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

Norfolk Island Ditching ATSB Report - ?

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 - ?

Old 7th Dec 2017, 16:13
  #1301 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lookleft
Just a couple of questions. Who is Richard James Davies and why are his fuel calculations and the assumptions made any better or have any more credibility than anyone else ?
Seems to be a fella, who might have spent the odd hour or two, or three, operating over very deep water, very far from anywhere, not to mention, in particular, quite a lot of very relevant book work.

http://www.ibac.org/wp-content/uploa...ard-Davies.pdf
ventus45 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2017, 19:22
  #1302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ventus45
Originally Posted by Lookleft
Seems to be a fella, who might have spent the odd hour or two, or three, operating over very deep water, very far from anywhere, not to mention, in particular, quite a lot of very relevant book work.

http://www.ibac.org/wp-content/uploa...ard-Davies.pdf
So I take it that this Ex RAAFie is one that we like, (Using Down and Welded's Royal We) as against all those other Ex RAAFies that is "destroying the Industries".
I am working my way through Mr Davies' contribution to the fuel dilemma, I find his assumptions no more "correct" than any others' assumptions.

Last edited by Eddie Dean; 7th Dec 2017 at 19:43. Reason: on becomes one
Eddie Dean is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2017, 19:23
  #1303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 5,274
Received 410 Likes on 202 Posts
Originally Posted by megan
You must be a unique aviator LB, not making ANY mistakes, despite NASA finding that EVERY crew makes mistakes on EVERY flight. You must be a Skygod, along with Lookleft.
Errrm, you haven’t been paying attention, megan.

Ironically (given your suggestion that I’m a Skygod along with Lookleft), I quote my post in response to Lookleft’s suggestion that I claimed I’d only ever made one mistake:
from my post #1136:
How about you, LL? Have you ever made a mistake that could have resulted in a bad outcome, but luckily didn’t? (I've made plenty.)
From my post #1141:
Another of you Monday morning quarterbacks has already identified the operational lesson: Don't run out fuel. I've already learnt that lesson. I once landed and uploaded an amount of fuel that was exactly the amount of usable fuel stated in the flight manual for the aircraft. Errors in enroute calculations. Never made the same mistake in the 27 years since. But there for the grace of the Quod (may you be touched by the Quod's noodly appendage).
As you say: we all make mistakes nearly every flight.

I think you’re correct, KK: Down and Welded’s finely crafted rhetoric pegs him.
Lead Balloon is online now  
Old 7th Dec 2017, 19:42
  #1304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No True Scotsman

I see we(using Down And Welded's Royal Weee) are now using logical fallacy against him(down and welded).
Should he make the statements that he has, then he is no true aviator.
Eddie Dean is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2017, 20:57
  #1305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 3,564
Received 89 Likes on 32 Posts
Enough!

The pilot was not prosecuted because there was little chance of conviction and the operator and CASA would be dragged through the mud by the defence.

The operator was not prosecuted because there was little chance of conviction and CASA would be dragged through the mud by the defence.

The regulation says that the pilot and operator must take 'reasonable steps" to avoid running out of fuel. The regulation then goes on to state that the courts, not CASA, must determine what is reasonable under the circumstances of the flight.


What DJ did was 'reasonable". He complied with rules and regulations and still failed. This throws into doubt CASA's entire regulatory strategy - for which DJ is still being punished, unjustly.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2017, 22:53
  #1306 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,244
Received 188 Likes on 84 Posts
Too funny LB. Despite our allegedly well crafted responses too each other in the end we get lumped into the same basket labeled "skygods". I doubt megan will be able to get any clearer picture from your post to clear up his post about any previous post.

Thankyou Ventus for posting Richard Davies CV. Doesn't make his contribution any more credible though as ED states:
I am working my way through Mr Davies' contribution to the fuel dilemma, I find his assumptions no more "correct" than any others' assumptions.
and as LB stated:


