Channel 7 Sunday Night Program About VH-MDX

[Jabawocky]

yr right these are not personal attacks. YOU bring the personal bit in by often quoting how awesome you are. Thats the personal bit, all supplied by yourself.

Hitting Dick up with simple questions is also not personal attacks. It is rational playing the ball not the man.

Simply regardless of what you or Dick think, the fact is MDX was getting his clearance, he (the pilot) just chose not to wait for it (not long) and instead sent 4 people to their death.

Fact is it was not the RAAF that did that.

Now I do believe we have some very excessive MIL airspace, have only been roadblocked once, a few times climbed or descended, but NEVER have I been sent even remotely close to my death by ATC.

Fact and data is never a weapon against a deeply held superstition.

By the way I don't care what your maths and english grades are. Playing the ball here not the man. As I have in the other threads too.

If you want warm fuzzy personal support I agree that the pilot of the Mooney not the LAME's sent them to their deaths too. But of course some would argue the opposite. So which side of that debate are you on?

[Jabawocky]

Funny how none of them will answer the simple question:

Why do we need to be uniquely different from say the USA? Why are our boys so precious? Why does OH&S laws make the painting of the Harbour Bridge an impossibility? (Today's news)

WHY ARE AUSTRALIANS SO PRECIOUS?

Gooday Bob,

I support the notion of smaller and less restrictive MIL airspace however there are some technical challenges that unless you talk to and go see the coalface, you can never fully appreciate the problem.

Some of the large areas do not have sufficient radar coverage and unfortunately the whole lot gets locked up because some is not able to offer protection to us the civvies.

This is vastly different in the USA.

Add to that we do suffer from a you can only do what you are allowed mindset in an ex penal colony, where as the USA has the opposite mind set, do what you like unless it is not a good idea in which case we will make a law about it.

When you know ATC's that have watched a bugsmasher wander right through live firing, and damned near hit by a missile, and you listen to them recount the story and see the look in their eyes as they and the RAAF almost sent X number of people to their deaths, then you start to understand.

In this instance, the time it took to identify, with random infrequent and poor radar coverage (in Willy R space) get on the phone to the range controller and knock it off, was only seconds, not minutes, and in that time the firing was already underway. Can you imagine if we opened up a lot more without the coverage and someone gets hit?

Then it will be definately the RAAF's fault. Imagine the fallout then. MDX was not in anyway the RAAF's fault and even Dick's assertion that the normal and typical processing time of the clearance was the hole in the cheese is factually incorrect. How can something that is normal and to be expected another hole in the cheese? Holes in the cheese are things that actually go abnormal and wrong. This clearance delivery was not abnormal.

Go have a cuppa with "you know who" and get him to explain it. I am sure it will make more sense.

[Bill Pike]

I doubt that failures of vac pumps or poor pilot decisions will stop any day soon but I see no reason at all to require aircraft to flight plan over tiger country SE when it isn't necessary.
Statistically it might not be dangerous but it made me nervous when I did it.
This nonsense doesn't happen in the States and shouldn't happen here. If there isn't radar coverage thirty miles from our main fighter base there should be

[yr right]

Jaba.
I have never said how good I am or anything like that. I've been ask what my experience was so I've given it. If my record in the industry isn't good enough we'll then I guess I'll leave.
This fella was under enormous pressure at this stage of the flight. His judgement was impaired and as such he made the wrong decision. I don't think anyone is going to say that was not the case. The point is. He should not have had to be placed into that position. Had he been able to costal the accident would not of happened. Can you say that's not true. Or atleast agree that the margarin of error would have been largely reduced to great than a 90% chance of getting to a safe out come.
And by the way because some one is dyslexic or colour blind as in the other thread that dose not mean that we are dumber than you are just means we may not be as good as you in them areas.
Cheers

[p.j.m]

Originally Posted by yr right

What a crook. Can some one tell me why the raaf need and exclusion zone from the coast to the range 1 hour out of the largest city in Australia.

Tell me, if Mt Kilimanjaro was at Williamstown, instead of the RAAF base, would you be asking the government to remove it, or would you plan to fly around it?

Its a known limitation, plan accordingly, pretty simple stuff really.

[p.j.m]

Originally Posted by Dick Smith

I made it very clear on the Sunday interview that I believed the pilot made serious errors of judgement.

And that is the root cause of this incident.

Rather than trying to transfer the blame to the RAAF, fix the problem at the source.

Maybe start with

1) Psychometric tests to week out "fly by the pants" cowboys who refuse to follow rules and believe they are so important they won't wait to have aircraft faults to be fixed or wait a couple of minutes to get a required clearance
2) More regulation so aircraft with faulty instruments are not allowed to take off in the first place, other than in an emergency, and getting home to the wife for dinner doesn't count Dick.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

For my point of view, just like the FTDK said in response to my deleted post. Contact EARLY so you can get where you need to go when you get there. There is zero possibility of getting A LANE...meaning no clearance required anywhere on the coast over or near Willie. Just as much chance as getting a lane over the top of SY...just like in the US.

If the overhead route was available thirty years ago and was marked on the maps...which means available on request...wouldnt a prudent thoughtful pilot ring the number in the book...knowing from the ARFOR the wx would be crud inland...to request that route? I am pretty sure the PIC would not have planned inland...however, going by the transcripts, somewhere on that track he would still have had trouble with wx closing in in the CTA.

