Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
NZ TV news is reporting that the Christian Aviation Seneca that crashed last February was a CFIT (which the TAIC report confirms).
A lot of people were saying at the time that "once the report came out, many of us would have to eat our words". It now appears that the reverse is true.
Sadly, the report also notes the presence of cannabis in the bloodstream of the pilot. Dave Brown was strongly denying on TV that his son ever took drugs, and that the presence of cannabis was as a result of "passive smoking". However, the report discounts that possibility.
So here's my thing. I would be the last person in the world to ever agree that any pilot should take an illegal drug, however I can't help thinking that this will now be seized upon and used to impose drug testing on the NZ pilot community, even though the report clearly states that the use (or not) of cannabis was not a factor in the accident. That was obviously the intent of the CAA spokesman interviewed for the piece.
Is anyone, apart from me, concerned about this? I am not concerned from the point of view of any personal involvement with drugs. My problem is that pilots are now being perceived as unprofessional and in need of supervision in this regard. when was the last time your doctor underwent a drug test at work?
Discuss...
A lot of people were saying at the time that "once the report came out, many of us would have to eat our words". It now appears that the reverse is true.
Sadly, the report also notes the presence of cannabis in the bloodstream of the pilot. Dave Brown was strongly denying on TV that his son ever took drugs, and that the presence of cannabis was as a result of "passive smoking". However, the report discounts that possibility.
So here's my thing. I would be the last person in the world to ever agree that any pilot should take an illegal drug, however I can't help thinking that this will now be seized upon and used to impose drug testing on the NZ pilot community, even though the report clearly states that the use (or not) of cannabis was not a factor in the accident. That was obviously the intent of the CAA spokesman interviewed for the piece.
Is anyone, apart from me, concerned about this? I am not concerned from the point of view of any personal involvement with drugs. My problem is that pilots are now being perceived as unprofessional and in need of supervision in this regard. when was the last time your doctor underwent a drug test at work?
Discuss...
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
MOR.....I believe everybody in our choosen field should be concerned.This is another example of pilots who do not deserve the priviledge of flying aircraft.
You may remember a while back,there was discussion of another accident involving a pilot who tested positive for drugs.This seems an all too familiar subject,and it is just pathetic.
I say again,...We as pilots are held to a higher standard than most,the reasons being obvious.The public hearing of this situaton and the supposed drug use, will only make your and my ability to make a living in aviation that much harder,and will most certainly degrade our image as professionals!!!!!
I have previous dealings in these issues,and have been on the recieving end of pilots who have used drugs,and it has cost me a buisness and several lawsuits.Believe me,it has not been a holiday.
Thanks for the post MOR.......arohanui
You may remember a while back,there was discussion of another accident involving a pilot who tested positive for drugs.This seems an all too familiar subject,and it is just pathetic.
I say again,...We as pilots are held to a higher standard than most,the reasons being obvious.The public hearing of this situaton and the supposed drug use, will only make your and my ability to make a living in aviation that much harder,and will most certainly degrade our image as professionals!!!!!
I have previous dealings in these issues,and have been on the recieving end of pilots who have used drugs,and it has cost me a buisness and several lawsuits.Believe me,it has not been a holiday.
Thanks for the post MOR.......arohanui
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
QF.Quoll....not to be disrespectfull,but concerning the Erebus crash.....you need to read the book "Impact Erebus"...I believe it would shed light on your comments.....If you cant get it,PM me,I would be more than happy to send it to you to read......only if you send it back.......I have friends in the mongrel mob if you dont.....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
pakeha-boy,
I would think the type (fixed card) and the position of the instrument (lower left panel) of the ADF, and the fact that it did not comply with the requirement that all nav instruments be duplicated if being used as prime navigation aid (NDB Approach) would be more likely to have been the prime cause of this accident rather than the finding of cannabis in the blood stream.(Is it possible to have had the reading found from third party smoke?) This is of course unacceptable, but he had carried out the flight prior to the accident without any apparent problems, including two missed approaches at Keri Keri. That a fixed card ADF, which whilst it may be acceptable for under the hood basic training, in VMC, should be approved for actual IFR, and approaches for real, in this day and age I find quite remarkable.
