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

Norfolk Island Ditching ATSB Report - ?

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

Norfolk Island Ditching ATSB Report - ?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 24th Mar 2015, 01:45
  #881 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,955
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Plan to an isolated airport (at any time or wx) without an alternate? Just not defendable.
Iron Bar,
Absolute rubbish, you obviously have little knowledge of the law and practice for fuel requirements for isolated airports.
Over the years, I could not count the number of occasions when I have set off for an isolated airport (no realistic alternate) and have arrived without an alternate.
Indeed, the airline I worked for would not have been able to operate a significant part of its operation if an alternate was required for all operations to remote/island airports.
The Four Corners program is a sobering reminder of the paucity of compensation for many industrial injuries, and where money is concerned, there is no justice, only the law.
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 02:26
  #882 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Sticky,

I wonder that if (arising from the proposed coronial hearing) there is any identified relationship (or suggestion thereof) between Ms Currall's passing and the NGA accident this might just be sufficient to justify a coronial investigation into the circumstances surrounding the accident.
I could not help but wonder the same thing.

You are a sticky little beak
Jabawocky is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 07:15
  #883 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,991
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
Ok no Alternate but did he calculate a PNR based on one and two Engine return to Noumea?

Did he then check the weather etc just before the PNR to make an informed decision??

He should not have been surprised at TOD regarding the weather at Norfolk Island, he should have been on top of it at all times.

I've never flown there but I'd like to think my pucker factor not to mention survival instinct would have dictated a little more follow up of the actual weathers considering the fact it was Norfolk Island we were flying to ( with no Alternate ) and not Sydney.

Yes he may have had a TAF but even I know the reputation of Norfolk........


mmmmmm ok thought not...

Last edited by ACMS; 24th Mar 2015 at 07:56.
ACMS is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 07:57
  #884 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,154
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Totally agree, ACMS.

In these circumstances I'd be demanding the half hourly met reports all the way.
CaptainMidnight is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 08:09
  #885 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,991
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
And I would have carried as much Jet A1 as possible.......
ACMS is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 08:25
  #886 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And I would have carried as much Jet A1 as possible.......
Which would of then stopped you from climbing above the RVSM altitude confining you to below FL290 burning more fuel and restricting your range even more than it was with fuel load he departed with at Apia.

Do please try to do all the reading surrounding this crash. There is far more to it than would first appear.
PLovett is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 08:30
  #887 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,991
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
Huh? So a Westwind cannot climb above FL290 at MTOW?

Surely at MTOW a Westwind could make the high 30's? ( 350 360 )

I dont understand your reasoning?

He was RVSM capable wasn't he? So he would have planned optimum FL's which at MTOW would be FLXX for a Westwind.......why would carrying an extra hour or so fuel screw his FL capability that much??

Do tell
ACMS is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 08:32
  #888 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,955
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
ACMS,
Agreed,
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 08:36
  #889 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ACMS. Negative RVSM. Had planned FL350 from memory but was restricted to 280..
Hempy is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 08:38
  #890 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,991
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
Hang on, so you're saying he needed to be above FL410 to stay out of RVSM because he wasn't equipped?

Mmmmmm Swiss cheese holes all lined up didn't they.....
ACMS is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 08:53
  #891 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good Crikey article on the RVSM/fuel planning debacle here;
ATSB Pel-Air report excluded critical fuel factor | Plane Talking
Hempy is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 09:30
  #892 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,991
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
Got it thanks.

I still say he should have calculated a PNR and checked the METARS.
ACMS is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 10:10
  #893 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,254
Received 195 Likes on 90 Posts
It really is no longer important what the flight crew did on the night, what 4 Corners clearly showed was the physical and emotional deterioration of Karen Casey, who 4 Corners rightly stated was the real hero of the story. Despite what the law technically is she should have been granted an ex-gratia payment by Pel-Air in recognition of what she had done. Even Dominic James looked done in by the whole deal but he at least was physically spared. I hope the judge rules in her favour but of course there will be appeals and more appeals until the money runs out.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 11:35
  #894 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: what should be capital of Oz
Age: 68
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Indeed, the airline I worked for would not have been able to operate a significant part of its operation if an alternate was required for all operations to remote/island airports.
So, what was the fuel policy - island reserve, plan to a PNR etc etc? I'd be very surprised if a responsible operator didn't have contingencies or options in place, particularly at the planning stage, and hadnt kept revising them thereafter as the flight progressed.

And therein lies the difference, there was an option at the planning stage and that was to take more fuel. There were options during the flight which have been discussed at length in this thread. In short, an apparent mindset that a landing at the destination was assured so no need to keep formulating a "plan B" as the flight progressed.

Id be very concerned if your airline had asked you to put all your eggs in the one basket before you even got airborne but in this case ..........
zanzibar is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 20:11
  #895 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Ex-pat Aussie in the UK
Posts: 5,792
Received 115 Likes on 55 Posts
With Ansett, on the 146 from Learmonth to Christmas Island, we would work out a PNR back to Learmonth (or, if needs be a Last Point of Safe Diversion to Java) for Depressurised, One Engine out and two engines out and mark the most limiting of those. Before that point we would check the latest weather report from the Christmas Island observer on HF and make a commit decision.

Still occasionally came a cropper with the cap cloud which forms over the Island though - which required some unusual circuits to get onto the runway.
Checkboard is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 20:32
  #896 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,079
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This is all good stuff.

If we can reach a unanimous view that it was all the pilot's fault, we can save the ATSB the busy-work of going through the facade of another 'investigation' to reach the same conclusion as the last.

I have difficulty in believing that the patent errors in the weather information transmitted to NGA, and the weather information that was withheld from being transmitted to NGA, had no influence on the crew's appreciation of the actual and forecast weather at YSNF on the way to the point at which the decision to continue or not had to be made. And the CASA FOI population, comfy behind their desks, cuppa in hand and only the pressure of calculating their pension payments to confuse them, split 50/50 on the question whether the crew were obliged to divert, based on the weather information transmitted to NGA.

But I see, from others' posts, that the crew could have and should have known more.

I see now why Erebus was the pilot's fault.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 21:29
  #897 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Ex-pat Aussie in the UK
Posts: 5,792
Received 115 Likes on 55 Posts
Don't read that opinion into my post Creampuff - I didn't intend it that way.

The Pelair manuals were deficient in flight planning methods, and so was their training (not on their Pat Malone there, though) - and the CAA allowed that - especially with the complications of not being RVSM, and not being trained on the recently fitted TCAS, to allow the full range of diversion options.

The met department admit that they cannot predict the weather at Norfolk - but don't append their TAFs with "PROB 10 FG".

The question of whether the flight was AIRWORK, with an illegal passenger, or CHARTER and lacking the diversion options that requires is yet to be addressed.

etc. etc.
Checkboard is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2015, 22:36
  #898 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,079
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My apologies, Checkboard. I certaintly didn't read that into your post, and I certainly did not intend to make that inference.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 05:10
  #899 (permalink)  
prospector
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
But I see, from others' posts, that the crew could have and should have known more.
I see now why Erebus was the pilot's fault.

Fail to see any similarity between the two occurences, but interesting to see you have come to a conclusion re Erebus after all these years.
 
Old 25th Mar 2015, 05:46
  #900 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To qualify my last comment for Leadsled. What I should have said was,

"without an alternate, that otherwise could have been carried"

I get you re ops to remote islands. Glad I don't have to do them.
Iron Bar is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.