Incident that could have dwarfed lockhart river
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The GAFA
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My money is on the receiver being a Trimble 2000. They're potentially a death trap. I've seen it indicate being on-track when in actual fact was 20+ miles off-track. It was also the same unit fitted to the aircraft in the Benalla CFIT..
Last edited by drunk_pilot; 17th Sep 2015 at 18:49. Reason: Typo
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My money is on the receiver being a Trimble 2000.
It was also the same unit fitted to the aircraft in the Benalla CFIT
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely sensationalist piece of journalism in this mornings Melbourne Herald Sun about it. Headline said aircraft came within 90m of each other. Then later in the article it says they came within 1NM (1.8KM) horizontally & 90m VERTICALLY. Also crapped on about how passengers refused to fly back with same pilot and they had to fly another one in. Really..? Or did they have to fly another one in cos the GPS was U/S in the 1st A/C and couldn't fly out safely in the conditions..?
They also named the pilot with a nice photo of him for all to see (presumably copied from company website). Article made him sound like an incompetent bumbling idiot. Pretty unfair until the full FACTS are known. Its not as if he's some newby who just got his instrument rating. Very experienced and well regarded operator prior to this incident. All very strange.
They also named the pilot with a nice photo of him for all to see (presumably copied from company website). Article made him sound like an incompetent bumbling idiot. Pretty unfair until the full FACTS are known. Its not as if he's some newby who just got his instrument rating. Very experienced and well regarded operator prior to this incident. All very strange.
My money is on the receiver being a Trimble 2000. They're potentially a death trap. I've seen it indicate being on-track when in actual fact was 20+ miles off-track. It was also the same unit fitted to the aircraft in the Benalla CFIT..
When you live....
My word. I've flown one with a TNL 2000
Join Date: May 2003
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like an enquiry independent of the ATSB, seeking contact from parties involved; audio here:
Mid-air scare prompts calls for change
Mid-air scare prompts calls for change
Interesting that despite the sensationalist reporting of the Australian and the inaccurate reporting of 3AW this incident still is not serious enough for all media outlets to pick up on it. I have been listening to the ABC all day and all they are interested in is growing your own vege patch and federal politics. They are even quoting what happened on Sydney radio rather than Dick Smith on Melbourne radio. If the two aircraft had hit however then that would have been newsworthy. BTW where is Thorn Bird in all this, he started the ball rolling. He either was the other pilot or knows the other pilot quite well.
With Hawthorn playing Adelaide pretty sure it will be back to the usual news fodder tomorrow. If it was also in the SMH,DT, CM,WA,NTNews,CT,AA, HM then I would agree that mainstream media is suddenly taking an interest in aviation matters.
Nothing wrong with the Garmin 155XL. I think it has the same GPS engine as the Garmin GNS430 (not 430W). Unless the aircraft has recently had its ADSB upgrade, it looks like its coupled with an Avidyne MFD in this aircraft.
There are plenty of jets still using the 155XL.
The pilot (assuming its the normal pilot for that aircraft) is very competent and has been flying this aircraft for 10 years or more. You've got to assume that 90% of us would have had the same issue in the same circumstances.
This incident shares with the old Benalla incident that radar data on the aircraft's flight path, but Airservices Australia did not provide any advice. In a first world country we should expect better than this.
Before the ATC guys jump in and complain, these comments are directed at the system, not the controllers.
The other issue it raises is the adequacy of the "backup" network of ground based navaids that we are going to be left with. If the Mt Livingstone NDB and / or VOR was still operating or the Eildon Weir VOR, then the pilot would have had a cross check. But the system that AsA are unilaterally leaving us with does not provide this.
After the criticisms of the ATSB over the diligence of the investigation of the Benalla incident and the Lockhart river incident. Plus the criticisms of the collusion between CASA & the ATSB over the Pelair incident, this will be a very interesting report.
There are plenty of jets still using the 155XL.
The pilot (assuming its the normal pilot for that aircraft) is very competent and has been flying this aircraft for 10 years or more. You've got to assume that 90% of us would have had the same issue in the same circumstances.
This incident shares with the old Benalla incident that radar data on the aircraft's flight path, but Airservices Australia did not provide any advice. In a first world country we should expect better than this.
Before the ATC guys jump in and complain, these comments are directed at the system, not the controllers.
The other issue it raises is the adequacy of the "backup" network of ground based navaids that we are going to be left with. If the Mt Livingstone NDB and / or VOR was still operating or the Eildon Weir VOR, then the pilot would have had a cross check. But the system that AsA are unilaterally leaving us with does not provide this.
After the criticisms of the ATSB over the diligence of the investigation of the Benalla incident and the Lockhart river incident. Plus the criticisms of the collusion between CASA & the ATSB over the Pelair incident, this will be a very interesting report.
I agree that there is nothing wrong with the Garmin 155XL GPS. Not as nice as the G430/530 or later, but still capable of doing the job.
Incidents like this, and Benalla, and even Lockhart R say something for my "belt and braces" practice of always having at least two GPSs operating in the aeroplane even if the other unit is a portable. Having spent many hours in front of a G430W in the panel and a G496 on the yoke, I can't recall them ever being in disagreement on my position for any length of time, although I have had one or the other drop out for a period.
As I recall, the Lockhart R aircraft was scheduled to have terrain warning installed and the Benella aircraft was to have an avionic upgrade including GPS. A Garmin 496 with the terrain warning turned on may have saved both.
Dr
Incidents like this, and Benalla, and even Lockhart R say something for my "belt and braces" practice of always having at least two GPSs operating in the aeroplane even if the other unit is a portable. Having spent many hours in front of a G430W in the panel and a G496 on the yoke, I can't recall them ever being in disagreement on my position for any length of time, although I have had one or the other drop out for a period.
As I recall, the Lockhart R aircraft was scheduled to have terrain warning installed and the Benella aircraft was to have an avionic upgrade including GPS. A Garmin 496 with the terrain warning turned on may have saved both.
Dr