Prospector
I would think the type (fixed card) and the position of the instrument (lower left panel) of the ADF, and the fact that it did not comply with the requirement that all nav instruments be duplicated if being used as prime navigation aid (NDB Approach) would be more likely to have been the prime cause of this accident rather than the finding of cannabis in the blood stream.(Is it possible to have had the reading found from third party smoke?) This is of course unacceptable, but he had carried out the flight prior to the accident without any apparent problems, including two missed approaches at Keri Keri. That a fixed card ADF, which whilst it may be acceptable for under the hood basic training, in VMC, should be approved for actual IFR, and approaches for real, in this day and age I find quite remarkable.
Prospector
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
prospector, at some point we have to draw the line as to what is safe and what is not. The regulatory autorities around the world still alow fixed card ADF to be used for IFR flight, certainly for part 135 operations. Had there over the last 30-40 years been an appreciable number of accidents directly attributed to Fixed card ADF use then I think this would no longer be the case. It is all fine and well condemning the use of this technology (maybe you use it, maybe not) however, it is tried an tested and still acceptable for commercial operations.
As an aside, I personally found fixed cards easier to use than RMI's but there you go.
I don't want to get into the drug thing too much, but HAD he been using cannabis then the vast majority of my sympathy for him goes out the window. How many pilots out there are STUPID enough to take drugs and risk their lives and careers, not to mention the innocent lives of others. I sincerely hope they are few and far between.
regards
below.....
As an aside, I personally found fixed cards easier to use than RMI's but there you go.
I don't want to get into the drug thing too much, but HAD he been using cannabis then the vast majority of my sympathy for him goes out the window. How many pilots out there are STUPID enough to take drugs and risk their lives and careers, not to mention the innocent lives of others. I sincerely hope they are few and far between.
regards
below.....
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
Prospector....
With all due respect,I do not believe the prime reason for this accident was cannabis,did it contribute??? to believe it did not,I find hard to believe.
In the early 80,s,I co-owned an operation in Alaska.We had a C-206,3 C207,s and 2 Twin otters.Several of these A/C had fixed card ADFs,this was the era and their use was the thing of he day.
One of my pilots,crashed the C-206,killing himself and several others.The autopsy showed THC and others drugs classified as "illegal".At the hearing,evidence presented confirmed he was a casual user.Before all of this,he did a fine job,always at work,considered a good stick.
The lawsuit that followed cost me my buisness,my certificate,and the flying jobs of 6 pilots.Am I biasd???,bloody oath I am.I dont make the rules,I just follow them.
MOR,s original post asked if we are concerned,for one, I am,I stand by my post.Was drug use the root cause?, probably not,but I have seen and been through enough to know that it did not help!!!!
you have a nice day mate.........PB
With all due respect,I do not believe the prime reason for this accident was cannabis,did it contribute??? to believe it did not,I find hard to believe.
In the early 80,s,I co-owned an operation in Alaska.We had a C-206,3 C207,s and 2 Twin otters.Several of these A/C had fixed card ADFs,this was the era and their use was the thing of he day.
One of my pilots,crashed the C-206,killing himself and several others.The autopsy showed THC and others drugs classified as "illegal".At the hearing,evidence presented confirmed he was a casual user.Before all of this,he did a fine job,always at work,considered a good stick.
The lawsuit that followed cost me my buisness,my certificate,and the flying jobs of 6 pilots.Am I biasd???,bloody oath I am.I dont make the rules,I just follow them.
