Moorabbin - does this seem a bit thin?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moorabbin - does this seem a bit thin?
Investigation Number:AO-2008-059 from the ATSB - Investigation: AO-2008-059 - Midair collision
I may be missing something, but the 'Final Report' states that:
I hesitate to question, but this seems to be a blanket condemnation of the controller, albeit with a couple of caveats. Admittedly, I'm not good at navigating around, but can't find the basis for what appears to be a harsh conclusion with no supporting evidence.
My concern is for the poor bloke who's probably been sweating this for close to three years - now we have this.
Does anyone have some reference (ATSB?) that supports this particular conclusion.
I may be missing something, but the 'Final Report' states that:
In the time leading up to the collision, the air traffic controller workload had been high and relevant traffic information was not issued to the pilots in sufficient time to assist self‑separation.
My concern is for the poor bloke who's probably been sweating this for close to three years - now we have this.
Does anyone have some reference (ATSB?) that supports this particular conclusion.
I too sympathise with the controller, quite likely overworked.
ATC is supposed to advise pilots of traffic so they can arrange their own separation. In this case there was heaps of traffic, but he did not advise them, and the collision happened a minute later. The instructor (and student) was aware there was traffic (from the radio) but was not told where to look.
Not being a MMB local, why don't they bring inward traffic in at 1500 AGL and make departues leave at 1000 AGL? Would remove the conflict IMHO.
can't find the basis for what appears to be a harsh conclusion with no supporting evidence
Not being a MMB local, why don't they bring inward traffic in at 1500 AGL and make departues leave at 1000 AGL? Would remove the conflict IMHO.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bent,
Thanks for the reply as regards:
My question goes to the solid evidence that this was, indeed, the case - see bold.
I am not having a swipe at you, or anyone else that wants to comment; but I think that if that criticism is going to be levelled at the guy on the end of the mic, then surely there should be corroborating justification (on the website) as to the assertion that his performance was 'deficient'.
Maybe I am missing something in respect of 'due process'.
Thanks for the reply as regards:
ATC is supposed to advise pilots of traffic so they can arrange their own separation. In this case there was heaps of traffic, but he did not advise them, and the collision happened a minute later. The instructor (and student) was aware there was traffic (from the radio) but was not told where to look.
I am not having a swipe at you, or anyone else that wants to comment; but I think that if that criticism is going to be levelled at the guy on the end of the mic, then surely there should be corroborating justification (on the website) as to the assertion that his performance was 'deficient'.
Maybe I am missing something in respect of 'due process'.
No, the report isn't "a bit thin".
If anything, the report is too harsh on the controller and not harsh enough on AsA.
I've regularly been in the circuit at YMMB both before and after the date of the accident and the controllers have to work their backsides off; you can hear it in their voices sometimes.
They are especially busy when the bigger schools start a new class and all of a sudden you have four or Five aircraft with students flying circuits for the first time, often not that familiar with voice procedure and a bit of an accent. Add in a Third solo and a couple of arriving aircraft, say one asking for circuits on arrival and another asking for a glide approach, then perhaps an IFR departure and it can get very busy very quickly with no warning. That is why you now have to ask for start clearance for the circuit these days.
I've heard a controller say "which Cessna are you? Waggle your wings!" when a tongue tied student can't explain which Cessna he is (turning downwind, early downwind, mid downwind, late downwind, etc.) I've also heard a controller chastise a student who independently decided that instead of going around, he would try an orbit on final to get better separation.
When I start to hear the controllers loading up like that I do a full stop to avoid adding to their workload - which is still substantial today with class D.
Go easy on the controllers they do a fantastic job, it's AsA who should have been looking at the increasing workload on their staff because since in 2008 the whole overseas student thing was in full swing at YMMB and the workload had increased considerably. AsA should have been proactive, not reactive.
P.S. The pilot of UPY isn't and won't be the only one to confuse 31L and 35L, I did it as a student pilot by following a Metroliner on final as instructed by the tower, only the Metroliner mistakenly landed on 31 instead of 35, fortunately without incident. The controllers warned me off in time. I think the pilot had tea and bikkies with the controllers after that.
