Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Merged: Pel-Air Westwind Ditching off NLK

The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Merged: Pel-Air Westwind Ditching off NLK

Old 23rd Nov 2009, 22:20
  #321 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 12
Logical disconnect

2. No mayday or other communication was given regarding a possible ditching ergo ditching was unintentional ergo CFIT
3. It follows from 2. that no exceptional skill was necessary in the fortuitous outcome
4. On the face of apparent evidence the aircraft was not carrying the necessary fuel as mandated by my reading of the regs.
With respect Brian Abraham - there's a logical disconnect between the two assertions you make in 2 & 4. If indeed it was a CFIT as you claim to know, how can you purport to know how much fuel was carried with respect to the regulations? The logical consequence of your assertion that it was a CFIT, ie. they are still maneuvering, should be that they were STILL busy attempting approaches into Norfolk, possibly because they maintained an expectation that the weather might improve or, - in fact even STILL had NWWW as an alternate up their sleeve. The last option is highly unlikely I know, but as pilots we tend to be too quick to wash our hands off one of our colleagues after they've achieved that undesirable disconnect between number of Takeoffs and number of landing in our logbook. I realise this is a rumour network but all of the self pronounced aviation experts posting here, helps set a public perception of the nature of character, skill and experience (and in this case - bugger me dead, even the LOOKS) of the aviator in question. For us to hang anyone out to dry before KNOWING the facts involved are as despicable as the press desire to make heroes out of anyone of us after we have done nothing but what would be expected of us in a difficult situation. I have done some flying out to Norfolk myself and echo the sentimens regarding the bravery of the First Response team launching a boat across the reef at night time. Without a shadow of a doubt - THEY are the true heroes in this case and I shall rescind my Aussie citizenship unless they are receiving a well-deserved medal and honour on next Australia day.

I reckon it is time for a lot of posters on this forum to take a deep breath and let the REAL experts get on with their investigations into the chain of causation that led to the situation where 6 people managed to swim away from the aircraft that night.
Cheers all

Last edited by boeingbender; 23rd Nov 2009 at 22:39. Reason: Getting the "quote" in properly
boeingbender is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2009, 22:49
  #322 (permalink)  
601
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia
Age: 74
Posts: 1,151
in fact even STILL had NWWW as an alternate up their sleeve.
If this is the assumed case, then the conclusions you could assume for the accident was an attempt to get visual by letting down over the water or ducking under the minima (CFIT) rather than a planned and controlled ditching.

Think about it, why would you ditch if you still had alternate fuel on board?

I note with interest that the "Checklist" posted from the Flight Safety Foundation that there is no reference for the flight crew to don life jackets either before or after ditching.
601 is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 00:51
  #323 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 430
With respect Brian Abraham - there's a logical disconnect between the two assertions you make in 2 & 4. If indeed it was a CFIT as you claim to know, how can you purport to know how much fuel was carried with respect to the regulations? The logical consequence of your assertion that it was a CFIT, ie. they are still maneuvering, should be that they were STILL busy attempting approaches into Norfolk, possibly because they maintained an expectation that the weather might improve or, - in fact even STILL had NWWW as an alternate up their sleeve.
BoeingBender I don't see any disconnect at all.

After three approaches one would have thought that things are unlikely to get much better.
If you've been to NF then you will probably know that the reducing temperature will only worsen the situation in the short term therefore the chances of the fog lifting are very unlikely.
Yes it has happened, but would you bet yours and other's life on it ? I wouldn't.

So, if he had the fuel to head off elsewhere then that would have been the time to do it, NOT hang around until you get to fly a submarine.

Surely a decision to ditch would have (given the enormity of the decision) at least been preceded by the MAYDAY call and an approx position of where they planned to deposit the A/C.

All of the factors indicate that the splashdown WAS premature or at the very least unplanned.

Remember, this guy wasn't alone up there...The FO could well have organised all of those things we associate with a planned ditching maneuver.

I could certainly be wrong (have been in the past, many times and sincerely hope I am now) but these realities are hard to walk away from.
ZEEBEE is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 00:53
  #324 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 3,828
as pilots we tend to be too quick to wash our hands off one of our colleagues after they've achieved that undesirable disconnect between number of Takeoffs and number of landing
Not I, perhaps you missed my
None of the foregoing is criticism of the operating crew since so many other factors come into play eg training, pressure from management, experience
and
but the discerning aviator, whether they be amateur or professional, only have an interest in learning how a fellow practitioner of the art managed to come to grief. We are all fallible.
I reckon it is time for a lot of posters on this forum to take a deep breath and let the REAL experts get on with their investigations
My understanding from posts elsewhere on the site is that Danny set up the board as a substitute for the "happy hour" hangar flying that people might otherwise indulge. Should any not be comfortable with that I guess they can remove themselves and drink at the other end of the bar. Then again I don't know what subjects you restrain yourself to when hangar flying.

