The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Gippsland GA-8’s Grounded

Old 20th Jul 2019, 05:54
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 1,918
Gippsland GA-8’s Grounded

ABC news reporting that CASA have grounded GA-8’s after an accident in Sweden.
Stationair8 is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2019, 06:00
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: After all, what’s more important than proving to someone on the internet that they’re wrong? - Manson
Posts: 1,493
EASA AD issued prohibiting all flights - EAD 2019-0177-E GIPPSLAND: Prohibition of all Flights

CASA - well it's the weekend isn't it!
RVDT is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2019, 06:11
  #3 (permalink)  
TWT
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: troposphere
Posts: 685
Nine killed in plane crash in northern Sweden
TWT is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2019, 07:26
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Back too the hot bits again
Posts: 78
Interesting that EASA AD indicates that you can still ferry the aircraft. CASA website indicates you can ferry but the CASA instrument indicates no flying at all
which is it boys and girls?
Ethel the Aardvark is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2019, 09:36
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 43
Ethel,
It's very easy, a no brainer! make your own decision and simply don't fly. Go for the safest option at all times. Don't become a test pilot. Don't expect an Insurance pay out if duty of care and common sense are the safer option.
Office Update is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2019, 09:37
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Up North
Age: 30
Posts: 494
Originally Posted by Ethel the Aardvark View Post
Interesting that EASA AD indicates that you can still ferry the aircraft. CASA website indicates you can ferry but the CASA instrument indicates no flying at all
which is it boys and girls?
Gotta make it confusing enough for someone to get busted for doing the wrong thing, because you're damned if you do, damned if you don't, to enable CASA to show how their keeping all the bad bad pilots out of the sky
AussieNick is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2019, 15:42
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Back too the hot bits again
Posts: 78
Its not about wanting to fly one Office. It’s about CASA having many days to write the instrument and I believe it contradicts with EASA and CASA ‘s own media page. The grounding period starts at midnight so their was all day Sat to get them home.
Ethel the Aardvark is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2019, 17:37
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 46
Posts: 475
So what’s caused the grounding from the Sweden crash?

Other types have crashed and not immediate grounding.

Something we are not being told?
Global Aviator is online now  
Old 20th Jul 2019, 18:20
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: After all, what’s more important than proving to someone on the internet that they’re wrong? - Manson
Posts: 1,493
So what’s caused the grounding from the Sweden crash?
Maybe the fact that no other aircraft was involved and the wing outboard of the strut broke off?
RVDT is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2019, 00:17
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 347
Originally Posted by RVDT View Post
Maybe the fact that no other aircraft was involved and the wing outboard of the strut broke off?
You do not think the operation could have played a roll?
Bend alot is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2019, 02:18
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 2,818
Not only the wing broke but the tail is missing with a chute trailing. Flightradar gives the altitude as 13,400 so probably about to drop. Accidental release of a chute resulting in LOC? Similar to the Caravan at Nagambie?


megan is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2019, 03:03
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,036
Originally Posted by RVDT View Post
Maybe the fact that no other aircraft was involved and the wing outboard of the strut broke off?
There is a long list of types that have crashed due catastrophic failure of a wing and/or tail.with no other aircraft involved.
Originally Posted by Global Aviator View Post
So what’s caused the grounding from the Sweden crash?

Other types have crashed and not immediate grounding.

Something we are not being told?
Something must be known for there to be an immediate grounding. But CASA just says "a precautionary step pending the outcome of further investigation " - and EASA went along with it:
Early reports are that a wing may have detached from the aeroplane prior to the accident, but, at this time, the root cause of the accident cannot be confirmed. CASA Australia, the authority of the State of Design of the affected type design, has informed EASA that a Direction will be issued, which provides for the temporary prohibition of operations of the GA8 Airvan in Australia.
I guess there is a new rule for the issue of ADs to ground aircraft immediately?

Same logic as when I got a phone call from someone after a Pitts accident telling me not to fly mine as it had the same propeller. Nope, quick read of the newspaper report and peek at a photo of the wreckage - my opinion - it was LOC at low altitude.

Perhaps there should be some ADs grounding aircraft which have entered an unrecoverable spin until investigation proves the aircraft was not at fault.
djpil is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2019, 06:44
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,932
Originally Posted by Ethel the Aardvark View Post
Its not about wanting to fly one Office. It’s about CASA having many days to write the instrument and I believe it contradicts with EASA and CASA ‘s own media page.
Ethel,
Isn't that what you would expect from CASA.
Seriously, let's hope it is rapidly established that the problem was a mistake by jumpers, and not a fundamental structural problem with the aeroplane ---- the latter would really play into CASA's hands, and most likely be the end of the GA-8 and the company.
The history of CASA (and predecessors) treatment of Gippsland Aeronautics does not inspire confidence.
Tootle pip!!

