Aircraft down in Canley Vale

[tric]

Quite a few posts contain phrases like "let's leave it to the ATSB" or "don't speculate" etc. Isn't that what PPrune is here for? I can understand some people getting upset if they knew the people involved in this tragedy, but at the end of the day, this is what people do. If it may upset you then don't click on the thread. It is not rocket science, if you don't like sand....don't go to the beach.

[Jamair]

I'm still trying to get my head around an operational / organisational question - if I understand the answer from morno and others, unsuspecting patients in the NSW hospital system can be air-transferred from place to place by the lowest bidder?

So despite having RFDS as a contracted service provider to NSW ambulance, using new and late model twin turbine King Airs with all the mod cons, crew with minimums of ATPL, 3000+ hours and 5+ CIR renewals; patients (and medical staff) are still moved about in 30+ yr old, tired, piston-powered light twins, run by the lowest bidder? Is that right?

WTF??

[remoak]

Mr Remoak, or perhaps you would prefer " Captain" as your Title.
I congratulate you, it would appear you are the "Oracle" of all that is aviation.

You know, it's pretty sad that the best you can do in discussing this accident is to make personal attacks. But, whatever. Feel free to dump on me if it makes you feel better.

From your lofty position of " Knowledge" You cast dispertions on the standards, professional ethics and judgement of a fellow aviator... based on...???

I think the word you are looking for is "aspersions", but to answer your question: as a wise old aviator once told ME, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... it's a duck. Which is another way of saying that the standards and culture in GA are well known to feature certain common traits, no matter what part of the world you might happen to be in. One of those traits is a preoccupation with saving money at all costs, and a significant amount of pressure on young, inexperienced pilots to "do the right thing" and always think primarily of the company when making operational decisions. Not all GA companies are like that, but the majority definitely are. Most of them will never spell out their operational preferences directly, but all GA pilots understand what is expected of them and all, to some extent, "play the game".

Now in the (reputable) airline world, as you SHOULD know, the predominant training is to ALWAYS consider safety first and operational expediency as a secondary (but still important) consideration. Commanders are absolved of the responsibility to always consider the bottom line when making decisions.

Now going back to this accident, all the information so far seems to indicate that the weather at Richmond was fine. So...

at the completion of the checklists states "Land as soon as Practical" which sort of implies to a pilot that it might be a good idea to have a good think about just where I'm going to put this thing.... But I wasnt there, I wasnt looking out the window trying to make judgements about what the weather acually was, someone else was, and he made his judgement based on what he saw, but then unfortunately GA pilots are not blessed with the instincts of an airline pilot to see into the future

Once again, leaving aside the insults (exactly when did I ever insult you...?), if he had been following that checklist item, there is only one option, and that was right below him.

Funnily enough, the most important things I ever learned didn't come from the airline world, they came from GA... one of them was that maintaining control is everything, and the other was that if you think that you may be running out of options, find the nearest decent-sized place to set down and accept that you might damage the aircraft. Damage is better than death in my book.

Andrew had not long left Bankstown, he knew the conditions were Cavok there, and it was just a short distance away, his machine was under control and performing as it should, so he made a judgement.

His machine was clearly NOT performing as it should, and he was clearly not close enough to Bankstown to make it safely. It may well have been that a further problem sealed his fate, but if he had taken the safest option, none of that would have mattered. I do absolutely accept that he was probably caught out by something that he wasn't expecting... but as I said... if you take the airport right underneath you, a successful outcome is virtually 100% assured. What possible reason could there be NOT to do so, other than operational expediency or commercial pressure?

To be honest Sir, you sound like a pompous, arrogant, self opinionated Ass.

It is somewhat sad to me that can't look at this from a professional standpoint, and instead are clearly led by your emotions and a desire to sling insults. Hope it makes you feel better.

With regard to GA and airline, another great Philosopher once said
" Let he without sin cast the first stone".

No, it wasn't a philosopher, it was Jesus Christ in John 8:7, and it has nothing to do with GA or airlines. In fact, as you should know, airline safety DEMANDS that sinners not only cast the first stone (usually at themselves) but that without an open and forthright culture, safety can never flourish - which is another reason why GA has the reputation it generally does.

I'd really appreciate it if you would keep your conjecture to yourself and let the experts discover the facts and let others get on with grieving for the loss of a fine young man

No, I don't think I will. This not a forum for grieving, it a place for professional pilots to discuss matters of interest to pilots. If your emotional state is such that discussions of that nature offend you, you really need to keep away from this thread until you are in a better mental place.

