Firefighting plane down in NSW
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Blue Yonder
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its still not clear to me what the regulatory mechanism is. Surely if the grounding were achieved via a legislative direction or instrument, then that is a matter for the public record and needs to be published on comlaw along with all the other instruments and directions??
Speaking as someone who worked on the behaviour of metals under strain, the problem for is that "hrs" are merely an approximation of the life of the component.
What really determines the life is "seconds at x kg loading (and perhaps at temperature T deg mas well)" ,called the strain history, and that will give a finite life to identical components - in aluminium anyway. steel gets complicated by the existence of a yield point.
now fudge for manufacturing differences and defects and corrosion, apply a rule of thumb or Two, do some testing of ultimate loads and voila! We convince ourselves that there is a 99.95 percent chance that the component will last "x" thousand hours.
Obviously in the case of the Dromader either the assumptions were wrong or the "allowable "strain history of the components was exceeded.
What really determines the life is "seconds at x kg loading (and perhaps at temperature T deg mas well)" ,called the strain history, and that will give a finite life to identical components - in aluminium anyway. steel gets complicated by the existence of a yield point.
now fudge for manufacturing differences and defects and corrosion, apply a rule of thumb or Two, do some testing of ultimate loads and voila! We convince ourselves that there is a 99.95 percent chance that the component will last "x" thousand hours.
Obviously in the case of the Dromader either the assumptions were wrong or the "allowable "strain history of the components was exceeded.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
casa is out of touch with the Aviation Industry
This has just popped up [1.01PM 15/11/2013]:
PZL M18 Dromader Series Aeroplanes
AD/PZL/5 Amdt 1 - Centre Wing to Outboard Wing Attachment Joints
requiring specific inspections.
PZL M18 Dromader Series Aeroplanes
AD/PZL/5 Amdt 1 - Centre Wing to Outboard Wing Attachment Joints
requiring specific inspections.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: CY??
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the 415's would be great, but why would you want/need the military to operate them.. Canada and the US as well as others (spain etc..) all run them as a civil operation.. are we not that capable..?
On the operational side of things, scoopers are great if you've got suitable water (~ 1 mile of water) close to the fire. Obviously, the further away from the fire, the longer your circuit time, and the less effective you are..it's all about gallons per hour..
The Heff lashes out at RFS!
yr right:
It would appear that yr right's above comment may be close to the truth and the RFS were definitely part of the causal chain for this tragic accident.
Yesterday in Senate Estimates the Chair Senator Heffernan started the inquisition of CAsA with a passionate rant, although the Hansard is yet to be released the Murdoch press covered the moment and put out this article:Pilot 'taunted' before fatal crash
Kind of reminds me of a certain SBP email..." toughen up princesses"...hmm Captain 49'er commenting on intimidation is definitely (Mc)Comical!
More to follow...
RFS dont like aircraft cause they work its not a shinny red fire truck wake up smell the roses RFS is a mini emprire building place where the super heros live, sorry guys sad but true and once again im in the know here.
Yesterday in Senate Estimates the Chair Senator Heffernan started the inquisition of CAsA with a passionate rant, although the Hansard is yet to be released the Murdoch press covered the moment and put out this article:Pilot 'taunted' before fatal crash
'I'm disgusted as I'm informed that on that day it was pretty rugged weather and ... (pilots) were taunted by the Rural Fire Service because these guys didn't particularly want to fly,' Liberal senator Bill Heffernan told a Senate hearing into operations of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
The NSW senator said another pilot reported that Mr Black was told 'real men and real pilots would be up there'.
Witnesses saw a wing snap off Mr Black's aircraft before it plummeted to the ground.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau is investigating the crash.
Senator Heffernan said the RFS's opinions are 'outside the ambit of safety guidelines of air safety' and asked CASA to clarify its working relationship with the fire authority during emergency operations.
The CASA boss John McCormick said pilots are contracted by the bush fire service during waterbombing.
'We do rely on the expertise of the people who are involved with the firefighting ... I think it's terrible if they gave him intimidation to fly,' Mr McCormick said.
The NSW senator said another pilot reported that Mr Black was told 'real men and real pilots would be up there'.
Witnesses saw a wing snap off Mr Black's aircraft before it plummeted to the ground.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau is investigating the crash.
Senator Heffernan said the RFS's opinions are 'outside the ambit of safety guidelines of air safety' and asked CASA to clarify its working relationship with the fire authority during emergency operations.
The CASA boss John McCormick said pilots are contracted by the bush fire service during waterbombing.
'We do rely on the expertise of the people who are involved with the firefighting ... I think it's terrible if they gave him intimidation to fly,' Mr McCormick said.
