does NOT even have to be clear for a controller to issue a landing clearance. . .Read all about it, but a plain English version is: The controller must have a reasonable expectation that the runway will be available at the time you arrive. That is all. . .The rest is up to the pilot in command.<hr></blockquote>
Technically correct, although I know of not one ATC in this country that will clear an aircraft to land unless in the opinion of the controller NO collision risk exists ie . .If the preceding landing is turning off or rolling through to the upwind end etc.. .The clearance WILL NOT be issued unless the runway is clear or useable to the arriving aircraft!!. . . . [quote] . .Ardmore, in New Zealand now has more movements than ANY GA airport in Australia,thanks to all the training contracts where Massey and others have beaten Australia out, there is a wonderful variety of versions of the "english" language, etc etc, AND NO TOWER, not even for a few hours a day. . .Just a dammed good UNICOM, and a lot of pilots who have been taught good circuit discipline, and stick to it, something that seems to be missing in the "wild west".<hr></blockquote>
. .These would be the same pilots who have little experience operating in a controlled environment! And have therefore less experience in the airways system generally, you can pick them a mile away, and they are watched like hawks for the inevitable stuff up!. .Where is the traffic data collected and how calculated? How much does the “dammed good” Unicom operator/s cost?. .Ardmore is not blemish free since the removal of ATC!
[quote] . .Did you ever make it to a Great Eastern Fly-In at Evans Head. Every thing from powered parachutes and motor gliders through to the odd Sea Fury or Boomerang, over a 1000 movements on a peak day, three runways in a triangle, and guess what, no tower, not even a Unicom. . .Just a large number of pilots using the brains God gave them, and simple common sense.<hr></blockquote>
Good stuff – Just 3 little things
- How many days did the event go for? 3. . .- Airports like BK and JT operate 364 days a year for good reason! . .- BK has between 600 and 1600 moves a day for most days of the year except when its is IMC, then the traffic numbers drop due the absence of VFR. The IFR’s are of course separated in IMC. . .In a Zone of 3nm that means careful timings and one in, one out!. . <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
[ 25 February 2002: Message edited by: Capcom ]
[ 25 February 2002: Message edited by: Capcom ]</p>
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capcom
Thank you, spoken with much more authority than I am able and as usual elegantly and succintly put.
Icarus 2001. .Read my lips.
[quote]Perhaps I have been away from JT for too long and the training standards have slipped for some of the operators. The ones that I do know have an exceptionally high standard. <hr></blockquote>
Perhaps, doesn't proceed to say the training standards HAVE slipped. I was speaking to Lead Sleds and T's proposal that they have. Their proposal not mine.
Our friend 'T' would of course have taken the high standards of the organisation in which he was involved into account, in his drive to turn JT Tower into a McDonalds.. .I suspect that the professionals now running the place may have an entirely different view.
Most of the real pilots that I know, can chew gum and walk at the same time. Looking out, listening AND talking at the same time ain't all that much more difficult.
Thank you, spoken with much more authority than I am able and as usual elegantly and succintly put.
Icarus 2001. .Read my lips.
[quote]Perhaps I have been away from JT for too long and the training standards have slipped for some of the operators. The ones that I do know have an exceptionally high standard. <hr></blockquote>
Perhaps, doesn't proceed to say the training standards HAVE slipped. I was speaking to Lead Sleds and T's proposal that they have. Their proposal not mine.
Our friend 'T' would of course have taken the high standards of the organisation in which he was involved into account, in his drive to turn JT Tower into a McDonalds.. .I suspect that the professionals now running the place may have an entirely different view.
Most of the real pilots that I know, can chew gum and walk at the same time.
Looking out, listening AND talking at the same time ain't all that much more difficult.
I think that you guys and gals overlook poor old YPCK in Melbourne where there is NO tower at all, and a number of flying schools especially one where large numbers of international students who first language is poor english operate day and night without the benefit of a contoller.. .In the large picture of things I would suggest that Jandakot is a releatively 'quite' airfield.. .Take care out there!
