Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Accident Near Mangalore Airport - Possibly 2 Aircraft down

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

Accident Near Mangalore Airport - Possibly 2 Aircraft down

Old 29th Feb 2020, 02:55
  #241 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Houston
Posts: 175
Sunfish..........

Despite your overwhelming logic and evidence all you will get is excuses. The only defence I've seen so far is;

-Who's going to pay for it?
-Nobody wants to pay for it.
Hoosten is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 02:58
  #242 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 3,316
I will not post any of this here. Been there and done that. If you PM me your email address, I'll lay it all out for you
PM me your email address, the reason being I have absolutely no trust in your good self with your postings thus far.
megan is online now  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 05:38
  #243 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 55
I will answer this the best I can.

Originally Posted by Sunfish View Post
ĎLet me get this straight. ADS-B was rammed down the throat of IFR Aircraft owners and operators, five years(?) in advance of the U.S. mandate. This was done at huge expense, not to mention inconvenience.
It is my personal opinion and in no way representative of Airservices that ADSB mandate was introduced unnecessarily early. I would have waited until about 2022. However that is only my opinion. Others will certainly disagree.

Originally Posted by Sunfish View Post
Yet now OCTA, you purport to tell the Australian aviation community, that ADS-B was not expected to produce a safety benefit at all, ďbelow 5000ftĒ and not in class G airspace anyway because Airservices just passes traffic and has no responsibility beyond that.
=13.33px
I did no such thing. I pointed you to a piece of information that is in the public domain that I thought answered the question being asked. You can draw whatever conclusions you wish from that information. However I think saying it wasnít expected to provide any safety benefit would be twisting the facts. The benefit is certainly limited compared to at higher levels.

Originally Posted by Sunfish View Post
This is despite the known fact that most mid air incidents happen in the vicinity of the circuit.
I donít think ADSB is the solution to this. The only form of ATC I can think of that would work in the circuit area is tower. You donít want radar standards applied in the circuit at anything other than the busiest aerodromes. Circuit areas are too dynamic and the scale doesnít work at the enroute level. When you are responsible for 400SQM of airspace with dozens of aerodromes you canít watch every circuit area. Some form of ADSB in may be useful here, but I suspect in non controlled aerodromes lookout and listen out will be the best we have for quite a while. Outside the circuit area and in what you could probably call the terminal area I think there are viable solutions that could definitely help.

Originally Posted by Sunfish View Post
I therefore ask the question: Could the Aviation community be justified in forming the impression that CASA and Airservices are total frauds? They have foisted and continue to foist useless technology on the Aviation community that cannot produce a measurable increase in aviation safety at all considering the way it is employed and is never going to?I wonít ask the next question; why were they so keen to do this?
CASA and Airservices as a whole? No, that would be totally unjustified. Certain elements within each organisation? Well this forum isnít anonymous so I will let you all draw your own conclusion.

As for ADSB, calling it useless is unjustified. Like any technology, it has limitations. The people relying on it have to know the limitations to know what it can and canít do. The more appropriate question would be did the benefit justify the cost. When ADSB mandate first happened and ADSB cost $40k or more to fit? My answer would be no. In the next few years as the install cost falls, the technology and system improves, and coverage gets better, absolutely I think ADSB is appropriate.

The answer to your final question that you werenít going to ask but then half a sentence later asked would be I donít know any better than you do.

OCTA Aus is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 05:46
  #244 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 55
Originally Posted by Hoosten View Post
You might be surprised at my work history, my aviation experience and qualifications.)


Originally Posted by Hoosten View Post
And there we have it. All of the 'holier than thou' hyocrites. Pontificating about name calling and put downs. Good onya mate, that's what they say down there right?
We have a saying about that down here in Aus. Itís something to do with pots calling kettles a certain colour.

OCTA Aus is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 06:01
  #245 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,660
Sunfish. The answer is ADSB-In.

Work with what weíve got, as in the system we have. Donít try to reinvent the wheel. ADSB out has been chosen.

Spend your own money to be as safe as you can, because other than your loved one, nobody else really cares if you live or die!

The same goes with cars. Buy the biggest most heaviest and safest car with the most airbags, because if you buy a tiny little thing, the laws of physics are not on your side!


Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 07:35
  #246 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: YMML
Posts: 2,496
Track Shortener, this may sound strange but I am on your side. When you look at incidents involving CTAF or uncontrolled aerodromes it muddies the water.Benalla and Hotham come to mind. This incident is enroute with active IFR flightplans in the system. I am asking, is it possible for the system to be a bit more active using the data available? Otherwise Squawk7700 is on the money, look after yourself first, put in the tools and maintain your own SA...DTI breaks down with exactly this situation, one or both aircraft actively changing altitude in proximity.
OZBUSDRIVER is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 21:19
  #247 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: MEL
Posts: 26
is it possible for the system to be a bit more active using the data available?
Yes it's possible, provided the surveillance coverage exists to the a low enough level. But if it's separation that you want, the airspace classification would need to change.
Track Shortener is online now  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 21:50
  #248 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,205
Thank you for your considered answer OCTA and Squawk. I am debating with myself the advisability of spending about 2k to give me complete ADS-B in and out. I already have the transponder.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 22:10
  #249 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Oz
Posts: 36
Or, and I'm just throwing this out there, two pilots who have been given traffic on each other could communicate and self separate.