More to follow...
Join Date: May 2013
Location: .au
Age: 43
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This post now looks a bit odd due to the previous thread it was responding to having been removed after the responce it received....
Its this kind of idiot mentality towards safety that make a difficult job that extra bit harder.
What a great little macho line that was. I hope their conscience haunts them for ever more.
And its this mentality that flows on through to other workmates, family and friends of those touting it. Simply because it is the big man attitude, I'm the hero calling the shots crap.
here are two quotes from the other fire bombing thread on here. Demonstrating how this pathetic attitude towards safety flow on.
note "involved family member"
and the clincher
People in positions of responsibility need to be active stamping out this behavior. Weeding out the pests that spread the disease.
Its this kind of idiot mentality towards safety that make a difficult job that extra bit harder.
What a great little macho line that was. I hope their conscience haunts them for ever more.
And its this mentality that flows on through to other workmates, family and friends of those touting it. Simply because it is the big man attitude, I'm the hero calling the shots crap.
here are two quotes from the other fire bombing thread on here. Demonstrating how this pathetic attitude towards safety flow on.
decisions (for the fires surrounding Sydney anyway) were being made from Round Corner Dural upstairs HQ during the thick of the melee a few weeks ago. This from an involved family member...
and the clincher
and those moaning about being able to get into it early in the day with an aeroplane at that time would you like a cup of cement
Last edited by grug; 2nd Dec 2013 at 21:26.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Land of 1,000 Dances
Age: 63
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australian Bushfire Pilot 'taunted ahead of crash'
This one is a bit unusual, but he was a professional pilot:
Source: | The Australian
AN experienced waterbombing pilot killed when his plane crashed fighting bushfires was taunted before take-off for voicing his reluctance to fly in poor weather, a parliamentary committee has been told.
David Black, 43, was killed when his fixed-wing Dromader aircraft crashed in Budawang National Park on NSW's south coast on October 24.
"I'm disgusted as I'm informed that on that day it was pretty rugged weather and ... (pilots) were taunted by the Rural Fire Service because these guys didn't particularly want to fly," Liberal senator Bill Heffernan told a Senate hearing into operations of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
The NSW senator said another pilot reported that Mr Black was told "real men and real pilots would be up there".
Witnesses saw a wing snap off Mr Black's aircraft before it plummeted to the ground.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau is investigating the crash.
David Black, 43, was killed when his fixed-wing Dromader aircraft crashed in Budawang National Park on NSW's south coast on October 24.
"I'm disgusted as I'm informed that on that day it was pretty rugged weather and ... (pilots) were taunted by the Rural Fire Service because these guys didn't particularly want to fly," Liberal senator Bill Heffernan told a Senate hearing into operations of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
The NSW senator said another pilot reported that Mr Black was told "real men and real pilots would be up there".
Witnesses saw a wing snap off Mr Black's aircraft before it plummeted to the ground.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau is investigating the crash.
Let's not get too precious about this - some pollie is making political capital over an allegation about "taunting" - you can fill in the dots for yourself.
Without knowing what was said and the context, it is a bit rough to be calling "off with their heads" just because the flight ended in tragedy. I'm willing to warrant that there aren't too many professional pilots operating in the GA sector that haven't felt outside pressure to go and do a flight, dealing with that is part and parcel of the job and this pilot wasn't some 200hr hatchling.
Facts first.
Without knowing what was said and the context, it is a bit rough to be calling "off with their heads" just because the flight ended in tragedy. I'm willing to warrant that there aren't too many professional pilots operating in the GA sector that haven't felt outside pressure to go and do a flight, dealing with that is part and parcel of the job and this pilot wasn't some 200hr hatchling.
Facts first.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Perth, WA
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Charlie, you've got that bit right. Worse for this particular politician I'd have thought, being the one censured by the Senate for peddling untruths about a high court judge.
Thread Starter
Looks like metal fatigue. RIP David.
Crashed firefighting Dromader aircraft had 'fatigue cracking': report
Crashed firefighting Dromader aircraft had 'fatigue cracking': report
ATSB Prelim report
Preliminary report - AO-2013-187
Excerpts from page 5-6 of that report:
Excerpts from page 5-6 of that report:
Wing attach fitting maintenance requirements
In 2000, investigations by the US National Transportation Safety Board into a number of US M18 accidents in which the wings separated in-flight discovered severe corrosion and cracking in the wing lower attach fittings, which led to fatigue cracking and failure of the fitting.3
On 3 August 2000, the aircraft manufacturer issued service bulletin (SB) E/02.170/2000, which provided procedures for dealing with corrosion of the centre wing-to-outboard wing attach fittings. The SB included a procedure for inspection of fittings found to be affected by corrosion and stated that:
• ‘the only acceptable inspection method is magnetic cracks detection’4 (original emphasis)
• ‘the critical area of the joints include the lower surfaces of the [main holes] in the wing lower attach joints’
• the inspections did not require outboard wing removal
• any cracked fittings and worn-out expansion mandrels were subject to mandatory replacement.
