Near Collision at Mangalore & ADSB
Thread Starter
Near Collision at Mangalore & ADSB
Just trolling through the latest batch of ATSB reports and saw this one:
http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/5203556...-006-final.pdf
At the simplest level, we have an IFR aircraft fling according to a submitted plan and a VFR aircraft doing a navex.
My question is: how will this be any safer after ADS-B is implemented for IFR aircraft???
http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/5203556...-006-final.pdf
At the simplest level, we have an IFR aircraft fling according to a submitted plan and a VFR aircraft doing a navex.
My question is: how will this be any safer after ADS-B is implemented for IFR aircraft???
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Short answer Akro it won't.
Some of us might imagine that the implementation of ADSB in Australia has something to do with safety.
More to do with directors bonuses I believe, safety being the last thing on their mind.
Some of us might imagine that the implementation of ADSB in Australia has something to do with safety.
More to do with directors bonuses I believe, safety being the last thing on their mind.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Idlewild Peake
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that Mangalore circuit traffic is already under radar coverage.
This incident highlights two other points:
The ERSA entry "NOTE: Pilots must respond to radio requests from other TFC for their intentions, position or altitude" must apply to visitors only. The trainees don't comply. There are three instances, in this report, of the trainee not responding and one where an instructor delayed reponse.
Also, aren't we still supposed to depart by extending a leg of the circuit or tracking straight ahead til well clear of the circuit? The Benalla flyer turned right (opposite to the circuit direction) while still quite close and low.
This incident highlights two other points:
The ERSA entry "NOTE: Pilots must respond to radio requests from other TFC for their intentions, position or altitude" must apply to visitors only. The trainees don't comply. There are three instances, in this report, of the trainee not responding and one where an instructor delayed reponse.
Also, aren't we still supposed to depart by extending a leg of the circuit or tracking straight ahead til well clear of the circuit? The Benalla flyer turned right (opposite to the circuit direction) while still quite close and low.
Last edited by uncle8; 26th May 2014 at 22:38.
Am I just getting old, or have the rules changed?
Departing the circuit don't you extend one leg, or climb to 500' above the circuit height and are 3NM+ away before turning contrary to the circuit direction.
This bloke flying to Benalla levelled off at 1200 MSL - with Mangalore's elevation of 450MSL - so 200' lower than he should be just for a circuit, cleared the survey aircraft and then set course for Benalla requiring 60* turn contrary to the circuit direction while still at 1200MSL and presumably, still inside the circuit area!
And the flying school tries to put it back on the survey aircraft because "he didn't call like they normally do"? How about teaching your students to communicate with non-standard aircraft instead of delaying their responses or not talking at all.
Departing the circuit don't you extend one leg, or climb to 500' above the circuit height and are 3NM+ away before turning contrary to the circuit direction.
This bloke flying to Benalla levelled off at 1200 MSL - with Mangalore's elevation of 450MSL - so 200' lower than he should be just for a circuit, cleared the survey aircraft and then set course for Benalla requiring 60* turn contrary to the circuit direction while still at 1200MSL and presumably, still inside the circuit area!
And the flying school tries to put it back on the survey aircraft because "he didn't call like they normally do"? How about teaching your students to communicate with non-standard aircraft instead of delaying their responses or not talking at all.
Thread Starter
I think that Mangalore circuit traffic is already under radar coverage.
These things happen. On the eve of needing to spend $25k on my aircraft to make it ADS-B compliant in the name of safety - would ADS-B have reduced the risk of this incident (or any other near collision in the past year).
All it takes to eliminate the possibility is a phone call. If you are going to do some unusual ops in and around YMNG or any other airport that has high volumes of training, particularly foreign students.
Ring up, talk to the CP, CFI or even the duty instructor. They will put in a ground stop for the time you want......no problem. At the very least, the duty instructor can brief the students in a manner that they will understand of what's going to happen.
Most students, especially foreign students can not assimilate a call for non standard ops. Just saying on the radio in a few minutes you will be doing this and that simply doesn't compute. What they don't understand they simply dump from the consciousness.
There is no point whinging about poor English skills, that's the reality, always has been, always will be.
Ring up, talk to the CP, CFI or even the duty instructor. They will put in a ground stop for the time you want......no problem. At the very least, the duty instructor can brief the students in a manner that they will understand of what's going to happen.
Most students, especially foreign students can not assimilate a call for non standard ops. Just saying on the radio in a few minutes you will be doing this and that simply doesn't compute. What they don't understand they simply dump from the consciousness.
There is no point whinging about poor English skills, that's the reality, always has been, always will be.