The site's going to be a pretty empty place if we were all to take a deep breath whenever unfortunate events take place, though a deep breath is preferable before going under water.

Some info that just came to hand from another source

As an expat Norfolk Islander I can confirm there is no ILS available on Norfolk. The only aids are ADF and VOR. The GPS that was installed a number of years ago has not been commissioned. The weather during the 12 hours before the ditching was low ceilings that tended to roll in as fog every few hours. At the time of the ditching it was very heavy rain with fairly solid mist just above the cliff tops. Using the available aids there is no way that the strip could have been sighted in such conditions. The alternates are New Caledonia and Kaitaia in New Zealand both around an hour's flying time away. The local gossip at this stage is that the pilot held too long hoping for a break, and that the ditching was dead stick after just departing the end of RWY 22. If he had lost the engines while over land the ending would have been considerably worse as the airstrip is pretty much the only flat piece of land on Norfolk, the rest is very undulating and covered in Norfolk Island pines, a very substantial tree.

After radio contact was lost - there was no Mayday call - one of the local fire safety officers went out to the cliff top on the western side of the island and spotted 3 little lights bobbing in the ocean. There were only 3 life jackets being used for the 6 survivors. The accident report will make for interesting reading and there are sure to be lessons that can be learned not withstanding the amazing survival and rescue of all onboard.


Deadstick after all perhaps? In which case kudos for a good job in pulling it off if that be the case.

Last edited by Brian Abraham; 24th Nov 2009 at 01:12.
Brian Abraham is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 01:11
  #325 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Shire
Posts: 2,897
Has the Westwind got a ditching/water landing checklist in the QRH?
The Green Goblin is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 01:15
  #326 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: THE BLUEBIRD CAFE
Posts: 60
Should someone here be able to put me in touch with Dom, I'd
be v grateful. (Dear mod, it is to his potential advantage.)

PM only, any info.

Last edited by Fantome; 24th Nov 2009 at 01:48.
Fantome is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 01:19
  #327 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Suitcase
Posts: 233
Could we drop the debate as to whether or not we should be discussing this accident?
If you don't wish to be involved in the discussion, then don't.

Some posters have probably jumped to some dodgy conclusions,
at the end of the day though, if something happened out there that night that could happen to me with even the most careful planning, I want to know.
If the crew was at fault, if the the aircraft let them down, if the SOPs were lacking, I want to know.
If the weather forecasting, the regulations, fatigue or some other unknown factor was crucial, I want to know.

There is always something to learn from every discussion, every crash comic, every investigation report.
Keep up the questions and suggestions everybody, there is some good collective grey matter here.
WynSock is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 01:33
  #328 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Hiding..... in one hemisphere or another
Posts: 1,059
He'll get straight into QF now.
or a gig doing ferries for C&H
Atlas Shrugged is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 02:51
  #329 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 243
"NOTE TO ALL JOURNOS"
The vast majority of posts on this subject have been made utilising exactly what most of us detest. Unreliable second, third or imaginary information sourced through hack reporters, unqualified apparent witnesses or overly active imaginations!
NONE of them have spoken to the flight crew.
NONE of them have spoken to the company/ies concerned.
NONE of them were on the aircraft.
Comments such as that espoused by Brian, Zeebee Wiley and others above summarise what this forum is all about.
Not a forum for "professional" pilots but rather a virtual open back laundry window where the little old women who sit peeling potatoes on the sidelines of this industry can shout across the rickety back fence discussing the other neighbours personal and work life for all to hear with little or scant regard for facts or indeed for the effect on the unfortunate neighbours life or the life of his or hers loved ones as a result of their drool filled utterings.
The analogy that Brian has used is at best non sensical and at its worst a call to arms for every enthusiastic moronic wannabe to further tarnish Doms reputation. Most "professional" pilots will back me up on this!
As for Brian, Zeebee, Wiley and the part time crew...listen up.
Just so that we're clear you slack jawed idiots....this NOT a bar. It is an online forum veiwable from virtually any part of the world open to all.....including the journos you and other "professional" pilots all have no time for.
For the last few days I've been fielding questions and enquiries from media friends and aquaintances as to the circumstances behind this incident. My standard reply is....."I don't know all the facts, so I can't give an informed opinion" It's amazing how many of them have quoted "facts" and "unnamed sources" that seem to closely parallel the drivel that is served up on this website. Wake up to yourselves and have some consideration for somebody elses career.......morons!
GADRIVR is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 03:03
  #330 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 430
Brian