On 11 September 2000, CASA approved a procedure for inspection of the fittings using eddy-current testing as an alternative to the magnetic particle inspection required by the SB. This procedure provided information on preparing the area for inspection, instrument calibration, and other matters specific to the eddy-current testing method. It did not require wing removal and did not specify any particular critical area for inspection. Being a replacement for the inspection part of the SB, it did not provide repair instructions.
On 19 October 2000, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) issued airworthiness directive (AD) AD/PZL/5. It specified that the centre wing-to-outboard wing attach joints were to be inspected, using magnetic particle methods, for cracks in the lugs, corrosion in the main holes, and ovalisation of the main holes. The inspection was to be carried out in accordance with the manufacturer’s SB and was mandatory for all M18s5 after the fittings accumulated 2,500 hours service. Further inspections were required every 500 airframe hours or every 12 months, whichever came first.6
Aircraft maintenance information
Maintenance records indicated that the main spar attach point fittings on TZJ were installed new in 2004. The aircraft records indicated that since then it had accrued 3,980 flight hours, and 5,784 adjusted hours. A valid maintenance release was found in the wreckage.
The main spar attach fittings were last inspected on 8 August 2013, using the CASA-approved eddy-current procedure. Records indicated that since then, the aircraft had accumulated 120.1 flight hours and 154.7 adjusted hours, not including the accident flight.
Wreckage and site information
The on-site examination found that the left wing had separated at the attachment joint between the outboard wing and centre wing sections, about 6 m from the wingtip (Figure 6). Preliminary examination of the attach fittings indicated that the left outboard wing lower attachment lug had fractured through an area of pre-existing fatigue cracking in the lug lower ligament (Figure 7 and Figure 8). The fatigue cracking reduced the structural integrity of the fitting to the point where operational loads produced an overstress fracture of the remaining lug material. The detached section of lug was retained by the centre wing lugs and showed a matching fracture surface (Figure 8).
A number of aircraft components were removed from the accident site for further examination at the ATSB’s Canberra facilities, including:
• both sections of the separated lower main spar lug and the remainder of the lower main spar attach fitting (left wing)
• the entire upper main spar attach fitting (left wing)
• part of the rear spar attach fitting (left wing)
• the entire lower main spar attach fitting (right wing).
In 2000, investigations by the US National Transportation Safety Board into a number of US M18 accidents in which the wings separated in-flight discovered severe corrosion and cracking in the wing lower attach fittings, which led to fatigue cracking and failure of the fitting.3
On 3 August 2000, the aircraft manufacturer issued service bulletin (SB) E/02.170/2000, which provided procedures for dealing with corrosion of the centre wing-to-outboard wing attach fittings. The SB included a procedure for inspection of fittings found to be affected by corrosion and stated that:
• ‘the only acceptable inspection method is magnetic cracks detection’4 (original emphasis)
• ‘the critical area of the joints include the lower surfaces of the [main holes] in the wing lower attach joints’
• the inspections did not require outboard wing removal
• any cracked fittings and worn-out expansion mandrels were subject to mandatory replacement.
On 11 September 2000, CASA approved a procedure for inspection of the fittings using eddy-current testing as an alternative to the magnetic particle inspection required by the SB. This procedure provided information on preparing the area for inspection, instrument calibration, and other matters specific to the eddy-current testing method. It did not require wing removal and did not specify any particular critical area for inspection. Being a replacement for the inspection part of the SB, it did not provide repair instructions.
On 19 October 2000, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) issued airworthiness directive (AD) AD/PZL/5. It specified that the centre wing-to-outboard wing attach joints were to be inspected, using magnetic particle methods, for cracks in the lugs, corrosion in the main holes, and ovalisation of the main holes. The inspection was to be carried out in accordance with the manufacturer’s SB and was mandatory for all M18s5 after the fittings accumulated 2,500 hours service. Further inspections were required every 500 airframe hours or every 12 months, whichever came first.6
Aircraft maintenance information
Maintenance records indicated that the main spar attach point fittings on TZJ were installed new in 2004. The aircraft records indicated that since then it had accrued 3,980 flight hours, and 5,784 adjusted hours. A valid maintenance release was found in the wreckage.
