New MDX - Five Dead Williamtown Never Found
Rat,
It seems that many on this forum follow the General Melchett (Blach Adder) train of thought:
'If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.'
It seems that many on this forum follow the General Melchett (Blach Adder) train of thought:
'If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.'
If say the Willy RAAF base had long ago been shifted from its rather vulnerable coastal position, to somewhere up closer to our threats say Tindal (where miltary airspace abounds,) and if MDX had therefore been permitted to flight plan coastal the aircraft would not have been in a position where the pilot's purported limited abilities were insufficent. Therefore the accident would most likely not have happened. I am not sure what a "primary cause" is. Any break in the chain, no matter how trivial, can oft times avoid an accident.
One can equally say that had the PIC paid more attention to the fact that there appearred to be issues with the AH/GD, and the forcast flight conditions for the flight, when he was on the ground at Cooly - and stayed there, then "the accident would most likely not have happened"!
Or, had the flight proceeded coastal, the AH rolling upside down at some point could equally have resulted in the same outcome!
Dr
The only reason you guys discuss this prang ad infinitum is because the wreckage has never been found.
I put it to you that; had the wreckage been found within a week of the disappearance, none of you would even remember the event. Perhaps its time to get over it.
Weather Willy airspace is over sized and over regulated is another matter.
I put it to you that; had the wreckage been found within a week of the disappearance, none of you would even remember the event. Perhaps its time to get over it.
Weather Willy airspace is over sized and over regulated is another matter.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 'Stralia!
Age: 47
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Weather Willy airspace is over sized and over regulated is another matter.
And I will get over it when Dick stops misappropriating its status for his cause! (and when it does get found!)
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, ok. let's play that game a bit, just top see how stupid that philosophy really is.
"Well, if that mountain hadn't been there Joe would never have hit it in the dark, therefore it's the mountain's fault he crashed"
"If that nasty crosswind hadn't been there, Bob would never have lost control on landing and crash into the hangar, therefore it was the crosswind's fault he crashed (and also the hangar's fault for being in his way after he lost control) "
"If that level 5 thunderstorm hadn't been right there where Jeffery was flying, he wouldn't have had the wings ripped off his plane, therefore it's the Thunderstorm's fault he fell out of the sky in pieces"
Not a single one of those is any more inane that saying the existence of the Air Base caused the MDX crash.
I guess I walk out to an airplane with a radically different mindset than some folks here. In my philosophy, things like mountains, and thunderstorms, and restricted airspace, and ATC procedures, and short runways and all those other things are just facts, that's the environment in which I'm going to fly, and *my* job is to make good decisions on how I am going to conduct my flight given those factors. Up to and including the decision not to fly tonight, if too many of those factors are against me.
If the "it's not my fault" attitudes displayed here are representative of the prevailing view toward piloting responsibilities in Oz*, I would recommend that you stop using the term "Pilot in Command" and replace it with VOB, for "Victim on Board" Because that's what's being espoused, that the poor old MDX pilot was just a victim of circumstances beyond his control.
* just to be clear, I'm indulging in a little hyperbole here, obviously there are a number of Oz pilots here who have a little more rational view of what a pilot's responsibilities are.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again, A Squared, whomever you are, an excellent bloody post!
For the man that flies the 'Fork' - totally rational and un-emotive comments; not like some that just bore you to death with the unending agenda.
You have cred when it comes to taking a legitimate shot if that's ever your want.
While Dick will never change, Bill is panning out as a total disappointment as a 'professional.'
As A Squared alluded to, Bill, there is a thing called 'personal responsibility,' that was sadly lacking in this tragic incident.
To twist the facts to kick the RAAF in the bum is way below the standards of a (supposed) professional, and analytical, left-seater.
For the man that flies the 'Fork' - totally rational and un-emotive comments; not like some that just bore you to death with the unending agenda.
You have cred when it comes to taking a legitimate shot if that's ever your want.
While Dick will never change, Bill is panning out as a total disappointment as a 'professional.'
As A Squared alluded to, Bill, there is a thing called 'personal responsibility,' that was sadly lacking in this tragic incident.