MOR,s original post asked if we are concerned,for one, I am,I stand by my post.Was drug use the root cause?, probably not,but I have seen and been through enough to know that it did not help!!!!
you have a nice day mate.........PB
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
Prospector
Nobody is saying that cannabis use played an active part in the accident - not the report, and certainly not me. I also believe the fixed-card ADF is a red herring - you are either competent in it's use or not, if you aren't, you shouldn't use it. Part of the problem no doubt stems from the pilots lack of recent use of this ADF, but that doesn't excuse anything - the first rule of IFR (especially an approach) is that you should at all times know where you are, cross-checking with whatever you have available. If at any time you become uncertain of your position, you MUST execute a missed approach and climb to MSA.This is basic stuff.
Pilots (especially Part 135 pilots) naturally want to complete the approach, and many will live with the vague uneasiness they feel about an approach when they are not 100% sure about their position or tracking. 99% of the time they get away with it... but occasionally they run out of luck. It is a stupid way to operate. However, it is a way of operating that is common in the charter world.
In this case, the pilot didn't know where he was with any certainty, and even if the ADF was inoperative, the picture would have been wrong. He pressed on at low level whilst IMC, and paid the price.
Sadly, there is NO EXCUSE for CFIT.
However my main concern remains the drugs issue. I agree with pakeha boy, pilots who use drugs don't deserve to have licences. When you receive your first CPL, it is an expression of trust in your ability and judgement by the government and by extension, the travelling public. They have a right to expect you to abstain from drugs of any kind that could affect your performance as a pilot.
Now having said that, it is clear in this case that the cannabis is unlikely to have had any role in the accident (which is also true of Hamilton Island). Regarding "passive" or second-hand cannabis smoke, the report discounts that possibility due to the amount of cannabis in the bloodstream (too much for passive smoking).
I'm concerned about where we go from here. The standing of the profession of airline pilot has been significantly eroded in recent years, and it looks like it may get a whole lot worse now.
Nobody is saying that cannabis use played an active part in the accident - not the report, and certainly not me. I also believe the fixed-card ADF is a red herring - you are either competent in it's use or not, if you aren't, you shouldn't use it. Part of the problem no doubt stems from the pilots lack of recent use of this ADF, but that doesn't excuse anything - the first rule of IFR (especially an approach) is that you should at all times know where you are, cross-checking with whatever you have available. If at any time you become uncertain of your position, you MUST execute a missed approach and climb to MSA.This is basic stuff.
Pilots (especially Part 135 pilots) naturally want to complete the approach, and many will live with the vague uneasiness they feel about an approach when they are not 100% sure about their position or tracking. 99% of the time they get away with it... but occasionally they run out of luck. It is a stupid way to operate. However, it is a way of operating that is common in the charter world.
In this case, the pilot didn't know where he was with any certainty, and even if the ADF was inoperative, the picture would have been wrong. He pressed on at low level whilst IMC, and paid the price.
Sadly, there is NO EXCUSE for CFIT.
However my main concern remains the drugs issue. I agree with pakeha boy, pilots who use drugs don't deserve to have licences. When you receive your first CPL, it is an expression of trust in your ability and judgement by the government and by extension, the travelling public. They have a right to expect you to abstain from drugs of any kind that could affect your performance as a pilot.
Now having said that, it is clear in this case that the cannabis is unlikely to have had any role in the accident (which is also true of Hamilton Island). Regarding "passive" or second-hand cannabis smoke, the report discounts that possibility due to the amount of cannabis in the bloodstream (too much for passive smoking).
I'm concerned about where we go from here. The standing of the profession of airline pilot has been significantly eroded in recent years, and it looks like it may get a whole lot worse now.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
MOR,
I agree with what you have written, I have had no first hand dealing with cannabis, but it would appear that passive accumulation was not likely.
However, a little off the prime question you raised but still relevant I believe, is the following taken from the accident report.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft instrumentation requirements
1.8.6 Civil Aviation Rule 135.3538 stated in part that operators were to ensure that an aircraft was
equipped .with the number of instruments and equipment to ensure that the failure of any
independent system required for either communication or navigation purposes, or both, will not
result in the inability to communicate or navigate safely as required for the route being flown..