The main spar attach fittings were last inspected on 8 August 2013, using the CASA-approved eddy-current procedure. Records indicated that since then, the aircraft had accumulated 120.1 flight hours and 154.7 adjusted hours, not including the accident flight.
Wreckage and site information
The on-site examination found that the left wing had separated at the attachment joint between the outboard wing and centre wing sections, about 6 m from the wingtip (Figure 6). Preliminary examination of the attach fittings indicated that the left outboard wing lower attachment lug had fractured through an area of pre-existing fatigue cracking in the lug lower ligament (Figure 7 and Figure 8). The fatigue cracking reduced the structural integrity of the fitting to the point where operational loads produced an overstress fracture of the remaining lug material. The detached section of lug was retained by the centre wing lugs and showed a matching fracture surface (Figure 8).
A number of aircraft components were removed from the accident site for further examination at the ATSB’s Canberra facilities, including:
• both sections of the separated lower main spar lug and the remainder of the lower main spar attach fitting (left wing)
• the entire upper main spar attach fitting (left wing)
• part of the rear spar attach fitting (left wing)
• the entire lower main spar attach fitting (right wing).
There is nothing much to like about the Dromader.
I might be wrong but I was led to believe the outer wing section is little more than a reverse engineered Ayers Thrush wing and the attach points are much the same.
If that were the case it would be a big ask to see them in service on an aircraft with significantly higher TOW.
Their original saving grace was that with the 1000hp radial they were under powered (IMO) so had to be flown with a degree of care. They were also extremely heavy on the controls, especially the A models, abrupt or full control deflection was difficult. Basically they flew like a pig.
When the turbine retro fit came along servos were placed on the control surfaces so you could fly the damn things. That then made them fairly light on the controls.
More than one industry wise person has commented over the years that the turbine Dromader is an airframe at the very limits and requires very judicious operation, fire bombing stretches that somewhat.
I don't know what the answer to the Dromader issue is but i would personally like to see them phased out sooner than later.
Surprised the NDT done 120 hours earlier didn't pick an underlying issue on David's machine.
Another very sad loss to the industry, and I feel for his widow who has been close the industry all her life and witnessed this loss and sadness with others many times, now she has to struggle through it.
Nothing much to like about the Dromader.
I might be wrong but I was led to believe the outer wing section is little more than a reverse engineered Ayers Thrush wing and the attach points are much the same.
If that were the case it would be a big ask to see them in service on an aircraft with significantly higher TOW.
Their original saving grace was that with the 1000hp radial they were under powered (IMO) so had to be flown with a degree of care. They were also extremely heavy on the controls, especially the A models, abrupt or full control deflection was difficult. Basically they flew like a pig.
When the turbine retro fit came along servos were placed on the control surfaces so you could fly the damn things. That then made them fairly light on the controls.
More than one industry wise person has commented over the years that the turbine Dromader is an airframe at the very limits and requires very judicious operation, fire bombing stretches that somewhat.
I don't know what the answer to the Dromader issue is but i would personally like to see them phased out sooner than later.
Surprised the NDT done 120 hours earlier didn't pick an underlying issue on David's machine.
Another very sad loss to the industry, and I feel for his widow who has been close the industry all her life and witnessed this loss and sadness with others many times, now she has to struggle through it.
Nothing much to like about the Dromader.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: `
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could we please note that whatever the circumstances of this tragedy, this man, this pilot was a hero; like ALL fire-fighters he put himself in harms way and was unfortunate to have made the ultimate sacrifice as a result. While not glorifying or detracting from what happened, I hope his wife and children can take some comfort that he died trying to protect others.
David Blake, a true HERO!
My sincerest condolences to his wife, children, family and friends. I truly wish I could swap places with him.
David Blake, a true HERO!
My sincerest condolences to his wife, children, family and friends. I truly wish I could swap places with him.
It looks like the pilot was a passenger in this accident. This was an avoidable accident and very, very sad.
The failed attach point shows classic fatigue cracking followed by brittle fracture. I would like to think that this crack was detectable when the inspection was done 120 flight hours earlier. In fact I'm a little surprised it wouldn't have been visible to the naked eye or with simple dye penetrant. I hope CASA's specification of eddy current detection vs the manufacturers recommended magnetic particle inspection gets proper scrutiny.
I don't understand the overload concessions either. The original (radial engine) airframe is rated by the manufacturer for a MTOW of 5,300 kg in "overload operations". Without some sort of mechanical strength augmentation I don't understand how this can be extended by CASA to 6,600 kg., especially since operation at those weights for firefighting by definition involves operation in turbulent air and with significant aircraft manoeuvring.
