The West: Plane Safe After Engine Trouble
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
liver scars I'll admit. them other ones just never happened.
How ya going Vtail. must catch up for an ale when I'm down next, seeing as I missed the going away do.
How ya going Vtail. must catch up for an ale when I'm down next, seeing as I missed the going away do.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: waiting for that blo&dy plane!!
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
earest suitable airfield considering the
severity of the emergency, weather conditions, field facilities,
severity of the emergency, weather conditions, field facilities,
Jundee or Wiluna??? I know where i'd be landing.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has there been any more info on this one?
As mentioned earlier fuel starvation was rumoured, does anyone know if it has been confirmed?
If so, I wonder how much was left in the other tank?
Anyone?
- MP
As mentioned earlier fuel starvation was rumoured, does anyone know if it has been confirmed?
If so, I wonder how much was left in the other tank?
Anyone?
- MP
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
obviously enough to get one engine to wiluna.
surely if it had run out on one side, a restart would have been initiated on the way to Wiluna???. must be more to it than just a fuel management problem, or else running an engine out of fuel, and then going somewhere other than landing on the strip right there in front of you would equate to madness.
I think it must have been a bit more involved than a simple fuel problem that could be fixed from inside. would rule out mismanagement and exhaustion.
surely if it had run out on one side, a restart would have been initiated on the way to Wiluna???. must be more to it than just a fuel management problem, or else running an engine out of fuel, and then going somewhere other than landing on the strip right there in front of you would equate to madness.
I think it must have been a bit more involved than a simple fuel problem that could be fixed from inside. would rule out mismanagement and exhaustion.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: West of Point Byron!!!
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good thing you weren't in the command seat, then. Phew!
I based my reply on working for this particular operator for over 7 yrs
, flying to this very mine site over 150 times, in that type of aircraft (from that as you put it, 'in the command seat') for over 2500 hrs!!! I gave an opinion (just like you and every one is entitled too also) with enough reasoning and without getting into too much detail as to why I would've landed at Jundee on this particular day. So instead of writing nothing about something, why not come up with some form of response we can maybe all think about and learn from!!!
The management culture of years back when D.K was the CP is what needs to desperatley re-surface again for this particular organisation! Hopefully before it's too late and something like this recent incident becomes an accident!
Folks,
For every one of you who have suggested matters that are "commercial convenience" as reasons for diverting this aircraft from the nearest suitable (its planned destination) could I direct your attention to CAO 20.6.3 in general, and CAO 20.6.3.2(d) in particular.
As the aircraft involved is not EROPS/ETOPS/EDTO (take your pick) certified, could someone explain to me why the POH was not complied with, what operational (not commercial) circumstance justified the diversion.
What was the overriding operational safety consideration that precluded an immediate landing, and justified the diversion to another airfield.
The above CAO is no more than common sense codified, the kind of applied common sense sometimes referred to as airmanship.
Tootle pip!!
For every one of you who have suggested matters that are "commercial convenience" as reasons for diverting this aircraft from the nearest suitable (its planned destination) could I direct your attention to CAO 20.6.3 in general, and CAO 20.6.3.2(d) in particular.
As the aircraft involved is not EROPS/ETOPS/EDTO (take your pick) certified, could someone explain to me why the POH was not complied with, what operational (not commercial) circumstance justified the diversion.
What was the overriding operational safety consideration that precluded an immediate landing, and justified the diversion to another airfield.
The above CAO is no more than common sense codified, the kind of applied common sense sometimes referred to as airmanship.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bit harsh
Mr Slead
CAO said, SHOULD and given consideration, SAFETY etc
Now I am in no position to speak for this crew or promote thier decision, but the CAO is in my mind, and given the situation and the rest of the list is complied with in the intrest of SAFETY.
Jundee is a GRAVEL strip (Refer EMBREAR EMB120, Unpaved runway supplement, Emerg section Chap. Para. ETC), this may well have something to do with the decision. As for the time/performance consideration of 20.6.3.2.(d) Jundee - willuna is something like 26nm or 7 min flight time S/E. Given the nature of the failure and the drills, planning and just getting setteled after the very scary nature of the initial recovery, this seem to be a very reasonable amount of time spend in the air on one engine.
The cause and method of dealing with the failure will be investigated and visible for all to see after the investigation, the crew/company etc will be judged on that when the time comes.
The real question, was the fact that there was not an (fatal/serious) accident here a result of practiced skill or luck, or maybe a combination of both.
Skill requires practice and recency, to do this with the really dificult and dangerous manouvers means a SIM. The closest EMB120 SIM to Perth is at least HALF A WORLD AWAY. There is only ONE EMB120 operator in Aust. currently using a SIM for assessment. Practice of dangerous flight manouvers increases crew skill and reduces the reliance on luck in such situations.
(TBFTGOGGI)
richo
CAO said, SHOULD and given consideration, SAFETY etc
Now I am in no position to speak for this crew or promote thier decision, but the CAO is in my mind, and given the situation and the rest of the list is complied with in the intrest of SAFETY.