1.8.7 The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) advised that for an IFR flight the Rule required aircraft to
have a second independent navigation system available should the primary system fail.
Therefore, for an NDB approach the aircraft should have 2 independent ADF installations.
However, CAA conceded that there was still ongoing discussions with industry representatives
and operators about the intention of the Rule, many of whom did not meet the requirements of
the Rule.
1.8.8 Areas of discussion included alternative navigation equipment, for example GPS, to enable an
aircraft to be climbed to a safe altitude should equipment fail during an instrument approach and
either, conduct another approach using that equipment or being able to divert to an alternative
destination. The ACNZ.s planned phasing out of NDBs around New Zealand and the cost of
installing new equipment that could soon become obsolete also needs to be considered.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 135.3538. It was not being complied with. And it would appear with the knowledge and approval of CAA, ongoing discussions about a rule that was already in force?? ACNZ planned phasing out of NDB's, installing equipment that could soon be obsolete? The aircraft was imported in 1986, Christian Aviation had ownership from 1988, would CAA concede there have been ongoing discussions with industry representatives for some 20 years? and all this time NDB approaches were being carried out not in compliance with the rules? and no action from the regulator?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Pilots (especially Part 135 pilots) naturally want to complete the approach, and many will live with the vague uneasiness they feel about an approach when they are not 100% sure about their position or tracking. 99% of the time they get away with it... but occasionally they run out of luck. It is a stupid way to operate. However, it is a way of operating that is common in the charter world."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strong statement, very hard to crosscheck with anything on the NDB approach if you have only one needle, that surely is why the rule states two required?. If this way of operating is common in the charter world, and one would presume you speak from experience, then surely it is time CAA did something about it? or does it not fit into their definition of Affordable Safety.
Prospector
I agree with what you have written, I have had no first hand dealing with cannabis, but it would appear that passive accumulation was not likely.
However, a little off the prime question you raised but still relevant I believe, is the following taken from the accident report.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft instrumentation requirements
1.8.6 Civil Aviation Rule 135.3538 stated in part that operators were to ensure that an aircraft was
equipped .with the number of instruments and equipment to ensure that the failure of any
independent system required for either communication or navigation purposes, or both, will not
result in the inability to communicate or navigate safely as required for the route being flown..
1.8.7 The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) advised that for an IFR flight the Rule required aircraft to
have a second independent navigation system available should the primary system fail.
Therefore, for an NDB approach the aircraft should have 2 independent ADF installations.
However, CAA conceded that there was still ongoing discussions with industry representatives
and operators about the intention of the Rule, many of whom did not meet the requirements of
the Rule.
1.8.8 Areas of discussion included alternative navigation equipment, for example GPS, to enable an
aircraft to be climbed to a safe altitude should equipment fail during an instrument approach and
either, conduct another approach using that equipment or being able to divert to an alternative
destination. The ACNZ.s planned phasing out of NDBs around New Zealand and the cost of
installing new equipment that could soon become obsolete also needs to be considered.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 135.3538. It was not being complied with. And it would appear with the knowledge and approval of CAA, ongoing discussions about a rule that was already in force?? ACNZ planned phasing out of NDB's, installing equipment that could soon be obsolete? The aircraft was imported in 1986, Christian Aviation had ownership from 1988, would CAA concede there have been ongoing discussions with industry representatives for some 20 years? and all this time NDB approaches were being carried out not in compliance with the rules? and no action from the regulator?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Pilots (especially Part 135 pilots) naturally want to complete the approach, and many will live with the vague uneasiness they feel about an approach when they are not 100% sure about their position or tracking. 99% of the time they get away with it... but occasionally they run out of luck. It is a stupid way to operate. However, it is a way of operating that is common in the charter world."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strong statement, very hard to crosscheck with anything on the NDB approach if you have only one needle, that surely is why the rule states two required?. If this way of operating is common in the charter world, and one would presume you speak from experience, then surely it is time CAA did something about it? or does it not fit into their definition of Affordable Safety.
