New MDX - Five Dead Williamtown Never Found
Thread Starter
New MDX - Five Dead Williamtown Never Found
In relation to the MDX crash west of Williamtown, many people have been fascinated by the fact that the pilot inadvertently flew almost due west for many, many miles until he was on the other side of Barrington Tops, and no air traffic controller in front of a radar screen mentioned this to the pilot – either directly or indirectly through Flight Service.
It has recently been claimed to me that the Williamtown air traffic controller – even though there was an operating radar in the tower, actually was not qualified to use the radar and could only do procedural work.
If this is so, it’s a very important point that was not bought out in the BASI investigation. Can anyone confirm whether the Williamtown controller was actually radar rated or is it true that person had not received that quite straight forward training? If that is so, why has this been kept hidden?
It has recently been claimed to me that the Williamtown air traffic controller – even though there was an operating radar in the tower, actually was not qualified to use the radar and could only do procedural work.
If this is so, it’s a very important point that was not bought out in the BASI investigation. Can anyone confirm whether the Williamtown controller was actually radar rated or is it true that person had not received that quite straight forward training? If that is so, why has this been kept hidden?
From memory, RAAF controllers leave the school of ATC rated with a 'tower rating' and after a number of years, they can seek 'Applroch training'. They the go back to SATC to do their Radar course.
Tower controllers are not required to be radar qualified to do their tower job.
I doubt tis fact was 'hidden' as am sure ever military ATC. knows this progression path from TWR to approach. I understand it is reversed in civian ATC, as the Senior Controllers are tower controllers.
It has been a while, so I stand to be corrected.
To call the course 'straight forward' training is a bit of a backhanded insult to the controlers who complete the RADAR training.
Ther is more to RADAR control than just looking at the screen.
Tower controllers are not required to be radar qualified to do their tower job.
I doubt tis fact was 'hidden' as am sure ever military ATC. knows this progression path from TWR to approach. I understand it is reversed in civian ATC, as the Senior Controllers are tower controllers.
It has been a while, so I stand to be corrected.
To call the course 'straight forward' training is a bit of a backhanded insult to the controlers who complete the RADAR training.
Ther is more to RADAR control than just looking at the screen.
Dick, the unfortunate outcome of the MDX flight is down to the PIC - all the rest is just ancilliary "noise"!
The PIC of MDX had numerous opportunities to break the chain of events that tragically resulted in the deaths of himself and 4 others - and he failed to do so. He just made one poor decision after another until the end result was inevitable.
I am a contemporary of the PIC, with a similar level of flying experience at the time, and remember the incident well. I would have stayed on the ground at Cooly!
Dr
The PIC of MDX had numerous opportunities to break the chain of events that tragically resulted in the deaths of himself and 4 others - and he failed to do so. He just made one poor decision after another until the end result was inevitable.
I am a contemporary of the PIC, with a similar level of flying experience at the time, and remember the incident well. I would have stayed on the ground at Cooly!
Dr
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 'Stralia!
Age: 47
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
*Sigh*....
No, he was not qualified to use it at that time, but it was left on as an aid to his situational awareness. Procedural separation was in force that evening, not radar separation. The monitoring of the flight was not the responsibility of Williamtown. MDX was not inside Williamtown airspace. That fact has not been hidden by anyone. The RAAF ATC school syllabus for way back then obviously thought that it was not a required qualification on march out from the school. Hardly the controller in questions fault.
To recap -
MDX NOT in his area of responsibility.
PIC of MDX made the decision to track west away from the coast after being told of a short delay due to preceding slower traffic at the same (or about) level. No airspace hoarding at all.
PIC originally planned to follow the route he ended up taking, he was offered transit through Willamtown if he wanted to wait, which the PIC declined.
"Not my area of responsibility" is a slippery slope for everyone. Lines must be drawn *somewhere*.
Hope that clears it up...
No, he was not qualified to use it at that time, but it was left on as an aid to his situational awareness. Procedural separation was in force that evening, not radar separation. The monitoring of the flight was not the responsibility of Williamtown. MDX was not inside Williamtown airspace. That fact has not been hidden by anyone. The RAAF ATC school syllabus for way back then obviously thought that it was not a required qualification on march out from the school. Hardly the controller in questions fault.
To recap -
MDX NOT in his area of responsibility.