Jundee is a GRAVEL strip (Refer EMBREAR EMB120, Unpaved runway supplement, Emerg section Chap. Para. ETC), this may well have something to do with the decision. As for the time/performance consideration of 20.6.3.2.(d) Jundee - willuna is something like 26nm or 7 min flight time S/E. Given the nature of the failure and the drills, planning and just getting setteled after the very scary nature of the initial recovery, this seem to be a very reasonable amount of time spend in the air on one engine.
The cause and method of dealing with the failure will be investigated and visible for all to see after the investigation, the crew/company etc will be judged on that when the time comes.
The real question, was the fact that there was not an (fatal/serious) accident here a result of practiced skill or luck, or maybe a combination of both.
Skill requires practice and recency, to do this with the really dificult and dangerous manouvers means a SIM. The closest EMB120 SIM to Perth is at least HALF A WORLD AWAY. There is only ONE EMB120 operator in Aust. currently using a SIM for assessment. Practice of dangerous flight manouvers increases crew skill and reduces the reliance on luck in such situations.
(TBFTGOGGI)
richo
Richo,
No doubt the PIC had good reasons for his or her actions, my post was really directed elsewhere.
If you review some of the potential reasons/explanations for the diversion proffered by other posts, a good proportion are "commercial convenience", and not "operational safety".
In most of the Operations Manuals, with which I have dealt, the intent of the CAO quoted is embodied in more emphatic fashion, emphasising that diversions in twin engine aircraft with one inoperative, will not be made for such things as "better maintenance/passenger" facilities/services etc.
Common sense/good airmanship/the CAO (in this case, really all the same thing) quite severely limit the actions of the PIC.
Tootle pip!!
No doubt the PIC had good reasons for his or her actions, my post was really directed elsewhere.
If you review some of the potential reasons/explanations for the diversion proffered by other posts, a good proportion are "commercial convenience", and not "operational safety".
In most of the Operations Manuals, with which I have dealt, the intent of the CAO quoted is embodied in more emphatic fashion, emphasising that diversions in twin engine aircraft with one inoperative, will not be made for such things as "better maintenance/passenger" facilities/services etc.
Common sense/good airmanship/the CAO (in this case, really all the same thing) quite severely limit the actions of the PIC.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Point taken.
Again I don't know this operators procedures intamately, but most operators have a priority of flight, such as the old ANSETT one (below), which details the prefered decision making, IF the priorities and situation allow.
SAFETY
PAX COMFORT
SCHEDULE
ECONOMY
(in that order)
As you sugest the CAO read in conjunction with OPSMAN, QRH, AFM etc will give crews the best direction for what to do, followed by what is best for the pax and company. There is however and always will be the ability of the crew to make a decision which they belive gives the best outcome. Let us be judged on that ability.
Meaning no disrespect, but this gem for the late Sir Douglas Bader, comes to mind.
"Rules are there for the Guidance of wise men and the absolute obedience of ..........."
richo
Again I don't know this operators procedures intamately, but most operators have a priority of flight, such as the old ANSETT one (below), which details the prefered decision making, IF the priorities and situation allow.
SAFETY
PAX COMFORT
SCHEDULE
ECONOMY
(in that order)
As you sugest the CAO read in conjunction with OPSMAN, QRH, AFM etc will give crews the best direction for what to do, followed by what is best for the pax and company. There is however and always will be the ability of the crew to make a decision which they belive gives the best outcome. Let us be judged on that ability.
Meaning no disrespect, but this gem for the late Sir Douglas Bader, comes to mind.
"Rules are there for the Guidance of wise men and the absolute obedience of ..........."
richo
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain K Russell,
Glad to see you removed your vitriolic post from last night, or did the moderator remove it ?.
Please explain to me why you feel it is necessary to slag off your ex-employees ( from what i've seen they are quite nice chaps ) and Skippers ( ditto ) on PPRUNE ?.
It very much read like a "pissed post", if that is the case perhaps you should turn the computer off when you go drinking.
Guess trying to bond your "already endorsed on PA31" pilot applicants for $5,000 is not helping you, did you honestly think it would ?.
Libel is a nasty creature, beware.
I have never worked for you, nor do i know you, but your reputation has somewhat proceeded you on this one.
Glad to see you removed your vitriolic post from last night, or did the moderator remove it ?.
Please explain to me why you feel it is necessary to slag off your ex-employees ( from what i've seen they are quite nice chaps ) and Skippers ( ditto ) on PPRUNE ?.
It very much read like a "pissed post", if that is the case perhaps you should turn the computer off when you go drinking.
Guess trying to bond your "already endorsed on PA31" pilot applicants for $5,000 is not helping you, did you honestly think it would ?.
Libel is a nasty creature, beware.
I have never worked for you, nor do i know you, but your reputation has somewhat proceeded you on this one.