Deadstick after all perhaps? In which case kudos for a good job in pulling it off if that be the case.
If it was TRULY a deadstick, then I think the the pilot did a good job in keeping the aircraft in a flying attitude until it hit something.
I don't think he would have had a clue where the water was in the conditions, and given that he was flying into a black hole, it would have been so easy to have allowed the aircraft to roll off the straight and level.

This accident has given me a new thing to be thankful for....I'm SO glad it wasn't me !!
ZEEBEE is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 03:05
  #331 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: middleofthehighway
Posts: 424
GADRIVR Et al,

For crying out loud.. if you didnt want to read this you wouldn't have logged on. The mere fact you read the thread and then deride the posters for commenting is the most hypocrital thing... get lost if you dont want to know...

The title of this one isnt "Official ATSB Report" so why are you here?


On thread topic. John Sharp was the opposition minister during another successful ditching and I believe he was very vocal on the standards of the industry at the time.


Dog
Dogimed is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 03:22
  #332 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 286
GADRIVR, not having a go but can you be absolutely certain that nobody here has talked to people that were actually in NLK and involved that very night, even though it might be 2nd or 3rd hand information?

Granted most people's posts are, for lack of a better word, 'uninformed', there is the reasonable possibility that others are not.


However... Any word on FDR/CVR (does the WW carry them?) and aircraft recovery? How deep is the water?
If the seas are as rough around NLK as some posters mention, then I'd imagine recovery would be quite difficult.
MyNameIsIs is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 03:27
  #333 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Close
Posts: 232
FDR / CVR Recovery?

If they can find them that is....the clock is ticking...once immersed in water and the contact is activated isn't there a 60 day (max...) time limit before the sonar stops...(just remembering the metro into Botany Bay....)

Stikybeke is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 03:38
  #334 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 3,828
GADRIVR, listen up. Just so that we're clear you slack jawed idiot, I'm playing a bit part, in a very small way off forum, to helping Dominic out in this, to him, stressful time. I've walked in his shoes so don't for one minute attempt to lecture me. moron.

I can't speak for Wiley but I know for a fact that ZEEBEE has had a long, and I might say, distinguished career in things aeronautical. An old women peeling potatoes he ain't.

PS Please do check what the "R" in PPRuNe stands for. moron (merely added for emphasis, but I'll wake up hating myself in the morning)
Brian Abraham is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 03:49
  #335 (permalink)  
swh

Eidolon
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Some hole
Posts: 1,976
Originally Posted by The Green Goblin
Has the Westwind got a ditching/water landing checklist in the QRH?
Yes it does, red hatching around the sides, tab 14.


DITCHING

PREPARATION

1. Communications ............................................................ .....MAYDAY
2. Transponder ............................................................ ........CODE 7700
3. Passengers ...........................................BRIEFED AND PREPARED
4. Cabin baggage ............................................................ .... SECURED
5. CABIN LIGHTS switch ........................................... BELTS/NO SMK
6. EMERG L T switch ............................................................ ........ ARM
7. Cabin altitude controller ................................... SET FOR DESCENT
8. Fuel DUMP pushbuttons ................................................... PUSH ON
(boosted dump required)

APPROACH

1. Cabin pressurization .................. MONITOR DEPRESSURIZATION
2. Landing gear lever ...................... UP; WARNING HORN CB - PULL
3. FLAPS lever ............................................................ .................... 40
4. AIRSPEED bug and ADA indicator ........................ SET FOR VREF
(Figure 5-48)
5. Heading ........................................... PARALLEL TO MAIN SWELL

BEFORE TOUCHING WATER

1. Radar altimeter .................................................. SET FOR 50 FEET
2. Altitude ......................... NOSE UP; 10 deck angle when DH light
comes on (GO AROUND mode)
3. Thrust levers ............................................................ ......... CUT-OFF
4. FUEL SHUTOFF switches ................................................... CLOSE
5. BATTERY MASTER SWITCH .................................................. OFF

