Runway Collision at YPJT
Thread Starter
Runway Collision at YPJT
Early this evening a C152 and ultralight collided on rwy 24R at Jandakot.
Details are still unclear.
No one killed but injuries sustained to one of the occupants. Judging by the wreckage, I'd say it was the ultralight pilot
[ 22 February 2002: Message edited by: YPJT ]</p>
Details are still unclear.
No one killed but injuries sustained to one of the occupants. Judging by the wreckage, I'd say it was the ultralight pilot
[ 22 February 2002: Message edited by: YPJT ]</p>
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Oz
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TV news said (and we all know how reliable they are) that the ultraligh landed on top of the other aircraft (172?). But it definately looked like the other way around <img src="frown.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 49
Posts: 1,286
Likes: 0
Received 33 Likes
on
10 Posts
Was it a C152 or a C172? If so which company was it from? Or was it a private plane? Does anyone know if the tower was operating or the air/ground operator at the time?
Moderator
It looked like a C172, and that it landed on top of the ultralight. Whether they were both landing, or the ultralight lined up underneath the 172 is difficult to tell. Glad no-one was badly hurt.. .The A/G people do a great job, but a place like Jandakot needs the tower open for longer hours. Is this an example of affordable safety?
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Big Southern Sky
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<img src="frown.gif" border="0"> . .Hope all are OK!
Yep! . .No radio?. .No See and Avoid?. .No ATC?
CAGRO works a treat! <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
Yep! . .No radio?. .No See and Avoid?. .No ATC?
CAGRO works a treat! <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The TV news showed the Cessna and the other aircraft that appeared to be a VH registered homebuilt. The engine appeared to have been torn from the homebuilt.. .More interesting was that the TV news reported that the Police bomb squad had to be called in to remove an explosive device.. .Is this correct? What is GA coming to? What sort of explosive device?. .Or is this all the result of a fertile imagination in the head of some cub reporter looking for a scoop story with the result that truth does not get in the way of said story.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: oz
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not going to start speculations about the incident especially who is to blame. I witnessed the collision and yes, the C172 did land on top of the ultra light. C172 was given landing clearance fro the tower just before it closed.
I dont believe this thread deserves finger pointing, thankfully everyone walked away.
I dont believe this thread deserves finger pointing, thankfully everyone walked away.
All,. .I gather the "bomb" was a ballistic parachute. . .I wonder, does that mean if you have an incident in your new multi zillion dollar Colunbia, the Army Bomb Disposal unit is going to be called in to blow it up.. .Like the suitcase of bra's and nickers blown all around Brisbane Eagle Farm a while back.. .Tootle pip!!
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
DWR,
Yes we're all thankful that everyone walked away. But looking at the point of impact on the ultralight, it was only a matter of inches between this and a far more tragic outcome.
Hopefully this will be the final nail in the coffin for those who support the view that Jandakot could operate safely as a full time MBZ. I personally have had the excitement of witnessing:
1. A student accelerating and descending over the top of me on base outside twr hours.
2. Aircraft taking off and turning opposite the circuit direction with a number of other aircraft entering and leaving the zone at the same time.
3. Aircraft departing on different runways to those already in use.
The list goes on.
Despite nearly all operators expressing their concerns at various times regarding the cutback in ASA staff and twr hours they (ASA) will not consider putting on extra controllers. With the increases in traffic movements, especially with the two foreign schools, things are only going to get worse.
Hopefully, what occurred on Friday will make the decision makers re-evaluate the current level of ATC services but I'm not holding my breath. <img src="frown.gif" border="0">
Yes we're all thankful that everyone walked away. But looking at the point of impact on the ultralight, it was only a matter of inches between this and a far more tragic outcome.
Hopefully this will be the final nail in the coffin for those who support the view that Jandakot could operate safely as a full time MBZ. I personally have had the excitement of witnessing:
1. A student accelerating and descending over the top of me on base outside twr hours.
2. Aircraft taking off and turning opposite the circuit direction with a number of other aircraft entering and leaving the zone at the same time.
3. Aircraft departing on different runways to those already in use.
The list goes on.