To twist the facts to kick the RAAF in the bum is way below the standards of a (supposed) professional, and analytical, left-seater.
obviously there are a number of Oz pilots here who have a little more rational view of what a pilot's responsibilities are.
Bill is panning out as a total disappointment as a 'professional.'
If I may presume to dissent from the content of A Squared's, et al, posts.
The comparators used by A Squared are matters over which there is no control: the position of mountains, the wind direction and the phenomenon of storms.
The location of the RAAF Base at Williamtown is merely a decision of humans. A decision that can be changed.
The unpredictability of the response that people trying to transit the airspace receive is the product of a human machine. Humans have control over that machine.
Please humour those of us who labour under the misconception that we have the right to point out that the location of the RAAF Base, the size of the surrounding airspace and the procedures for transit are all matters over which humans have control and can therefore be changed.
And although we all realise that a move or change would cost money, we also have a right to point out that a move or change might be a better investment of the taxpayer's limited dollars because of the return in, among other things, the reduced rigmarole for all civilian traffic through the entire corridor. Further, some of us still adhere to that quaint metaphor about pipers and tunes, but of course the reality is that private citizens should just STFU and pay taxes so as to be inconvenienced in whatever way government and its agencies choose.
(I agree, Fantome.)
The comparators used by A Squared are matters over which there is no control: the position of mountains, the wind direction and the phenomenon of storms.
The location of the RAAF Base at Williamtown is merely a decision of humans. A decision that can be changed.
The unpredictability of the response that people trying to transit the airspace receive is the product of a human machine. Humans have control over that machine.
Please humour those of us who labour under the misconception that we have the right to point out that the location of the RAAF Base, the size of the surrounding airspace and the procedures for transit are all matters over which humans have control and can therefore be changed.
And although we all realise that a move or change would cost money, we also have a right to point out that a move or change might be a better investment of the taxpayer's limited dollars because of the return in, among other things, the reduced rigmarole for all civilian traffic through the entire corridor. Further, some of us still adhere to that quaint metaphor about pipers and tunes, but of course the reality is that private citizens should just STFU and pay taxes so as to be inconvenienced in whatever way government and its agencies choose.
(I agree, Fantome.)
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I may presume to dissent from the content of A Squared's, et al, posts.
The comparators used by A Squared are matters over which there is no control: the position of mountains, the wind direction and the phenomenon of storms.
The location of the RAAF Base at Williamtown is merely a decision of humans. A decision that can be changed.]
The comparators used by A Squared are matters over which there is no control: the position of mountains, the wind direction and the phenomenon of storms.
The location of the RAAF Base at Williamtown is merely a decision of humans. A decision that can be changed.]
I get that there is a contingent here who feel that the ATC procedures associated with the base should be changed, or even that the base should be moved elsewhere. That may be. I really don't have an opinion one way or another on that.
But, those advocates diverge from rationality when they attempt to blame the astonishingly poor decisions made that night by the pilot upon the RAAF.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fantome (post #108), go back and read the use of the word 'sent' - post #63
The implication being that the PIC was 'sent' to his death by the RAAF. He wasn't 'sent' anywhere by the RAAF. He had choices.
It's unfortunate that someone of Bill's stature falls into the trap of using emotive language in an endeavor to sway opinion. Reminds me of someone else whose name escapes me.
If you regard 'sent' as legitimate in the context that it was posted, and think such use was 'professional,' then we inhabit separate planets.
The implication being that the PIC was 'sent' to his death by the RAAF. He wasn't 'sent' anywhere by the RAAF. He had choices.
It's unfortunate that someone of Bill's stature falls into the trap of using emotive language in an endeavor to sway opinion. Reminds me of someone else whose name escapes me.
If you regard 'sent' as legitimate in the context that it was posted, and think such use was 'professional,' then we inhabit separate planets.
Thread Starter
The five were clearly sent to their deaths because of the totally rediculous RAAF airspace restrictions that existed on that Sunday night when no military operations were taking place at all.
