New MDX - Five Dead Williamtown Never Found
Thread Starter
The media claim that I was a supporter of David Hicks was always wrong.
I was a supporter of Hicks being placed in front of a jury .
One of the reasons I supported this was because it was pointed out to me that we could hardly object if our servicemen and women were treated the same way as Hicks in a future war.
As simple as that.
I was a supporter of Hicks being placed in front of a jury .
One of the reasons I supported this was because it was pointed out to me that we could hardly object if our servicemen and women were treated the same way as Hicks in a future war.
As simple as that.
Dick,
Whilst I am a critic of you in many ways, I've always supported your stance regarding David Hicks. And for the reasons that you and LB have outlined.
(Coincidently, David Hicks and I both attended Para Vista Primary School in S.A. but at different times..)
Whilst I am a critic of you in many ways, I've always supported your stance regarding David Hicks. And for the reasons that you and LB have outlined.
(Coincidently, David Hicks and I both attended Para Vista Primary School in S.A. but at different times..)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Australian military appear to be arrogant to many - because they are charged with protecting Australias security, and they do just that whenever a security threat is present.
In many cases, their actions appear heavy-handed - and under some circumstances, they are. But that's their job.
During WW2, the Australian military did many outrageous and heavy-handed things.
They stopped civilians driving trucks and commercial vehicles in the streets and confiscated their vehicles - and therefore their liveihoods - without anything more than promising the owners the Govt would send them a cheque for the Govt-assessed value of the vehicle.
The problem was the truck and commercial vehicle owners couldn't find replacements for their vehicles, so they nearly always lost out heavily.
There was no compensation for lost earnings due to this heavy-handed military requisitions action.
The landholders at Tocumwal in 1942 weren't even advised the Govt had confiscated their land for a major air base.
The first the land owners knew, was they found people cutting and rolling up their fences, prior to earthmoving equipment arriving to build runways and hangars and military buildings on their land.
Shortly after this heavy-handed takeover, the landowners were presented with official Govt orders to leave their homes - and they were given 24 hrs to collect their basic personal possessions, to get out, and to find another home and another way to earn a living.
Yes, there was a War on, and things were pretty desperate - but the Australian military acted with pretty extreme heavy-handedness in that era - because they were charged with defending Australia, and whatever it took to carry out that defence, was done - with no niceties.
So, with this background, this security attitude continues to this day within the Australian military.
They will not give up their hold on what they regard as important military assets and reserved areas, because they firmly believe they will be needed again one day, in the case of another 1942-type event.
In many cases, their actions appear heavy-handed - and under some circumstances, they are. But that's their job.
During WW2, the Australian military did many outrageous and heavy-handed things.
They stopped civilians driving trucks and commercial vehicles in the streets and confiscated their vehicles - and therefore their liveihoods - without anything more than promising the owners the Govt would send them a cheque for the Govt-assessed value of the vehicle.
The problem was the truck and commercial vehicle owners couldn't find replacements for their vehicles, so they nearly always lost out heavily.
There was no compensation for lost earnings due to this heavy-handed military requisitions action.
The landholders at Tocumwal in 1942 weren't even advised the Govt had confiscated their land for a major air base.
The first the land owners knew, was they found people cutting and rolling up their fences, prior to earthmoving equipment arriving to build runways and hangars and military buildings on their land.
Shortly after this heavy-handed takeover, the landowners were presented with official Govt orders to leave their homes - and they were given 24 hrs to collect their basic personal possessions, to get out, and to find another home and another way to earn a living.
Yes, there was a War on, and things were pretty desperate - but the Australian military acted with pretty extreme heavy-handedness in that era - because they were charged with defending Australia, and whatever it took to carry out that defence, was done - with no niceties.
So, with this background, this security attitude continues to this day within the Australian military.