Prospector
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
Prospector
I quite agree with you.
You could take the view that a "second independent navigation system available should the primary system fail" could mean a VOR receiver used at the alternate, in other words the pilot could have diverted to Rotorua and carried out a VOR/DME approach there. However it is a slightly frivolous view.
My own belief is that the CAA are criminally negligent (in the moral sense) for not either enforcing the rules, or ensuring that ACNZ provide naviads more in keeping with the 21st century. But then, the CAA take a very hands-off approach to safety in any case.
Having said that, there was nothing stopping Christian Aviation from equipping both it's aircraft and it's pilots more appropriately for the charter task - for example getting the aircraft GPS installation approved for IFR approaches, providing a second RMI to complement the RBI, and making sure the pilot was approved to carry out GPS approaches.
Yes, I do speak from experience in charter work, a time in my life that I am very glad is over. Operators will all tell you that they are very safety-conscious, and in their hearts most want to be, but the fact is that it is a competitive industry with small margins and high expectations from the customer. Few operators can afford to equip their aircraft with all the toys, those that can often don't want to as "we have always managed with an ADF, why spend the money?"
Most will bend the rules to "get in", it is virtually an industry-standard attitude that the CAA is doing nothing to stop.
I quite agree with you.
You could take the view that a "second independent navigation system available should the primary system fail" could mean a VOR receiver used at the alternate, in other words the pilot could have diverted to Rotorua and carried out a VOR/DME approach there. However it is a slightly frivolous view.
My own belief is that the CAA are criminally negligent (in the moral sense) for not either enforcing the rules, or ensuring that ACNZ provide naviads more in keeping with the 21st century. But then, the CAA take a very hands-off approach to safety in any case.
Having said that, there was nothing stopping Christian Aviation from equipping both it's aircraft and it's pilots more appropriately for the charter task - for example getting the aircraft GPS installation approved for IFR approaches, providing a second RMI to complement the RBI, and making sure the pilot was approved to carry out GPS approaches.
Yes, I do speak from experience in charter work, a time in my life that I am very glad is over. Operators will all tell you that they are very safety-conscious, and in their hearts most want to be, but the fact is that it is a competitive industry with small margins and high expectations from the customer. Few operators can afford to equip their aircraft with all the toys, those that can often don't want to as "we have always managed with an ADF, why spend the money?"
Most will bend the rules to "get in", it is virtually an industry-standard attitude that the CAA is doing nothing to stop.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 'round here
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
At the end of the day you have to say was this accident in this crapheap old aircraft any different to similar cfit accidents occurring 30 or 40 years ago when they had the same light twin aircraft operating SPIFR with borderline-in-todays-world autopilot and nav systems having the same accidents?
Answer NO.
When you look at automotive safety and the areas it has improved to reduce fatalities overall or shipping safety and the areas it has improved to reduce fatalities overall it is criminal that aviation has the same accidents occurring decade after decade after decade after decade. SPIFR in commercial ops should only take place in an aircraft with a minimum of a competent deicing system, gpws and a nav and autopilot system that can competently fly an approach/missed approach hands off.
The public don't deserve any less, neither do those operating the aircraft. Obviously the public will have to pay for the extra cost and the size of the charter industry may go down but the level of safety will increase tenfold.
There are a considerable number of people on this forum who would say "I cut my teeth in SPIFR" or "Best training I ever had" But a great deal of them also wouldn't put their kids on a SPIFR charter if it was shaping up to be a nasty day to go flying.
It isn't the greatest analogy but if stagecoach imported a bunch of those buses that hack around the Kashmir with no brakes, overloaded by a factor of 3 and put them on runs around Auckland charging 20% of what they charge for a bus fare now Joe Public would have a fit at the poor safety and casualty rate.
But Joe Public doesn't know aviation quite so well, relies on the industry and CAA to police it and set a level for his safety and that still isn't occurring.