The failed attach point shows classic fatigue cracking followed by brittle fracture. I would like to think that this crack was detectable when the inspection was done 120 flight hours earlier. In fact I'm a little surprised it wouldn't have been visible to the naked eye or with simple dye penetrant. I hope CASA's specification of eddy current detection vs the manufacturers recommended magnetic particle inspection gets proper scrutiny.
I don't understand the overload concessions either. The original (radial engine) airframe is rated by the manufacturer for a MTOW of 5,300 kg in "overload operations". Without some sort of mechanical strength augmentation I don't understand how this can be extended by CASA to 6,600 kg., especially since operation at those weights for firefighting by definition involves operation in turbulent air and with significant aircraft manoeuvring.
To my way of thinking the AD/PZL/5 should have required the wings were removed for the inspection. It is hard to imagine that crack was not there 120hrs prior when the NDT was carried out, possible but....and there is nothing quite like physically eye balling the components particularly given their history and the overload allowance.
CASA and the manufacturer get around the over weight operation by simply fixing a sticker to the instrument panel stating overweight operation can reduce fatigue life and lead to structural failure.
I often wondered how seriously pilots took this warning and whether many made a conscious effort to modify the way they flew the aircraft.
Aside from the inherent increase in low level turbulence associated with fire bombing consider the lot of the Dromader airframe. It is a budget airframe with a low G envelope it also has a low speed envelope and low Vfe speed. Now combine that with a more aerodynamic engine install, greater power and potential for higher speed and a significant uplift approval lighter control forces and the fact that many likely use first stage flap running into and during the dump while flying very near or at Vfe limit speed, it all sounds like a recipe for a problem. My memory of the Vn envelope with first stage flap was something like +2.5/-0.5 G, not much
If the AAAA hasn't already I see a good case for a very sobering education program for the operators/pilots and engineers of these aircraft.
CASA and the manufacturer get around the over weight operation by simply fixing a sticker to the instrument panel stating overweight operation can reduce fatigue life and lead to structural failure.
I often wondered how seriously pilots took this warning and whether many made a conscious effort to modify the way they flew the aircraft.
Aside from the inherent increase in low level turbulence associated with fire bombing consider the lot of the Dromader airframe. It is a budget airframe with a low G envelope it also has a low speed envelope and low Vfe speed. Now combine that with a more aerodynamic engine install, greater power and potential for higher speed and a significant uplift approval lighter control forces and the fact that many likely use first stage flap running into and during the dump while flying very near or at Vfe limit speed, it all sounds like a recipe for a problem. My memory of the Vn envelope with first stage flap was something like +2.5/-0.5 G, not much
If the AAAA hasn't already I see a good case for a very sobering education program for the operators/pilots and engineers of these aircraft.
To my way of thinking the AD/PZL/5 should have required the wings were removed for the inspection.
Its been many years since I've done eddy current or magnetic particle inspection, but the small amount of refresher reading I did this morning suggests that eddy current is not recommended for detecting cracks within bores (holes).
Any opinions about this?
I would have thought it's the maintenance company and NDT company who should know what inspections are required and allowed.
Julie Black had no reason to worry when the text messages she was sending her husband changed from blue to green, as he flew *towards raging bushfires.
David Black was a highly *experienced, skilled and careful pilot who had been waterbombing for years. He was the co-owner and chief pilot of their aerial crop spraying business, Rebel Ag, in Trangie, an hour northwest of Dubbo, with 9500 flying hours under his belt.
But in the minutes after their final exchange, something in the sky went catastrophically wrong.
The incident has since been the subject of investigations by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau and a NSW Coroner, yet Julie says no one has been held accountable. Next month a NSW Supreme Court judge will decide exactly who – if anyone – is to blame and how to “right their wrongs” in a civil trial that could change aviation safety.
Bushfires blazed along the south coast in the spring of 2013. On Monday, October 21, David and Julie Black started diverting resources from their aviation business to waterbomb south of Sydney for the Rural Fire Service.
At lunchtime David called his wife to say he was heading to the city of Nowra to help. The 43-year-old performed three firebombing runs that afternoon and another six the next day.
When he phoned home on Wednesday night to talk to his wife and three kids, their youngest – seven-year-old Adelaide – proudly told him she’d lost a tooth. uo the next morning – Thursday October 24 – he called early, before school, to ask whether the tooth fairy had visited.
“He quickly spoke to the girls and when he spoke to me I said ‘I’m running late. I’ll give you a ring when I get into the office’,” Julie recalled. Hours later, her business partner, husband and father of her three children was dead.
