Channel 7 Sunday Night Program About VH-MDX
You guys seemed obsessed with the idea that flight planning would have prevented the accident. I ask yet again, what do you think the pilot would have done if he'd planned over WLM and been refused a clearance by SY in exactly the way he was on the night? Answer me this: Why wouldn't he have pushed on in exactly the same manner?
Flight planning isn't going to stop this happening again as it will never guarantee an instant clearance or even a clearance at all. It will never guarantee the chosen route or preferred alternate routes are suitable for VFR. The pilot still has to decide "now what?". Pilot education will help and is more broadly applicable so will save far more lives.
Flight planning isn't going to stop this happening again as it will never guarantee an instant clearance or even a clearance at all. It will never guarantee the chosen route or preferred alternate routes are suitable for VFR. The pilot still has to decide "now what?". Pilot education will help and is more broadly applicable so will save far more lives.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Civil Aviation Regulations
CIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS 1988 - REG 224
Pilot in command
(1) For each flight the operator shall designate one pilot to act as pilot in command.
(2) A pilot in command of an aircraft is responsible for:
(a) the start, continuation, diversion and end of a flight by the aircraft; and
(b) the operation and safety of the aircraft during flight time; and
(c) the safety of persons and cargo carried on the aircraft; and
(d) the conduct and safety of members of the crew on the aircraft.
(2A) A pilot in command must discharge his or her responsibility under paragraph (2)(a) in accordance with:
(a) any information, instructions or directions, relating to the start, continuation, diversion or end of a flight, that are made available, or issued, under the Act or these Regulations; and
(b) if applicable, the operations manual provided by the operator of the aircraft.
(3) The pilot in command shall have final authority as to the disposition of the aircraft while he or she is in command and for the maintenance of discipline by all persons on board.
Pilot in command
(1) For each flight the operator shall designate one pilot to act as pilot in command.
(2) A pilot in command of an aircraft is responsible for:
(a) the start, continuation, diversion and end of a flight by the aircraft; and
(b) the operation and safety of the aircraft during flight time; and
(c) the safety of persons and cargo carried on the aircraft; and
(d) the conduct and safety of members of the crew on the aircraft.
(2A) A pilot in command must discharge his or her responsibility under paragraph (2)(a) in accordance with:
(a) any information, instructions or directions, relating to the start, continuation, diversion or end of a flight, that are made available, or issued, under the Act or these Regulations; and
(b) if applicable, the operations manual provided by the operator of the aircraft.
(3) The pilot in command shall have final authority as to the disposition of the aircraft while he or she is in command and for the maintenance of discipline by all persons on board.
Thread Starter
Le Pin. It is very likely if the Willy ATC had the flight details in advance he would have given a clearance before the pilot decided he could wait no longer as he was about to penetrate the " never go or you'll be shot " military airspace invisible line.
No cloud below 5000 south of willy so he could have descended to 2300' and remain in VMC.
I ask again. Can anyone remember the control zone step height between Newcastle and Brookliyn bridge in those days?
Why did the Sydney ATC say weather was a factor if the pilot could have operated OCTA south of Newcastle.?
If the RAAF road block was not active that night there is little doubt the pilot would not have turned inland to CRAVEN.
Change the unnecessary flight planning restriction before more lives are lost I reckon!
No cloud below 5000 south of willy so he could have descended to 2300' and remain in VMC.
I ask again. Can anyone remember the control zone step height between Newcastle and Brookliyn bridge in those days?
Why did the Sydney ATC say weather was a factor if the pilot could have operated OCTA south of Newcastle.?
If the RAAF road block was not active that night there is little doubt the pilot would not have turned inland to CRAVEN.
Change the unnecessary flight planning restriction before more lives are lost I reckon!
Sigh. Your views are the ones set in concrete. The clearance delay wasn't WLM, it was SY.
What are you doing to help pilots facing similar situations due to weather, no matter where they are? That would be a far more admirable and beneficial thing to do.