In theory I am just as safe in SPIFR as I am flying a link service to the same small town with it's non precision approach and limited aids. Obviously since there have in the past been over 30 SPIFR fatal accidents while the link services have had 0 this is not occurring.
Something is therefore wrong.
However as SPIFR deaths will continue to occur with monotonous regularity
it will at least provide for lively debate on the forum.
Answer NO.
When you look at automotive safety and the areas it has improved to reduce fatalities overall or shipping safety and the areas it has improved to reduce fatalities overall it is criminal that aviation has the same accidents occurring decade after decade after decade after decade. SPIFR in commercial ops should only take place in an aircraft with a minimum of a competent deicing system, gpws and a nav and autopilot system that can competently fly an approach/missed approach hands off.
The public don't deserve any less, neither do those operating the aircraft. Obviously the public will have to pay for the extra cost and the size of the charter industry may go down but the level of safety will increase tenfold.
There are a considerable number of people on this forum who would say "I cut my teeth in SPIFR" or "Best training I ever had" But a great deal of them also wouldn't put their kids on a SPIFR charter if it was shaping up to be a nasty day to go flying.
It isn't the greatest analogy but if stagecoach imported a bunch of those buses that hack around the Kashmir with no brakes, overloaded by a factor of 3 and put them on runs around Auckland charging 20% of what they charge for a bus fare now Joe Public would have a fit at the poor safety and casualty rate.
But Joe Public doesn't know aviation quite so well, relies on the industry and CAA to police it and set a level for his safety and that still isn't occurring.
In theory I am just as safe in SPIFR as I am flying a link service to the same small town with it's non precision approach and limited aids. Obviously since there have in the past been over 30 SPIFR fatal accidents while the link services have had 0 this is not occurring.
Something is therefore wrong.
However as SPIFR deaths will continue to occur with monotonous regularity
it will at least provide for lively debate on the forum.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: The Fragrant Harbour
Age: 49
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
I said it before and i will say it again, having been based in Taupo on the commuters and before that flying GA twins IFR into Taupo, that approach is dangerous, those of us that flew into there all the time knew the Bravo approach did strange things and the scariest of these was to give false inbound indications especially taking you East of the centerline. You could have 50 RMIs on board and you would have no idea that you were been fed false information. We advised CAA and they did nothing like usual.
Fixed card vs RMI, its safe its legal and its easy, i did over 100 fix card approaches in AP on the Bravo, albiet keeping myself slightly west of the inbound, i was scared of that hill.
Im saddened about the cannabis use but dont think it was a causual factor.
Fixed card vs RMI, its safe its legal and its easy, i did over 100 fix card approaches in AP on the Bravo, albiet keeping myself slightly west of the inbound, i was scared of that hill.
Im saddened about the cannabis use but dont think it was a causual factor.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
What a load of twaddle.
An approach doesn't "do" anything, and any refractive effect would be obvious when the approach was being calibrated.
There is no way you can get that far off-track with an apparently correct indication, he was at least 24 degrees off-track... have a look at the track plot in the accident report. Besides, the ADF had a trapped reading that was roughly correct (32 degrees right of the aircraft heading), so if that was what the instrument was reading at the time of impact, it is clear that the ADF or NDB was not the problem, as testing confirmed. Subsequent airborne testing of the NDB installation the next day found no problems.
So it wasn't the approach itself, or the ADF.
I am also intrigued as to why you would think the CAA has anything all to gain by ignoring your reports... it isn't their navaid.
What you are saying is that the CAA deliberately refused to investigate a safety-related issue, which is unlikely, even for them.
An approach doesn't "do" anything, and any refractive effect would be obvious when the approach was being calibrated.
There is no way you can get that far off-track with an apparently correct indication, he was at least 24 degrees off-track... have a look at the track plot in the accident report. Besides, the ADF had a trapped reading that was roughly correct (32 degrees right of the aircraft heading), so if that was what the instrument was reading at the time of impact, it is clear that the ADF or NDB was not the problem, as testing confirmed. Subsequent airborne testing of the NDB installation the next day found no problems.