That’s what’s called a mere “appeal to authority”.
In the end his calculations of the FOD was nearly half that of the actual fuel at ToD as stated in the report.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 00:15
  #1307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 5,274
Received 410 Likes on 202 Posts
So, how do we go about ascertaining the correct numbers?
Lead Balloon is online now  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 02:02
  #1308 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lead Balloon, I am going to start with full tanks, both main and tips.
Now, someone explain to me why this aircraft will not attain altitude with full tanks, when I see from previous flights that it did. After this is settled there are a few more details required.
Eddie Dean is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 03:02
  #1309 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,244
Received 188 Likes on 84 Posts
So, how do we go about ascertaining the correct numbers?
If you don't want to accept the ATSB's methodology then you have to come up with your own. R Davies figures were based on the information provided to him by whoever commissioned him so his figures can only be considered "correct" in that context. The ATSB sets out the different methods that Pelair used to determine fuel. Either the fuel/hour figures or the 23lb/min method. I am assuming that the fuel figure quoted at ToD was derived off the FDR. For me the bigger issue is what was done with that fuel once the PIC realised that the weather had deteriorated and they couldn't divert.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 06:09
  #1310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 5 Posts
What DJ did was 'reasonable". He complied with rules and regulations and still failed. This throws into doubt CASA's entire regulatory strategy - for which DJ is still being punished, unjustly.
That’s only an opinion Sunfish. I’m not saying you’re wrong but it is just one persons opinion that what DJ did was ‘reasonable’.
Obviously some people think his decision making was not up to scratch, you obviously think his decision making was ok. Such is life.
At the end of the day if all a PinC had to do was comply with the legal minimums we would be seeing fuel emergencies left right and center. But they don’t, they have to put on enough fuel to keep the aircraft safe and make a series of decisions along the flight that ensure that the reserve fuel is never used. That’s the goal. Unless you’re at war completion of the mission is secondary to ensuring that reserve fuel is not used. I sometimes wonder if some pilots realise that.
73qanda is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 09:10
  #1311 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: On the 15th floor
Age: 53
Posts: 379
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
I agree with that but I think some pilots forget that it’s a business at the end of the day and the fuel policy has already been risk assessed by CASA.
kellykelpie is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 09:15
  #1312 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 5 Posts
I prefer my own risk assessment as the CAA rarely turns up to discuss the forecast with me
73qanda is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 09:25
  #1313 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: On the 15th floor
Age: 53
Posts: 379
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by 73qanda
I prefer my own risk assessment as the CAA rarely turns up to discuss the forecast with me

Oh - so you can interpret the fuel requirements without CASA.
kellykelpie is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 09:32
  #1314 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Richmond
Age: 70
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by kellykelpie
Oh - so you can interpret the fuel requirements without CASA.
CASA and your employer set the MINIMUM requirements
JamieMaree is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 09:36
  #1315 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 5,274
Received 410 Likes on 202 Posts
And what were the factors at the start of the flight that indicated more than the ‘minimum’ fuel requirements should be carried? Other than hindsight.
Lead Balloon is online now  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 09:37
  #1316 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 5 Posts
Calm down kellyk, no need for obvious indignation, my response was supposed to be light hearted.
I’m not really sure what your driving at with
Oh - so you can interpret the fuel requirements without CASA.
I do what most do and ensure that the flight planners have built the plan IAW the regs and that provides me with the absolute minimum fuel I can legally depart with, then I decide what I want to depart with, from there I have two figures in front of me, what I think is a safe quantity, and what the rules say is the minimum quantity. I simply choose the highest one and have it loaded. Easy.
73qanda is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 09:43
  #1317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 5 Posts
LB and Kellyk, my comments above are not meant to be a criticism of DJ or of that flight. I was just trying to answer kelly’s cryptic comment about CAsA when he brought into question how I personally do my fuel planning. My days of building plans like DJ had to are twenty years past.
73qanda is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 10:13
  #1318 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: On the 15th floor
Age: 53
Posts: 379
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
Yes - sorry qanda. Out of line. I’m at dinner and a few wines - you know. Apologies.
kellykelpie is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 12:32
  #1319 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well people,

I guess we (not the royal we) but supporters and them with malice and aforethought, can now put this debate to bed.

I understand that today Mr James completed a $25,000 Check flight with two CAsA "experts" who's time cost around $160 per hour, each, and has been cleared to complete his final command check to line, which will probably run to another $25,000.

Nice little earner for CAsA, one big expense for the operator, but maybe someone somewhere thought eight years in purgatory was enough.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2017, 18:34
  #1320 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 3,564
Received 89 Likes on 32 Posts
73ganda - I have no opinion on what DJ did or didn't do. I stated that the test for a legal conviction is what is "reasonable" as determined by the Court.

DJ complied with his employers instructions and the regulations. Neither CASA or ATSB could show that what he did was unreasonable.

He thus demonstrated the existence of a gaping hole in CASA's regulatory strategy - that the regulations are strict of necessity to keep the public safe and that adherence to the letter guarantees a safe outcome.
Sunfish is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.