PIC of MDX made the decision to track west away from the coast after being told of a short delay due to preceding slower traffic at the same (or about) level. No airspace hoarding at all.
PIC originally planned to follow the route he ended up taking, he was offered transit through Willamtown if he wanted to wait, which the PIC declined.
"Not my area of responsibility" is a slippery slope for everyone. Lines must be drawn *somewhere*.
Hope that clears it up...
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 72
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Allthecoolnames.
Civilian controllers go through the college and are streamed as TWR or enroute. They leave the college and graduate as junior controllers in their respective stream. Controllers can apply for cross training after a few years but not many do. TMA controllers (approach /departures) mostly come from experienced enroute controllers.
Civilian controllers go through the college and are streamed as TWR or enroute. They leave the college and graduate as junior controllers in their respective stream. Controllers can apply for cross training after a few years but not many do. TMA controllers (approach /departures) mostly come from experienced enroute controllers.
Thread Starter
The pilot was not informed of a " short delay". Considering that at the present time at Willy pilots can be held up to 30 mins without explanation even when operating VFR up the coastal lane I can see why a pilot would think twice when being told there would be a delay.
It's incredible how you military people think you have to follow some type of clearly unethical code to protect the system you were in.
Even today the ERS prohibits planning over Willy if the restricted areas are active so the same type of accident no doubt will occur again. This is criminal .
And no. I have never blamed the individual controllers who were just complying with pathetic rules and leadership.
Typical that BASI protected the pathetic " system" and made no recommendation as to the controllers with a radar screen actually being responsible for radar covered airspace . Even when I changed that it was resisted by ex military people at CAA.
The pilot was not ever given any information on how long the delay might be Even the FSO was worried that the aircraft was getting close to the controlled airspace .
All five would have most likely lived if FAA NAS airspace had existed on the night with direct flight over the top in class E airspace . The military hierarchy who don't copy the best from around the world will be responsible for the next lot of fatalities.
It's incredible how you military people think you have to follow some type of clearly unethical code to protect the system you were in.
Even today the ERS prohibits planning over Willy if the restricted areas are active so the same type of accident no doubt will occur again. This is criminal .
And no. I have never blamed the individual controllers who were just complying with pathetic rules and leadership.
Typical that BASI protected the pathetic " system" and made no recommendation as to the controllers with a radar screen actually being responsible for radar covered airspace . Even when I changed that it was resisted by ex military people at CAA.
The pilot was not ever given any information on how long the delay might be Even the FSO was worried that the aircraft was getting close to the controlled airspace .
All five would have most likely lived if FAA NAS airspace had existed on the night with direct flight over the top in class E airspace . The military hierarchy who don't copy the best from around the world will be responsible for the next lot of fatalities.
You're taking over from Derryn Hinch as the human headline, Dick. New posts all the time with provocative titles may work for a quick bit of shock value but are thin on content while being loaded with emotive rhetoric.
I honestly believe this is not so much about saving lives for you as pushing your stance that you should be cleared wherever and whenever you like without holding.
I honestly believe this is not so much about saving lives for you as pushing your stance that you should be cleared wherever and whenever you like without holding.
PS This is not a personal attack on you, you've achieved heaps more than I ever will in my lifetime, but on the '60 minutes article' approach you seem to love using.
Fortunately, I only spent 12 years acting unethically within that criminal organization. But some of those guys and gals here spent in excess of 20 years. Perhaps you will string them up first?
Dick, Is this part of your electioneering for Mackellar?
Dick, Is this part of your electioneering for Mackellar?
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick, radar system is still not good. MH370 went past a few with nothing said. If you want to attack Australia seems the Western front is the way - The USA navel Base in Exmouth certainly would not have detection of aircraft incoming capability.
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: 2,976
Received 102 Likes
on
59 Posts
Fortunately, I only spent 12 years acting unethically within that criminal organization.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 'Stralia!
Age: 47
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick,
That is inaccurate on so many levels, it's not funny.
One, if you had seen the train wreck that was my last PAR, you would know that that is one of the least accurate statements ever made in my general direction, it's not even funny...
Two, I have not been involved in military air traffic control, aside from the occasional visit to various towers around the country. I haven't even served in the relevant service.
So, please enlighten me as to what happens now is relevant to what happened over 3 decades ago? And, from my personal experience, I have never been held transiting Williamtown.