If anything, the report is too harsh on the controller and not harsh enough on AsA.
I've regularly been in the circuit at YMMB both before and after the date of the accident and the controllers have to work their backsides off; you can hear it in their voices sometimes.
They are especially busy when the bigger schools start a new class and all of a sudden you have four or Five aircraft with students flying circuits for the first time, often not that familiar with voice procedure and a bit of an accent. Add in a Third solo and a couple of arriving aircraft, say one asking for circuits on arrival and another asking for a glide approach, then perhaps an IFR departure and it can get very busy very quickly with no warning. That is why you now have to ask for start clearance for the circuit these days.
I've heard a controller say "which Cessna are you? Waggle your wings!" when a tongue tied student can't explain which Cessna he is (turning downwind, early downwind, mid downwind, late downwind, etc.) I've also heard a controller chastise a student who independently decided that instead of going around, he would try an orbit on final to get better separation.
When I start to hear the controllers loading up like that I do a full stop to avoid adding to their workload - which is still substantial today with class D.
Go easy on the controllers they do a fantastic job, it's AsA who should have been looking at the increasing workload on their staff because since in 2008 the whole overseas student thing was in full swing at YMMB and the workload had increased considerably. AsA should have been proactive, not reactive.
P.S. The pilot of UPY isn't and won't be the only one to confuse 31L and 35L, I did it as a student pilot by following a Metroliner on final as instructed by the tower, only the Metroliner mistakenly landed on 31 instead of 35, fortunately without incident. The controllers warned me off in time. I think the pilot had tea and bikkies with the controllers after that.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remember, didn't Class D and circuit number limits come about shortly after this crash?
A conclusion could be inferred that they realised the controller / process / ATC was partly at fault and they took measures to correct the situation, quite quickly in fact.
A conclusion could be inferred that they realised the controller / process / ATC was partly at fault and they took measures to correct the situation, quite quickly in fact.
then surely there should be corroborating justification (on the website)
1. he did not advise traffic
2. he was overloaded.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Bent,
As I said, I'm not good on computer stuff. I will follow your guide.
Sunfish:
It was never my intent to question the controller. My point was that he's been hammered with no (apparent) justification. That said Bent - I'll try and locate and read the appendix.
As I said, I'm not good on computer stuff. I will follow your guide.
Sunfish:
If anything, the report is too harsh on the controller and not harsh enough on AsA.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: melb
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The media is all over the "overworked controllers" theme, prepare yourselves for the mornings paper. The anti airport mob are frothing at the mouth and will get plenty of coverage.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Mars
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does it matter? Class D (or formerly GAAP) controllers give sequence and are not responsible for separation. That is purely a matter for the pilot(s) involved. Had a Citation right up my bum in a 172 on downwind the other day... how he stayed behind is beyond me but whatever, separation is not a matter for the controller. No-ones fault, just a stupid system, just asking for same to happen again, especially when everyone is inexperienced, busy or distracted....
No-ones fault, just a stupid system, just asking for same to happen again, especially when everyone is inexperienced, busy or distracted....
If you bring incoming traffic into a higher circuit above outgoing traffic, the conflict that caused this accident is removed. Incoming 1500 AGL, outgoing 1000 AGL. Descent to 1000 AGL is allowed by the controller when he sees space. It's done at other Class D, why not at Moorabbin? Perhaps there is a reason, I'd like to hear it.
(I note in ERSA departures are supposed to climb to 2000 or higher, to separate them from arrivals. This doesn't remove the conflict when arrivals at 1000 AGL join a busy circuit at the same altitude, which happened here).
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you bring incoming traffic into a higher circuit above outgoing traffic, the conflict that caused this accident is removed. Incoming 1500 AGL, outgoing 1000 AGL. Descent to 1000 AGL is allowed by the controller when he sees space. It's done at other Class D, why not at Moorabbin? Perhaps there is a reason, I'd like to hear it.
(I note in ERSA departures are supposed to climb to 2000 or higher, to separate them from arrivals. This doesn't remove the conflict when arrivals at 1000 AGL join a busy circuit at the same altitude, which happened here).