Or does Hoosten and squawk think pilots aren't able to do this?
iron_jayeh is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 22:26
  #250 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 64
Posts: 314
iron jayeh , Pilots are capable . But when youíre in an RPT and the traffic is a 200 hour Private Pilot with sweat on his brow in a non-towered environment the risk is real.
ATSB files are full of such incidents . See my previous link.
Its a fail-dangerous system , pure and simple.
We have been very , very lucky.
George Glass is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 23:28
  #251 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Oz
Posts: 36
You say pilots are capable, then you say they aren't. I only have about 100 hours and I can stay out if the way. Surely ifr pilots are capable
iron_jayeh is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2020, 00:17
  #252 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 55
Originally Posted by George Glass View Post
iron jayeh , Pilots are capable . But when youíre in an RPT and the traffic is a 200 hour Private Pilot with sweat on his brow in a non-towered environment the risk is real.
ATSB files are full of such incidents . See my previous link.
Its a fail-dangerous system , pure and simple.
We have been very , very lucky.
Ah yes the good old they only have a PPL, they must be incompetent. I remind you that 200 hours is enough to be in the right hand seat of an RPT jet, so that pilot is not inexperienced. Also I would love to know how you determined their experience level, do you ask them to give their hours with their callsign?

Also the main solution everyone on here seems to want to propose is class E down to 1200ft. Which is not going to protect you from that VFR pilot. In fact to an extent it may make it harder. The solution for this would be a tower. In most occasions that would be overkill.

Iron, yes IFR pilots should be able to separate themselves. At the worst just fall back to putting 1000ft between you and the other guy until you have something else.
OCTA Aus is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2020, 00:56
  #253 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 64
Posts: 314
Not just PPL OCTA Aus. I’ll rummage around and see if I can find my copy of the ASIR I lodged when I , commanding an RPT Jet , almost came nose to nose with a light aircraft doing a scenic at Ayers Rock . Thankfully he had his transponder on . I had a chat to him on the ground . He could hardly stand , his knees were shaking so much . Turned out he was simply looking in the wrong place. It was his first professional job. He had a CPL and 300 hours.
Sounds like your are with the Department , OCTA Aus. Its a pity you guys don’t get to spend much time in the jumpseat anymore. Guess it costs too much.
I recall AirServices did a review recently on airspace around Ayers Rock and decided , once again , not to instal a tower. A courageous decision . Hope another shoe doesn’t drop.
By the way I have other ASIRs like that as well.
We have been very , very lucky.
Robust systems tolerate failure.
Fail-dangerous systems fail to disaster.
What sort of system do you think non-controlled CTAFs are OCTAS Aus ?
George Glass is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2020, 01:02
  #254 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Oz
Posts: 36
So George pilots can't separate themselves?
iron_jayeh is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2020, 01:24
  #255 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 64
Posts: 314
I guess it boils down to how many times you want to roll the dice with RPT jets with150 plus pax on board.
AirServices review of airspace around Ayers Rock is a revelation into the way they think.
Fortunately , in some cases such reviews have reversed previous idiotic decisions such as the reopening of the tower at Karratha.
But its still rolling the dice. Personally I think all non-radar CTAFs servicing RPT jets with over 100 seats should have a tower. Period.
But , of course , this is Australia.
Its never going to happen.
Until..............
George Glass is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2020, 01:27
  #256 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Oz
Posts: 36
Re rpt jets, maybe you're right, because they aren't only mixing it with other ifr pilots but people like me in a tecnam.

However that is consistent separate from this incident involving two small ifr aircraft.

Again are you saying that given a similar situation, two ifr pilots don't have the knowledge to self separate ?

The more cta you put in, the less airspace I can use etc. That then creates what Dick calls roadblocks in the sky. Which then forces other aircraft into unsafe situations.

iron_jayeh is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2020, 01:31
  #257 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 74
Originally Posted by George Glass View Post
I recall AirServices did a review recently on airspace around Ayers Rock and decided , once again , not to instal a tower.
As the airspace regulator, CASA conducts airspace reviews, and determines the appropriate class of airspace and whether TWR or other services are required, not Airservices.

I wish I had a dollar for every pilot who doesn't know the division of responsibilities between the two, and thinks Airservices decides classes of airspace and level of ATS.

I take direct debit, or Paypal

https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/defaul...ember-2018.pdf
buckshot1777 is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2020, 01:37
  #258 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 64
Posts: 314
buckshot1777 , you are right . Happy to be corrected. I just did a google search and didn’t pay enough attention to the header.
By the way I don’t think too many Pilots really care much about bureaucratic architecture.

Last edited by George Glass; 1st Mar 2020 at 01:49.
George Glass is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2020, 03:26
  #259 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 74
True. My post was in the interests of directing blame where it is due
buckshot1777 is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2020, 03:31
  #260 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 64
Posts: 314
Understood
George Glass is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

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