David took off in his PZL-Mielec M-18 Dromader from Nowra air base at 9.40am on a firebombing mission about 62km to the southwest. Another firebombing aircraft and a support helicopter went with him.
Rebel Ag had nine aircraft out that day – spraying crops and water bombing – so shortly after her husband lost mobile phone service, Julie sat down at her desk and opened her tracking software to check their pilots’ locations. “And TracPlus was frozen, which was quite bizarre,” she said. “So then I logged on to the MyRFS and that was also frozen.
“And then I jumped over to Facebook and immediately saw a post from the RFS saying there had been an aircraft accident.” Julie tried to call her husband but could not get through.
“I started contacting all my other pilots but no one knew anything,” she said. “So then I contacted the RFS state air desk but they were not able to give me any information. They were in a complete state of panic.”
Julie roll-called her pilots. “Everyone sent a message back except for David Black.”
It took hours for emergency services to retrieve David’s body from the wreckage on a heavily wooded ridge in an isolated and mountainous section of Budawang National Park, west of Ulladulla.
“I had to battle tooth and nail for them to get Dave’s body,” Julie said. “They were going to leave him there overnight.”
Julie’s brother flew her to Nowra but even once there, no one could confirm anything. “I didn’t get told (it was his plane) until about 3.30pm,” she said.
That afternoon, as the news of her husband’s crash spread, the RFS commissioner, premier and even the prime minister called her.
“As the sun started setting, everyone wanted to go home,” she said. “I told them ‘no one gets to go home and have dinner with their wife and kids until we get my husband’. I was very adamant that he deserved better.”
Eventually, that evening, the navy deployed Sea King helicopters to winch down and retrieve her husband’s body.
“Since that day it’s just been one big long battle,” she said.
Initially the cause of the crash was a mystery. “I couldn’t understand how or why he crashed?” Julie said. In the following days, witnesses from that mission shared what they had seen.
David had been flying 30m above the tree line when the left wing of his aircraft suddenly folded upwards and tore off. The plane immediately rolled to the left *before plummeting to an “unsurvivable impact”.
The ATSB’s final 104-page *report, published in February 2016, found that the outboard left wing had separated at the centre-to-outboard lower wing attachment joint.
It was caused by a fracture in the left outboard wing lower *attachment lug.
The aircraft’s centre-to-outboard wing attachment fittings were last inspected on August 8, 2013, with no defects reported. The ATSB determined that *issues with the left wing were not detected during that inspection – 11 weeks before the crash – *because an incorrect testing technique, an eddy current inspection method, had been used.
The eddy current inspection method was not approved by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
In late 2000 CASA had issued an airworthiness directive requiring inspections of Dromader wings to be conducted using the magnetic particle method.
“This (incorrect testing) exposed those aircraft to an inspection method that was potentially ineffective at detecting cracks in the wing attachment fittings,” the report said. A coronial inquest a year later also found that the inspection, *maintenance and testing procedures in relation to David’s aircraft, including the wing fittings, were “inadequate”.
The NSW deputy state coroner said David’s plane had been *inspected in August 2013 by two companies – Beal Aircraft Maintenance and Aviation NDT – using the alternative, less sensitive, and unapproved eddy current technique.
Magistrate Derek Lee found that the August 2013 safety *inspection failed to detect both *corrosion pitting and a fatigue crack in the left wing’s lower attachment fitting. Lee said the unapproved testing process combined with the failure to remove the plane’s wings during the safety check “all meant that the August 2013 inspection was inadequate”.
Soon after the inquest, Julie launched civil action against CASA, Beal Aircraft Maintenance and Aviation NDT “because they did not do their jobs properly”.
“I am a big believer in righting wrongs and there’s so many wrongs in this case,” she said.
The 48-year-old said CASA was ultimately responsible for her husband’s death because the safety watchdog failed to realise that Beal Aircraft Maintenance and Aviation NDT Services were using the wrong method to test the wing attachments.
She said CASA should have, after issuing the airworthiness *directive in 2000, checked and *ensured that engineers were conducting maintenance on M18 Dromader aircraft correctly. “How did CASA, as the statutory authority who are overseeing safety, not do any auditing or cross-checking with the operators to ensure they were using the right testing technique for 13 years?” Julie said.
“That’s just one example of their dysfunction.”
There have been multiple failed mediation attempts since 2017. “It’s dragged on because CASA have dragged their feet through the whole matter,” Julie said.
“They don‘t believe they hold any responsibility in this case which then leads me to the question: why are they called the Civil Aviation Safety Authority?
“The buck stops with them.
“There has to be an apportionment of blame.”