Delude yourself as much as you like.
I said it clearly on the Sunday night show and I know who most Australians will believe.
And it will happen again unless we get the necessary airspace reforms in.
I have offered to pay the cost for RAAF people to travel to North America to see how this type of accident has far less chance of happening there.
No need they say. " we are better and know it all".
Delude yourself as much as you like.
I said it clearly on the Sunday night show and I know who most Australians will believe.
And it will happen again unless we get the necessary airspace reforms in.
I have offered to pay the cost for RAAF people to travel to North America to see how this type of accident has far less chance of happening there.
No need they say. " we are better and know it all".
Guest
Posts: n/a
I said it clearly on the Sunday night show and I know who most Australians will believe.
But, those advocates diverge from rationality when they attempt to blame the astonishingly poor decisions made that night by the pilot upon the RAAF.
Dick, as has been repeated over and over and over again, the only person who did any sending was the pilot. Stop deluding yourself. Not even the most creative use of English can distort reality to match your words.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must admit that I have some (grudging) admiration for Dick, because he is a bloody good media performer. He could sell spears to the Spartans and does have the talent to use language in a manner that can sway the gullible out there in TV land.
'Road-block airspace,' 'They turned the radar off (G Airspace Trial),' 'The manual telephone system (G Airspace Trial),' 'Dirt-road airspace (NAS),' 'The proven US system (NAS),' etc,etc.
He's damned good, and I dips the lid in that regard. He uses his profile well when it comes to influencing the unwashed.
But, for mine, I much more miss his juicy beetroot with a burger over his logic when it comes to airspace.
'Road-block airspace,' 'They turned the radar off (G Airspace Trial),' 'The manual telephone system (G Airspace Trial),' 'Dirt-road airspace (NAS),' 'The proven US system (NAS),' etc,etc.
He's damned good, and I dips the lid in that regard. He uses his profile well when it comes to influencing the unwashed.
But, for mine, I much more miss his juicy beetroot with a burger over his logic when it comes to airspace.
The five were clearly sent to their deaths because.....
Dick seems upset that clearance was delayed even though there were no military operations taking place that night. This is not logical. If there had been military operations taking place, would the outcome have been any different? You are focussing on the wrong problem Dick.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 74
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dispatch
The title is "Pilot in Command" for a reason....command.
Years back I had to have a good heart to heart with a Captain who should have known better and had put in a report complaining that "He had been dispatched with barely minimum fuel" and wasn't happy. Well apart from the fact that on a15 hour flight he had lots of alternates available including his Refile airport the bottom line was that HE was the person who signed the flight plan. No-one else. There's always the option of delay, postpone, cancel etc etc.
That applies Dick, to the lowest time PPL and the highest time airline captain.
It can never ever ever ever ever be "their fault".
Years back I had to have a good heart to heart with a Captain who should have known better and had put in a report complaining that "He had been dispatched with barely minimum fuel" and wasn't happy. Well apart from the fact that on a15 hour flight he had lots of alternates available including his Refile airport the bottom line was that HE was the person who signed the flight plan. No-one else. There's always the option of delay, postpone, cancel etc etc.
That applies Dick, to the lowest time PPL and the highest time airline captain.
It can never ever ever ever ever be "their fault".
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 'Stralia!
Age: 47
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The five were clearly sent to their deaths because of the totally rediculous RAAF airspace restrictions that existed on that Sunday night when no military operations were taking place at all.
If the RAAF are the problem, why is there not a C206 as well as a C210 up there we are looking for?
Now, I go back to my original question, that you are dodging -
If the US NAS military airspace had existed at Willy that night the pilot would have continued down the coast with lights and a horizon in front.
But, it didn't exist, and yet in spite of that, a C206, VH-AZC, planned, and flew that route with "lights and a horizon in front." MDX and AZC was, incidentally, not the only traffic operating in, over or around Williamtown then.
If what you are saying is true, then the above statement shouldn't have been possible. Could you please reply to that statement.
