Bell ditching off Newcastle
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick I’m still a tad confused if they were going to NTL or not. The flight info I saw at the time of posting which was not long after the event, was it was stopping in NTL, this info appears to be gone from online sites. Others are saying it wasn’t stopping. Some are saying it was. Then came reports that they were speaking to the Tower about ditching. This information is somewhat vague and unconfirmed. I understand the media are not getting answers to these basic communication questions out of the Air Force.
The tracking somewhat navigating away from the dunes for a planned ditching lined up with that ditching statement but it appears more likely a loss of control in gusty, wet and miserable IFR conditions I think. Pilot inexperience in such conditions? Well it certainly has not flown much this year.
The tracking somewhat navigating away from the dunes for a planned ditching lined up with that ditching statement but it appears more likely a loss of control in gusty, wet and miserable IFR conditions I think. Pilot inexperience in such conditions? Well it certainly has not flown much this year.
I don't believe for a second there would have been any intention to turn away from land and ditch the helicopter at sea at night in bad weather, especially a helicopter not fitted with emergency flotation, nor probably equipped with life rafts or life jackets. The survivability of that scenario is zero.
How far off-shore was it found?
Seems amazing that a SAR aircraft spotted the tail-rotor sinking!
Seems amazing that a SAR aircraft spotted the tail-rotor sinking!
Surprise surprise that a certain someone is here with a torch and pitchfork to blame the RAAF.
Junior. No surprise. Just commonsense.
It is is well known that the RAAF Willy ATCs are often forced to keep VFR aircraft holding at Anna Bay.
This is primarily caused by 1950s procedures that have never been updated!
I wonder why the secrecy about the radio calls?
It is is well known that the RAAF Willy ATCs are often forced to keep VFR aircraft holding at Anna Bay.
This is primarily caused by 1950s procedures that have never been updated!
I wonder why the secrecy about the radio calls?
For interests sake, at 1815L at Willy there would have been zero fast jet movements. If there was a delay it would likely have been caused by RPT traffic.
Talk about putting the cart before the horse.
Thoughts are with the pilot and pax, whatever it was it sounds like it wasn't a lot of fun.
The delay is not ‘caused’ by aircraft inbound to or outbound from Willy, military or otherwise.
The delay is caused by 1950s procedures that still treat an aircraft miles away from the extended centreline of the Willy runway, at 500’ AGL, as being a material risk to aircraft inbound to or outbound from Willy (military or otherwise).
Someone give me the probabilities of an aircraft inbound or outbound from Willy colliding with an aircraft at 500’ over Stockton Beach.
Hopefully someone will pipe up and say: “Even if it’s a vanishingly remote risk, it can be mitigated by making people hold over 10 nautical miles away”, thus proving the point.
The delay is caused by 1950s procedures that still treat an aircraft miles away from the extended centreline of the Willy runway, at 500’ AGL, as being a material risk to aircraft inbound to or outbound from Willy (military or otherwise).
Someone give me the probabilities of an aircraft inbound or outbound from Willy colliding with an aircraft at 500’ over Stockton Beach.
Hopefully someone will pipe up and say: “Even if it’s a vanishingly remote risk, it can be mitigated by making people hold over 10 nautical miles away”, thus proving the point.
Last edited by Lead Balloon; 10th Sep 2019 at 04:44.
I think some people might be reluctant to declare an emergency for fear of the wrath of CASA and the inevitable following non compliance and enforcement action.
Sad but just look at the Glen Buckley thread to see what people fear.
Sad but just look at the Glen Buckley thread to see what people fear.
If the clearance limit was Anna Bay the pilot would have most likely had the lights of Newcastle ahead when flying south.
A left turn out over the ocean to hold would result in no visible horizon while in the turn!
A left turn out over the ocean to hold would result in no visible horizon while in the turn!
None of this is to say the way the airspace is managed is perfect, I don't think anyone thinks it is, I note the current AIC SUP reference WLM's airspace (https://www.airservicesaustralia.com...up/a19-h40.pdf). But what you're doing right now is drawing a massive bow, and pre emptively laying blame at people who likely had nothing to do with the tragedy that took place here.
And I have flown through WLM in a GA single, it was a total pain in the ass. I agree it’s not done well, I just don’t think it’s relevant to what’s occurred here.
Last edited by junior.VH-LFA; 10th Sep 2019 at 09:05.
It’s not about the people implementing 1950s procedures.
It’s about the people in this Galapagos who insist that the 1950s procedures are justified.
It’s about the people in this Galapagos who insist that the 1950s procedures are justified.
I heard and saw this aircraft fly over my house early Friday, heading south. It was so noisy I went outside for a look. I remember thinking "Who still flies an olive drab Huey?" Sadly, now I know.
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?