Light plane crash near Mt Gambier
I agree that we are jumping to conclusions to say that flight from VMC into IMC was a factor in this tragedy.
However, it doesn't change the fact that untrained flight from VMC into IMC has been a contributing factor into past fatalities.
I agree with one (or both) of the Leads (Leadsled? Lead Balloon?) that we don't need more regulation. I personally am willing to accept these deaths as the consequence of being involved in aviation, the same way I accept the deaths (including those of close friends and family) in car accidents as not deterring me from driving. However, unfortunately, in my opinion, the travelling public fuelled by a hysterical media don't appear to share that view. A fatal car accident doesn't deter their wish to drive (or indeed improve their driving habits) but a fatal aircraft accident appears to mean that anyone who subsequently sets foot in a light aircraft is doomed.
And there's the rub....
However, it doesn't change the fact that untrained flight from VMC into IMC has been a contributing factor into past fatalities.
I agree with one (or both) of the Leads (Leadsled? Lead Balloon?) that we don't need more regulation. I personally am willing to accept these deaths as the consequence of being involved in aviation, the same way I accept the deaths (including those of close friends and family) in car accidents as not deterring me from driving. However, unfortunately, in my opinion, the travelling public fuelled by a hysterical media don't appear to share that view. A fatal car accident doesn't deter their wish to drive (or indeed improve their driving habits) but a fatal aircraft accident appears to mean that anyone who subsequently sets foot in a light aircraft is doomed.
And there's the rub....
...a hysterical media...
For an example - If it hasn't been noted yet just have a look how the traditional American media has handled the way President Trump has been using all forms of media. Thus sidelining the constructed storyline that used to come from the traditional media 'swamp' - look at the hysteria that has created..
One of the new age media groups, Breitbart, has been covering the sheer corruption of the CNN reporting of Trump. Multiple employee sacking so far and more to come from what was once billed 'America's most trusted news source'
CNN Blackmails Source of Donald Trump Wrestling Video - Breitbart
.
I hope you are not suggesting that Breitbart is an independent and reliable new source? Given one of Trumps closest advisors used Breitbart as a mouthpiece for the Trump campaign its credibility is zero.
I don't wish to draw the conversation away from the original discussion of the topic regarding the tragic crash near YMTG, but (without making assumptions about this particular incident), as a few have said, the wonderful people at Angel Flight need to have a introspective look at their operations and organisation. The concept and initiative of Angel Flight is brilliant and should be supported wholeheartedly - the woefully inadequate minimum experience requirements for the pilots needs to be addressed. These pilots are picking up "passengers" - not family members or friends...
Again, I'm not drawing conclusions in this case, as I know near FA about this incident, but these are my strong feelings regarding the Angel Flight operation.
Again, I'm not drawing conclusions in this case, as I know near FA about this incident, but these are my strong feelings regarding the Angel Flight operation.
I don't wish to draw the conversation away from the original discussion of the topic regarding the tragic crash near YMTG, but (without making assumptions about this particular incident), as a few have said, the wonderful people at Angel Flight need to have a introspective look at their operations and organisation. The concept and initiative of Angel Flight is brilliant and should be supported wholeheartedly - the woefully inadequate minimum experience requirements for the pilots needs to be addressed. These pilots are picking up "passengers" - not family members or friends...
Again, I'm not drawing conclusions in this case, as I know near FA about this incident, but these are my strong feelings regarding the Angel Flight operation.
Again, I'm not drawing conclusions in this case, as I know near FA about this incident, but these are my strong feelings regarding the Angel Flight operation.
Yeah, ah suppose they come under the heading of life's 'baggage'.....
...with CASA though, far as i'm aware they only differentiate between fare paying pax and non-fare paying pax. With them AF pilots, Family, friends, and those in need who wants a lift somewhere all come under the heading of non-fare paying pax.
.
I guess I was trying to draw a distinction between friends/family members who have a bit of knowledge of their friend/relative pilot and may have a bit more knowledge of their experience/currency/general professionalism in order to assist them with deciding if they are going to go flying with Uncle Dave on the weekend.
- VS -
Mum/Dad with sick kid who needs to fly for treatment, with kindly Pilot Dave whom they don't know from a bar of soap but would expect to be suitably experienced for the task.
I do NOT cast aspersions on the brilliant and generous Angel Flight pilots who do a fantastic job for a wonderful organisation. I'm talking about the fact that a higher quality of pilot is required to undertake this operation than the minimums currently demand - as would be expected by their (undoubtedly grateful) "passengers".
- VS -
Mum/Dad with sick kid who needs to fly for treatment, with kindly Pilot Dave whom they don't know from a bar of soap but would expect to be suitably experienced for the task.