I don't want to be the best pilot in the world - Just the oldest
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
swims around looking at the bait, waits to see who else is interested, then takes a bite
OK Kagamuga, enlighten us all please. Where the hell is YPCK? For a minute I thought you were referring to Point Cook. It doesn't appear in ERSA or on the NAIPS database. Given that it is only known to yourself, I sincerely doubt that it has anywhere near the movements of Bankstown or Jandakot at 194,060 and 171,424 respectively for 2001 - 2002
Tastes bait and upon realising it is the cheap windup brand - spits it out
[ 26 February 2002: Message edited by: Islander Jock ]</p>
OK Kagamuga, enlighten us all please. Where the hell is YPCK? For a minute I thought you were referring to Point Cook. It doesn't appear in ERSA or on the NAIPS database. Given that it is only known to yourself, I sincerely doubt that it has anywhere near the movements of Bankstown or Jandakot at 194,060 and 171,424 respectively for 2001 - 2002
Tastes bait and upon realising it is the cheap windup brand - spits it out
[ 26 February 2002: Message edited by: Islander Jock ]</p>
Moderator
Apparently it was a "Spirit".?
As regards to where the pilots trained and whether they were recent Jandakot products is speculation at this stage as most of us don't know who they were.
So Realist is back to haunt us under a different pseudonym! heh heh his posts are always good for a laugh.
[ 26 February 2002: Message edited by: Charlie Foxtrot India ]</p>
As regards to where the pilots trained and whether they were recent Jandakot products is speculation at this stage as most of us don't know who they were.
So Realist is back to haunt us under a different pseudonym! heh heh his posts are always good for a laugh.
[ 26 February 2002: Message edited by: Charlie Foxtrot India ]</p>
Capcom,. .Have a look at ERSA, the daylight etc graphs, and the concentrations of movement rates at YSBK, you may very well be surprised. Several years back, freighter operators opposed an extension of tower hours, didn't really want to get near the delays when the tower is open.For some of your mates, that must be beyond their horizon, pun intended.
As for movement rates, assuming the figures quoted are correct, Bankstown doesn't get to 600 per day average too often. It's many a year since 1000 was seen, mostly it is more like a morgue.
Don't forget a circuit is counted as two movements for an aircraft doing touch and goes, which ever way you cut it, 360,000 plus at Ardmore puts YSBK and YPJT in the shade.
In the last decade, Ardmore movement rates have increased by almost 40%, can ANY GAAP make that claim.
And now it all works with a unicom, and works well.
Tootle pip !!
As for movement rates, assuming the figures quoted are correct, Bankstown doesn't get to 600 per day average too often. It's many a year since 1000 was seen, mostly it is more like a morgue.
Don't forget a circuit is counted as two movements for an aircraft doing touch and goes, which ever way you cut it, 360,000 plus at Ardmore puts YSBK and YPJT in the shade.
In the last decade, Ardmore movement rates have increased by almost 40%, can ANY GAAP make that claim.
And now it all works with a unicom, and works well.
Tootle pip !!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: perth
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As usual, Islander Jock didn't read the statement by LeadSled, I wonder if Islander Jock knows what a comma is ???? LeadSled certainly did not say the graphs were in ERSA.. .Maybe this is a wakeup call to Islander Jock that he isn't quite as clever as he thinks he is, legend in his own lunch box, I wonder if he has been to YSBK ?????
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I saw in the paper it was a "Sting". .<a href="http://www.tl-ultralight.cz/index_en.html" target="_blank">See Here</a>
The picture I saw at first looked like the engine had been cut off as someone said earlier, but on further examination I realised it was the rear of the plane which had been cut away about 30cm back from the cockpit.
The picture I saw at first looked like the engine had been cut off as someone said earlier, but on further examination I realised it was the rear of the plane which had been cut away about 30cm back from the cockpit.
I don't want to be the best pilot in the world - Just the oldest
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kaga,. .I think you will find Point Cook is YMPC.
T,. .Yes I realised in my haste that I failed to correctly comprehend the sentence and therefore immediately withdrew the comment. I apologise to Leadslead for my mistake.
btw, I have been in and out of Bankstown and as for legend in my own lunchbox comment. Thanks for the compliment, never considered myself in such high regard.
edited to annoy T
[ 26 February 2002: Message edited by: Islander Jock ]</p>
T,. .Yes I realised in my haste that I failed to correctly comprehend the sentence and therefore immediately withdrew the comment. I apologise to Leadslead for my mistake.
btw, I have been in and out of Bankstown and as for legend in my own lunchbox comment. Thanks for the compliment, never considered myself in such high regard.
edited to annoy T
[ 26 February 2002: Message edited by: Islander Jock ]</p>
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Big Southern Sky
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lead-
I am familiar with all the documents!. .If an operator is running a tight margin, and are made aware that the only way they are going to get those services is on a direct cost basis ie . .Those who use the service for those additional hours will be billed for 100% of the cost of the tower during those additional hours! Of course they said NO. .If there are only half a dozen moves during an hour, the cost will obviously be huge!