Dick, I support many of your causes, but you do yourself and your aims a great disservice trying to sensationalize an angle, and ignoring basic facts. But, I will point this out the flaws in this particular arguement using just facts, free from sensationalism.
At 08:50:31 UTC, MDX reported at Taree, giving his estimate for his next waypoint, being Singleton, as planned.
FIS 5 replied with a question of if he would prefer a clearance via Williamtown, if it were available.
There was a minute or so of MDX coming up with an estimate Williamtown, then at 08:51:27 he was told to standby whilst FIS 5 organised it.
At 08:51:47, FIS 5 contacted WM and informed WM of the request for a NVFR airways clearance.
At 08:52:22, WM advised FIS 5 that preceding slower traffic (AZC) at the same level would necessitate a change of level to either 7 or 9 thousand feet.
Now, this is the important part.
And for ease of reading, I will continue this on a new post.
you military people think you have to follow some type of clearly unethical code to protect the system
One, if you had seen the train wreck that was my last PAR, you would know that that is one of the least accurate statements ever made in my general direction, it's not even funny...
Two, I have not been involved in military air traffic control, aside from the occasional visit to various towers around the country. I haven't even served in the relevant service.
Considering that at the present time at Willy pilots can be held up to 30 mins
Dick, I support many of your causes, but you do yourself and your aims a great disservice trying to sensationalize an angle, and ignoring basic facts. But, I will point this out the flaws in this particular arguement using just facts, free from sensationalism.
At 08:50:31 UTC, MDX reported at Taree, giving his estimate for his next waypoint, being Singleton, as planned.
FIS 5 replied with a question of if he would prefer a clearance via Williamtown, if it were available.
There was a minute or so of MDX coming up with an estimate Williamtown, then at 08:51:27 he was told to standby whilst FIS 5 organised it.
At 08:51:47, FIS 5 contacted WM and informed WM of the request for a NVFR airways clearance.
At 08:52:22, WM advised FIS 5 that preceding slower traffic (AZC) at the same level would necessitate a change of level to either 7 or 9 thousand feet.
Now, this is the important part.
And for ease of reading, I will continue this on a new post.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 'Stralia!
Age: 47
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At about 08:52:50, FIS 5 then said he would check with Sector 1, and get back to WM because "Sector One's going to give him a clearance".
At 08:53:00, FIS 5 contacted Sector 1 to further the clearance request for MDX. He confirms that S1 is aware of AZC and then requests a clearance for MDX. S1 says that his airspace is not Night VMC and therefore, "clearance would NOT be available in controlled area" but advised he would check with approach to see if a low level coastal clearance was available.
It's now only been a bit over two minutes and 30 seconds since MDX was offered the clearance over WM, and WM very quickly stated that there would be no problems with that, bar separation from traffic at the same level, on the same track, that he was catching.
At 08:53:42 FIS 5 contacted Approach to inquire about the clearance for MDX, and Approach replied that they would have to check the weather and get back to him.
At 08:54:20, FIS 5 contacts MDX again to advise him of the situation regarding the possible clearance over Williamtown, of which, to recap, Williamtown was only 1 piece of airspace out of 3, such a clearance would require, and, the only one that at first request said yes (but with a change of level).
At 08:55:09, there is a bit of a 3 way conversation between AZC, MDX and FIS 5, that, for want of a better way to summarise, was a mere status update for the two aircraft.
At 08:56:00, MDX ADVISED FIS 5, that rather than wait for the clearance via Williamtown, he would track via Craven. Despite knowing that preceding traffic already had transited Williamtown, THE PIC elected to continue his PREVIOUSLY PLANNED COURSE.
Final recap - for those of you playing at home -
This exchange occurred over a time period of less than 6 minutes.
There were 3 separate pieces of airspace that require a clearance for the airways clearance to be granted, the first being Williamtown, which WM advised, almost immediately, would be available for the airspace that was his direct area of responsibility. The other 2 civilian zones, Sector 1 and Approach was, 'no but I'll see if I can get a low level' and 'let me check the weather' respectively, were what added (a not unreasonable) delay to the provisioning of an airways clearance to MDX, of which the PIC, for what ever reason, decided not wait it out.
These are the facts of the matter, and I can supply anyone that cares to ask for the material I am referencing.