I do NOT cast aspersions on the brilliant and generous Angel Flight pilots who do a fantastic job for a wonderful organisation. I'm talking about the fact that a higher quality of pilot is required to undertake this operation than the minimums currently demand - as would be expected by their (undoubtedly grateful) "passengers".
the woefully inadequate minimum experience requirements for the pilots
PPL holders don't have the ability to build mega hours, and what is experience? 10,000 hours doing circuits? CASA bestows the right to carry passengers to a newly minted PPL. Are the PPL requirements too low?
The very last thing needed is more "rules", just obey the ones we have. ie stay VMC if that's your category, as Lead Balloon says (my bolding),
If there is a problem, it is not caused by Angel Flight. It's caused by human factors issues that have been around forever.
If the rules for day VFR Angel Flights should be changed, the rules for all day VFR private operations should be changed.
But hang on a second, if the current rules were complied with, there wouldn't be a problem, would there?
The problem isn't the rules. We're drowning in rules.
If the rules for day VFR Angel Flights should be changed, the rules for all day VFR private operations should be changed.
But hang on a second, if the current rules were complied with, there wouldn't be a problem, would there?
The problem isn't the rules. We're drowning in rules.
[T]he woefully inadequate minimum experience requirements for the pilots needs to be addressed.
It seems you are saying that there are pilots who have a licence that authorises them to carry passengers in private operations, but only their families and friends who - apparently - are competent to, and do, make an assessment of the pilots' professionalism. My long experience is that family and friends simply assume - reasonably - that the pilot knows what he or she is doing, if for no other reason than that most family and friends wouldn't have a clue how to judge otherwise.
Sorry for my delayed response...
Yes, but as far as I can ascertain, Angel Flight pilots do not require a CPL? A raw bone CPL has done a CPL course - yes, obviously they can carry paying passengers.
Absolutely - I don't advocate any more "rules". The issue is the "stay VMC if that's your category" and then, quite poignantly:
Absolutely correct - I believe there are many similarities between Angel Flight ops and the ops carried out by EMS professionals. The actual pressure (and it's not just "perceived") to get the job done is immense and it is Human Factors which presents the opportunity to press the limits. I am aware that Angel Flight is not utilised for "life and death" situations, but the pressure is clearly there when Timmy needs to get to his dialysis appointment and the only other option is a 4 hour drive... Whereas the EMS industry has the framework and resources to not only teach their operators about the risk, they can (and have) internally regulated to take the decision making away from the crew regarding "do we go or not".
This very real pressure on an Angel Flight pilot cannot be compared to a PPL taking his family/friends for a jolly on the weekend.
Whilst I cannot quote the statistics relating to Angel Flight accidents, my interest/concern in this topic has only developed due to the fact they HAVE been crashing, for similar reasons, over the last 10 years or so - I would be interested if someone does have the stats. Something is amiss and needs to change drastically to stop these accidents happening.
In short, it is my personal opinion, that those conducting Angel Flights ops need a CPL and an Instrument Rating to bring the risk to an acceptable level. Is this realistic/achievable? Maybe not, but without those qualifications, these accidents will continue to occur for the reasons outlined above.
What level of experience might you suggest? Compared to what is required for a CPL I would have thought their 250 hours in command to be more than reasonable. You seem to be suggesting that a raw bone CPL shouldn't be permitted to carry paying passengers due to lack of experience.
The very last thing needed is more "rules", just obey the ones we have. ie stay VMC if that's your category, as Lead Balloon says
It's caused by human factors issues that have been around forever.
This very real pressure on an Angel Flight pilot cannot be compared to a PPL taking his family/friends for a jolly on the weekend.
Whilst I cannot quote the statistics relating to Angel Flight accidents, my interest/concern in this topic has only developed due to the fact they HAVE been crashing, for similar reasons, over the last 10 years or so - I would be interested if someone does have the stats. Something is amiss and needs to change drastically to stop these accidents happening.
In short, it is my personal opinion, that those conducting Angel Flights ops need a CPL and an Instrument Rating to bring the risk to an acceptable level. Is this realistic/achievable? Maybe not, but without those qualifications, these accidents will continue to occur for the reasons outlined above.
Last edited by josephfeatherweight; 10th Jul 2017 at 00:33.
The actual pressure (and it's not just "perceived") to get the job done is immense
that those conducting Angel Flights ops need a CPL and an Instrument Rating to bring the risk to an acceptable level
The takeaway from this tragedy is to ensure that AF passengers are fully apprised of the risks involved in GA aircraft travel and that all involved are aware that there is always a plan B.
[M]y interest/concern in this topic has only developed due to the fact they HAVE been falling out of the sky, for similar reasons, over the last 10 years or so.
"Falling out of the sky"? You should be a journalist.
There have been aircraft commanded by CPLs with IFR ratings "falling out of the sky", over the last 10 years, too. And they've killed more people than have died in the course of community service flights over the same period.