What are you doing to help pilots facing similar situations due to weather, no matter where they are? That would be a far more admirable and beneficial thing to do.
Thread Starter
Because of the changes introduced during my time at CAA/CASA pilots call ATC directly- not through a third party.
So that's a start. If that had been allowed on the night I bet the pilot would have gone coastal .
Now we need to remove the military enforced flight planning restriction re planning the safest way down the coast for non pressurized aircraft.
Isn't it interesting how hard it is to get this change. I bet the RAAF doesn't know why it has to remain but probably no one empowered to actually have it changed.
They can't even introduce MOA's. - leave everything as it was in 1940!
So that's a start. If that had been allowed on the night I bet the pilot would have gone coastal .
Now we need to remove the military enforced flight planning restriction re planning the safest way down the coast for non pressurized aircraft.
Isn't it interesting how hard it is to get this change. I bet the RAAF doesn't know why it has to remain but probably no one empowered to actually have it changed.
They can't even introduce MOA's. - leave everything as it was in 1940!
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Canberra, ACT, Australia
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick...
That's a way over the top remark and was not what actually occurred!
To say that WLM didn't have flight details and caused the PIC to hold is, in my experience, another 'long bow being drawn', or putting it much more plainly, utter BS! It only takes a couple of seconds to manually make out a strip and only a few more to give some sort of clearance response. There was no delay there!
As 'evil roy' said
- that seems to be the point that you have not yet been able to grasp.
I haven't yet seen any mention of airspace releases that night. Just who had what airspace? Exactly where was the PIC "about to penetrate the 'never go or you'll be shot' military airspace invisible line"? On the TRE - WLM track, or the TRE - CRV track? Or the TRE - SGT track? From what I could see of the enclosures on the BASI file, the aircraft was tracking well NORTH of his planned route (TRE-CRV) when FIS5 offered the amended route over WLM.
Don't forget, the WLM control zone was GL-A050 radius 12nm. The areas in question that MDX planned to fly around were in some cases GL up to FL125. Are we referring specifically to R582A (GL to FL125) - who had control of R582A at the time that all this was going on? If that airspace was released to FIS5, it would have been OCTA, and above FL125 to Sector 1.
Pure speculation! What was he supposedly waiting for and what actions was he taking (orbiting, holding?) whilst he was supposedly waiting?
I note that you didn't manage (and I'm sure that you must have tried so hard) to get Channel 7 to give you another couple of minutes TV time in which you could have given that public apology for your liblellious remarks that started this whole thread off. What a shame - you've lost a lot of your supporters over this one Dick.
It is very likely if the Willy ATC had the flight details in advance he would have given a clearance before the pilot decided he could wait no longer as he was about to penetrate the " never go or you'll be shot " military airspace invisible line.
To say that WLM didn't have flight details and caused the PIC to hold is, in my experience, another 'long bow being drawn', or putting it much more plainly, utter BS! It only takes a couple of seconds to manually make out a strip and only a few more to give some sort of clearance response. There was no delay there!
As 'evil roy' said
it was clearance through S1 and SYD APP airspace that was refused.
I haven't yet seen any mention of airspace releases that night. Just who had what airspace? Exactly where was the PIC "about to penetrate the 'never go or you'll be shot' military airspace invisible line"? On the TRE - WLM track, or the TRE - CRV track? Or the TRE - SGT track? From what I could see of the enclosures on the BASI file, the aircraft was tracking well NORTH of his planned route (TRE-CRV) when FIS5 offered the amended route over WLM.
Don't forget, the WLM control zone was GL-A050 radius 12nm. The areas in question that MDX planned to fly around were in some cases GL up to FL125. Are we referring specifically to R582A (GL to FL125) - who had control of R582A at the time that all this was going on? If that airspace was released to FIS5, it would have been OCTA, and above FL125 to Sector 1.
...the pilot decided he could wait no longer ...