They will not give up their hold on what they regard as important military assets and reserved areas, because they firmly believe they will be needed again one day, in the case of another 1942-type event.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We must ask ourselves why it would even enter the head of the pilot of MDX to flight plan via Craven etc. My understanding at the time was that he had been told at the flight planning that clearance via Willy airspace was unlikely to be available. And, as I recall, there was a red arrow on the chart that prohibited flight planning via Willy Indeed in my view that is the only reason that makes sense. So one was not permitted to flight plan through Willy airspace although clearance might become available? There isn't any doubt that single engine aircraft were at times require to track that way when only risible levels of traffic by international standards were using Willy airspace. I doubt that anyone will believe the conversation I had with Alan Newman of DCA (or similar) about flight planning direct Sydney from Willy in lieu of via MQD about 1970. "Why can't we flight plan direct?" "Because there is a red arrow on the chart" "But why is it there?" "Because we don't want you flight planning direct" and so on. I did finally win that one, (with the support of Bob Green and Arthur Doubleday), saving my then employer a lot of money that had previously been wasted on pointless extra track miles.
PS I always am a supporter of Dick when I support his aims. I do not care about his methods. They are his business.
Why we are discussing Hicks here I cannot fathom.
PS I always am a supporter of Dick when I support his aims. I do not care about his methods. They are his business.
Why we are discussing Hicks here I cannot fathom.
Last edited by Bill Pike; 28th Feb 2016 at 21:53.
Thread Starter
The current regulations , today , state that a pilot must not flight plan over Williamtown south from Taree if the Willy restricted areas are active.
They mostly are.
So a pilot is forced inland to the tiger country where five bodies are still lost.
It is an outrageous limitation which works against safety.
Willy was located there because of the steelworks at Newcastle . The steelworks have closed down .
Giant roadblock airspace on this busy air route between two of our largest cities works against our national interest .
Modern international procedures if copied would allow the airspace to be better shared with no measurable reduction in safety.
How long before the next fatalities caused by unnecessary holding or diversion?
They mostly are.
So a pilot is forced inland to the tiger country where five bodies are still lost.
It is an outrageous limitation which works against safety.
Willy was located there because of the steelworks at Newcastle . The steelworks have closed down .
Giant roadblock airspace on this busy air route between two of our largest cities works against our national interest .
Modern international procedures if copied would allow the airspace to be better shared with no measurable reduction in safety.
How long before the next fatalities caused by unnecessary holding or diversion?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another 35 years, perhaps? To put it in better perspective, MDX is the only known crash (reputedly) caused by diversion around Williamtown (well, according to Dick, anyway), in 113 years of aviation.
And in many peoples opinions, the diversion around Williamtown was not the primary cause of the crash of MDX.
And in many peoples opinions, the diversion around Williamtown was not the primary cause of the crash of MDX.
Thread Starter
One track. What about the extra cost of the extra distance and holding? Wouldn't it be better to remove this waste if possible?
Have you seen what is happening to GA in this country?
A friend just tried to book his tour group on the float plane at Strahn in Tassie.
Closed down like the operator at Hobart. Can't even get my life raft serviced in Aus any more. Over $4 k to send it to Singapore as dangerous goods.
GA is doomed. Now that both CASA and AsA are run by the military as I said before- get out now before you lose even more money.
Have you seen what is happening to GA in this country?
A friend just tried to book his tour group on the float plane at Strahn in Tassie.
Closed down like the operator at Hobart. Can't even get my life raft serviced in Aus any more. Over $4 k to send it to Singapore as dangerous goods.
GA is doomed. Now that both CASA and AsA are run by the military as I said before- get out now before you lose even more money.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 'Stralia!
Age: 47
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about the extra cost of the extra distance and holding? Wouldn't it be better to remove this waste if possible?
That it caused the loss of MDX. No.
But that point there is something I think everyone can get behind.
Thread Starter
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.
It was the RAAF leadership constant refusal to copy the best from around the world that forced the pilot to fly towards the mountains. The RAAF was clearly primarily responsible.
There were no military aircraft operating in the airspace at the time
Why then the huge death making roadblock airspace?
It was the RAAF leadership constant refusal to copy the best from around the world that forced the pilot to fly towards the mountains. The RAAF was clearly primarily responsible.
There were no military aircraft operating in the airspace at the time
Why then the huge death making roadblock airspace?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 'Stralia!