So it wasn't the approach itself, or the ADF.
I am also intrigued as to why you would think the CAA has anything all to gain by ignoring your reports... it isn't their navaid.
What you are saying is that the CAA deliberately refused to investigate a safety-related issue, which is unlikely, even for them.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
Don't like this military vs cilvilian IFR training procedures; this needs a good Dept of Civil Aviation balanced opinion. Providing of course the Department is balanced....
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
I've just read the taic report, found it a bit interesting that they said he descended in accordance with the profile and the steps...they made specific mention of the five mile step but didn't mention that there is a step of not below 3600ft until 8 miles, by the time he got there he had already descended through the step by 600 feet. Overloaded? He had been flying for three hours with two missed approaches and was in a cockpit that required a different scan than he was used to and until that day hadn't done a fixed card approach since 2002, With all that I reckon it wouldn't take much else to make me overloaded. If I was starting to get sick or had not got a good nights sleep the night before I reckon it might overload me. Does anyone else think it could be that simple?
Another thing I found interesting is that with the AWIB reporting the cloud as BKN 4000 and wind favouring rwy17 he would have had a certain picture, he got the real story about the weather while joining the arc and opted to carry on then circle for 35. I think thats exactly what I would have done as well, when briefing the approach though, his mindset would have been getting visual on the arc, for me in the past this has adversly affected my attitude to the approach, it has caught me out when conditions are worse than expected, does anyone else get that?
Another thing I found interesting is that with the AWIB reporting the cloud as BKN 4000 and wind favouring rwy17 he would have had a certain picture, he got the real story about the weather while joining the arc and opted to carry on then circle for 35. I think thats exactly what I would have done as well, when briefing the approach though, his mindset would have been getting visual on the arc, for me in the past this has adversly affected my attitude to the approach, it has caught me out when conditions are worse than expected, does anyone else get that?
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
Flyingkiwi....a question....why would anyone contemplate evening thinking about doing an NDB app with the knowledge or thinking that the signal strength was questionable?......
I, like you have done many NDB apps,none under the premise that this was a "hit and hope" operation....
apologies if I have misread your post.........PB
I, like you have done many NDB apps,none under the premise that this was a "hit and hope" operation....
apologies if I have misread your post.........PB
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
Come on MOR, don't you remember basic IFR instruments and navaids?
Coastal effect?
ADF roll on..the effect of cloud and hills on the approach..and the common frequency of electrical storms..
Hardly a 100% guaranteed approach aid.
Coastal effect?
ADF roll on..the effect of cloud and hills on the approach..and the common frequency of electrical storms..
Hardly a 100% guaranteed approach aid.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
cjam,
Yes, I do believe it is very likely that it was that simple. There is nothing wrong with a fixed card if it is all you are using, but to jump from one system to another, with periods of months in between is a big ask. And to have the instrument in the bottom left hand of the panel certainly would not help.
Prospector
Yes, I do believe it is very likely that it was that simple. There is nothing wrong with a fixed card if it is all you are using, but to jump from one system to another, with periods of months in between is a big ask. And to have the instrument in the bottom left hand of the panel certainly would not help.
Prospector
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
mattyj
1. Coastal effect - no, it's a lake with a convoluted coastline.
2. Cloud - I assume you are joking.
3. Hills - maybe, but then it would show up during navaid calibration, wouldn't it? The approaches are designed to take this into account (same with coastal effect), and that is the reason that you often see offset final approaches on NDB approaches - to allow sufficient tolerance.
4. Electrical storms - well there weren't any in this case, but if you had ever flown around thunderstorms, you would know that the effect on an ADF needle is to make it swing around (pointing towards the TS). The movements are erratic, and any pilot that relies on an ADF during electrical weather needs their head read. Go somewhere with a real approach.