Knowing what it takes to get a gig like flying a PA-31 out of BK, the guy must have had numerous people who have checked him out in the past, had good normal engine handling skills, and no doubt passed 5 or so instrument renewals and various twin ratings. He would have been on top of the pile waiting to get an airline gig.

NOWHERE has ANYBODY called his skill into question. This is not about skill, it's about JUDGEMENT. Nobody is directly questioning that either, but there are a number of questions that need answers, and you won't get them from any investigation.

If it may upset you then don't click on the thread. It is not rocket science, if you don't like sand....don't go to the beach

Precisely.

I've had issues in the past with remoak () but you need to READ and UNDERSTAND what he is SAYING.

He is attempting to discuss (in his own unique style!)

Geez not you too...

All I am doing is asking questions. I haven't made any judgements and don't intend to. It's just that the questions offend some people, probably because they are afraid of the answers. Ah well... that's people I guess.

[prospector]

remoak,

Well handled, right amount of restraint with obvious insights to the points raised.

[sagan]

Remoak,

Earlier you said

'I am absolutely certain that, if handed an aircraft at 7000 feet only a couple of miles from a suitable aerodrome, with no weather issues and in clear conditions, I could safely land it there. I'm sure you could too. Just close both throttles and enjoy the glide... because you have plenty of time.'

I realise these were put up after your post

SPECI YSRI 142200Z AUTO 00000KT 0200NDV // ////// 04/04 Q1033=

SA 14/06/2010 21:30->

METAR YSRI 142130Z AUTO 00000KT 0150NDV // ////// 04/04 Q1033=

SP 14/06/2010 21:30->


Am I missing something here ?

[The Green Goblin]

Remoak, while I have had my differences of opinion with you in the past and have been waiting here to stick the knife in to you or waiting for you to hang yourself, having known Willow, your last post pretty much sums up what I've been thinking.

If only he took Richmond

5000-7000ft at 20 odd mile out, I can see why he took Bankstown. (You could also hear it in his voice when offered Richmond, he had Bankstown already planned) I probably in the same situation would have done the same thing at that stage in my flying.

Sometimes in this game when you have a plan in your head and your mental capacity is at it's limits flying, dealing with the failure, passengers and ATC it's pretty hard to change your course of action particularly if you have not found any reason to doubt it.

I think the moral of the story is land ASAP and let the company figure the rest out later. At least then your only consideration will be how to taxi it on one engine and what to tell ops! I hope something good will come of this mess or someone will remember Andrew when they have an engine failure and act accordingly. The regs are written in blood, just hope it's never your own.

Tread carefully guys.

[GADRIVR]

David,

It's obvious at this stage that dear Remoak is utterly incapable of admitting that he may have been out of line. I still shake my head in wonder at stupidity of his comments directed towards you.

Some of his ideas may have a bit merit, the majority have not.

GA in New Zealand is a bit of a basket case. Largish country, small population, low amount of funds being directed to the CAA will lead to the problems he has described with young pilots (assuming that his comments that on young pilots in NZ are true!!). A fairly large amount of accidents, particulary in the rotary fleet over there would seem to back up his assertions.

I find it interesting however that he has decided to use his understanding and view of another countrys GA sector issues and applied them to Australia.


No doubt he'll dissect my comments, check the spelling and grammar etc to the nth degree and prove once again that he is indeed the all knowing God of things aviation. ( Remoak, please don't compare yourself to Chuck Yeager or his way of doing things as you have previously in another thread, that was embarassing)

Remoak.... I don't have any probs with people expressing views, (as long as they are FACTUAL) big fan of the concept really. I DO have a problem with kicking a bloke when he's down. It's that simple really.

Again, try to pay Andrew and Kath a little respect as well as the industry over here you play not part in. SURELY you learn't the meaning of that word in the airline world?

Looking forward to your reply

Regards,
Drivr

[remoak]

Sagan

Am I missing something here ?

Posts 122, 130, 173 and 181 all seem to suggest that fog was not an issue, as does the fact that the controller offered it. Not sure why the auto wx report says what it does.

Green Goblin

I think the moral of the story is land ASAP and let the company figure the rest out later.

My point exactly.

I'll give you a chance to put the knife in on another thread...

