Bell ditching off Newcastle
Hypothetically, lets assume that the aircraft was required to hold due ATC, please Dick enlighten me, how that could cause an aircraft to crash or how that would even relate to the aircraft's loss. You know as well as anyone that had an emergency been declared, there would have been ZERO requirement to hold.
Originally Posted by MickG0105
If Willy ATC had required UVC to hold at Anna Bay why was he turning left? I was taught that right turns were standard for holding patterns unless directed otherwise. Common sense would dictate that if he was required to hold he would have been turning right, wouldn't it?
The altitude of the aircraft may suggest that UVC was not operating as part of Willy ATCs coastal clearance (at least at the time of the incident) and instead was offered tracking direct with a higher altitude (possibly at pilot request) before the crew decided to ditch.
Originally Posted by MickG0105
If Willy ATC had required UVC to hold at Anna Bay why was he turning left? I was taught that right turns were standard for holding patterns unless directed otherwise. Common sense would dictate that if he was required to hold he would have been turning right, wouldn't it?
The Willy Coastal Route procedures clearly require aircraft to remain “over water”. If you’re south bound and you’re instructed not to go past Anna Bay, you have no choice but to turn left to remain over water if you approach Anna Bay without receiving clearance to go further, unless you’re already a long distance off the coast.
Reminds me of a similar out of Cairns, many moons ago.
Aircraft , low in the dark and dzl, asked to stay clear of the airport, where the lights were, for RPT. The turn away /orbit into the black hole finished that off. RIP those 2
Others may have more intimate details and knowledge of...so correct me if I;m wrong.
Aircraft , low in the dark and dzl, asked to stay clear of the airport, where the lights were, for RPT. The turn away /orbit into the black hole finished that off. RIP those 2
Others may have more intimate details and knowledge of...so correct me if I;m wrong.
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
Errrm, I don’t think you get put in a ‘holding pattern’. You are just told that you are cleared to a specified point, and what you do to ensure you don’t go past that point without further clearance is up to you.
Originally Posted by Dick Smith
It is is well known that the RAAF Willy ATCs are often forced to keep VFR aircraft holding at Anna Bay.
The flight path just doesn't strike me as syncing up with the Anna Bay hold hypothesis.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bendigo, Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
non-standard left turn away from all your visual references...
it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to adopt a non-standard left turn away from all your visual references.
...and when you've turned right - finished your outbound leg and now turn right (again) - what visual reference do you have? Haven't thought that one out, have you!
...and when you've turned right - finished your outbound leg and now turn right (again) - what visual reference do you have? Haven't thought that one out, have you!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A pothole on the information superhighway
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircraft was a helicopter .... why would it have flown a holding pattern at all, instead of just hovering at the clearance limit point?
Just sayin'
Just sayin'
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 63
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
read post Number 1
Post 1 indicates the helicopter was approx. 3000ft (VFR lane coastal 500ft) as such all this discussion re aircraft held / made to orbit at low level being the cause of the accident is rather spurious..
Still outside controlled airspace at 3000 at that point. Being denied clearance into the Willy CTR would necessitate holding at Anna Bay at 500 or 3,000 either way.
Originally Posted by DeRated
it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to adopt a non-standard left turn away from all your visual references.
...and when you've turned right - finished your outbound leg and now turn right (again) - what visual reference do you have? Haven't thought that one out, have you!
...and when you've turned right - finished your outbound leg and now turn right (again) - what visual reference do you have? Haven't thought that one out, have you!
At some point you would have to turn away from your visual references but on the basis that they are predominantly to the south (Newcastle and Williamtown) and to the west (Nelson Bay Road, Nelson Bay itself and Shoal Bay) you are almost certainly better served making a standard right turn because that places you (in the right hand seat) on the inside of the turn. That's not so important on the outbound leg as you run back up the coast, the lights are on the left and ahead of you but it's important when you turn inbound at the outbound end, because you're on the inside you'll reacquire Newcastle/Williamtown that much sooner.
In any event, even if there was no benefit one way or another, why would you make a non-standard left turn?
Last edited by MickG0105; 11th Sep 2019 at 07:37. Reason: Spelling
Originally Posted by KRviator
Still outside controlled airspace at 3000 at that point. Being denied clearance into the Willy CTR would necessitate holding at Anna Bay at 500 or 3,000 either way.
Not at Anna Bay it isn’t (unless R587 is active, in which case it’s a Romeo).
And some people seem to be labouring under the misconception that a requirement to remain outside some airspace results in a requirement to enter a ‘holding pattern’.
And some people seem to be labouring under the misconception that a requirement to remain outside some airspace results in a requirement to enter a ‘holding pattern’.
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
Not at Anna Bay it isn’t (unless R587 is active, in which case it’s a Romeo).
And some people seem to be labouring under the misconception that a requirement to remain outside some airspace results in a requirement to enter a ‘holding pattern’.
And some people seem to be labouring under the misconception that a requirement to remain outside some airspace results in a requirement to enter a ‘holding pattern’.
Originally Posted by Cedrik
What is the minimum NFR chopper height?
Originally Posted by Maggie Island
R578A-G form the controlled airspace portions around the CTR that are active from 0600-2200L (sometimes later) daily. Its all controlled airspace out to 25nm.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Australia
Age: 46
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To take a step back to reflect on current conditions, it was not long after last light (10 mins or so) in blowing dust and gusting 48kts on the TAF that the aircraft crashed. It was flying the coastal route south. The conditions were horrendous and would be close to IMC conditions. The aircraft apparently refueled at Coffs so would mean it would be very close to being into reserves (if no aux tank fitted near the hell hole) by Williamtown to add to the weather.
If one was “planning” to do a NVFR flight you would be at least at lowest safe if not 4500’ from the Taree (Ugpot) to Willy leg if following the airway. I think there is more to the story which no doubt ATSB will uncover.
lets hope they can find and recover the hull
RIP
If one was “planning” to do a NVFR flight you would be at least at lowest safe if not 4500’ from the Taree (Ugpot) to Willy leg if following the airway. I think there is more to the story which no doubt ATSB will uncover.
lets hope they can find and recover the hull
RIP
Last edited by belly tank; 11th Sep 2019 at 12:47.