But, it didn't exist, and yet in spite of that, a C206, VH-AZC, planned, and flew that route with "lights and a horizon in front." MDX and AZC was, incidentally, not the only traffic operating in, over or around Williamtown then.
If what you are saying is true, then the above statement shouldn't have been possible. Could you please reply to that statement.
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Sydney
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Divided we fall...
All,
I read this thread and others bemoaning the state of GA and offer an observation as a mid-life, new-to-aviation PPL.
I begin by disclosing my admiration for both Dick (as a successful businessman and champion of GA) and the personnel of the RAAF (professionals trying to serve to the best of their ability).
Isn't this thread an example of why GA isn't united in getting improvements?
To use an annoying phrase, we are "playing the man, not the ball".
I sense broad agreement that allowing planning (in all circumstances) and overflight (except when specific activity requires) of Williamtown airspace at a reasonable level for GA (above 5,000 say) would be a great improvement.
If we could unite behind that; I reckon we stand a chance of a change (fresh eyed optimism maybe). If we attack each other on the way we each try to advance that cause, we have no hope (even with fresh eyed optimism).
One successful unified victory could begin to build momentum and the GA community may stop looking so hopeless to so many of you.
To get a change made; different messages will resonate with different audiences. We need people who can speak to the rule-makers in calm and logical language about the benefits, risks and practicalities of a proposal. We also need as much public support and visibility as possible (there are politicians involved ultimately who know more about being elected than aviation). I believe Dick's use of this accident is a way to explain to the public what we are trying to say; whether or not it had a bearing on the crash, it is a lightning-rod of interest around which we can get interest from voters.
Planning my first ever YSBK to YBAF flight recently, I found myself wishing for a fifth option:
- plan low level coastal (love Victor 1, but prefer height when available)
- plan inland route (low-ish, narrow-looking path just screaming out VCA to me)
- wait until the day of the flight in the hope RA was inactive and I could file over the top) or
- my eventual choice (like the accident flight), high and simple but inland over nasty terrain
Why can't we back each other, use the skills we all have in different areas of influence and actually try getting just one win on the board?
LoP
(waiting to be shot down by someone for my doe-eyed ignorance or told about Hicks, fire services at Ballina or the reason one member of our GA community won't ever support another one)
I read this thread and others bemoaning the state of GA and offer an observation as a mid-life, new-to-aviation PPL.
I begin by disclosing my admiration for both Dick (as a successful businessman and champion of GA) and the personnel of the RAAF (professionals trying to serve to the best of their ability).
Isn't this thread an example of why GA isn't united in getting improvements?
To use an annoying phrase, we are "playing the man, not the ball".
I sense broad agreement that allowing planning (in all circumstances) and overflight (except when specific activity requires) of Williamtown airspace at a reasonable level for GA (above 5,000 say) would be a great improvement.
If we could unite behind that; I reckon we stand a chance of a change (fresh eyed optimism maybe). If we attack each other on the way we each try to advance that cause, we have no hope (even with fresh eyed optimism).
One successful unified victory could begin to build momentum and the GA community may stop looking so hopeless to so many of you.
To get a change made; different messages will resonate with different audiences. We need people who can speak to the rule-makers in calm and logical language about the benefits, risks and practicalities of a proposal. We also need as much public support and visibility as possible (there are politicians involved ultimately who know more about being elected than aviation). I believe Dick's use of this accident is a way to explain to the public what we are trying to say; whether or not it had a bearing on the crash, it is a lightning-rod of interest around which we can get interest from voters.
Planning my first ever YSBK to YBAF flight recently, I found myself wishing for a fifth option:
- plan low level coastal (love Victor 1, but prefer height when available)
- plan inland route (low-ish, narrow-looking path just screaming out VCA to me)
- wait until the day of the flight in the hope RA was inactive and I could file over the top) or
- my eventual choice (like the accident flight), high and simple but inland over nasty terrain
Why can't we back each other, use the skills we all have in different areas of influence and actually try getting just one win on the board?
LoP
(waiting to be shot down by someone for my doe-eyed ignorance or told about Hicks, fire services at Ballina or the reason one member of our GA community won't ever support another one)