I note that you didn't manage (and I'm sure that you must have tried so hard) to get Channel 7 to give you another couple of minutes TV time in which you could have given that public apology for your liblellious remarks that started this whole thread off. What a shame - you've lost a lot of your supporters over this one Dick.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: -28.1494 / 151.943
Age: 68
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a shame - you've lost a lot of your supporters over this one Dick.
If anyone can tell me why the route Coastal Brisbane to Sydney should be locked out to my flying, please do. If it is necessary to shift the airbase then do it, seems it's no problem to send them to Iraq or Afganistan anytime some dumb politician (both sides) wants to impress the good old USA. What's wrong with sharing the airspace?
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,971
Received 97 Likes
on
56 Posts
Hempy: Re your Ten commandments;
Amen!
Mods, This thread is to me at least, starting to go round in circles! Maybe I have been out of the game too long but all I see is the same points put in various ways. Care to apply the lock?
Amen!
Mods, This thread is to me at least, starting to go round in circles! Maybe I have been out of the game too long but all I see is the same points put in various ways. Care to apply the lock?
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: oz
Age: 65
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dick Smith
I ask again. Can anyone remember the control zone step height between Newcastle and Brookliyn bridge in those days?
From what I remember of my days, negotiating clearance up there, was always a pain even with the advanced notice via FS.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: -28.1494 / 151.943
Age: 68
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
If it is necessary to shift the airbase then do it,
Sure mate, care to contribute the necessary tax dollars?
If it is necessary to shift the airbase then do it,
Sure mate, care to contribute the necessary tax dollars?
Mmmmmmm. I don't think having Syria and Iraq as fundamentalist states under ISIS is good for anyone actually.
So yes we might need to go and do something about it.
Anyway thread drift.....back to normal programming
So yes we might need to go and do something about it.
Anyway thread drift.....back to normal programming
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by nitpicker
Mmmmmmm. I don't think having Syria and Iraq as fundamentalist states under ISIS is good for anyone actually.
So yes we might need to go and do something about it.
Anyway thread drift.....back to normal programming
So yes we might need to go and do something about it.
Anyway thread drift.....back to normal programming
From the NOTAM this morning - the power of advertising, eh?
GEN-FPR-1, ROUTE FLIGHT PLANNING REQUIRMENTS AMD
PARAGRAPH 1, NEW SOUTH WALES, AMD FLW ENTRIES TO READ:
COFFS HARBOUR WILLIAMTOWN:
NOT TO BE FLIGHT PLANNED WHEN R580, R583A, R587A OR R587B ACT.
LORD HOWE - WILLIAMTOWN - LORD HOWE:
ATS ROUTE W149 MUST NOT BE FLIGHT PLANNED WHEN R574 ACT. AN ALTERNATE
ROUTE VIA PMQ MUST BE PLANNED.
LORD HOWE ISLAND - WILLIAMTOWN PORT MACQUARIE:
ATS ROUTE W768 MUST NOT BE FLIGHT PLANNED WHEN R574 ACT. VFR TRANSIT
NOT ASSURED WHEN R574 ACT.
WILLIAMTOWN TAREE:
NOT TO BE FLIGHT PLANNED WHEN R580, R583A, R587A OR R587B ACT.
WILLIAMTOWN - COFFS HARBOUR:
NOT TO BE FLIGHT PLANNED WHEN R580, R583A, R587A OR R587B ACT.