Right now, I wish there was a little emoji for dropping a microphone and walking off stage...
At 08:53:00, FIS 5 contacted Sector 1 to further the clearance request for MDX. He confirms that S1 is aware of AZC and then requests a clearance for MDX. S1 says that his airspace is not Night VMC and therefore, "clearance would NOT be available in controlled area" but advised he would check with approach to see if a low level coastal clearance was available.
It's now only been a bit over two minutes and 30 seconds since MDX was offered the clearance over WM, and WM very quickly stated that there would be no problems with that, bar separation from traffic at the same level, on the same track, that he was catching.
At 08:53:42 FIS 5 contacted Approach to inquire about the clearance for MDX, and Approach replied that they would have to check the weather and get back to him.
At 08:54:20, FIS 5 contacts MDX again to advise him of the situation regarding the possible clearance over Williamtown, of which, to recap, Williamtown was only 1 piece of airspace out of 3, such a clearance would require, and, the only one that at first request said yes (but with a change of level).
At 08:55:09, there is a bit of a 3 way conversation between AZC, MDX and FIS 5, that, for want of a better way to summarise, was a mere status update for the two aircraft.
At 08:56:00, MDX ADVISED FIS 5, that rather than wait for the clearance via Williamtown, he would track via Craven. Despite knowing that preceding traffic already had transited Williamtown, THE PIC elected to continue his PREVIOUSLY PLANNED COURSE.
Final recap - for those of you playing at home -
This exchange occurred over a time period of less than 6 minutes.
There were 3 separate pieces of airspace that require a clearance for the airways clearance to be granted, the first being Williamtown, which WM advised, almost immediately, would be available for the airspace that was his direct area of responsibility. The other 2 civilian zones, Sector 1 and Approach was, 'no but I'll see if I can get a low level' and 'let me check the weather' respectively, were what added (a not unreasonable) delay to the provisioning of an airways clearance to MDX, of which the PIC, for what ever reason, decided not wait it out.
These are the facts of the matter, and I can supply anyone that cares to ask for the material I am referencing.
Right now, I wish there was a little emoji for dropping a microphone and walking off stage...
Pinky,
I spent most of my time in the RAAF painting kerbs and rocks white and on the parade ground. Sometimes, I fiddled around with the avionics in the aircraft. (That's if they couldn't find anyone better for the job.)
Most certainly, I have no Air Traffic Control experience apart from flying in aeroplanes!
But Dick doesn't differentiate between any of us. All are equally smeared because we were in the RAAF. So we were all apparently part of that criminal organisation acting unethically.
(I sometimes wonder if perhaps Dick applied to join the RAAF and was knocked back. Over to you, Dick?)
A "Like" to FTDK; RatsoreA and AOTW who all summed it up rather well.
I spent most of my time in the RAAF painting kerbs and rocks white and on the parade ground. Sometimes, I fiddled around with the avionics in the aircraft. (That's if they couldn't find anyone better for the job.)
Most certainly, I have no Air Traffic Control experience apart from flying in aeroplanes!
But Dick doesn't differentiate between any of us. All are equally smeared because we were in the RAAF. So we were all apparently part of that criminal organisation acting unethically.
(I sometimes wonder if perhaps Dick applied to join the RAAF and was knocked back. Over to you, Dick?)
A "Like" to FTDK; RatsoreA and AOTW who all summed it up rather well.
So all of that rigmarole, Rats, because there was one bugsmasher other than MDX? Just one. Catching up same level? OMG! MDX was VFR FFS. On what basis did S1 presume to know the actual weather where MDX was going?
I realise that Dick's wrong in blaming the RAAF or any individual, RAAFie or otherwise, because they were just applying the rules in the system they were part of. But what a silly, silly system, almost completely devoid of any connection with real-world risks and real-world risk mitigation. I think that's the substantive point that Dick's trying to make.
I realise that Dick's wrong in blaming the RAAF or any individual, RAAFie or otherwise, because they were just applying the rules in the system they were part of. But what a silly, silly system, almost completely devoid of any connection with real-world risks and real-world risk mitigation. I think that's the substantive point that Dick's trying to make.
His post #9 certainly strays a fair way from that point and culminates in a prediction that the criminal military will again be responsible for similar fatalities, so I reckon he should have a think about how he puts his ideas across.