GADRIVR

I find it interesting however that he has decided to use his understanding and view of another countrys GA sector issues and applied them to Australia.

You need to get out more, mate. I have been involved in GA in NZ, the UK, the USA and Europe. I hold JAA/EASA, FAA, NZ and - yes - Australian licences. If you think that the problems of GA are not common across all those countries, you know precisely squat about the subject.

No doubt he'll dissect my comments, check the spelling and grammar etc to the nth degree and prove once again that he is indeed the all knowing God of things aviation. ( Remoak, please don't compare yourself to Chuck Yeager or his way of doing things as you have previously in another thread, that was embarassing)

What is it with you guys? You can't argue the issues on their merit, so you just stick the boot in. Very professional.

I DO have a problem with kicking a bloke when he's down. It's that simple really.

Please show me anywhere where I have done that. In fact, I have been extremely careful NOT to do it.

Maybe he was a mate of yours, and you just can't handle the possibility that he may have made a mistake - I don't know. But I DO know that the personal insults that I have received from you and your mate Dave are way out of line, and do more to disrespect the memory of the lost pilot (and his passenger) than anything I have said.

Why don't you try and get a grip on your emotions before you post again?

[Xeptu]

Remoak, I was about to reply but you beat me to it, I have read through all your posts and unless I missed something or the offending post has been removed, I dont see anything wrong with what you have said or the reasoning behind that, so far I agree with pretty much everything you have said.

Sadly there are some that knew this pilot personally and are clearly effected by emotion. Guys if you are one of those you'd be doing yourself a favour to take a break and stay out of pprune for awhile.

There are a number of others that appear to be onto it too but havnt been as obvious as remoak.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Remoak, I was about to reply but you beat me to it, I have read through all your posts and unless I missed something or the offending post has been removed, I dont see anything wrong with what you have said or the reasoning behind that, so far I agree with pretty much everything you have said.

Ditto!

Dr

[Under Dog]

For all you people who are waiting the report from the ATSB sadly it will not answer all your questions,these will be held by the pilot in command forever.

Regards
The Dog

[The Green Goblin]

The most the ATSB will ever give us is why the engine(s) failed and the loss of performance that resulted.

[Dookie on Drums]

Remoak, I was about to reply but you beat me to it, I have read through all your posts and unless I missed something or the offending post has been removed, I dont see anything wrong with what you have said or the reasoning behind that, so far I agree with pretty much everything you have said.

Ditto as well. I am an ex driver from Airtex and flew with Kathy many times. Naturally, like most I was upset by this accident and shed a tear or two. However, I am in agreement with Remoak. I cannot see anything offensive posted by him at all. I want answers like we all do.

Regards,
DoD

[paulg]

For those who think Remoak gave no unnecessary personal offence to David Grant, I suggest you read posts 195 and 207 again and see if you are still of this opinion.

[wheatbix]

I know a few people who were flying that morning in the area and they have all indicated that Richmond was covered by a layer of cloud at 800-1000ft.

This is reflected in Andrews statement of being "visual on top" which may be part of the reason why he chose to fly back to Bankstown instead.

[Horatio Leafblower]

Bit emotional?

Yeah me four, I'm with Remoak.

Without comparing myself to Chuck Yeager ( ) I think some of you guys should read the first part of The Right Stuff - the bit about how good pilots deal with the death of their (equally professional) colleagues.

[Xeptu]

195 and 207 re-read and my view is unchanged, I'm still with remoak. Sorry if that offends

[Dookie on Drums]

For those who think Remoak gave no unnecessary personal offence to David Grant, I suggest you read posts 195 and 207 again and see if you are still of this opinion.

I have and still stand by my opinion. In fact, I'd say Remoak has been the target of unnecessary personal attacks here.

But enough of that. Lets get back to the thread.

[Ivasrus]

For those using the atc recordings in this thread (ESPECIALLY MEDIA), please use a great deal of caution - legality aside, their accuracy is not verified and all that you hear is NOT all that was broadcast. PGW was at various stages on several frequencies, which were scanned by amateur services in amongst other frequencies for the same recordings. ATSB, I imagine, will rely heavily on every single transmission to & from PGW in their investigation. This will include BK ground, tower, SY departures, and SY radar frequencies. Not only for the substance of the dialogue (transcript), but any background sounds may provide clues.

[Jabawocky]

Yeah...I read them and DITTO...remoak is not out of line but rather being less emotional and closer to the mark than most, myself included.

J