After six years of legal wrangling, a civil trial before the judge Robertson Wright has been set down for three weeks from May 1. Barrister Ian Harvey from Wentworth Chambers will represent CASA, while barrister David Lloyd SC of 12 Wentworth Selborne Chambers will represent Julie. Lloyd will be instructed by Mark Gray-Spencer of GSG Legal, an aviation lawyer of 30 years, who has worked with Julie on this case from the start.
From the trial Julie, who has funded her legal battle with *proceeds from selling the family’s *aviation business, is seeking three outcomes.
The widow wants compensation for her losses, an inquiry into CASA’s operations and what she says is a long-overdue apology.
“Well, obviously (an apology) from the aircraft engineers and NDT services that were involved,” she said.
“Most importantly, CASA, but because it’s an organisation, no one is held accountable.
“There’s not one person there who would be losing any sleep over this.
“I’m not even sure that those who are running CASA are aware this matter is coming up for trial.”
The single mother said that *despite the findings of the ATSB and the coroner, no one has expressed *remorse.
“You can see how many different hands played a part in the lead up to this accident and not one of those people has said to me or my children, ‘I’m so sorry’,” she said.
“No one has said ‘I should have done this differently or I should have overseen this differently’.
“A simple heartfelt apology *really does make a difference and would just be a nice way to end it all.”
Julie said she was committed to exposing the “dysfunction” within CASA so that an incident like this never happens again.
“There are still wrongs that need to be righted,” she said.
“Wings don’t just fall off *aircraft.”
A spokesperson for CASA said it would be inappropriate for the agency to comment on matters before the court.
I would have thought it's the maintenance company and NDT company who should know what inspections are required and allowed.
Julie Black had no reason to worry when the text messages she was sending her husband changed from blue to green, as he flew *towards raging bushfires.
David Black was a highly *experienced, skilled and careful pilot who had been waterbombing for years. He was the co-owner and chief pilot of their aerial crop spraying business, Rebel Ag, in Trangie, an hour northwest of Dubbo, with 9500 flying hours under his belt.
But in the minutes after their final exchange, something in the sky went catastrophically wrong.
The incident has since been the subject of investigations by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau and a NSW Coroner, yet Julie says no one has been held accountable. Next month a NSW Supreme Court judge will decide exactly who – if anyone – is to blame and how to “right their wrongs” in a civil trial that could change aviation safety.
Bushfires blazed along the south coast in the spring of 2013. On Monday, October 21, David and Julie Black started diverting resources from their aviation business to waterbomb south of Sydney for the Rural Fire Service.
At lunchtime David called his wife to say he was heading to the city of Nowra to help. The 43-year-old performed three firebombing runs that afternoon and another six the next day.
When he phoned home on Wednesday night to talk to his wife and three kids, their youngest – seven-year-old Adelaide – proudly told him she’d lost a tooth. uo the next morning – Thursday October 24 – he called early, before school, to ask whether the tooth fairy had visited.
“He quickly spoke to the girls and when he spoke to me I said ‘I’m running late. I’ll give you a ring when I get into the office’,” Julie recalled. Hours later, her business partner, husband and father of her three children was dead.
David took off in his PZL-Mielec M-18 Dromader from Nowra air base at 9.40am on a firebombing mission about 62km to the southwest. Another firebombing aircraft and a support helicopter went with him.
Rebel Ag had nine aircraft out that day – spraying crops and water bombing – so shortly after her husband lost mobile phone service, Julie sat down at her desk and opened her tracking software to check their pilots’ locations. “And TracPlus was frozen, which was quite bizarre,” she said. “So then I logged on to the MyRFS and that was also frozen.
“And then I jumped over to Facebook and immediately saw a post from the RFS saying there had been an aircraft accident.” Julie tried to call her husband but could not get through.
“I started contacting all my other pilots but no one knew anything,” she said. “So then I contacted the RFS state air desk but they were not able to give me any information. They were in a complete state of panic.”
Julie roll-called her pilots. “Everyone sent a message back except for David Black.”
It took hours for emergency services to retrieve David’s body from the wreckage on a heavily wooded ridge in an isolated and mountainous section of Budawang National Park, west of Ulladulla.
“I had to battle tooth and nail for them to get Dave’s body,” Julie said. “They were going to leave him there overnight.”
Julie’s brother flew her to Nowra but even once there, no one could confirm anything. “I didn’t get told (it was his plane) until about 3.30pm,” she said.
That afternoon, as the news of her husband’s crash spread, the RFS commissioner, premier and even the prime minister called her.
“As the sun started setting, everyone wanted to go home,” she said. “I told them ‘no one gets to go home and have dinner with their wife and kids until we get my husband’. I was very adamant that he deserved better.”