AFTER DITCHING

1. Pilot DV window .............................. OPEN to depressurize cabin
(alter removing loose articles
from window and console areas)
2. Emergency escape windows and door ................................ OPEN
WHICHEVER IS ABOVE WATER LEVEL
3. life Rafts ........................................... TIE static line to anchoring
point and prepare for deployment
4. LAUNCH AND BOARD LIFE RAFTS.
swh is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 04:01
  #336 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 243
Dogimed,
There is no hypocrisy in my previous post. Rather, I've posed the view that unfounded speculation posted on a web site that is accessed by the mainstream news media and held up to be truth is not contributing in a positive fashion to the flight crews careers. Indeed given that the fact that the REX group are actively pushing for route expansion as well as pushing for more medical evacuation work, it would be reasonable to assume that this incident will quickly become a political football.
My concern is purely for the flight crew in pointing what I have in the previous post. I'm assuming that you yourself are working in the industry. Put yourself in Dom and Zoes shoes for just one moment. Think about the pressures that they are facing right now apart from the obvious effects from last weeks ditching.
Think about that the fact that here is the mild possibility that regardless of the facts that exist, they may become scapegoats for an organisations shortcomings, whether that organisation be a government department, a company or not for profit organisation. All that work over 10 years or more for what??!!
Have you considered that or indeed that there but for the grace of God go you?
I'm not a hypocrite sport. Just a bloke who has given up God knows how much to be a part of this industry. I love it.
What I detest is the elements that exist within and on the fringes of this industry that seem to collectively possess the instincts of a reptile...not above eating its own young on occasion!
I was at a dinner with some senior types from a major health organisation over the last few days. Guess what the major point of conversation was?
Take another guess as to where these blokes were getting their info from? Thats right, you guessed it.....here and Crikey.
Do they care as to whether the "facts" quoted here are accurate or not. Nope.They seemed only worried about the political consequences and how it affected them and their careers. Nothing else.
So I can't say as to whether I know the facts or not. I don't profess to be "an expert of some standing whose opinion would be considered favourably in any court in the land" (I can't believe some pompous arse would post something like that!!!!).
The only thing I can say is that a political maestrom is brewing, and uninformed fools posting on this website aren't helping the crew, companies or people involved in any way, shape or form by giving an opinion here!
GADRIVR is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 04:28
  #337 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: no where
Posts: 4
gadrivr and lester

About time someone posted something sensible.
If the rest of you lot had it your way Dom would already be tarred and feathered.
Can't wait to see the facts published, a few retractments might be forthcoming. Yeh right.
the point is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 04:33
  #338 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 3,828
I'm sorry, I've obviously missed how you and others posting second hand info on a website such as this helps the crew
GADRIVR, or is that idiot? And Lester. Both of you failed comprehension heh? Read what is written. I wrote "OFF FORUM"

No wonder PPRuNe descends into bun fights. Sorry Mods.
Brian Abraham is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 04:36
  #339 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 51
Posts: 6,855
GADRIVR

If this whole thread never happened, the ditching did though.... the result would be the same for the crew. Their careers were screwed about the time the wx went bad. Thats prior to the swim and long before this thread even started.

Get used to the fact that this is the world we live in. What the media do with this thread and some very good thought provoking material is up to them. The fact is of course they research bugger all, but that will not change the state of the pilots future at all. Of course they were heroes a week ago until a few of us started to read the press and say.......hang on a minute!

I wish I could say it will be a lot better for them. It could have been a lot worse.
Jabawocky is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2009, 05:00
  #340 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 12
Listen, Brian Arbaham, Zeebee,Wiley & Others.
I am not arguing for the the plausibility of any specific other chain of events other than that which you guys already seems to have decided transpired out there the other night. Why - because I just don't KNOW and I was merely cautioning you to refrain from forming firmly held opinions (and voicing them in public) before some more FACTS are on the table. You guys are like a bunch of religious zealots purporting to KNOW without having access to the REAL FACTS, but that somehow the opinion you form based on what you BELIEVE to be true, just HAS to be true - because you believe it!

Ohh, and I am not saying don't discuss it, I am well aware of the nature of some of the most ardent contributors to this forum and hence spend very little time frequenting it. All I was trying to say, was that by publicly crucifying one of our colleagues before the best available facts are in, you are not doing him or his company any favors and that there COULD be mitigating circumstances explaining why they ended up in the drink. Just think about it for a second - if your methodology in accident investigation was meritorious, the ATSB would be completely superfluous.

So let me say it again - just back off a little, there MAY be more than what meets the eye
boeingbender is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.