Last edited by LeadSled; 21st Jul 2019 at 06:45. Reason: minor edit
LeadSled is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2019, 06:55
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,232
LeadSled, not even CASA would have enough money to shut down Mahindra !!
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2019, 07:46
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 347
Originally Posted by Squawk7700 View Post
LeadSled, not even CASA would have enough money to shut down Mahindra !!
Wont stop them attempting.
Bend alot is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2019, 08:56
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,402
CASA have enough money for Mahindra to close the factory here and take all work overseas.

My guess is that is what will happen, much to the relief of CASA, because it then removes any accountability for continuing oversight of Gippsaero.

To put that another way, CASA doesn’t have a mandate to foster, or to at least not destroy, Australian businesses. The simplest method for CASA to fulfill the “safe aircraft” part of their “safety” mandate is to prevent aircraft from being built here.

My guess is that CASA will hit Gipps with audits and extremely expensive or impossible demands.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2019, 09:17
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 132
Originally Posted by Sunfish View Post
CASA have enough money for Mahindra to close the factory here and take all work overseas.

My guess is that is what will happen, much to the relief of CASA, because it then removes any accountability for continuing oversight of Gippsaero.

To put that another way, CASA doesn’t have a mandate to foster, or to at least not destroy, Australian businesses. The simplest method for CASA to fulfill the “safe aircraft” part of their “safety” mandate is to prevent aircraft from being built here.

My guess is that CASA will hit Gipps with audits and extremely expensive or impossible demands.
And the last thing CASA would want to be seen doing is potentially aiding and abetting GA to navigate the compliance minefield. The FAA just got a belting for getting too friendly and complacent with Boeing, and CASA won't make the same mistake.
Pearly White is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2019, 11:49
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Earth
Posts: 61
As a matter of interest, I see the CASA announcement says that they have sent an airworthiness engineer to Sweden to gather data.
(https://www.casa.gov.au/media-releas...rily-suspended)

Why CASA? Surely ATSB are the folks who should be invited to be present?
(https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...r/ae-2019-034/)
stressmerchant is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2019, 12:21
  #19 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: various places .....
Posts: 6,516
Why CASA? Surely ATSB are the folks who should be invited to be present?

Consider which NAA is the certificating authority ? https://www.mahindraaerospace.com/ma...20Rev%2022.PDF

ATSB would have been invited to participate by the State of Registry.

I am only speculating, here, but it would not be unreasonable/unexpected for the ATSB to request either a Gippy Aero or CASA accredited representative to go on ATSB's behalf.

When I last was working with ASTA, I was part of a two-man team which went on ATSB's behalf to an O/S Nomad fatal - quite some years ago, now. The NTSB was a tad busy with other stuff at the time so we ended up running the bulk of the investigation, as it turned out - a bit unusual, but them's the breaks at times ..
john_tullamarine is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2019, 00:42
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 2,818
By Dorthom in Accidents forum
Directive issued last year:AD/GA8/9 Airworthiness Directives as madeThis instrument amends certain part replacement times which were recently mandated by AD/GA8/9. As Australia is the State of Design for the type, CASA is required to develop, and to transmit to other States of Registry, an airworthiness directive (AD) to correct the problem. The AD sets out required remedial action to replace certain GippsAero GA8 wing struts and wing strut fittings within specified timeframes in response to a manufacturing quality escape which resulted in wing strut fittings in the effective serial number range to be manufactured with incorrect grain orientation.Administered by: Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Development
AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE

On the commencement date specified below, and for the reasons set out in the background section, the CASA delegate whose signature appears below repeals Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD/GA8/9 and issues the following AD under subregulation 39.001 (1) of CASR 1998 and subsection 33 (3) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901. The AD requires that the action set out in the requirement section (being action that the delegate considers necessary to correct an unsafe condition) be taken in relation to the aircraft or aeronautical product mentioned in the applicability section: (a) in the circumstances mentioned in the requirement section; and (b) in accordance with the instructions set out in the requirement section; and (c) at the time mentioned in the compliance section.

GippsAero GA8 Series Aeroplanes

AD/GA8/9 Amdt 1

Wing Strut and Wing Strut
Fittings - Inspection and Replacement

11/2018

megan is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.