Eventually, that evening, the navy deployed Sea King helicopters to winch down and retrieve her husband’s body.
“Since that day it’s just been one big long battle,” she said.
Initially the cause of the crash was a mystery. “I couldn’t understand how or why he crashed?” Julie said. In the following days, witnesses from that mission shared what they had seen.
David had been flying 30m above the tree line when the left wing of his aircraft suddenly folded upwards and tore off. The plane immediately rolled to the left *before plummeting to an “unsurvivable impact”.
The ATSB’s final 104-page *report, published in February 2016, found that the outboard left wing had separated at the centre-to-outboard lower wing attachment joint.
It was caused by a fracture in the left outboard wing lower *attachment lug.
The aircraft’s centre-to-outboard wing attachment fittings were last inspected on August 8, 2013, with no defects reported. The ATSB determined that *issues with the left wing were not detected during that inspection – 11 weeks before the crash – *because an incorrect testing technique, an eddy current inspection method, had been used.
The eddy current inspection method was not approved by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
In late 2000 CASA had issued an airworthiness directive requiring inspections of Dromader wings to be conducted using the magnetic particle method.
“This (incorrect testing) exposed those aircraft to an inspection method that was potentially ineffective at detecting cracks in the wing attachment fittings,” the report said. A coronial inquest a year later also found that the inspection, *maintenance and testing procedures in relation to David’s aircraft, including the wing fittings, were “inadequate”.
The NSW deputy state coroner said David’s plane had been *inspected in August 2013 by two companies – Beal Aircraft Maintenance and Aviation NDT – using the alternative, less sensitive, and unapproved eddy current technique.
Magistrate Derek Lee found that the August 2013 safety *inspection failed to detect both *corrosion pitting and a fatigue crack in the left wing’s lower attachment fitting. Lee said the unapproved testing process combined with the failure to remove the plane’s wings during the safety check “all meant that the August 2013 inspection was inadequate”.
Soon after the inquest, Julie launched civil action against CASA, Beal Aircraft Maintenance and Aviation NDT “because they did not do their jobs properly”.
“I am a big believer in righting wrongs and there’s so many wrongs in this case,” she said.
The 48-year-old said CASA was ultimately responsible for her husband’s death because the safety watchdog failed to realise that Beal Aircraft Maintenance and Aviation NDT Services were using the wrong method to test the wing attachments.
She said CASA should have, after issuing the airworthiness *directive in 2000, checked and *ensured that engineers were conducting maintenance on M18 Dromader aircraft correctly. “How did CASA, as the statutory authority who are overseeing safety, not do any auditing or cross-checking with the operators to ensure they were using the right testing technique for 13 years?” Julie said.
“That’s just one example of their dysfunction.”
There have been multiple failed mediation attempts since 2017. “It’s dragged on because CASA have dragged their feet through the whole matter,” Julie said.
“They don‘t believe they hold any responsibility in this case which then leads me to the question: why are they called the Civil Aviation Safety Authority?
“The buck stops with them.
“There has to be an apportionment of blame.”
After six years of legal wrangling, a civil trial before the judge Robertson Wright has been set down for three weeks from May 1. Barrister Ian Harvey from Wentworth Chambers will represent CASA, while barrister David Lloyd SC of 12 Wentworth Selborne Chambers will represent Julie. Lloyd will be instructed by Mark Gray-Spencer of GSG Legal, an aviation lawyer of 30 years, who has worked with Julie on this case from the start.
From the trial Julie, who has funded her legal battle with *proceeds from selling the family’s *aviation business, is seeking three outcomes.
The widow wants compensation for her losses, an inquiry into CASA’s operations and what she says is a long-overdue apology.
“Well, obviously (an apology) from the aircraft engineers and NDT services that were involved,” she said.
“Most importantly, CASA, but because it’s an organisation, no one is held accountable.
“There’s not one person there who would be losing any sleep over this.
“I’m not even sure that those who are running CASA are aware this matter is coming up for trial.”
The single mother said that *despite the findings of the ATSB and the coroner, no one has expressed *remorse.
“You can see how many different hands played a part in the lead up to this accident and not one of those people has said to me or my children, ‘I’m so sorry’,” she said.
“No one has said ‘I should have done this differently or I should have overseen this differently’.
“A simple heartfelt apology *really does make a difference and would just be a nice way to end it all.”
Julie said she was committed to exposing the “dysfunction” within CASA so that an incident like this never happens again.
“There are still wrongs that need to be righted,” she said.
“Wings don’t just fall off *aircraft.”
A spokesperson for CASA said it would be inappropriate for the agency to comment on matters before the court.