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The instructor (and student) was aware there was traffic (from the radio) but was not told where to look.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Either 31 or 35 should be bulldozed. (oops, we can't have crosswind landings now can we!) It is a ridiculous set up for a civilian aerodrome. It may have worked as a military aerodrome but it doesn't now.
There are so many systemic and organisational issues tied up with this aerodrome that it's a wonder this type of thing doesn't happen weekly.
There are so many systemic and organisational issues tied up with this aerodrome that it's a wonder this type of thing doesn't happen weekly.
Back in the Old Days, 13 / 31 & 17/35 each had 3 runways, plus 04/22 plus an East / West grass strip parallel to Centre Dandenong Rd where the industrial estate is now.
In the " Old Days" there was also a greater diversity of aircraft, some without radio's and no transponders. You probably only have to go back 20 years to have found homebuilts, Tiger Moths, modern era light aircraft, jets and RPT all co-exiting satisfactorily.
I can also recall doing circuits where there were effectively 2 concurrent circuits being flown - inner & outer.
Moorabbin is not the busiest, most complex or most difficult airport in the world. Its simpler than it used to be with less traffic that it has handled in the past. I don't believe there are problems with the facilities, diligence of the controllers or pilots. But, the system and level of resourcing has changed frequently.
In the " Old Days" there was also a greater diversity of aircraft, some without radio's and no transponders. You probably only have to go back 20 years to have found homebuilts, Tiger Moths, modern era light aircraft, jets and RPT all co-exiting satisfactorily.
I can also recall doing circuits where there were effectively 2 concurrent circuits being flown - inner & outer.
Moorabbin is not the busiest, most complex or most difficult airport in the world. Its simpler than it used to be with less traffic that it has handled in the past. I don't believe there are problems with the facilities, diligence of the controllers or pilots. But, the system and level of resourcing has changed frequently.
Top 11 busiest airports by aircraft movements 2009
1 Jandakot Airport Perth, Western Australia JAD 458,750
2 Bankstown Airport Sydney, New South Wales BWU 347,266
3 Moorabbin Airport Melbourne, Victoria MBW 310,550
4 Sydney Airport Sydney, New South Wales SYD 287,480
5 Parafield Airport Adelaide, South Australia PAL 243,522
6 Melbourne Airport Melbourne, Victoria MEL 191,864
7 Brisbane Airport Brisbane, Queensland BNE 179,242
8 Gold Coast Airport Gold Coast, Queensland OOL 133,290
9 Archerfield Airport Brisbane, Queensland --- 132,094
10 Perth Airport Perth, Western Australia PER 118,704
11 Adelaide Airport Adelaide, South Australia ADL 99,950
1 Jandakot Airport Perth, Western Australia JAD 458,750
2 Bankstown Airport Sydney, New South Wales BWU 347,266
3 Moorabbin Airport Melbourne, Victoria MBW 310,550
4 Sydney Airport Sydney, New South Wales SYD 287,480
5 Parafield Airport Adelaide, South Australia PAL 243,522
6 Melbourne Airport Melbourne, Victoria MEL 191,864
7 Brisbane Airport Brisbane, Queensland BNE 179,242
8 Gold Coast Airport Gold Coast, Queensland OOL 133,290
9 Archerfield Airport Brisbane, Queensland --- 132,094
10 Perth Airport Perth, Western Australia PER 118,704
11 Adelaide Airport Adelaide, South Australia ADL 99,950
I reckon that ranking would look very similar to that of 1999, 1989, 1979, etc. But the numbers for the secondary airports are decreasing despite a contraction in the number of "metropolitan" airports. Some share of the traffic from Casey, Mooroduc, Lovely Banks, Wallan and other closed airfields has moved to Moorabbin.
movements
Homesick
Looks like those figures come from the ASA website, if so they do not include circuit movements except for the first takeoff and the final landing and overfly or transits are not counted either. Actual numbers at ex GAAP and regional class D's are quite a bit higher than that.
Looks like those figures come from the ASA website, if so they do not include circuit movements except for the first takeoff and the final landing and overfly or transits are not counted either. Actual numbers at ex GAAP and regional class D's are quite a bit higher than that.
)