The same sectors voiced clear dissent at an AsA/Industry meeting held at BK last year!. .When discussing future reduction and removal of some services, the usual 2 or 3 protagonists purported to represent the view of the operators at BK. . .Several Industry persons then had to correct this statement and record their contrary view. Interestingly many organisations were it seems unaware of the meeting!
Your “Pun” is not only wrong, it assumes the pilots of night freighters are my mates and work for one company! . .Don’t know any of them as mates! I have had conversations with pilots of most companies!
No- 600 may be the crude average, what I also said was that weather, weekends etc dictate various levels of traffic during the year.. .It be fact that more than a few weekend CAVOK days are in excess of 1000 moves!. .Some IMC Mondays might be struggling to reach 100+,however 100+ IMC moves is a busy shift! . .Besides If you are IFR in IMC who in their right mind want’s to be shooting an NDB or GPS NPA approach whilst there are other IFR’s airborne in the soup within 3nm! And no one SEPARATING you! . .Leadie, Come on mate!
Unicom’s- I am not sure where you get traffic move rates from! Who collects them? And how are the customers billed?
You and I agree on one thing:-. .User pays has made the services we expect and rely on expensive and messy to administer! . .Most PPL owners have moved off GAAP Airfields because they can’t afford the Airport, ATC, hangarage etc now incurred at GAAP’s. .So do we remove the service or fix the charging regime?. .Why aren’t AOPA and Indiana trying to fix that?. .Because it was HE who put that system in place, with the enthusiastic support of Canberra! To undo that would be an admission of error!
Indiana Wrong! No, what am I saying? It is impossible for his preciousness to be WRONG!
NZ went to Unibombs after the same “necessary reforms” occurred!
So then, will Australia be relying on NZ for Fighter aircraft in 10years time? . .Only if Canberra are as silly as their Governments of recent years!!!!
I am familiar with all the documents!. .If an operator is running a tight margin, and are made aware that the only way they are going to get those services is on a direct cost basis ie . .Those who use the service for those additional hours will be billed for 100% of the cost of the tower during those additional hours! Of course they said NO. .If there are only half a dozen moves during an hour, the cost will obviously be huge!
The same sectors voiced clear dissent at an AsA/Industry meeting held at BK last year!. .When discussing future reduction and removal of some services, the usual 2 or 3 protagonists purported to represent the view of the operators at BK. . .Several Industry persons then had to correct this statement and record their contrary view. Interestingly many organisations were it seems unaware of the meeting!
Your “Pun” is not only wrong, it assumes the pilots of night freighters are my mates and work for one company! . .Don’t know any of them as mates! I have had conversations with pilots of most companies!
No- 600 may be the crude average, what I also said was that weather, weekends etc dictate various levels of traffic during the year.. .It be fact that more than a few weekend CAVOK days are in excess of 1000 moves!. .Some IMC Mondays might be struggling to reach 100+,however 100+ IMC moves is a busy shift! . .Besides If you are IFR in IMC who in their right mind want’s to be shooting an NDB or GPS NPA approach whilst there are other IFR’s airborne in the soup within 3nm! And no one SEPARATING you! . .Leadie, Come on mate!
Unicom’s- I am not sure where you get traffic move rates from! Who collects them? And how are the customers billed?
You and I agree on one thing:-. .User pays has made the services we expect and rely on expensive and messy to administer! . .Most PPL owners have moved off GAAP Airfields because they can’t afford the Airport, ATC, hangarage etc now incurred at GAAP’s. .So do we remove the service or fix the charging regime?. .Why aren’t AOPA and Indiana trying to fix that?. .Because it was HE who put that system in place, with the enthusiastic support of Canberra! To undo that would be an admission of error!
Indiana Wrong! No, what am I saying? It is impossible for his preciousness to be WRONG!
NZ went to Unibombs after the same “necessary reforms” occurred!
So then, will Australia be relying on NZ for Fighter aircraft in 10years time? . .Only if Canberra are as silly as their Governments of recent years!!!!