Not sure what you mean by ADF roll on, if you mean dip, it is only relevant when turning. Doesn't apply on a final approach.
It isn't a 100% navaid (whatever that means), but it is a perfectly acceptable aid if used within its limits.
It wasn't so long ago that we were doing approaches into NSN using an AM broadcast station... not even an NDB. I still have the approach plates...
Come on MOR, don't you remember basic IFR instruments and navaids?
Coastal effect?
ADF roll on..the effect of cloud and hills on the approach..and the common frequency of electrical storms..
Coastal effect?
ADF roll on..the effect of cloud and hills on the approach..and the common frequency of electrical storms..
2. Cloud - I assume you are joking.
3. Hills - maybe, but then it would show up during navaid calibration, wouldn't it? The approaches are designed to take this into account (same with coastal effect), and that is the reason that you often see offset final approaches on NDB approaches - to allow sufficient tolerance.
4. Electrical storms - well there weren't any in this case, but if you had ever flown around thunderstorms, you would know that the effect on an ADF needle is to make it swing around (pointing towards the TS). The movements are erratic, and any pilot that relies on an ADF during electrical weather needs their head read. Go somewhere with a real approach.
Not sure what you mean by ADF roll on, if you mean dip, it is only relevant when turning. Doesn't apply on a final approach.
It isn't a 100% navaid (whatever that means), but it is a perfectly acceptable aid if used within its limits.
It wasn't so long ago that we were doing approaches into NSN using an AM broadcast station... not even an NDB. I still have the approach plates...
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Back Paddock
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Taupo Seneca crash report on TV news tonight...
Someone has to back you up FlyingKiwi. I was scared of that hill too. When I first started doing regular GA flights to Taupo our company senior pilots filled me in on that damn Bravo approach and the concerns many pilots before me had with it. Yeah it's certified and been checked etc etc but I was (and still am) of the opinion that SOMETIMES when god knows what conditions there are and the moons align you can recieve some frightening indications in that area. Only ever flew it IFR if I had a GPS to back up. Did it VMC several times and tried to fly that approach as accurately as I could for personal curiousity I suppose. Gave a FAIR track on MOST occaisions but several times (to varying degrees) it put me (what I would class as) significantly to the East of track and more correct indications did not start to occur until 3-4 nm from the aid. Once was almost over the lower slopes of the Mount.
Not saying this WAS the cause-but I'd say it may well have played a part, significant or minor. Perhaps it was merely compounded by other factors in the report and discussed. At the end of the day it was (and will no doubt remain) an accident without a known cause/causes.
Prospect- Some aircraft I used flew to AP had two ADF's and they showed the same thing.
MOR as for the 032 trapped RB indication-that's hardly definitive! The aeroplane came to an awful sudden stop and the surely every ADF needle you've ever seen hasn't pointed consistly (except in a sim!) I think you're being a bit harsh on FlyingKiwi. An opinion from fellow aviators of experiences they have had is not twaddle. You cannot experience everything yourself and considering the experiences as well as the mistakes of others is a must for any pilot n'est pas?
Cjam- Had to recheck that radar plot in the report. Cannot believe naught was made of it in the report.
Not saying this WAS the cause-but I'd say it may well have played a part, significant or minor. Perhaps it was merely compounded by other factors in the report and discussed. At the end of the day it was (and will no doubt remain) an accident without a known cause/causes.
Prospect- Some aircraft I used flew to AP had two ADF's and they showed the same thing.
MOR as for the 032 trapped RB indication-that's hardly definitive! The aeroplane came to an awful sudden stop and the surely every ADF needle you've ever seen hasn't pointed consistly (except in a sim!) I think you're being a bit harsh on FlyingKiwi. An opinion from fellow aviators of experiences they have had is not twaddle. You cannot experience everything yourself and considering the experiences as well as the mistakes of others is a must for any pilot n'est pas?
Cjam- Had to recheck that radar plot in the report. Cannot believe naught was made of it in the report.