Despite nearly all operators expressing their concerns at various times regarding the cutback in ASA staff and twr hours they (ASA) will not consider putting on extra controllers. With the increases in traffic movements, especially with the two foreign schools, things are only going to get worse.
Hopefully, what occurred on Friday will make the decision makers re-evaluate the current level of ATC services but I'm not holding my breath. <img src="frown.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Earth
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RS-Cowboy - What were the other 2 major accidents? I know one of their 152's had a situation about 3 weeks ago but what else?
I hope after this the tower will now stay active 'till 10pm like it used to a few years ago. Enough scary things go on when the tower is active let alone during MBZ procedures.
I know the good ppl in the tower have lodged an official complaint so lets hope something gets sorted out.
Air Services Australia.... is'nt that an oxymoron???? <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
I hope after this the tower will now stay active 'till 10pm like it used to a few years ago. Enough scary things go on when the tower is active let alone during MBZ procedures.
I know the good ppl in the tower have lodged an official complaint so lets hope something gets sorted out.
Air Services Australia.... is'nt that an oxymoron???? <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
Moderator
Descend When Ready, when the C172 was cleared to land, where was the ultralight? Todays Sunday Times said they were both landing, (so it must be true <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> ) I was wondering if ATC saw the ultralight or did it overtake the 172 from beneath after the tower closed? Or was it lining up? Just wondered if you could shed some light as you saw it happen.
We all need to make sure that nothing like this can ever happen again. Maybe the powers that be will listen this time. (and maybe I'll win lotto next week)
Sorry you had to witness it <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
We all need to make sure that nothing like this can ever happen again. Maybe the powers that be will listen this time. (and maybe I'll win lotto next week)
Sorry you had to witness it <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hells bells boys and girls, I know it's the wild west and all but I think you need more than longer tower hours.
Aren't there any instuctors over that way?
How exactly could one explain Islander Jock's example of a student behaving as reported on base?
The Aero Club has had how many prangs or incidents in how long?
At the risk of being shot at across the border I'm a wondering if a closer look in the mirror is not required before screaming for more costs.
Aren't there any instuctors over that way?
How exactly could one explain Islander Jock's example of a student behaving as reported on base?
The Aero Club has had how many prangs or incidents in how long?
At the risk of being shot at across the border I'm a wondering if a closer look in the mirror is not required before screaming for more costs.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: perth
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snide Remark, I agree, training ???? one wonders just what standards are being used.. .I simply can't understand how the last check on final,"runway clear" gets missed.. .And it isn't sun in the eye's either,between 1755 and 1805 local in February the sun is still quite high. This time of the year YPJT is 95% severe clear so its not weather related, probably just some of that divine belief that Marconi is the single safety aid to aviation.. .Isn't "see and Avoid" the primary means of separation in GAAP Zones. I thought the PIC was responsible for separation, silly of me !!
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
snide remark. .as usual;D
T. .Before I started that malarkey, you should disclose to the assembled throng that it was you who led the AOPA charge for the closure of the JT tower in the first place, in the interests of "unnecessary costs" and whatever other agenda you may have been running for your then employer.
Who's paying the bill for the last few and the inevitable house full of people.
Oh and BTW can you point me at an example of a dual runway, GA airport anywhere in the world, that carries the number (busiest in OZ) and diversity of traffic, ultralight, turbine, and training, complete with pilots whose first language is not English, that does NOT have a Tower operating during busy periods including night circuit training.. .Just one will do.
T. .Before I started that malarkey, you should disclose to the assembled throng that it was you who led the AOPA charge for the closure of the JT tower in the first place, in the interests of "unnecessary costs" and whatever other agenda you may have been running for your then employer.
Who's paying the bill for the last few and the inevitable house full of people.
Oh and BTW can you point me at an example of a dual runway, GA airport anywhere in the world, that carries the number (busiest in OZ) and diversity of traffic, ultralight, turbine, and training, complete with pilots whose first language is not English, that does NOT have a Tower operating during busy periods including night circuit training.. .Just one will do.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: perth
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.. .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.. .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.. .Chino in California with 2 parallel and a cross runway reverts to a CTAF outside Tower Hours without even a certified air ground operator.. .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.. .It would seem in the YPJT incident occurred whilst the Tower was still operating, again it is the PIC who is responsible for separation.