I feel issues between ATC and VFR pilots is perceived skill or lack thereof. Nothing to do with whether Mil or Civ just worried VFR will go pearshaped right in the middle of busy airspace and then have to be extracted by using a huge amount of committed resources. And that issue has been extant since VFR and IFR became separated as airports got busier. Trust!

[evilroy]

This fella was under enormous pressure at this stage of the flight. His judgement was impaired and as such he made the wrong decision. I don't think anyone is going to say that was not the case. The point is. He should not have had to be placed into that position.

If this was "enormous pressure" then he should not have been the pilot in command. The situation that night was no more stressful than what hundreds of thousands of pilots have faced every day and night.

[Bill Pike]

"Its a known limitation, plan accordingly, pretty simple stuff really. "

That, p.j.m., is exactly what the Minister should say to the RAAF about a coastal airway

[junior.VH-LFA]

Some of you need to learn what an initial and pitch is, and then look up how close to the coat Williamtown is.

You have no chance of a coastal lane.

[Jabawocky]

Y R

This fella was under enormous pressure at this stage of the flight.And what are pilots trained to deal with, and how to make decissions His judgement was impaired and as such he made the wrong decision.You Bet! I don't think anyone is going to say that was not the case. Seems to me not, however some seem to discount the value of your statement when it suits their political agendaThe point is. He should not have had to be placed into that position. Correct, he should not have put himself there to begin with, but even when he did, he continued with bad decissions, fatal ones.Had he been able to costal the accident would not of happened. Can you say that's not true. That is not true, HE WAS ABLE TO, HE CHOSE NOT TOOr atleast agree that the margarin of error would have been largely reduced to great than a 90% chance of getting to a safe out come.I reckon the chances are he may have still lost it, unless he was in true VMC, and yes the coast route would have provided the far best outcome. The coast route was available all he had to do was take the clearance that was seconds away from being given, or if he was really in strife just entered anyway and declared HE REQUIRED it and taken it anyway.

As for you being dumb...I never said that, nor your dyslexic condition assuring that. Please try not to confuse me with others.


Jnr,

Some of you need to learn what an initial and pitch is, and then look up how close to the coat Williamtown is.

You have no chance of a coastal lane.

Just doing a normal approach to land on profile makes for easy study of the beach. No need for anything else to prohibit a coastal lane.

[Creampuff]

Jnr.

The discussion (from my perspective) is not about the 10% of the time there is one or more military or commercial aircraft around. It's about the other 90% of time.

[junior.VH-LFA]

Weekends possibly, but it's been my experience having lived and worked at Williamtown that Mon-Fri the airspace is quite busy, with Hornets/Hawks doing a 3 mile initial straight over the coast at 350kias and 1500ftAGL. Low initials can be done at or below 500ffAGL.

In terms of number of movements, it was usual for about 30 Hornet movements per day, and about 20 Hawk. Add to that 4SQN PC9's also.

I don't see how a lane could provide separation from that traffic, without requiring a clearance.

Perhaps I'm missing the point.

[500N]

You are forgetting the security aspect as well.
The raaf are unlikely to want aircraft flying near or over the base
Where the possible potential for you know what might occur.


Looking at the map, why not the gap between the two small areas ?

[Creampuff]

Of course, I forgot "security".

The aircraft cleared to transit never look out the window and the pax never take pictures.

The pax on the commercial aircraft that land there never look out the windows or take pictures.

The punters at the civvy terminal can't see what's going on on the other side of the runway.

It's the warm inner glow of 'security' caused by the compliance of law abiding citizens.

I tried to make the point earlier: Lines on charts and airways clearances are not going to stop the real bad guys.

Jnr: Calculate the percentage of time all that's going on, compared with the 168 hours in a week.

[500N]

I wasn't talking about taking photos !

[Check_Thrust]

Dick,

In post 354 on page 18 of this thread I asked for your opinion on an accident that occurred in the USA. Can you please provide a response to my question?

[Bill Pike]

There was a corridor two thousand feet above KLAX last time I looked. A pitch and break is confined to the circuit area I believe. No one has said that a clearance shouldn't be required however it should routinely be given.

[Creampuff]

If you weren't talking about photos, what were you talking about 500N?

What's stopping the punters with airways clearances from dropping flour bombs and rolls of toilet paper out the window as they fly over?

Lines on charts and airways clearances won't stop the real bad guys.

[p.j.m]

Originally Posted by 500N

I wasn't talking about taking photos !

Apparently it doesn't really matter anyway - just ask Dick.

Originally Posted by AirTrafficOne

I have cleared YOU in your Jetranger, with your wife and kids on board to transit and land somewhere private north of Williamtown. On a return flight one day I cleared you to fly right over the Base, cautioning you not to take any photographs and then to hover in front of the control tower whilst you took pictures, your kids waved and I shone the Aldis Lamp at them.

Dick has shown over and over again in this thread, he thinks he and his fellow "millionaire businessmen" are a privileged class in Australia and that the rules don't apply to them.

Issues with aircraft instruments or equipment, flight paths, clearances can all just be swept aside by them as "unimportant", and they should be allowed to do whatever they want, whenever they want, and if as a result of their own actions things go pear shaped, they expect the public to get them out of their mess, or they blame someone else for it.

You can't get in the way of a civilian Jetranger that wants a clear, unimpeded path from Terry Hills to his hobby farm north of Williamtown, when ever it suits the pilot!