But in any event, your 'bottom line' is minimum CPL and current IFR. That's a regulatory option, and I respect your view that those minimums are an appropriate regulatory option to pursue.
Next task: Define community service flights in such a way as to clearly distinguish them from other flights. (You'll note that I use the term "community service flights" rather than "Angel Flights". That's because the organisation Angel Flight is just a 'clearing house' to connect people in need of a flight for non-urgent medical reasons with pilots who are willing to volunteer to fly them. These arrangements could still be made, even if AF shut its doors tomorrow.)
What is/are the objectively-ascertainable characteristics of community service flights that distinguish them from other passenger-carrying operations that are appropriately characterised as private? When the FOI lobs in to do a ramp check, what will the FOI look at and ask so as to distinguish between the two?
The last thing Australian aviation needs is another lump on the regulatory camel that is the classification of operations regime.
"Falling out of the sky"? You should be a journalist.
The last thing Australian aviation needs is another lump on the regulatory camel that is the classification of operations regime.
In my opinion AF needs to take the lead here, recognise that there is an issue and mandate the minimums, which I have suggested should be a CPL and IR.
"Incidents involving fatalities" would be even better than "crashing"...
So let's assume Angel Flight takes the initiative and sets a minimum CPL and current IFR for AF pilots. How does that stop private pilot, Joe Citizen, flying a neighbour's friend's son from Unflabungardoo to YSBK for a specialist medical appointment?
So let's assume Angel Flight takes the initiative and sets a minimum CPL and current IFR for AF pilots. How does that stop private pilot, Joe Citizen, flying a neighbour's friend's son from Unflabungardoo to YSBK for a specialist medical appointment?
Umm, well, it doesn't, but that's not under the banner of "Angel Flight", is it?
I'm making mere suggestions in an effort to make a worthy service provider (Angel Flight) viable into the future.
I believe there is an experience issue that is magnified by the nature of the tasking that needs addressing.
Respectfully, I've said all I'll say on this. Cheers.
I'm making mere suggestions in an effort to make a worthy service provider (Angel Flight) viable into the future.
I believe there is an experience issue that is magnified by the nature of the tasking that needs addressing.
Respectfully, I've said all I'll say on this. Cheers.
Umm, well, it doesn't, but that's not under the banner of "Angel Flight", is it?
I'm making mere suggestions in an effort to make a worthy service provider (Angel Flight) viable into the future.
I believe there is an experience issue that is magnified by the nature of the tasking that needs addressing.
Respectfully, I've said all I'll say on this. Cheers.
I'm making mere suggestions in an effort to make a worthy service provider (Angel Flight) viable into the future.
I believe there is an experience issue that is magnified by the nature of the tasking that needs addressing.
Respectfully, I've said all I'll say on this. Cheers.
.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are there any stats available on how many AF missions are flown and by what licence and flight rules..? I'm only guessing but wouldn't a large percentage be done PPL & VFR..? How many are done PPL & IFR..? How many CPL's with current CIR would be available to do these AF missions..? I can see where you're coming from with setting these minimums and you may well make the flights somewhat safer, but won't there be a new problem due to lack of availability of qualified pilots to accept the required missions..? (Throwing the baby out with the bathwater comes to mind).
Why is this relevant?
This is a sad accident where people are killed. Its no more or less tragic that they were under the auspice of Angel flight, or scouts, or the local school or next door neighbors of the pilot or some flying mates from his local airport.
The CPL licence is designed to teach pilots how to operate under the operation manual of a commercial organisation and fuel and navigation planning in environments where the commercial nature requires a pilot to operate with less discretion to add personal safety margins.
Speaking as a CPL, as much as we might like to think that we are demi-gods, the CPL licence does not mean that we fly any better or more safely than a PPL. And if there were something in the CPL syllabus that created safer pilots for flights like this, then CASA is culpable for not implementing in in the PPL syllabus.
I might also remind you that only a week or two earlier in nearby Renmark were there also 3 fatalities. Except that there were 2 highly qualified CPL's and a CASA examiner on board.
This is a sad accident where people are killed. Its no more or less tragic that they were under the auspice of Angel flight, or scouts, or the local school or next door neighbors of the pilot or some flying mates from his local airport.
The CPL licence is designed to teach pilots how to operate under the operation manual of a commercial organisation and fuel and navigation planning in environments where the commercial nature requires a pilot to operate with less discretion to add personal safety margins.
Speaking as a CPL, as much as we might like to think that we are demi-gods, the CPL licence does not mean that we fly any better or more safely than a PPL. And if there were something in the CPL syllabus that created safer pilots for flights like this, then CASA is culpable for not implementing in in the PPL syllabus.
I might also remind you that only a week or two earlier in nearby Renmark were there also 3 fatalities. Except that there were 2 highly qualified CPL's and a CASA examiner on board.