GEN-FPR-17, FLIGHT PLAN OPTIONS, PARAGRAPH 8, ADD THE FLW ALTN
ROUTING AVBL:
YCFS YWLM:
DCT CFS W196 TRE W603 WLM (REF ERSA-GEN-FPR-1, PARA 1)
YPMQ YWLM:
DCT PMQ W223 TRE W603 WLM (REF ERSA-GEN-PFR-1, PARA 1)
YTRE YWLM:
DCT TRE W603 WLM DCT (REF ERSA-GEN-PFR-1, PARA 1)
DCT TRE W223 NICLA W182 WLM DCT
YWLM YCFS:
DCT WLM W603 TRE W196 CFS (REF ERSA-GEN-FPR-1, PARA 1)
YWLM YPMQ:
DCT WLM W603 TRE W223 PMQ DCT (REF ERSA-GEN-PFR-1, PARA 1)
YWLM YTRE:
DCT WLM W603 TRE DCT (REFER ERSA-GEN-PFR-1, PARA 1)
DCT WLM W182 NICLA W223 TRE DCT
AMD EN ROUTE SUPPLEMENT AUSTRALIA
FROM 06 160005 TO PERM
GEN-FPR-1, ROUTE FLIGHT PLANNING REQUIRMENTS AMD
PARAGRAPH 1, NEW SOUTH WALES, AMD FLW ENTRIES TO READ:
COFFS HARBOUR WILLIAMTOWN:
NOT TO BE FLIGHT PLANNED WHEN R580, R583A, R587A OR R587B ACT.
LORD HOWE - WILLIAMTOWN - LORD HOWE:
ATS ROUTE W149 MUST NOT BE FLIGHT PLANNED WHEN R574 ACT. AN ALTERNATE
ROUTE VIA PMQ MUST BE PLANNED.
LORD HOWE ISLAND - WILLIAMTOWN PORT MACQUARIE:
ATS ROUTE W768 MUST NOT BE FLIGHT PLANNED WHEN R574 ACT. VFR TRANSIT
NOT ASSURED WHEN R574 ACT.
WILLIAMTOWN TAREE:
NOT TO BE FLIGHT PLANNED WHEN R580, R583A, R587A OR R587B ACT.
WILLIAMTOWN - COFFS HARBOUR:
NOT TO BE FLIGHT PLANNED WHEN R580, R583A, R587A OR R587B ACT.
GEN-FPR-17, FLIGHT PLAN OPTIONS, PARAGRAPH 8, ADD THE FLW ALTN
ROUTING AVBL:
YCFS YWLM:
DCT CFS W196 TRE W603 WLM (REF ERSA-GEN-FPR-1, PARA 1)
YPMQ YWLM:
DCT PMQ W223 TRE W603 WLM (REF ERSA-GEN-PFR-1, PARA 1)
YTRE YWLM:
DCT TRE W603 WLM DCT (REF ERSA-GEN-PFR-1, PARA 1)
DCT TRE W223 NICLA W182 WLM DCT
YWLM YCFS:
DCT WLM W603 TRE W196 CFS (REF ERSA-GEN-FPR-1, PARA 1)
YWLM YPMQ:
DCT WLM W603 TRE W223 PMQ DCT (REF ERSA-GEN-PFR-1, PARA 1)
YWLM YTRE:
DCT WLM W603 TRE DCT (REFER ERSA-GEN-PFR-1, PARA 1)
DCT WLM W182 NICLA W223 TRE DCT
AMD EN ROUTE SUPPLEMENT AUSTRALIA
FROM 06 160005 TO PERM
Thread Starter
So. Are there any worthwhile changes?
Surely an improvement as at least can be flight planned over WLM when the airspace is not active.
Are those restricted areas normally active on weekends.?
Incredibly complicated.
Surely an improvement as at least can be flight planned over WLM when the airspace is not active.
Are those restricted areas normally active on weekends.?
Incredibly complicated.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Canberra, ACT, Australia
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick.
See 'Designated Airspace Handbook' - Section 13 - Current edition dated 29 MAY 2014.
Are those restricted areas normally active on weekends.?
Last edited by CWO Geoff; 17th Jun 2014 at 04:08.
Thread Starter
Let us into the secret - what does the handbook say!
Imagine you are a low time private pilot? I think you would fly inland into the mountains rather than make a slight mistake in reading all that stuff. And doesn't it say the restricted areas can become active at any time?
Imagine you are a low time private pilot? I think you would fly inland into the mountains rather than make a slight mistake in reading all that stuff. And doesn't it say the restricted areas can become active at any time?