Age: 47
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fascinating! I hadn't heard of this incident before this thread. Not being from Oz some of the terminology and acronyms are lost on me, but I think I follow the basic plot here. From reading what has been posted and linked here and some other reading, it seems that the PIC:
Planned a night VFR flight over a route which included flying into mountainous terrain, on the downwind side of a mountain range when winds aloft were up to 70 knots, (and if that wasn't enough of a clue, severe turbulence was specifically forecast in a SIGMET) with conditions forecast to be questionable for VFR flight, with forecast icing along his route and at his altitudes, in a single engine airplane not equipped for icing.
And, after getting beat around a bit on a preceding flight segment, (as a hint that the turbulence forecasts were not just fear-mongering), he landed for fuel, then took off in an airplane which, by the pilots own statements, was experiencing malfunctions with the gyros and/or electrical system, for a night VFR flight in marginal conditions with forecast icing and severe turbulence over mountainous and unpopulated (read unlighted) terrain, and proceeded to execute his flight exactly as he had planned it. Well, except for the crashing part, he didn't plan that, but it wasn't exactly unforeseeable, either.
Yes, I can completely understand how it is 100% the RAAF's fault that this poor victim encountered icing and downdrafts beyond the capabilities of his airplane and crashed.
Damn those murdering thugs.
Planned a night VFR flight over a route which included flying into mountainous terrain, on the downwind side of a mountain range when winds aloft were up to 70 knots, (and if that wasn't enough of a clue, severe turbulence was specifically forecast in a SIGMET) with conditions forecast to be questionable for VFR flight, with forecast icing along his route and at his altitudes, in a single engine airplane not equipped for icing.
And, after getting beat around a bit on a preceding flight segment, (as a hint that the turbulence forecasts were not just fear-mongering), he landed for fuel, then took off in an airplane which, by the pilots own statements, was experiencing malfunctions with the gyros and/or electrical system, for a night VFR flight in marginal conditions with forecast icing and severe turbulence over mountainous and unpopulated (read unlighted) terrain, and proceeded to execute his flight exactly as he had planned it. Well, except for the crashing part, he didn't plan that, but it wasn't exactly unforeseeable, either.
Yes, I can completely understand how it is 100% the RAAF's fault that this poor victim encountered icing and downdrafts beyond the capabilities of his airplane and crashed.
Damn those murdering thugs.
Last edited by A Squared; 1st Mar 2016 at 02:01.
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
So, regardless of any decisions made by the PIC of MDX, the blame lies squarely at the feet of that homicidal maniac, Sir Richard Williams.
Or perhaps his mother?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 'Stralia!
Age: 47
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regardless of all else in this thread -
was pretty funny.
And seeing as Dick hasn't responded to my question, I will just stick in small repeat quote here -
Or perhaps his mother?
And seeing as Dick hasn't responded to my question, I will just stick in small repeat quote here -
Quote:
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.
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.
pardon a further aside Rats . . .. Dickie as his intimates knew him, was the first head of the RAAF to be ranked Air Marshal. (Not noted for his humour. As with the book "The Wit of Malcolm Fraser". . . a companion piece would likewise be 100 blank pages.) His autobiography is one of the most uncompromising in the annals of Australian military history. As reflected in his chosen title . .. THESE ARE FACTS.
BACK ON TOPIC - is there any update on the efforts of the person or persons continuing their search?
BACK ON TOPIC - is there any update on the efforts of the person or persons continuing their search?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even CASA said it should be class D like Broome - but these people are incapable of making a leadership decision that could save the industry money and improve safety
The recommendations on WLM airspace were made in a rather amateurish paper prepared by AsA staff and submitted to CASA. That piece of bumf was so bad that it was embarrassing to read.
It was cobbled together around 2008/2009 in response to the continued pressure on the minister that was applied by a particular airspace messiah - no names, no pack-drill.
The reasoning, logic and justification were laughable; but, when you have a predetermined conclusion, made under unrelenting pressure to 'do something,' I suppose rationale goes out the window.
Nice one Bill in respect of 'sent.' Your use of language is approaching that of Dick's.
Well said A Squared. That is one of the best posts that I've read on this forum.
Last edited by Howabout; 2nd Mar 2016 at 14:45.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.